Making the Call to the Suspect
Article 1, Interview and Interrogation
Article 1, Interview and Interrogation: Making the Call to the Suspect
The first step to a successful suspect interview is getting them in the room in the first place. For most investigative units, this process begins when the investigator calls the suspect to schedule a non-custodial interview. Since I became a detective, I’ve made some smooth, successful calls to suspects, and I’ve made some clumsy, unsuccessful calls to suspects. In this article, I will discuss strategies I’ve learned to make calls to suspects smoother and more successful.
I know that I have felt anxious about making these calls, and I bet that you have too. I’ve found myself taking a long lunch break or volunteering for that patrol call that just came across the line. Why am I so helpful today? Oh. Right. It’s because the time has come to confront a suspect, and I don’t know how it’s going to turn out.
I have seen detectives twist themselves into knots to justify why they aren’t calling a suspect. “He’s a flight risk.” “I don’t speak Spanish.” “I think the case facts speak for themselves.” “Nobody would criticize me for suspending this case without taking that extra step.” Don’t be this detective! If the suspect is guilty, you’ve missed a chance to get justice for your victim. If the suspect is innocent, you’ve bypassed an important safety mechanism to prevent them from being charged.
So you are going to be the detective that calls a suspect in. Great. What’s his number? I have done a number of investigations where I got to this point, and I couldn’t believe that I failed to actually ask the family this question when I should have. When you have access to the victim or their family, always ask if they have contact information for the suspect if the suspect is known. Ask them for a phone number, another phone number, a girlfriend’s phone number, email, Bumble, Snapchat, Facebook or anything else that they may use to communicate.
You’ve done everything right up to this point. You identified a suspect, you have their phone number, and you decided to call them. Something is still holding you back. At this point, stop thinking about it. Pick up the phone, and call them. If you have to, set a time like 10:30 am and no matter what you have to pick up the phone and make that call.
It’s possible that I’m describing something that is outside of your experience. If so, look to later articles on subjects that may interest you. I know that these delay tactics are used because I have used them, and I have seen them used. What is it about calling a suspect? I think it’s that you just can’t predict what they are going to say. The result of your conversation could have momentous impact on the course of your investigation. Anything could happen, and how quickly you respond to these random possibilities will make a big difference. I’m not the quickest at thinking on my feet so I know I feel extra pressure to get this right.
I’ve laid out steps that you can follow to increase your likelihood for success when scheduling suspects for interviews. Following these steps will lead to smoother and more successful interactions with suspects. I discuss each item in more detail below.
Record, record, record.
Identify yourself and ask them to identify themselves.
Be direct about what you are investigating, but use soft words.
Listen to what they say.
Sell them the car.
Set the appointment, and follow up.
If they ask for a lawyer, have a response.
If they refuse to come in, interview them on the phone.
Record, record, record. This is fundamental. Attach a recorder to your phone. Mine is attached to the computer, which can record inside of an app on the desktop. You need to record the call to the suspect every single time. The suspect may admit to something on the phone that will be useful in your investigation. The suspect may decide to confess on the phone. The suspect may complain on you later (and you’ll be wanting an accurate account of what happened). If the suspect agrees, declines, or doesn’t decide, you’ll have a record of it. These days people need recordings and video to believe events. Give them that.
Identify yourself and ask them to identify themselves: My typical introduction goes like this, “Brian? This is Detective *** with the *** Police Department. How are you doing today? Listen, I have something I need to discuss with you, but I need to make sure that I’m talking to the right person. Can you spell your last name for me? Can you tell me your date of birth? Ok, great…”
Why is it so important that the suspect identify themselves? Because if you don’t, it gives the defense something to argue about that might lead to suppressing any statements they make. “Yes, you called my client’s number. Yes a male answered the phone. Yes he spoke knowledgeably about the situation, but did you know he has a twin brother that hates him and sometimes impersonates him?” They might not win the argument, but every chance you give them to argue is another chance you might lose.
If you forget to have the suspect identify themselves at the beginning, have them do it at the end. One time, I called a man on the phone that was accused of hitting a person on the head with a baseball bat. When I called, I delivered my introduction. I asked him to come in, but I forgot to ask him to identify himself. He said, “I’m not gonna come in, but I’ll tell you what happened on the phone.” I thought this sounded like the second best thing to him coming in person.
Within a few minutes, he told me a not so believable story about feeling threatened and responding with the bat. About this time, I realized that had an unidentified man on tape confessing to an aggravated assault. Great. I hurriedly blurted out, “How do you spell your last name again?” and then, “So your date of birth makes you…Oh that’s right. I have it written down somewhere, but can you remind me of your birthday?” Then I had what I needed. I thanked him for his time, added the recording to the digital case file, and I promptly cut a warrant for him for aggravated assault.
