Review of Supporting Documents

When reviewing specifications, you should use all the tools at your disposal. Reviewing supporting documents that accompany a charge sheet will ensure the accuracy of your effort. The accused's service record will aid you in determining whether or not there is jurisdiction over the accused. Also, this helps to verify the personal information on page 1 of the charge sheet. Other documents that will help you are shore patrol reports, incident complaint reports, NCIS reports, records of unauthorized absences (NAVPERS 601-6Rs, page 6s), and administrative remarks (NAVPERS 601-13s, page 13s). These documents will help you in determining the correctness of the drafted charge(s) and specification(s).

WITNESS INTERVIEWS

Some aspects of LN duty assignments require you to interview witnesses with the purpose of gathering information much the same as an investigator. In most cases, witnesses have been interviewed by trained investigators before you undertake the task. In any event, the techniques used by you to gather information are universal and effective if applied properly.

Interviews

During the process of gathering information for an investigation, you almost invariably make use of one of the most valuable sources, people; you do so by interviewing them. An interview is the questioning of a person believed to possess knowledge of official interest to the command and the interviewer. In an interview, the interviewer encourages the person questioned to give an account of an incident under investigation in his or her own words and in his or her own way. Interviews are used for the following purposes: 

l To establish the facts of a crime that may provide the investigator with leads that will disclose the perpetrator of the crime or offense under investigation or of other crimes committed or both 

l To corroborate or disprove statements 

l To verify inferences derived from physical evidence

l To link physical evidence of a suspect with a case

l To clear a suspect (develop evidence that eliminates an individual as suspect of committing an offense)

. To secure evidence that may establish the guilt or complicity of a suspect, to help in the recovery of fruits of the crime, or identify accomplices

You must become thoroughly familiar with the military and civilian laws that apply to the specific offense under investigation before conducting an interview. A knowledge of these laws assists you in evaluating the relevancy of information you receive. You must avoid any oversight or mistake that would impair the value of the results of your investigation to the person or agency using the results in a legal action. Often, through questioning a witness about one offense, you may develop investigative leads related to other offenses. This additional information may be of value to other investigative agencies.

Human factors affect success in stimulating the subject to talk and influence the accuracy or truthfulness of the information that you secure from him or her. Evaluate each subject and the evidence he or she furnished; attempt to understand the subject's motivations, fears, and mental makeup; and use your understanding of the subject to gain useful information. In selecting a technique of interview, consider the following factors.

PERCEPTION AND MEMORY.- The validity of the information divulged during an interview is influenced by the subject's ability to perceive correctly what happened in his or her presence, to recollect that information, and to transmit it correctly. A mistake made in recalling a particular incident is often caused by the following: . A weakness in the subject's ability to see, hear, smell, taste, or touch. l The location of the subject in relation to the incident at the time it occurred. Rarely do two people give the same account of an incident witnessed by them. . A lapse of time since the occurrence of the incident or the subject having had no reason for attaching much importance to it when it occurred. The account given an incident at a later time is often colored, consciously or unconsciously, by what the subject has heard or seen regarding the incident since it occurred. Furthermore, a subject may fill in the gaps in his or her knowledge of a particular incident by rationalizing what he or she actually did see or hear and may repeat the entire mixture of fabrication and fact to you as the truth. Therefore, a subject should be interviewed as soon as possible after the occurrence of an incident. Even then all your skill is required to discover what the subject actually observed.

PREJUDICE.- When making a statement, the subject may be influenced by prejudice. You should be alert to this possibility and attempt to discover the motivation behind such prejudice. A statement influenced by prejudice should be carefully evaluated and closely examined for reliable information that may be helpful in the investigation.

RELUCTANCE TO TALK.- You may meet a person who is reluctant to divulge information. You must legally overcome this reluctance to secure the information you need. The most common reasons for reluctance to talk are as follows:

. Fear of self-involvement. Many persons arc unfamiliar with investigative methods to the extent that they are afraid to give the investigator their aid. They may have committed a minor offense that they believe will be brought to light upon the least involvement with authorities. They may have the opinion that the incident that occurred is not their business or that guilt lies jointly on the victim and the accused. They may fear the publicity that may be given to persons involved in any way with criminal cases.

l Inconvenience. Many persons disclaim knowledge of incidents because they do not wish to be inconvenienced by being subjected to questioning or by being required to appear in court. . Resentment toward authority. This resentment may be present particularly among persons who do not have a positive loyalty to the organized community. Sometimes the resentment manifests itself as sympathy for an accused who is regarded as an underdog pitted against the impersonal, organized forces of society represented by the authorities.

PERSONALITY CONFLICT.- The lack of success in an interview may be caused by a personality conflict between the interviewer and the subject. When that is the case, you should voluntarily recognize this fact and, before all chances of success are lost, withdraw in favor of another interviewer. The subject may feel a willingness to talk to the new interviewer after his or her experience with an objectable one.

REFUSAL TO TALK.- A recognized weakness of the interview technique is that no person can legally be made to talk if he or she is not willing to do so. No person capable of committing a crime should be expected to confess his or her guilt.

When too many persons are present, the individual being interviewed may be reluctant to divulge all that he or she knows about an incident. Interviewing an individual in the presence of many persons has been held by the courts to constitute duress. On the other hand, someone should be present to witness the questioning, to witness any statement made, and to protect the interviewer against a possible charge of coercion or _duress. Normally, not more than two interviewers should be present.