The tickle of curiosity. The gasp of discovery. Fingers running across the keyboard.

The tickle of curiosity. The gasp of discovery. Fingers running across the keyboard.

The World of Iniquus - Action Adventure Romance

Showing posts with label Derek Pacifico. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Derek Pacifico. Show all posts

Sunday, May 4, 2014

Police Interviews: Preparation and Rapport Building with Sgt. Pacifico


____________________________________


detective
detective (Photo credit: olarte.ollie)
Fiona - 
Good morning, Sgt. Pacifico - Thanks for stopping by ThrillWriting.


Today, I have a some questions for you about the interrogation process. I was watching a movie last night where the arresting officer was the one who conducted the interrogation - is that the norm?

Sgt. Pacifico - 
Well, that depends. Was the "arresting officer" as you called him a uniformed police officer who knew nothing about the case and just picked the guy up at someone's request or maybe a warrant? Or was he the one who had conducted the investigation?

Fiona-
In this case, he was on patrol, witnessed the crime, and made the arrest. Can you help me understand why you're making a distinction in your question?



Sgt. Pacifico - 
Sure. First, let me say that in  the scenario you posed, yes he would conduct the interview. Here is how (in most places and agencies) it works. Contrary to television, the vast majority of interviews and interrogations conducted on a daily basis throughout law enforcement are done by uniformed patrol officers. 

Although the best interrogators are often displayed as detectives -and this is often true - there are far more interrogations and inteviews happening in the uniformed ranks. 

Detectives don't steal cases from patrol officers and start interrogating a suspect without knowing the case very well and having done some of their own work on it. Just like the FBI doesn't come in with their hands on their hips and take cases away from local police departments. 

English: Omar Khadr is interrogated by two Can...
English: Omar Khadr is interrogated by two Canadians (faces obscured) while a female CIA agent oversees. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
A detective will conduct an interrogation of a suspect after he has been assigned the case through an administrative process, or if it is the natural assumption of the major case in progress that detectives respond to from the very beginning. In the natural order of things, as the police officers are no longer needed at the scene, they are relinquished back to handling calls in the field.

Something to consider, if we had complete control over the investigation process, the very last action we want to take is to interrogate the suspect. Often that is done very early in a case both in real life and also in fiction. But it is a mistake.

Now the reality is, sometimes we don't even know our suspect is our suspect when we first talk to them. We may think he is a witness....we just don't know either way. I hated it when my suspects would be put in my lap at the early stages of the investigation, and I didn't have enough knowledge to interrogate properly. Asking questions to which we don't know the answer is a dangerous area to be in.


Fiona - 
At what level of concern will a case require a detective to join the team?

Sgt. Pacifico - 
Detectives get involved in cases for a couple of different reasons. Most often it is a manpower issue. The detective doesn't need to fly off to some other call and can spend all day, or the next three days or intermittently the next three weeks working the case. Patrol officers have to field numerous calls every day and be as available as possible for dealing with emergencies - domestic fights, bar fights, traffic crashes, fires, medical emergency calls (we are sometimes the closest unit to a medical call) and any other 911 you can think of. 

So if we have a major case brewing that is going to require a lot of coordination, follow-up and by its nature is too enormous for patrol to handle, then detectives are requested by the field supervisor. In most cases this is a sergeant. But then there are those cases which naturally get detective calls without any further ado: homicide, severe crimes against children, some rapes, bomb and arson cases for sure, and some serious assaults

Fiona - 
Some rapes?

Sgt Pacifico - 
Me grilling Dan McD in Law & Order SVU's inter...
Me grilling Dan McD in Law & Order SVU's interrogation room (my buddy MikeC works on the show and let us look around the set!) (Photo credit: dpstyles™)
The reason for the "some rapes" is this - If the case is pretty basic in its investigative properties (readers follow the technical answer not anything emotional here), and you have a seasoned officer with great interrogation skills who is a renowned investigator, and you can spare him from patrol, there is no reason to call a detective. 

A basic investigation might include a date rape. Here a friend/acquaintance or family member is the suspect. The location is accessible. And, there is easily obtainable evidence because it was the victim's or suspect's residence. Also, all involved parties are local and available. A good patrol cop will handle this. 

