Narrative and accusatory interviewing are more than different techniques—they represent two fundamentally different investigative philosophies. One is designed to gather and evaluate information. The other often begins with the objective of obtaining admissions or confessions. Those choices influence the quantity, quality, and reliability of the evidence investigators ultimately present in court.
Most investigations begin with the crime. The better question is: When did the crime really begin? Long before the act itself, offenders often progress through a series of decisions involving distorted thinking, planning, preparation, and commitment. Understanding that sequence can change how investigators conduct interviews—and how they build stronger cases.
Many investigators believe talking demonstrates control. In reality, excessive talking suppresses the subject’s narrative, increases the risk of contamination, and reduces statement reliability. Learn why disciplined silence is one of the most powerful—and overlooked—skills in investigative interviewing.
MAN SHOOTS AT DEPUTIES IN BACKYARD THEN QUICKLY EXITS RESIDENCE THROUGH FRONT DOOR, UNARMED, IS SHOT AND SUES: WHO WINS? On July 10, 2025, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals decided Heid v. Rutkoski[i], in which the court of appeals [...]
From the United States Supreme Court Geofencing to Catch a Bank Robber Chatrie v. United States, slip opinion No. 25-112 In another case involving technology which was beyond science fiction when the Bill of Rights and specifically the Fourth Amendment [...]