Nine Step Model Of Interrogation

Along with the nine step model comes various external elements that strengthen the interrogation’s likelihood for success. The interrogator is instructed to exude confidence at all times with knowledge of the case details but not necessarily the facts pertaining to the evidence. The room is to be plain for best results, therefore no loose or distracting objects should be displayed. Straight back chairs are encouraged to limit psychologically undesirable traits such as slouching. Although all these details are encouraged to be used by interrogators, often times these exact regulations are not followed. If not followed, unethical actions could derail and inadmissible or false confessions could arise due to the coercive nature in which the interrogation
Simply, there were too many false confessions due to the coercive and overly aggressive nature of the Reid method. Further, the method did not consistently appease International Factoring Association’s (IFA) standards. On the other hand the PEACE method does not deviate from the IFA ethical standards and coupled with the removal of coercive techniques, it reduces the chances of inadmissible statements. The switch first occurred in Britain in the 1990’s, however the Canadian forces had not addressed the method as probable until Sergeant Carr’s proposal, “Looking at PEACE & Reid’s Interview Models: A Canadian Perspective” was released in 2013. His proposal discussed various differences and the application of both methods, but mainly spoke to the need for constant improvement of interview theories as there are no perfect theories, one is only as profound as its competitors. Though the PEACE method’s benefits were known long before 2013, the North American and United Kingdom’s legal systems differ vastly therefore the RCMP needed to act pragmatically when thinking of implementing a new interview system as
One response emerges through a philosophical view whereas the other appeals to a psychological standpoint. The philosophical perspective encourages a closer look at the beginning stages of the Reid method where the hard evidence is overlooked and interrogators elaborate case details to convince the suspect of their known guilt. Due to the fact that philosophy attempts to decipher concepts and situations sans prejudice, the aforesaid motive of the Reid technique goes against philosophers goal to solve issues in a neutral manner. The concept that nothing is sacred in philosophy and nothing is beyond doubt closely relates to the PEACE technique. There is no presumed opinion in the PEACE method, guilt is to be determined it is not to be disproved; therefore all angles are free to be questioned. This is not the case for the Reid method. Tied to the notion that nothing is beyond doubt, is the concept of the humility surrounding the limitation of one’s knowledge. Certainly our knowledge is abundant but not infinite. Hence, there are many elements left unknown even when reasonable certainty of guilt is confirmed. So why the change from the Reid method? To eliminate the essence of pre-confirmed bias causing a coercive interrogation and to install an object, truth seeking method