A stranger rape, unknown suspect with extreme violence, a crappy outdoor and contaminated scene or a late reported case where evidence is lost...that is going to need a heck of lot more work and a detective will likely spend weeks if not months on it. 

Remember, detectives don't just materialize from no where as super interrogators. It's those great street cops that we promote to detective. On Friday, he was a street patrol officer; but come Saturday morning, his orders are effective, and he is now officially a detective. The only thing that changed was his clothing

Fiona-
Thank you for clarifying. I feel better.

How might early interrogation or interviews interrupt a good outcome - good meaning finding the guilty person and removing them from society?

Sgt Pacifico -
Well, the interruption of getting a suspect too early is that without any evidence to provide the investigator with confidence he is the person, it takes a lot of the power of the performance away from the interrogation. That is part of the preparation. Knowing what we know that only the suspect and cops could know. Having some form of proof of his involvement, OR having such knowledge of something that we know we can bluff him with evidence that doesn't exist, but he would believe does exist. That is a whole discussion on themes that we will engage in the future.

Fiona - 
Okay so let's say the crime is one of the one's you listed earlier. The police chief wants to put his crack, A+ detective on the scent. What does the detective do prior to entering the interrogation room? (Besides making sure he had an in and out burger a bathroom break and a cig)?

Sgt. Pacifico - 
Interrogation (255/365)
Interrogation (255/365) (Photo credit: andrewrennie)
First of all, the chief ain't involved. That is done by the captain of the division. The chief is running the entire department, (unless we are talking about the small 15 man departments, then yes he might become directly involved in making personnel requests.) 

If a detective is involved in the case at the late hour and was not part of the investigation and now being brought in, he will indeed make sure about the food, water and bathroom and then he will sit down with the investigating officers and get completely briefed on the case. That could take 10 minutes to the better part of an hour. Hence, the In-N-Out Burger is vitally important to obtaining rapport after the detective enters. (And thanks for reminding me that I'm hungry...) 

A good detective will also go over the suspects rap sheet and any written information on the suspects history available. It is in these little bits of history and truths that we know that we can use to test a suspects honesty. 

We want to know as much about a suspect as we can before entering the room to give us an edge. 

Lastly, we need to determine his status. Is he indeed in custody or did he come voluntarily? If he came voluntarily, did he ride in a cop car? If so was he handcuffed? In the cage portion or up front? All these things matter - they help determine the potential defense issues as to whether or not there was defacto custody or not. Bottom line, do we need to do Miranda or not based on the current set of circumstances.

Fiona - 
Now that our detective is up to speed. How does he build the all important rapport necessary to get a confession? Also, concerning Miranda - will the detective who comes in read the miranda rights just to CYA?

Sgt. Pacifico - 
No, with Miranda warnings, we don't automatically read them like on television. If he is NOT in custody we do not need to advise him of his constitutional rights per the Miranda decision if we are NOT going to ask him questions against his self interest or regarding information related to the case in chief. 

As part of the rapport building phase, like in any interview including a hiring one, there is usually chit-chat to break the ice. The cops and crook are strangers to each other most often, and there is a need to get to know each other. So we talk about what I call "sports and horses."

However, before we ask any questions that could illicit an incriminating response AND we plan on keeping him now in custody, then we will need to advise him of Miranda. If though, we are going to let him go regardless of what he confesses to, then we don't have to do a miranda warning. But see, now we are getting back to our previous Miranda discussion. Like I said, there are a bunch of variables to Miranda situations that takes hours and days to discuss and learn.

Fiona -
What might a sports and horses discussion look like - "Hi, I'm Sgt Pacifco. I'd like to put your butt in jail for the rest of you life - hey, did you catch the Nicks' game?

Sgt. Pacifico - 
Well, cut out the first part, and you got it right. "Hey there, I'm Derek, this funny looking, lanky guy over here is my partner Rick. Don't mind his gawdawful tie, his wife is out of town and didn't lay out his clothes for him this morning. You get something to eat? You gotta piss?" 

And it goes on from there - "You a baseball fan? Me too. Can you believe Jeter is retiring? I'm kinda glad. He should go out on top. Don't want to see him stay past his abilities. I'll bet he'll be on the networks doing commentary before next spring training." And away we go.... maybe for a half-hour, a full hour.

