One stop interrogation & interviewing resource

[rborum]

Looking at your website, I just realized that the paper Interviewing Al-Qaeda-related subjects: A law enforcement perspective is a slightly modified version of the NCIS paper Interviewing & Interrogating Militant Islamists: A Law Enforcement Perspective - by the same authors, of course. A bit over two years ago I wrote a rambling, informal review of the latter piece here.

Ted - First - thanks for the clarification on the protocol for links. I get it, and appreciate your patience with my learning curve.

Thanks also for pointing me to your thoughtful analysis/review of our interim NCIS report back in 2007. It's always encouraging to hear that ideas we put out are making sense and that many of us are fundamentally on the same page as we move forward on the interrogation issue. A number of those involved in the "Educing Information" project are currently working to promote an initiative for the US - in partnership with our allies - to become world leaders in non-coercive interrogation/intelligence interviewing over the next 5-10 years.

[davidbfpo]

Found this on an occassionally used website: http://jiox.blogspot.com/ and this NDIC paper 'Interrogation: WW2, Vietnam & Iraq (2008): http://www.dia.mil/college/pubs/pdf/12010.pdf

Dropped here as it is a current thread, although not Afghan-specific.

Started to skim through, so may add more later. Some great parts, including an Israeli viewpoint and this quote:

The maximum opportunity for intelligence gathering comes in the first hours after an arrest, before others in a group can possibly know that their walls have been breached. The bottom line is fear works. The best way to use this fear is when it is genuine and originates with the source. Fear that is not introduced artificially, but originates solely in the mind of the prisoner, is the most effective.

.

davidbfpo

[jmm99]

Moderators Note: See Post 2 to explain why this appears!

this suggestion:

from Jedburgh
Wonder how much they paid those "experts"? All they needed to do was ask a few old, experienced HUMINT NCOs. The best advice in the world, for free. Read my posts on interrogation.

Not being one to lightly disregard your advice (), here are the threads I found (using Advanced Search on interrogation and Jedburgh as poster):

A Lesson About Torture, Half Century On

Profusion of Rebel Groups Helps Them Survive

Terrorism in Indonesia

U.S. Army Adds Interrogators

Republican Revolt over interrogation techniques?

It's the Tribes, Stupid

Battlefield Ethics

It's Our Cage, Too - links to three threads on torture and interrogation in this post.

Advisers Fault Harsh Methods in Interrogation http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/...ead.php?t=9446

Extraordinary Rendition

HUMINT-Centric Ops

Fort Hunt's Quiet Men Break Silence on WWII

Semantic Search Engine as a model for Intel Analysis tool

Rendition in the Southern Cone: Operation Condor

"Face" among the Arabs

Iran in the News

Stalin World?

Gitmo and the lawyers!

Revising FM 3-24: What needs to change?

Screening for Interrogation

Hamas in Gaza

Iran and Iraq

35M school, Camp Williams UT

Interrogation in Afghanistan

Not to turn this into a Jedburgh Appreciation Page (), but the above threads contain multiple good links and comments by Ted and others.

[davidbfpo]

Interrogation irregularly features on SWC and an in-house, ex-military expert is Jedburgh whose contributions have been assembed by JMM recently. I thought it worthy of putting his posts / threads in one place for future use.

[davidbfpo]

Been awhile since the thread has been updated, but when looking for something else I came across this paper 'National Security Interrogations: Myth and Reality' by Steven Kleinman:http://content.thirdway.org/publicat...v._Reality.pdf

The Third Way labels itself as a 'moderate' "think tank" and appears to be Democratic Party dominated.

[davidbfpo]

Ali Soufan reviews “The Interrogator: An Education,” a new book by CIA veteran and former detainee interrogator Glenn Carle.

It would be a struggle to find a CIA operative who endorses the use of enhanced-interrogation techniques. Carle’s experience and frustrations with the interrogation system bears out the fact that Anyone with actual interrogation experience knows that rapport-building techniques, which use knowledge to outwit detainees and gain cooperation, produce better intelligence than enhanced interrogation.

