Wicklander - Zulawski and Associates, Inc.

The trusted leader in training for over 25 years.

Tips

Back to Tips

"The suspect says, "I want to leave."

The suspect may say this in one of two ways. A strong statement demanding to leave or in a docile manner testing the water to determine if he will be permitted to leave. In determining what response to give, the interrogator must decide if the suspect is in custody. If the suspect is in custody the answer is quite simple, No, you can't leave you are under arrest. Once the suspect is taken into custody by a public law enforcement officer, Miranda warnings come into play. The failure to Mirandize the suspect may result in the suppression of subsequent statements and evidence.

If the suspect is not in custody, the interrogator may not detain the individual against his will or he may face false arrest and unlawful restraint actions. The interrogator may, however, attempt to change the suspect's mind about leaving. Most suspects attempting to leave are in an internal panic and are listening to the most basic instinct, fleeing from a threat. The suspect is torn internally. The primitive half of the mind screams "run", while the rational half says, "Wait, I think I can fix this."

The interrogator needs to address the rational part of the suspect's mind or the primitive mind will win out and the suspect will flee. Most often, this can be successful done by creating curiosity and letting the suspect know that he can leave.

1) Bob, you are free to leave anytime you choose. No one is going to keep you here against your will. This is a meeting to make you aware of certain things that will become extremely important to you in the near future. There are three things that you need to understand and take into consideration. The interrogator uses the suspect's first name to grab his attention and draw him out of the panic he feels. He then addresses the suspect's emotional mind reassuring it that there is no reason for panic and he is free to go. Finally, he captures the rational mind with a promise of information that has not been relayed as yet, asking himself "What are the three important things?" This creates curiosity and causes the suspect to delay. The interrogator then returns to the rationalization process attempting a new rationalization since the previous ones were ineffective. The three items promised are lost among the following rationalizations.

2) That's fine, you can leave anytime that you want to. No one is keeping you here. But understand that once you walk out that door, you have no control of the situation. Every thing is out of your hands. In this response, the interrogator again reassures the primitive mind that there is no reason to panic and then addresses the rational thought process. The interrogator must next address the suspect's hope, "I hope if I say nothing I won't get fired, arrested, embarrassed. This is presented by the interrogator in the third person, "most people think that…" For a detailed discussion of addressing hope see the chapter on rationalization and showing understanding.

The interrogator's physical actions must in no way restrict the suspect's freedom to leave the meeting. In most cases, the interrogator need not even rise from his chair to control the situation. Any request to have the suspect reseat himself is better made in the form of a question, rather than a command. "Why don't you sit for a second so we can talk this through?"


Back to Tips

® 2007 Wicklander-Zulawski and Associates, Inc. All rights reserved. - 800-222-7789 - info@w-z.com