The Reid Technique: How well do you think you can handle a police interrogation?

They were just witnesses to a murder, pressured by the police to change their story until the wrong man was jailed for a crime he did not commit. Linden MacIntyre takes you inside “The Interrogation Room” with disturbing police videotapes that reveal an investigation gone terribly wrong.

In a fifth estate exclusive, we show how Peel Regional Police used this controversial method to convince, not suspects, but several murder witnesses, that they had not seen what they thought they had. Witnesses were berated, threatened and held for hours until they told police what they wanted to hear. We show you these tapes and exactly how the police built an entire case that sent an innocent man, Eric ‘Action’ Morgan, to prison for more than 3 years, charged with homicide. See how a night that started out as a small birthday party ended in murder with bystanders manipulated by police until they lied.

It’s a tried and tested police interrogation technique that often results in confessions from crime suspects, sometimes whether they’re guilty or not. This method, known as the Reid Technique, has come under fire from critics over the years for eliciting false confessions. In “The Interrogation Room,” police use this technique on bystanders, not suspects and send an innocent man to jail.They were just witnesses to a murder, pressured by the police to change their story until the wrong man was jailed for a crime he did not commit. Linden MacIntyre takes you inside “The Interrogation Room” with disturbing police videotapes that reveal an investigation gone terribly wrong.

Watched this last night and today I decided to search for some similar interrogation videos but luckily found last night's episode already uploaded. Really a remarkable bit of psychology designed to wear you down and have you admit to something which you didn't do or say. Meant to confuse and have you second guess your own memories resulting in you going along with a police narrative. So towards the end, the witness in the video is mentally wrestled to the point of just about giving up when he then has one last surge of tenacity. One last attempt to maintain his integrity, a one last chance to prevent a friend from prison. Is all hope lost or will he cave? Watch and see. It's a bit of a nail biter to see which way this goes.

I for one would welcome an opportunity to be "interrogated" just so I can see what I'm made of. I would like to believe I'm tough, strong personality, steadfast in my convictions. But am I? Are you? Can you take on the cops for 8 hours of back and forth good cop/bad cop?
You can almost see the cop slip in his "authority" once the witness gets mad and call him out on his games. I think if it were me in there, I would alpha that cop to the point he gives up. I would not play his game at all.

What say you ATS?

a reply to: FlySolo

Puts quite a spin on CSI and other cop dramas.

a reply to: FlySolo

The Reid Method relies upon kinesics to find clues to deception. This is utter crap that has been largely dismissed by even the psychological community. It also shamelessly relies upon intimidation in order to wear people down and illicit a confession. This is psychological torture. These are "confessions" that are achieved by torture. It is unconscionable. Inexcusable.

a reply to: redhorse

Would you be able to outlast the interrogation?

a reply to: FlySolo

No Comment

Once you, as a witness or a suspect, understand the technique being used, it all falls flat on its face.

This is why you should either have a lawyer or remain silent, it is the sensible option.

In Australia we have Police insisting that witnesses must give statements and of course everyone is a witness until they are charged. There is an easy way out of it. We are required to give Name, Address and date of birth, that is all.

So here is an interesting conversation.

Police: We are here to take your statement.

Witness: I do not want to give a statement.

Police: If you do not provide us with a statement and answer our questions, you will be charged with hindering a Police investigation.

Witness: OK, charge me! After you tell me I am under arrest, what are the next words out of your mouth.

Police: Um

Witness: Here, I will help you, 'You have the right to remain silent' Now, why do we have to go through all of this crap just to get to the part where I can remain silent.


The interesting fact here is that the Police would never utter these words if a Lawyer is present. They always record interviews but they get very defensive if you insist on recording it as well. They hate being asked, "What have you got to hide?"

So it is better not to engage them in conversation. Wait for the court case and give evidence in front of the judge and jury where these psych tactics cannot be used.

P

a reply to: pheonix358

Once you, as a witness or a suspect, understand the technique being used, it all falls flat on its face.

That's what I am wondering about. Watching it a second time and I'm picking out other subtitles the cops are doing, I don't know if I would mention what I notice during the interview though, just keep it to myself. I would try and steer the interview into my line of questioning and turn tables, make the cop feel unsure of his line of questioning, but careful not to sound arrogant. But I would get mad, there would be yelling.