Link:http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...googlenews_wsj

[davidbfpo]

Six questions posed and in the last states - on general national policy, not the art of interrogation:

Frankly, I believe the main reason is that many people in the government have been sincere but deluded in their perceptions and actions in the “War on Terror.” I wrote my book because I was so distressed by so many aspects of the case: our erroneous and dangerous exaggeration of the terrorist threats facing us; what we have done to ourselves, our society, and our laws with our interrogation programs during the “War on Terror;” how our views about acceptable behavior have become coarser; our freedoms compromised unnecessarily; and how we unjustly kept a largely innocent man in prison for years, it seems, so as to bury in a dungeon the dark multiple, egregious errors.

Link:http://harpers.org/archive/2011/07/hbc-90008139

The second article is concerning with redactions made to the bbok at CIA insistence:http://www.harpers.org/archive/2011/07/hbc-90008135

[ganulv]

Douglas Starr, a faculty member in Boston University’s College of Communication, was interviewed on Fresh Air yesterday in conjunction with his New Yorker (behind a pay-wall) article he wrote titled “The Interview.” He was trained in both the Reid and PEACE techniques in the course of putting the piece together. Most surprising (and not in a good way) assertion he made in the course of the interview was that confession typically trumps physical evidence in the American justice system.

[davidbfpo]

I note in The Fesh Air article linked that:

This was an early case in 1955. [Darrel Parker], a forester in Lincoln, Neb., came home to find his wife had been brutally raped and murdered, and John Reid himself was called in to do the interrogation......Finally, in the summer of 2012, the state publicly admitted [Reid's] mistake and formally exonerated [Parker], who was now in his 80s, and he said, "At least now I can die in peace."

I was trained in the PEACE model many years ago, as were and until a few years ago all operational police officers in my department. It is awhile since I used it in suspect interviews.

The PEACE model IMHO works best with witnesses. It is not really suitable for suspects, even more so when they have a legal adviser present. There is a general right of silence in the UK, although legally qualified. Policing here has steadily been working towards taking any comments in interviews are a bonus - which can in low impact crimes mean no prosecution.

[ganulv]

Yeah, the part concerning Mr. Parker was… sad is not even close to the appropriate word.

I was trained in the PEACE model many years ago, as were and until a few years ago all operational police officers in my department. It is awhile since I used it in suspect interviews.

The PEACE model IMHO works best with witnesses. It is not really suitable for suspects, even more so when they have a legal adviser present.

Has there been a replacement with any particular standardized training regime and/or technique in general, and for suspects in particular?

A bit of a tangent, but some of the language in the interview (there was mention of the PEACE technique being used extensively in England and Wales) lead me to understand that policing policies are at least partly decided at the country level and not necessarily at the level of the UK as a whole. Is that indeed the case?

[slapout9]

Yeah, the part concerning Mr. Parker was… sad is not even close to the appropriate word.



Has there been a replacement with any particular standardized training regime and/or technique in general, and for suspects in particular?

A bit of a tangent, but some of the language in the interview (there was mention of the PEACE technique being used extensively in England and Wales) lead me to understand that policing policies are at least partly decided at the country level and not necessarily at the level of the UK as a whole. Is that indeed the case?

Yes, this technique is replacing the REID technique.
http://www.w-z.com/

[davidbfpo]

In part:

A bit of a tangent, but some of the language in the interview (there was mention of the PEACE technique being used extensively in England and Wales) lead me to understand that policing policies are at least partly decided at the country level and not necessarily at the level of the UK as a whole. Is that indeed the case?

I don't know if the PEACE model is used in Northern Ireland and Scotland, both have different legal systems.

The model was used in my former department, I expect it is wider use in England & Wales, although it will not be a national policing decision, more acceptance of its value by each department (43 in Eng & Wales).

Your first question was:

Has there been a replacement with any particular standardized training regime and/or technique in general, and for suspects in particular?

There are specialist courses for interviewing, mainly for 'serious crime'. That was not my forte, so I cannot add more.

[jmm99]

this:

... confession typically trumps physical evidence ....

Drizin & Leo, The Problem of False Confessions in the Post-DNA World (2004)(114 pp., examining 125 proven false confession cases):

This Article proceeds as follows:

Part I discusses, from a historical perspective, the study of wrongful convictions and the prominent role that false confessions have played in such studies. Part I also discusses the development of DNA testing and its role in renewing interest in the study of wrongful convictions.

Part II highlights the connection between police interrogation methods and false confessions, focusing principally on the social psychology of false confessions and research on the causes and consequences of false confessions.

Part III discusses the methodology used to compile and analyze the false confessions that make up this Article’s cohort, defines critical terms, and discusses the limitations of the data.