Be direct about what you are investigating, but use soft words. This may seem obvious, but it may not. Give them information they need to make an informed decision about speaking with you by correctly identifying what it is you are investigating, but use soft words. Instead of, “I’m investigating the aggravated sexual assault of a child.” Say, “Susie says that you put your finger in her butt. I work these cases all of the time, and I know the sorts of things kids can say. I know that the truth is usually somewhere in the middle. I’d really like to talk to you so that I can understand why it is that Susie would say such a thing. When would you be available to come to my office so that we can clear this situation up? Would next Tuesday afternoon work?” Aggravated Sexual Assault of a Child sounds scary. Both my description and the literal charge describe what happened. Only one gives the suspect the sense that maybe what they did was wrong but not, like, prison-wrong.
I ran into a newly promoted detective that I knew from a day of taking calls with him on patrol earlier that year. I asked him how detective life was treating him. He told me about a case that he was working on. It was a stranger rape case where the suspect had been identified through good police work. But then it took a turn. He said, “The guy wouldn’t come in for an interview, look.” He showed me text messages with the suspect after explaining that he had called numerous times without answer. I read through the text messages. After I read them, I understood why he hadn’t come in!
The message thread read something like this. “Mr X. I need you to come to the police station and talk to me.” “Sure. What’s it about?” “Are you going to meet me or not?” “Yeah, but I don’t understand why.” “If you aren’t going to meet me then I’m going to have to see this as an act of non-compliance…” You get the picture. This is not meant to be verbatim, but it definitely captures the tone of the messages.
I believe this approach comes from some misguided belief that the big secret to interrogation is springing the accusation on the person with no prior warning in order to gauge their response. Maybe there’s a fear that telling them about being investigated for a felony will rush them into the arms of a lawyer and you’ll miss your chance. This is wrong-headed. The advantage over a guilty suspect is not surprise…NEWS FLASH: they know they did it… the advantage is in anxiety over how they will perform while trying to convince the detective of a bunch of lies.
It is a distinct DISadvantage to not clearly identify the issue under investigation to the innocent suspect because that person may very well provide you an alibi or other defense that you didn’t know before talking to them. What if the suspect is guilty of a robbery but innocent of the rape you are investigating. If you told them, I suspect you hit a woman and stole her money, he may say, “I’d like you to call my lawyer please.” If you told them, I suspect you hit a woman and raped her in an alleyway, he may say, “I’ve never raped anyone in my life. When can we meet?” If you want to increase your chances for a successful interview, tell the suspect why you want to talk to them.
Listen to what they say. When you say, “Little Susie says that you put your finger in her butt,” there are a lot of ways that conversation can go. Some signs that you have the right guy might come in the form of objections. If you hear, “Why would I do that?” You’re hearing an objection, not a denial. If you hear, “I always knew something like this would happen,” you’re hearing an attempt at getting sympathy. If you hear, “Wow, what kind of prison sentence does something like that carry?” you’re hearing a person bargaining rather than denying. These are not typically the hallmarks of innocent people.
As in all things, there is no single magical indicator that will let you know if the person is lying or not. Think about these things as a percentages game. When you get several things that are more commonly associated with deception, you may be on the right path to knowing that a person is hiding something.
Sell them the car. By this I mean close the deal with all the techniques we know our friendly neighborhood car salespeople use. After all, you’re calling to get them into the interview room not to actually interview them on the phone. Let’s look at two different interview scheduling techniques. I’ve heard them both. You tell me which is more likely to bring a person into a police station.
“Hi Brian, thanks for taking my call. My name is Detective *** with the *** Police Department. How are you doing? Listen, the reason I’m calling today is that I got assigned this case. Hold on, let me pull it up. Okay here it is. So here it says that a guy named Andy is saying you cut him a little bit with a knife. We get these types of cases all the time. Do you know Andy? Okay right, I get the sense that there is more to the story. Would you like to come in and make a statement?”
This isn’t a bad call. This call gets through the introduction. It identifies the issue at hand but with soft language. It lets the person know that maybe you’re not all the way sold on what Andy has to say. But where it could improve is on closing the deal to make the sale. Let’s try it again, picking up towards the end.
“…I get the sense that there is more to the story. I want to make sure that you get heard so we can find out what really happened. I’m available either tomorrow at 1 pm or next Tuesday at 9 am. Which day can I put you down for? Tomorrow or Tuesday?”
