Obtaining the Answers

The Art and Science of Interrogation

By Kaelyn Phelps
JOUR 370 - News II: Advanced Journalism
Fall 2015

EAST PROVIDENCE, RI __ Detective Corporal Michael Spremullis brown eyes stare intently
at the computer in front of him as he types names, phone numbers, and checks the
Facebook page of a wanted sex offender. His long legs barely fit under his small, wooden
desk. His buzz cut, silver and black peppered hair create the illusion he is older than he
really his, but his smooth tanned skin brings a contrasting youthful appearance to his
demeanor.
He reaches into his tall, black sock for a tin can of Copenhagen tobacco dip. He screws off
the lid, fingers out a large clump, and places it into the bottom left side of his mouth under
his lip. The mint-smelling dip soon refreshes the air around him, the smell filling the voided
space of the office. Unfailingly, he is always accompanied by a plastic Aquafina water bottle
filled with brown tobacco spit. By the end of the workday, his once-empty bottle will be
halfway full of thick, brown spit.
His desk inside the East Providence Police Station is covered in papers and manila filing
folders, with the only free space being his mouse pad that proudly displays his
four-year-old sons toothy smile as he poses next to a snowman.
This Halloween, hes going to be a Marine just like his daddy, Det. Spremulli boasts.
On his corkboard hangs two crayon drawings from a child whose sex offender he
successfully locked away. The drawings offer the only splashes of color in the otherwise
drab room painted off-white and maroon that houses the East Providence Detective unit.
The office is set up like a reverse fishbowl; seven desks line the perimeter of the room, so
close to each other the detectives seated at each desk could reach out and hold hands. They
dont do this, though. Rather, the ego of testosterone suffocates the room, with no comment
being uttered without an accompanying sarcastic reply.
His stained, tobacco-brown fingers click away on the computer mouse as he continues to
survey the sex offenders Facebook page. What he finds is a disappointment; the offender
used an alias when he met with the victim, and his Facebook page reveals a different alias.
The phone number he used to text the victim is nowhere to be found in the computer
database, and Det. Spremulli thinks it is a Google number. This is his first offense, so his
DNA is not yet in the system either. At this point, Det. Spremulli has hit a dead end.
Its draining, he says. This job really wears on you. People want to know why we have a
bad attitude and its because of the stuff we see everyday.
1

He drives to East Providence High School after the principal thinks she may have
recognized the offenders face. No connection is made.
He drives to the 11-year-old victims house to talk with her again, to see if there are any
new details she can try to remember to help him. She offers nothing.
All Im going to think about, all night, is this case. Im going to think of different things I can
do, avenues to take, he says.
Then, a break. He tracks down the cellphone number of the offenders brother, locates the
address and determines that the two brothers live together. He sends the police to arrest
him. Only, when the police show up, the offender isnt home. The only thing Det. Spremulli
can do is leave his cellphone number with the brother and ask him to have the offender call
him when he can.
Around 3 p.m., Det. Spremulli receives a call on his cellphone. Its the offender: The idiot
actually called me, he said.
He keeps him on the line, waving to the other detectives to tell the dispatch team he has the
guy on the phone. They talk in circles for about 10 minutes while dispatch tracks the
phones location and sends the police to the pizza place the offender is seated in. He keeps
talking until he hears Oh, shit before the line goes dead. Det. Spremulli has captured his
guy.
He brings him into the station, processes him downstairs, and then brings him up to be
seated in the East Providence interrogation room.
The interrogation room is a small, dreary room with three off-white walls and the far wall
painted maroon. The square room is dimly lit with no windows, and only large enough to fit
three chairs, a round, useless table tucked in the corner next to the door, and a square
wooden table shoved in the far left corner so only two sides can be accessed. Many suspects
have sat in the chair on the far wall against the table, facing the door, as a detective sits in
the chair on the other open side of the table questioning them.
He was pissed, said Det. Spremulli. He thought that I set him up.
The suspect sits in his chair, stiffly leaning back and forth. His face shows pure indignation,
the steady face of a warrior charging into an outnumbered battle.
2

Do you know why I brought you in here today? said Det. Spremulli.
No.
No idea at all? The suspect shakes his head.
Det. Spremulli agitatedly sighs and shifts in his chair in a way that indicates he is just as
ready for battle as the suspect.
The aggressive battle of interrogation, where explosive questions are launched and
charged answers are expelled in return, begins.

