Detecting deceptive behaviours during police interrogations

Abstract

This research aims to analyse the methodologies adopted by the police to detect deceptive behaviour during interrogations. This study is a first in the local context, therefore, a qualitative approach was adopted. For richer information, a population familiarised with interrogations was needed, hence purposive sampling was used. Inspectors from the Malta Police Force were the most feasible for this study since they constantly face interrogations. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with participants. Thematic analysis was adopted to identify themes that stood out from the data. Deceptive behaviour for some participants is not accurate, but for others, it can be accurate if a substantial amount of evidence is in hand. An increase in sweating, fidgeting, and foot jiggling was found to be common cues to deception. However, this does not necessarily mean that such behaviour equals deception – literature shows that innocent people may still express signs of anxiety under pressure. Strategies used were also discussed, and participants mentioned that several strategies can be implemented. Being well familiarised with the case and evidence helps in detecting deceptive behaviour because one would already know the answer because of the evidence. Conducting two interrogations was another strategy, the first interview would be a generic one to build rapport with the suspect, and the second would be a more specific one to attack the suspect based on his behaviour from the first interrogation. It was also evident the importance of the audio-visual during interrogations, this equipment records every sound and picture of the interrogation. Here police can spend ample time analysing the interrogation and can identify potential deceptive behaviour. Training and improvement were crucial to discuss among participants. It was clear that a lack of training was absent in the force, additionally, deception detection courses were not equally distributed to participants. Some participants participated with professional entities such as the CIA, in deception detection training, whilst other participants had to buy books and implement their studies in actual interrogations. All participants stressed the importance of more courses regarding deception detection, as it is something that is continuously developing. This study proves that deception detection cannot be seen as reliable evidence, but rather as something which if several factors are combined may help during the course of an interrogation. Further research on detecting deceptive behaviour and more tuition to police officials serve to be propitious to the police force in general and more specifically to interrogators.