The interview/interrogation room or setting is inappropriate. For the interview room, it is important to have the suspect’s and investigator’s chairs facing each other without anything between them. Unfortunately, this is not the case in the watched interrogation. Also, privacy is an important factor meaning that there should be minimal involvement of a third party unless it is an interpreter or a parent or guardian in the case the suspect is a juvenile. In the video, there are two interviewers implying that the privacy element is compromised.
The interviewers are not dressed properly, and this is one of the critical distracting factors throughout the interrogation. The female detective, for instance, has her gun exposed, which is contrary to the requirement that investigators should cover their badges, handcuffs, and other equipment.
The interviewers are not correctly positioned. It appears that the male detective is the chief investigator in this case. Thus, it is important to have him sit directly opposite the suspect without anything between them. This does not happen as he sits at a certain angle facing the suspect with a table between them. Also, the male detective appears to be leaning back in his chair and is not at eye level with the suspect.
The interviewers’ demeanor and attitude are inappropriate. The female detective, in particular, has a negative attitude and perception of the suspect. In fact, she uses harsh words towards the suspect and believes that whatever he says is false. She further accuses him of acting up despite his age, which is not expected of an investigator.
At the beginning of the interview, there is no rapport between the interviewers and Bailey. The interviewers appear harsh and unwelcoming, and these scare Bailey and prevent him from telling the truth. However, later on, the male detective appears to build a rapport with Bailey since he gives him ample time to explain himself and take responsibility for his actions.
The interviewers shut Bailey down when they think that he is lying. The female detective appears harsh and uses obscene language. At some point, the female detective appears to shame the suspect by telling him that he does not chase after people of his age. From the interrogation point of view, the female detective’s response in such situations is inappropriate.
Based on the viewed interrogation, it is clear that the interviewers have determined the suspect’s guilt before the interview. The female detective, in particular, insists that the suspect is guilty and that he should take responsibility for his actions. She stresses that having been a detective for several years, she can tell whether or not a suspect is lying. She rubbishes whatever the suspect says and treats them as lies. She believes that the suspect is guilty and should be charged for indecent exposure. In the real sense, making such a determination is inappropriate. Interviewers must listen to suspects’ end of the story to determine whether they are guilty or not.
The interviewers have no qualifications to be good interviewers. Some of the qualities of a good interviewer are that he or she must ensure privacy, minimize the reminders of consequences, be aware of covering their badges or handcuffs and other equipment, and minimize distractions. The interviewers fail to ensure these perspectives, and as such, are not good interviewers.
For the most part, the interviewers remind Bailey of the consequences of his actions. The female detective focuses more on telling Bailey about the consequences of his actions, which is inappropriate.
Towards the end of the interrogation, Bailey confessed the crime, and affirmed that he had been involved in the same previously. This is contrary to the beginning of the interview where he denies the allegations against him.
I feel that the male detective approaches the issue appropriately to some extent. He allows Bailey to explain and give his side of the story. He resonates well with Bailey and gives a good reason for his arrest.
I feel that the female detective is unwelcoming and uses threats to have Bailey accept the crime. She has a bad perception and attitude towards the suspect, and this is not expected of an interviewer.
If I were guilty of a crime, I would confess to the male detective. He appears to be more reasonable than the female detective and would give a suspect ample time to explain himself or herself.