Then using the prep work, we ask some questions we know the answer to in order to establishing his truth telling style, his truth baseline. Even a mass murdered isn't going to come in and lie about their hobbies, the weather and conversational stuff. Knowing what his full legal name is, we will still ask him to tell is his name. We want to see where that takes us. If his legal name is William Mark Smith, and you call him Will, William or Bill only to find out he hates his first name and goes by Mark, then you have started on a hated foot.

Fiona - 
So whether you like it or not - you have to read the sports page.

Sgt. Pacifico - 
No, you don't need to read the sports pages. For many years I didn't know enough about sports and really still don't - only baseball. As my son got more involved in playing, we started watching it more. That's why the sports and horses comment. I once had this 15 year old female murder suspect who was neither sport, music, or artfully aware of the world, but she loved horses. Fortunately, I finally found something to talk to her about. Having some knowledge of horses from a summer I spent with some folks who had a horse ranch, I knew enough to ask my suspect questions and have some conversation about something she liked that broke the ice and allowed us to have a meaningful conversation. All the while, I'm reading her facial expressions and body language as it related to something she was comfortable speaking about.

Fiona - 
This is very helpful information - obviously the interview process is key. I'm looking forward to your next visit so we can continue learning some of the tricks of the trade. In the mean time, can you tell me how things are shaping up for the Writers' Homicide School? I bet your novelists are compiling their lists of questions to bombard you with.

click HERE

Sgt. Pacifico - 
I look forward to it as well! The Writers Homicide School is having its next session on June 9-10 in Las Vegas, Nevada. We have writers coming in from as far away as Australia and Canada. Registrations are on sale now, but we will be closing off ticket sales pretty soon so the crowd isn't too big to handle. So if you want to get a ticket, you'd better get in soon. We have a variety of packages available at THIS LINK


Thank you so much for stopping by. And thank you for your support. When you buy my books, you make it possible for me to continue to bring you helpful articles and keep ThrillWriting free and accessible to all.



P.S. If you found this blog article helpful, you might also want to read these other ThrillWriting articles featuring Sgt. Derek Pacifico:
Enhanced by Zemanta

Wednesday, April 16, 2014

Miranda Warnings: Miranda Rights - Information for Writers with Sgt. Derek Pacifico




Two United States Marshals arrest a suspect.
Two United States Marshals arrest a suspect. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Hi everyone - 


Today, Sgt. Derek Pacifico has stopped by ThrillWriting to let me ask him some questions. 


To learn more about Sgt. Pacifico and his background - visit this LINK to read the interview where 
we talked about Homicide Scenes .

Sgt Pacifico, I was thinking about Miranda - You know if I were to write a spoof, my heroine would be named "Miranda Warnings."

Sgt. Pacifico - Ha!

Fiona - I thought since I have you here, I'd pick your brain for some plot twists regarding Miranda. This is what I know about Miranda Rights, and what I thought was sufficient:
Some guy named Miranda said that life wasn't fair - took it to court and won - and now everyone must be told that they have certain rights based on the constitution. Then he died in some horrible way...

Miranda Warning:
English: Border Patrol agent reads the Miranda...
. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
* You have the right to
   remain silent.
* Anything you say OR do
   can and will be used
   against you in a court of
   law.
* You have the right to and
   attorney.
* If you cannot afford an 
   attorney, one will be appointed to you.
Do you understand these rights? as they have been read to you?



Sgt. Pacifico - That's not far off the mark. Miranda is a United States Supreme Court decision based on a 1966 case of Arizona v. Miranda. Without going into grand detail, Miranda basically said he didn't know he didn't have to talk to the cops and didn't know he could be represented by an attorney before and during questioning. The basic elements of Miranda which is actually properly called the Miranda Advisal of one's rights - Miranda being the decision not the rights themselves. Technically speaking, the proper way to write it in a police report is, "I advised the suspect of his rights per Miranda." Not, "I advised the suspect of his Miranda rights.

Fiona - Oh good point!

Sgt. Pacifico - Bottom line, the rights cops advise people of are based on primarily two constitutional amendments the 5th Amendment, the right to remain silent and not incriminate one self and the 6th amendment, which is the due process clause. But there are two other amendments that come into play in each case.