Now we’re talking. This one makes it clear that you want to hear his side of the story and it provides two options for time slots. The slope has been smoothed for this suspect to roll into tomorrow or Tuesday. It is possible but much more mentally challenging to say, “I don’t want to talk at all” or to choose any sort of option that involves not coming in.
Some sales just aren’t that hard. Some people are ready to buy the car. I’ve made calls and had the suspect say, “I can be there in an hour. I can’t wait to clear this up.” When you hear this tactic, I recommend remaining neutral as to interpreting this development. It is possible that it is the mark of an innocent person that is anxious to clear their name. It is also possible that you are dealing with an aggressive personality type that thinks they can overwhelm you or get to you when you aren’t prepared.
Set the appointment and follow up. Suspects tend to find better things to do around the time of their interview appointments. Follow up with them at least once before the appointment. By treating the interview appointment like a doctor’s visit, you’ll make it seem routine instead of momentous. If a suspect is on the fence about coming in, they will be reassured by a text message that says, “Robert, thanks for taking my call the other day. This is really going to help clear this issue up. See you tomorrow at 9 am. Call me if you need directions.” A message like this is reminiscent of the dentist confirming an appointment. You are making yourself available in a way that may encourage the suspect to soften their expectations. I believe that many suspects view a police interview like a battle of sorts. If you’re expecting a fight but all you get is helpfulness, it will be hard to maintain the hard outer shell.
If they ask for a lawyer, have a response. I used to really worry about this development. I don’t anymore. You want to talk to a suspect for two reasons: in the interest of fairness and to get the truth. But let’s be clear: a good investigation should be able to stand whether or not the suspect confesses to the crime. If your entire case relies on getting a confession, it’s not that good of a case. I find that I am successful in having suspects come in by staying neutral with this development. Do not get angry. It’s not personal.
There are legitimate reasons to want to retain counsel before making statements to police detectives. I have had suspects say, “You’ll be hearing from my lawyer!” When I respond, “Great! What is your lawyer’s name? I’ll reach out to them.” They often seem put off by this. Their big gun was LAWYER and you didn’t flinch or worry about it. I’ve had this turn out two ways. One, they say, I’ll make some calls and let you know. I’ve also had the person relent and say that they didn’t do anything wrong and they’d rather just come in and talk about it.
Let’s look at these two outcomes: “I’ll make some calls and let you know.” I don’t know about you, but I don’t have enough hours in my work days to wait indefinitely to hear from a lawyer that may or may not be retained by this suspect. If this happens, I say, “Sure. That makes sense. One thing, though: I have a lot of cases and I want to get this case resolved as quickly as possible. Some lawyers will advise you to come in with them and make a statement and other lawyers will tell you not to make a statement. In order to wrap this case up, I really need to know if there will be a statement or not be a statement. Either is fine of course. Will you have your lawyer contact me or should I follow up with you tomorrow to get their name?”
This is a case management technique more than a getting-the-person-into-the-interview technique. When a person definitely expresses a desire to have counsel, you have no idea if they are going to actually call a lawyer or if what they are really saying is that they don’t want to make a statement and also they aren’t calling anybody. If “I want a lawyer” really means, “I’m not talking to you, do what you need to do,” then I want to know that! Reaching out to a suspect is a step that should be taken during an investigation if possible. If they are really getting a lawyer, then you want their name so that you can ask them if they want to have their client make a statement. If they aren’t getting a lawyer and just don’t want to talk, the box is checked and you can move on to next steps.
Outcome 2: The person is miffed that you aren’t impressed with lawyers and says that they’ll just come in and make a statement. In this scenario, move in and make the sale like we discussed before. You might consider reading Miranda when they come in, but in my opinion it would not be necessary because you will, of course, follow best practices when it comes to non-custodial statements.
If they refuse to come in, interview them on the phone. In-person interviews are always best, but sometimes the suspect isn’t willing to come in for one. I’ve listened to detectives plead and cajole the person on the other end of the line to come in for an interview. I’ve listened to detectives call a suspect three and four times to try for the interview. This is where you need to be flexible. There will come a time when it is obvious that the suspect is unlikely to come in for an interview. When this becomes clear to you, pivot, and interview them on the phone. I’ve gotten three confessions on the phone. It is possible.
In conclusion, practicing the skills discussed in this article will increase your chances of achieving the first and most important step of interview and interrogation: getting the suspect in the room. There will always be suspects that refuse to come in for an interview. Don’t worry about them. Your mission is to persuade the undecided suspect to show up for an interview. Once they come in, you can get down to the business of interview and interrogation.