Interview

and
Interrogation
 1. Interview – An interview is the questioning of a person believed to possess
knowledge that is in official interest to the investigator.
 2. Importance of interview - Interview in crime investigation is very important
considering that the person interviewed usually gives his account of an incident under
investigation or offers information concerning a person being investigated in his own
manner and words.
 3. The Person Interviewed Consider:
a) His ability to observe.
b) His ability to remember.
c) His ability to narrate
d) His mental weakness because of stupidity or infancy
e) His moral weakness because of drunkenness, drug addiction, his being
a pathological liar or similar factors.
f) Emotional weakness resulted by family problems, hatred, revenue, and love.
 Interrogation - An interrogation is the questioning of a person suspected of having
committed an offense or of a person who is reluctant to make a full disclosure of information
in his possession which is pertinent to the investigation.

 Purpose of Interrogation
a) To obtain information concerning the innocence or guilt of suspect.
b) To obtain a confession to the crime from a guilty suspect.
c) To induce the suspect to make admissions.
d) To know the surrounding circumstances of a crime.
e) To learn of the existence and location of physical evidence such as documents or weapons.
f) To learn the identify of accomplices.
g) To develop information which will lead to the fruits of the crime.
h) To develop additional leads for the investigation.
i) To discover the details of any other crime in which the suspect participated.
Admission
VS
Confession
Admission
a mere acknowledge of an accused that he may be in the
crime scene but not the one who committed the offense.
 may not the liability for such crime and may invoke
defenses to sway the fault.
 such admission may be used as evidence against him
during the trial of the case.
Confession
 acknowledges the guilt of a person that he is the one who
committed the offense.
 most reasonable evidence for prosecuting a case because
no person would probably admit his guilt that he was the
one who committed the offense if it was not really true at
all.
Deposition
 Deposition is a legal term that refers to the process of taking
sworn testimony from a witness outside of the courtroom
setting. It is an important method of gathering information
and evidence in a legal case, typically conducted during the
pretrial phase. During a deposition, the witness (referred to
as the deponent) is questioned under oath by attorneys from
both sides of the lawsuit.
 The purpose of a deposition is to allow attorneys to
gather information, assess the credibility and knowledge
of witnesses, discover potential evidence, and establish
facts relevant to the case. The testimony given during a deposition
can be used as evidence during trial or for other legal purposes. It is
usually recorded by a court reporter who transcribes the testimony
to create an official transcript.
 Overall, depositions play a crucial role in the discovery and fact-
finding process of a legal case, allowing attorneys to obtain
relevant information from witnesses under oath before the trial.
Procedural Safeguards
The specific procedure of procedural safeguards can vary depending on the context in
which they are implemented. However, there are some general steps involved in
establishing and following procedural safeguards. Here is a generalized procedure:
1. Identification of Rights: The first step is to identify the rights or interests that need to
be protected. This could include rights such as due process, privacy, freedom of speech,
or non-discrimination.
2. Legal Framework: Determine the relevant laws, regulations, or policies that govern
the specific area where procedural safeguards are needed. These legal requirements will
define the minimum standards or procedures that must be followed.
3. Designing Safeguards: Develop a set of safeguards that align with the identified
rights and legal requirements. This may involve creating rules, procedures, or
guidelines to ensure fairness, transparency, and protection of individual rights.
4. Implementation and Communication: Safeguards should be effectively
implemented and properly communicated to all relevant parties. This includes
providing clear instructions, training, and awareness-raising initiatives to ensure that
everyone involved understands their rights and responsibilities.
5. Monitoring and Compliance: Regular monitoring and evaluation should be carried
out to ensure that the procedural safeguards are being effectively implemented. This
may involve conducting audits, collecting feedback, or reviewing the overall
effectiveness of the safeguards.
6. Remedies and Appeals: Establish processes for individuals to seek remedies or
appeal decisions if they believe their rights have been violated. This can include
mechanisms such as grievance procedures, ombudsman offices, or judicial review
depending on the specific context. It's important to note that the specific procedure for
procedural safeguards may vary depending on the legal system, industry, or
organization involved.
Voluntariness
Requirements
 Requirements of Voluntariness
 The voluntariness of a statement is determined by considering the
following factors: [8]
 threats or promises oppression operating mind police trickery
 The application of the confessions rule is contextual and requires taking
into account all the circumstances.[9] The degree of each factor present
will be taken into account. For example, a low-level inducement may
vitiate voluntariness where the level of oppression from lack of sleep
may be high.[10]
 The test for right to silence and voluntariness are functionally equivalent.
A voluntary statement cannot violate the right to silence. [11]
 There is no rule requiring that police officers seek the consent to
record the dialogue of any witness or accused that they chose to
interview.[12]
 Voluntariness must be proven when the statement is being admitted
for the purpose of establishing an officer's reasonable suspicion to
permit a screening demand.[13]
 Voluntariness need not be proven where the statement is being
tendered for voice identification.[14]
 Voluntariness implies "an awareness about what is at stake in
speaking to persons in authority, or declining to assist them".[15]
 Non-Investigative Exception Where the police ask questions and obtain
information from the accused regarding their name, address, and phone
number while booking the accused, there is no requirement for proving
voluntariness and no voir dire is needed.[20]
 Cross-examination of a Co-accused Exception Defence counsel may use a
prior statement to cross examine a co-accused who incriminates the accused
even where the statement is not voluntary.[21]
 Criminal Offence Exception When the statement itself is the offence, such as
in an obstruction charge, uttering threats, etc, then there is no need to prove
voluntariness of the statement.
 Failure to Caution Not Fatal A statement made to a person in authority is not
inadmissible solely because the officer failed to give the proper cautions. This
failure may be a factor in the voluntariness analysis, but admissibility rests
solely on the question of voluntariness.[23]
 Burden of Proof Under the common law voluntariness rule, the Crown must
prove voluntariness beyond a reasonable doubt.[24]
 However, for a Charter claim against the right to silence, the burden is upon
the claimant to prove on the balance of probabilities.[25]
 Appellate Review Where the correct test is applied and all relevant factors are
considered, the decision is owed deference to the determination of
voluntariness.[26