Part IV sets forth the quantitative findings gleaned from the cohort.

Part V takes a more qualitative approach to the data set, highlighting some of the common themes and trends that emerge from the cohort cases and describing illustrative cases in some detail.

Finally, Part VI concludes this Article with several policy recommendations suggested by the aforementioned findings, and highlights some recent positive developments which suggest that reforms designed to reduce the frequency of false confessions may stand a better chance of being implemented now than ever before.

Which is why no good lawyer will allow a client to be interviewed directly by police, whether that client is an accused, a focus person, a person of interest or a "mere" witness. Recall that Martha Stewart started off a potential witness in an investigation focused on someone else.

Regards

Mike

[rborum]

The Phase Two report from the Intelligence Science Board's Study on Intelligence Interviewing has been approved for release.

It distills the current state of social/behavioral science thinking on key issues in the Intelligence Interviewing process, including:

• Persuasion
• Power
• Interests & identities
• Stress
• Resistances
• Memory

It also includes a couple of detailed case studies with teaching notes.

You can find a link to the report on the next post.

- Randy Borum

[rborum]

You can access the report HERE.

Intelligence personnel who are trying to elicit information from a prisoner or a detainee can effectively do so in a non-coercive manner, according to the Intelligence Science Board (ISB), an official advisory group to the Director of National Intelligence.

The United States and other democracies can benefit from exploring and learning more in the area of non-coercive intelligence interviewing

The Board said in a sequel (pdf) to its December 2006 report on "Educing Information" (pdf). That earlier study found that existing U.S. intelligence interrogation practices were not scientifically well-founded.

The study team could not discover an objective scientific basis for the techniques commonly used by U.S. interrogators.

The newly disclosed follow-on report, dated April 2009,

is written primarily for individuals concerned with 'high-value' detainees and those who focus mainly on strategic interrogation.

It provides a survey of behavioral science perspectives on topics relevant to the interrogation process -- including persuasion, power, stress, resistance, and memory -- as well as two case studies of actual interrogations.

A copy of the ISB report was obtained by Secrecy News. See "Intelligence Interviewing: Teaching Papers and Case Studies," A Report from the Study on Educing Information, Intelligence Science Board, April 2009 (211 pages).

The ISB report adopted the new term "intelligence interviewing" instead of "interrogation" in part because it said "interrogation" is freighted with stereotypes often involving coercion. The report emphasized the utility of non-coercive interrogation but acknowledged the difficulty of empirically establishing its superiority to coercive questioning.

During Phases I and II, contributors could find no studies that compare the results of 'coercive' interrogations with those of non-coercive intelligence interviews. It is also difficult to imagine how such studies might be conducted in a scientifically valid, let alone morally acceptable, manner.

The ISB study notably dissected the "ticking time bomb" scenario that is often portrayed in television thrillers (and which has "captured the public imagination"). The authors patiently explained why that hypothetical scenario is not a sensible guide to interrogation policy or a justification for torture. Moral considerations aside, the ISB report said, coercive interrogation may produce unreliable results, foster increased resistance, and preclude the discovery of unsuspected intelligence information of value (pp. 40-42).

There also are no guarantees that non-coercive intelligence interviewing will obtain the necessary information,

the report said.

However, the United States has important recent examples of effective, non-coercive intelligence interviewing with high value detainees.

The ISB said its report could

provide experienced and successful interviewers a more formal understanding of the approaches they may have used instinctively. It may also help them to communicate their expertise to their colleagues... This [report] is intended to foster thinking and discussion and to encourage knowledge-based teaching, research, and practice. It does not, and cannot, offer doctrine or prescriptions. It is a start, not an end.

The mission of the Intelligence Science Board is

to provide the Intelligence Community with outside expert advice and unconventional thinking, early notice of advances in science and technology, insight into new applications of existing technology, and special studies that require skills or organizational approaches not resident within the Intelligence Community.

[Rex Brynen]

Thanks for posting that, Randy.

[Tracker275]

I read a lot of parts of the paper to first identify what the difference is between "coercive", and "non-coercive" interrogation techiniques. However, so far...I haven't been able to find in the paper where they clearly define what either means within the context of the paper in clear definition.

It is important to note what they consider to be the definition of the two, and the differences. Since that seems to be one of the main themes of the document, it would be helpful to know what they consider each to be by their definition.