This Is How You Interrogate

Before Det. Spremulli had his suspect, before his suspect walked into the interrogation
room and before Det. Spremulli sat down and began to question him, he was already
creating the framework of the interrogation. The framework has been laid out by others,
carefully crafted and manipulated over the years so as to create the best chance of
obtaining a truthful confession. All Det. Spremulli needs to do is add a little bit of his own
flavor to the technique.
Interrogation is a science, perfected and performed since the beginning of the Western
judicial system. Confessions are the glue holding an investigation together, and without
them, an otherwise bulletproof binder of evidence would not hold up well in court. The art
of obtaining a confession became imperative in the role of a law enforcement detective.
Detectives nationwide like Det. Spremulli are trained how to interrogate using the
Reid

Technique of Interviewing and Interrogation

. This technique, established by John E. Reid
and Associates, who began developing interviewing and interrogation techniques in 1947,
became the standard for law enforcement interrogations. It advocates a legal, proven
process through which a true confession can ultimately be obtained.
The technique contains nine steps:
1. The positive confrontation
: the interrogator confronts the suspect with evidence of
his guilt and begins to make the transition to a sympathetic and understanding
friend.
3

2. Theme development
: the interrogator presents a moral justification for the
suspects actions and uses this same theme throughout the interrogation process.
3. Handling denials
: the suspect will deny the accusations, and the more he denies the
accusations the less likely he is to eventually confess, making it important for the
interrogator to intercept all potential denials.
4. Overcoming objections
: when the suspect realizes his attempts to deny involvement
are unsuccessful, he will attempt to actively object as to why he could not have
committed the crime using emotional, factual, or moral objections.
5. Procurement and retention of suspects attention
: after realizing his objections dont
work either, the suspect will psychologically withdraw and begin to focus on the
impending punishment, so the detective must recapture the suspects attention
before he loses the suspect entirely.
6. Handling the suspects passive mood
: the suspect now feels utterly defeated and his
physical demeanor will reflect this mood, but it is important for the detective to
continue with the justified theme he has spun throughout the interrogation and
remain sympathetic.
7. Presenting an alternative question
: at this point the suspect is almost ready to
confess, so the detective presents a question with two choices, both of which require
the suspect to admit his guilt. One answer is morally better than the other.
8. Having the suspect orally relate various details of the offense
: once the suspect has
accepted one side of the alternative question, he must now begin to provide the
details of the crime, which will be corroborated with already-gathered evidence,
through short, concise questions asked by the interrogator.
9. Converting the oral confession to a written confession
: the interrogator takes the
oral confession and transcribes it into a written statement for the suspect to sign
and verify or has the suspect write the statement.
When Det. Spremulli is in the interrogation room, he vaguely follows these nine steps. By
this stage in his career, after 18 years as a detective with East Providence Police
Department, the interrogation process is ingrained in him. There are times when he does
not know why he asked a certain question, he just knows it was the right thing to do based
on the context of the situation.
4

The steps of the technique are not concrete, which allows for detectives to mold the steps
to fit the personality of their suspect with the goal of increasing their chances of obtaining a
true confession. This repurposing of the steps is not illegal, immoral, or frowned up, as long
as the detectives stay within the bounds of the core principles that the Reid Technique was
built upon. These principles advocate further the goal of legally obtaining a true confession.

Bulletproof or a Death Sentence?