25 words you need only to speak to the police. the rest of the time shut up.
am i being charged, if not am to free to leave, if i can't leave, i want a lawyer.
if so i want a lawyer.

a reply to: hounddoghowlie

I think asking for a lawyer is one of the things not to do.

a reply to: FlySolo
why, if you value your rights and know that they trick lie and deceive to get the out come they want, why wouldn't you ask for one. are you skilled in what's legal and what's not. they know what they can and can't do and sometimes don't even pay that any mind.

a reply to: hounddoghowlie

You're right. I wouldn't want to be in that situation at all. It's just the "what if" element to it. I know if I hadn't done anything wrong and the cop was messing with my memories about it; threatening charges, I would be very difficult.

a reply to: semperfortis

But you can't deny that it was used inappropriately in this particular case. I think around 25 min or sooner it gets into it

originally posted by: FlySolo
a reply to: hounddoghowlie

You're right. I wouldn't want to be in that situation at all. It's just the "what if" element to it. I know if I hadn't done anything wrong and the cop was messing with my memories about it; threatening charges, I would be very difficult.

It's unfortunate the general public doesn't believe cops and therapists can mess with your memories or perception of events. Study after study has proved they do, even if it's unintentional.

On another thread, there was group of posters who just plain refused to believe anyone could be manipulated into confessing to a crime they didn't do.

Many times when you are interrogated it's after a traumatic event when you are most susceptible to manipulation.

a reply to: FlySolo

There was a man killed by a spoon in the 1990s... Let's stop using spoons..

a reply to: semperfortis

huh?

For a certified interrogator, your response was less than fulfilling.

originally posted by: FlySolo
a reply to: hounddoghowlie

I think asking for a lawyer is one of the things not to do.

The video below has been posted many times on ATS, but you more than anyone on this thread needs to watch it.

a reply to: FlySolo

Here is a good read on the Reid Technique:
everything2.com...

It can be used to coerce a false confession, there are many cases of this.

a reply to: FlySolo

Made sense to me. Just because things occasionally are dangerous, or used incorrectly doesn't mean they aren't a valid technique the majority of the time.

Reid is a lot different than what's being portrayed here. I used to want to be a cop and took a TON of CJ classes. A number from former cops/current cops. I learned a lot about it and WIcklander-Zulawski and the dangers of using interrogation models incorrectly. You can make people believe something or scare them enough to do something. Neither is encouraged, because you don't get correct results that way. Like anything else, it can be abused. When I learned about it the manipulation was more about giving the person an excuse. So say something like "Listen, you're not a bad guy, I know you needed the money. It's not really your fault you had to steal... right?". Let people blame a misdeed on someone/something else and they feel more comfortable telling you (I think a lot of this has to do with thinking the court will be more lenient which you could argue is a little screwed up). There was also a lot of more shadowy stuff we would do. Like explain our job, what sort of information we had access to etc. So I want to introduce myself and tell you about my job. Pepper it with things about being able to track purchases, IDs, video, etc. Scare them a bit. Not threaten, but scare. I wouldn't want you to half to take the fall for this person just because you were having some monetary troubles.

When I did loss prevention (I wasn't the typical security guard or even plainclothes guy. I did plainclothes stuff but a lot was focused on employees and ORC cases) they shipped us all down to an FBI training seminar on interrogation in CA. Learned the same thing there.

I don't like the lies. I don't mind bending some truth, but telling a guy that there are records of his buddy leaving and calling him at certain times is stretching ethical bounds in my opinion. That would have screwed with anyone.

People think they would be super tough and impervious to these techniques, especially people that are aware of them, but you wouldn't be nearly as tough if it was happening to you. When used incorrectly they make you start thinking about every little thing, and questioning yourself. Is it worth it to potentially lose my kids, my job, spend years in prison, have my family and friends not believe me? Was I actually right? Could I have screwed up? No food, water or rest for an extended period of time will make you nuts, especially with the added stress of being in a new situation, having vague threats made towards you and if you can't afford a lawyer or are a little dumb thinking that the cops have already proved you wrong.

If I'm ever a witness to a serious crime I'm lawyering up but still telling the police everything I know. I don't know if they can legally keep you, but if not I would be walking out after 3 hours, sooner if they tried to badger me. Charge me or listen.