Fiona - Let's go to the 6th. I actually have a scene in one of my books talking about poop (Ha!) where my heroine was making a word play on search and seizure and "due process." Can you go over this in layman's terms for the writers - what is required in due process?...as it pertains to Miranda.

Sgt. Pacifico - The 6th covers the right to counsel as it pertains to interrogation. But here is what's interesting. It ONLY applies when a suspect is in custody, and this is where novelists and television get it wrong. There are two simple tests to Miranda necessity - was the suspect in custody? And were the statements interrogatory? If I am interrogating a subject in his kitchen, and then I leave him there and drive off, his statement from that day is coming in to court without having advised him of Miranda, because he was not in custody.


Fiona - When it is in the "interview phase" then anything you say can and will be used against you - but the police don't need to ante up that info. Only after the decision has been made to take the guy into custody.-what if you don't drive off? 

Police car emergency lighting fixtures switche...
 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Sgt Pacifico - If I have a guy in handcuffs, in the back of my car, and I have explicitly told him he is under arrest, thereby confirming the custody issue, but I don't ask any interrogatory questions, then I'm also fine. As long as I don't ask him any questions, or make any statement that would illicit a response regarding the case in chief, I can talk to him all day. What's your name? Do you like baseball? Who is your favorite team? Did you see Derek Jeter's last home opening day? None of those are going to be in violation of Miranda because they have nothing to do with the theft/assault/murder whatsoever.

Fiona - But you could make statements and see if you could egg something out of him?

Sgt Pacifico - Well, here is the confusing part for people. There must be custody AND interrogation. If I ask questions in his kitchen, and he admits to the crime, then I have a very short window in which to advise him of his rights. Here is how it works: a suspect makes an appointment with me, and I meet him somewhere on neutral ground. (happened all the time, by the way.) So no custody. Up until this point he has flatly denied his involvement. 

Now, during the interview, based on a whole set of skills and methods we don't have time for today, the suspect decides that continuing to lie is futile and admits to the crime.The man who came to the meeting thinking he was going to fool the cops and go on about his day, now realizes he can't admit to murder and expect to go home. Whether I say or do anything, he knows he is under arrest after he makes his admission. That is sort of a given. At that point, I must advise him of his rights before proceeding any further. 

The thing is, at this point he is NOT going to invoke his rights and say he wants a lawyer or refuse to talk. He came far enough in his head to admit to the crime; he is going to spill the beans...all of 'em.

Fiona - Does he need to sign a sheet? Do you just read the statements out loud and get a verbal confirmation? And what if there are language barriers or special needs barriers - ex. cognition issues or impairment?


Vintage Westinghouse Pocket Catridge Tape Reco...
 (Photo credit: France1978)
Sgt. Pacifico - Depending on jurisdictions, some officers read and others have them sign a sheet. My agency didn't do the sheet thing. But we ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS recorded every moment of the contact. At minimum on a tape recorder (yeah, I'm dating myself), and when available on video with audio as well, along with the 
tape recorder as a redundancy.

In fact, if you listen to one of my interviews outside the office, the first moments are the sound of the car driving, me putting into park, keys jingling, and my getting out of the car. I wanted anyone listening to the recording to know they heard everything from the moment I was with the guy, and that I didn't start the recording "late."

Fiona - Great detail! Tell me about the kinds of equipment you use.

Sgt. Pacifico - The equipment I used at the time was state of the art macro cassette recorders. We would hide in a day planner. We'd gut them and Velcro the recorder in the depth where the calender should have been - which is about the same size.
Malden Pocket
 (Photo credit: stirwise)
Then we'd get a lapel microphone and find a pen with circumference large enough to hollow the ink out and replace the tube with the microphone. The wire would come through the bottom of the hollow the pen and plug into the recorder. Then the pen would clip at the top of the day planner and look completely natural.

Fiona - Very cool.

Sgt. Pacifico - But nowadays the tech is so much better. We only had 90 minutes with a 45 minute per-side cassette. Now, a small recorder has a great mic and can go for 10 hours or more. After the interview, the recoder plugs into the computer through USB and is instantly available to the whole team and the DA. It's fantastic. Those little recorders fit in a shirt pocket without problem - weight or sight. I'm jealous.

