MISREPRESENTATIONS MADE ABOUT THE REID TECHNIQUE - AND THE CORRECT INFORMATION

Over the years a number of misrepresentations and statements containing misinformation have been made about The Reid Technique of Interviewing and Interrogation by "false confession experts," academicians and the media. We have prepared a document for your use that lists these misrepresentations and then provides the correct information as detailed in our training manual and our books, including Criminal Interrogation and Confessions, 5th edition, 2011.

Read the document here. 

eBOOK NOW AVAILABLE  

Criminal Interrogation and Confessions, 5th edition, now available through VitalSource as an eBook.  The price is $74.95, a 40% discount off the printed text price. Click here for details.  Also, watch for it to be available through Kindle and Google soon. You asked for it and we made it happen. 

CERTIFICATION IN THE REID TECHNIQUE (CRT)

One of the goals in creating the Reid Institute was to encourage investigators to enhance their skills through continuing education. At the same time, through the Reid Certification program we want to identify those Reid Institute members who have clearly developed their expertise in the utilization of The Reid Technique of Interviewing and Interrogation.

The Reid Certification program recognizes those individuals who have demonstrated their ability to effectively apply the basic concepts and techniques taught in our training seminars and textbooks. Reid students that successfully complete all of the training, testing and background requirements will be awarded Certification in The Reid Technique. They will also be able to include the "CRT" designation to their professional credentials.  Click here for details.

DO YOU HAVE VIDEO EXAMPLES FOR OUR SEMINARS?

If you have any video examples of interviews or interrogations that you have conducted using the techniques that you learned at our program, we would be happy to review them for possible use in our training seminars to illustrate the effectiveness of your skills.  If we use your video examples we will arrange with you to give your organization a free seat at our seminar, or free training materials of your choice.  Please contact Mark Reid at 1-800-255-5747 ext 36 or mreid@reid.com.

Featured Article

Two Courts Reject the Claim of Ineffective Counsel Because an Expert Witness on False Confessions Was Not Called
 

In the case of State v. Spoerl (March 2012) the Court of Appeals, Wisconsin rejected the defendant's claim that his counsel was ineffective for failing to call an expert witness on the issue of false confessions, stating that, "Spoerl's claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel fails for several reasons. First, the claim that counsel was ineffective for failing to call an expert witness or present a learned treatise on false confessions is precluded by State v. VanBuren, 2008 WI App 26, PP 17-19, 307 Wis.2d 447, 746 N.W.2d 545. Counsel's performance could not fall below the objective standard of reasonableness as measured against prevailing professional norms because there is no published Wisconsin case stating that expert testimony on false confessions is admissible and authorities elsewhere are split. Id.

Second, Spoerl did not present an expert witness at the post conviction hearing. Without evidence of what the expert would have said or how he would have been cross-examined, we cannot conclude that counsel was deficient or that the defense was prejudiced by the failure to call that witness.

Third, Spoerl failed to establish prejudice from his counsel's conduct. While the learned treatises speak generally of the phenomenon of false confessions and the effect of youth and mental disorders on interrogation, the treatises do not specifically address the significance of autism or Asperger's syndrome, and Spoerl offers no explanation for his ability to maintain his innocence regarding other crimes. Spoerl also fails to explain how the factors recited in the articles relate specifically to his confession. The evidence presented at the post conviction hearing does not undermine our confidence in the outcome."

Click here to read more about this case and read the second case here. 

The Spring 2012 legal updates include cases which address the following issues:

• Defendant does not have to actually speak to invoke the right to remain silent 
• Statement to suspect that he should explain his mistake so that his daughter did not have to grow up without her dad rendered the confession inadmissible 
• Suspect told he would only be a witness if he had merely been present but had not been a shooter - is this a promise of leniency? 
• Court finds testimony from Dr. Bruce Frumkin inadmissible on whether the defendant has a propensity to make a false statement 
• Is this statement an unambiguous invocation of the suspect's right to counsel - I'd like an attorney present. I mean but I can't afford one. So I guess I'll just speak to you now. I don't have an attorney. 
• I don't want to say anything more is an unambiguous exercise of the defendant's right to silence 
• If a juvenile is questioned in a police car, is he in custody? In this case the court said no.
• Rationalizing a defendant's actions (self-defense/accident) in such a way that he might hope that he would not be charged with murder did not render the confession inadmissible 
• Court finds that interrogators are permitted to use minimization techniques 
• Court excludes the testimony of Dr. Richard Leo: the proposed expert testimony was little more than speculation. 
• Court does not allow Dr. Richard Ofshe to testify on false confession issues 
• Court excludes testimony of social psychologist on false confessions 
• Two courts reject the claim of ineffective counsel because an expert witness on false confessions was not called 
• Court finds use of a videotape as a prop during an interrogation acceptable 
• Interrogating a suspect after continued denials not coercive 
• Confession voluntariness: telling defendant length of punishment and misrepresenting evidence 
• Fourteenth Amendment does not require law enforcement to videotape custodial interrogations 
• Is the request by a 15 year old to speak to their mother (in a custodial setting) tantamount to requesting an attorney?  

Read more about Spring Legal Updates here. 

Upcoming Events

Download our 2012 Brochure

Download our 2012 Catalog

Archived Newsletters 

Summer Edition

Fall Edition

Winter Edition

Library of Investigator Tips