...Still looking for that.

[jmm99]

in the 25 instances of "coerc" in the April 2009 Report linked in this thread, or in the 147 instances of "coerc" found in the "prequel" December 2006 Educing Information Report (several threads have discussed it), a precise, overall definition of "coercive" interrogation techniques.

The 2006 report discusses various "coercive" methods; and so, provides a better feel for that term than the 2009 report.

That being said, the best definition (by examples) of "coercive" interrogation is found in the so-called KUBARK Interrogation Manual (ToC snip):

IX. THE COERCIVE COUNTERINTELLIGENCE INTERROGATION OF RESISTANT SOURCES 82-104

A. Restrictions 82
B. The Theory of Coercion 82-85
C. Arrest 85-86
D. Detention 86-87
E. Deprivation of Sensory Stimuli 87-90
F. Threats and Fear 90-92
G. Debility 92-93
H. Pain 93-95
I. Heightened Suggestibility and Hypnosis 95-98
J. Narcosis 98-100
K. The Detection of Malingering 101-102
L. Conclusion 103-104

The 2009 report cites KUBARK nada; the 2006 report cites it 125 times and has a separate chapter devoted to it:

5. KUBARK Counterintelligence Interrogation Review:
Observations of an Interrogator – Lessons Learned and Avenues for Further Research, Steven M. Kleinman, p. 95

I'm positing you are looking for a legal-neutral definition of "coercive" and "non-coercive" interrogation - if so, look to KUBARK (snip from ch IX):

L. Conclusion

A brief summary of the foregoing may help to pull the major concepts of coercive interrogation together:

1. The principal coercive techniques are arrest, detention, the deprivation of sensory stimuli, threats and fear, debility, pain, heightened suggestibility and hypnosis, and drugs.

2. If a coercive technique is to be used, or if two or more are to be employed jointly, they should be chosen for their effect upon the individual and carefully selected to match his personality.

3. The usual effect of coercion is regression. The interrogatee's mature defenses crumbles as he becomes more childlike. During the process of regression the subject may experience feelings of guilt, and it is usually useful to intensify these.

4. When regression has proceeded far enough so that the subject's desire to yield begins to overbalance his resistance, the interrogator should supply a face-saving rationalization. Like the coercive technique, the rationalization must be carefully chosen to fit the subject's personality.

5. The pressures of duress should be slackened or lifted after compliance has been obtained, so that the interrogatee's voluntary cooperation will not be impeded.

We could, of course, spend a lot of fruitless and useless bytes talking about the evidentiary admissibility of "coerced" statements, and various aspects of the exclusionary rule and the fruit of the poisoned tree rule. I don't feel like doing that right about now.

Regards

Mike

[SWJ Blog]

Motivational Interviewing

Entry Excerpt:

Motivational Interviewing:
Improving Combat Advising to Strengthen Partnering with Afghan National Security Forces
by James Cowan, Nengyalai Amalyar and Mohammad Mustafa

Download The Full Article: Motivational Interviewing

Standing up a professional Afghan Na-tional Security Force (ANSF) is central to establishing a secure and more stable Afghan nation, and combat advising, as provided by US and coalition forces, is foundational to establishing a strong partnership with our ANSF brethren. Effective partnering, in turn, is critical to developing a capable and enduring ANSF. Given historical and evolving challenges and the contemporary importance of combat advising across US military operations, continuing efforts are necessary for further strengthening and preparing combat advisors to advise, coach, mentor, teach and partner with host nation security forces most recently in Afghanistan.



--------
Read the full post and make any comments at the SWJ Blog.
This forum is a feed only and is closed to user comments.

[Jedburgh]

Intelligence Interviewing: From Science to Practice

The 2014 HIG Research Symposium will be held at the National Academies of Sciences Building located at 2101 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C.

Please register for the conference by February 28, 2014

Our 2014 symposium will highlight new research findings aimed at supporting experts working in the Intelligence community, and will enable policy-makers and Intelligence professionals to network with our team of world-leading social scientists.

The symposium – which is being coordinated by the Center for Law & Human Behavior at the University of Texas at El Paso – will provide important opportunities to discuss the challenges currently faced by intelligence interviewers and the ways in which ground-breaking research can impact the effectiveness of interview and interrogation methods.

I'll be in attendance and in town for a couple of days - look forward to seeing anyone else who will be in the area.