Part II — US DOJ: FBI, DEA, ATF Will Record Questioning: Record The Whole Session

Posted: June 2, 2014 in Failed Forensics, False Confessions
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

In my last post, I discussed the significance of the new US DOJ policy, effective July 11, that creates a presumption that all federal law enforcement agencies — the FBI, the DEA, ATF, and all the rest, will record interrogations of suspects.  This will put these federal agencies on par with the several states and many hundreds of state and local departments that have recorded interrogations for years, as a matter of course.

I commented that, without access to the DOJ memorandum itself, there was no way to know whether the new policy would require recording of the whole interrogation, or just part of it (usually, the part that shows a confession, but not what lead up to it).  I promised to post again when I had more information.

The full DOJ memorandum is now public, and it requires that the agency records the full interrogation: not just the confession, but the whole session.  Here’s what the memorandum says:

I. g.   Scope of Recording.  Electronic recording will begin a soon as the subject enters the interview area or room and will continue until the interview is completed.

For proponents of recording interrogation, this is good news.   A partial recording could only give a partial picture of what went on in the interrogation room.  At worst, a partial recording could be downright misleading; at the very least, a recording that only contained the confession at the end of the interrogation would tell us nothing about the context — about how the police obtained the interrogation.  So the Scope of Recording requirement is a very important part of an effective recording system.

  1. […] not just the last part in which  the suspect confesses.  (I’ve made that argument  here.)  Adding a requirement to record both interrogator and suspect makes all the sense in the […]

  2. Robert Rios says:

    Whenever you decide to record the entire interrogation, you may not be taking into consideration that at trial time, much of what was said may have to be redacted due to the fact that it may be prejudical to the defense. Now, when the jury sees something redacted, thay have to wonder what you are trying to hide from them. To me, it’s best to record the whole interrogation, if you want but, take a seperate recorded confession with all the facts as they developed. The interrogation recording is for the courts in a motion to suppres, and the confession tape if it survives the motion is to be used at trial time for jury.
    Bob Rios, Lt. (ret)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s