Fiona - Do you need a warrant to record? (Warrants blog link)

Sgt. Pacifico - There is no need for police in California and most other jurisdictions to ask or receive permission to record their work. Only citizens can't record each other without permission. I haven't researched this completely, but in every jurisdiction, I have taught across the country, no agency has any legal problems secretly recording their interviews. No search warrants are needed for in-person or in-station recordings. Wiretaps do require a warrant.


Fiona - Okay, good. You said that there were two other constitutional amendments that came into play... can you address those?

Sgt Pacifico - SureThe 4th amendment (search and seizure) plays
a big part and is often overlooked.

If the cops aren't legally where they are supposed to be - meaning they bullied their way into a house or are overhearing conversations from a place of private residence that they did not have authority to enter - then any conversations or admissions are easily challenged. For example, the cops go to a house looking for the suspect and find him. They walk into the unlocked and open front door without permission. They talk to the suspect POST Miranda, and he confesses. The fact he waived Miranda clearly on the tape recording doesn't automatically attenuate the bad search. It's called fruits of the poisonous tree. Since we weren't legally in a place, then anything we saw, heard, or learned during that illegal search may be excluded from evidence in court.

Fiona - WOW!!!

Sgt. Pacifico - The second one is the 14th amendment which speaks to civil rights issues. Where cops get into trouble is in being coercive by the nature of interrogation. If we refuse to let the guy go to the bathroom, refuse water, food, and other essentials of life, if we keep rotating detectives - never allowing the suspect to rest, or if we make threats of violence, then the interview - if not the entire case - is getting tossed. At the beginning of almost all of my interviews where we had to hunt down a suspect, you will see me giving the suspect food and drink, usually from In-N-Out Burger which was on the way to headquarters. After the food and drink, I'd take him out of the room (while continuing to record) for a bathroom break and a (final) cigarette if he smoked. In that way there was no chance of complaints that I was depriving him of any human need. One defense attorney called them "cheeseburger interviews." I loved that! Kind of hard to call us big, bad, mean cops when we start the interview by feeding a guy...


English: A cigarette butt, lying in dirty snow.
 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Fiona - I'm assuming the cigarette is a nicety. 

Can an addict say, "I was in pain/stressed/ incapable..." because his drug of choice was not in his system? How coherent must a suspect be to agree to Miranda - one beer? walking? able to slurr out a word?

Sgt. Pacifico - That's a great question! Nicotine is a nicety. But if a guy is jonesing from heroin or cocaine, we aren't going to interview him. One of the primary questions we ask (during a non-drug related case) is if the suspect had used drugs recently. We make a promise that we aren't going to charge them with being under the influence if they admit they used meth last night, while we are here trying to solve a murder. Also, we are drug recognition experts and can tell whether a guy is "high" or not. If someone is drunk or high, then they do have a legal excuse of not "clearly and unambiguously" waiving their rights. 

Truly, if someone is high or drunk, we won't do the interview. The whole thing is legally problematic. If the suspect is going to stay in our custody, we will book him without reading him his rights and let him sleep it off. We will get him in the morning or many hours later when he has had a chance to sober up. Then we will start with Miranda and go from there. If he isn't staying in our custody, we will make some other arrangements based on the circumstances. Changes with each case.

Fiona - Very good. Okay we are winding down - are there any other details you wanted to get across?



Sgt. Pacifico - There are so many aspects to Miranda that we haven't even come close to being able to cover in this forum. It is a really interesting topic that changes in some legalities if not monthly then certainly yearly. When I teach "Interview and Interrogation" to law enforcement, it is a four-hour course. When I teach it at the Writers Homicide School, it is an hour or more on day two. I usually have to cut off the writers' questions, because we can go on for hours and hours with the "what ifs," stories, and other interesting aspects of Miranda. I find the topic fascinating as you can probably tell. If writers want to learn more and hear a full lecture and stories of Miranda success and failures from my many years as a homicide detective, they should come to the Writers  For more information on how to either get tickets or get a personal consultation with me, they can visithis LINK.



Fiona - Awesome. Thanks, Sgt. 


Thank you so much for stopping by. And thank you for your support. When you buy my books, you make it possible for me to continue to bring you helpful articles and keep ThrillWriting free and accessible to all.

Enhanced by Zemanta