Joseph P. Buckley, President of John E. Reid & Associates, in a
position paper

published by
the company writes, The successful interrogation is one in which (1) the suspect tells the
truth to the investigator and, (2) persuasive tactics used to learn the truth are legally
acceptable.
This goal leaves the interrogation process largely open to the interpretation of detectives,
who, most of the time, resign themselves to the proper execution of the interrogation. It is
because of the few who do not, though, that has prompted Buckleys company to issue a
series of best practices that accompany the nine steps of an interrogation.
Problems arise from detectives straying too far from these principles. Rather than stopping
just short of the line that exists between a legal and illegal interrogation, some detectives
manage to jump right over it, ultimately jeopardizing their suspect and increasing the
likelihood of a false confession. When the process is carried out properly, the guilty suspect
is locked away, his confession signed into evidence, and he serves his sentence in the Adult
Correctional Institute (ACI) in Cranston, Rhode Island. The key is to conduct the
interrogation the right way the first time, avoiding any and all errors and ensuring a
successful conviction.
The paper says that an interview should always be conducted before an interrogation.
Interviews are non-accusatory and should be used to build a rapport with the suspect, as
well as used to gather information that could be useful for the following interrogation. The
interview can switch over to an interrogation in a second, with the defining moment
coming when the questioning becomes accusatory.
By the time Det. Spremulli enters the interrogation room, he has already had at least one
conversation with the suspect. If he hasnt, then he takes the first part of the interrogation
to talk with them and to let them tell their story. This builds his credibility as an
interrogator and allows the suspect to build their credibility depending on whether the
5

information they provide matches with Det. Spremullis or not. This interview also gives
him time to think about his interrogation strategy, so when the time comes to begin
interrogating, Det. Spremulli is ready.
As part of the Reid Technique, it is also vital to learn the case facts as well as assess the
behavior of the suspect during the interrogation process to increase the chances for a
successful interrogation.
During the course of his investigation, Det. Spremulli gathered case facts, learning
everything there was about the offender before he had even met him or had him in custody.
He learned his criminal history, address, he looked at the Facebook page for clues as to who
he is friends with and who he hangs out with. By the time he walked into the interrogation
room, he knew the guy as well as a close friend would have. And throughout the
interrogation, he was constantly assessing his suspect, attempting to anticipate where the
suspects story was going and what his next move should be based on that anticipation. He
paid attention to the suspects behavior and physical demeanor, often using it as clues to
determine whether he was on the right track or whether he was close to breaking his
suspect down.
To help him with tracking these clues is his backup interrogator, the newer, younger East
Providence Detective Jamie Aceto.
In East Providence, every interrogation has two detectives in the room. This is a best
practice the East Providence Detective unit does automatically: ensuring only one detective
in the room is the lead investigator.
The lead interrogator controls the questioning and defines the clear path he intends to
follow throughout the interrogation process. The backup interrogator is in the room to take
notes, redirect the line of questioning if necessary and pick up on statements or
information overlooked by the lead detective. The backup interrogator needs to be careful
not to run the interrogation; if he takes too much control he can throw the lead off his game
and ruin his train of thought, derailing the entire interrogation in the process.
The paper further says, Following the confession, the investigator should investigate the
confession details in an effort to establish the authenticity of the subjects statements.
The confession is not the end of the interrogation process. If a confession is obtained, it is
vital for the detective to corroborate all the information contained in the statement, to
prove that the details are true and thus the confession is true. During, before, and after the
6

interrogation, Det. Spremulli continues to gather facts. If the suspect provides a clue, he will
immediately figure out how to forensically prove or disprove that clue.
You have to compare the physical evidence, said Det. Spremulli. You have to use your
judgment and look at the claim of the suspect versus the claim of the victim.
This ensures that Det. Spremulli not only has the right suspect in custody, but it also
safeguards against a potential false confession.
Even though detectives liberally apply the nine steps of the Reid Technique, most do not
disregard the best practices and values lying within those steps, often just because of
human nature. They make sure that their interrogation strategies fall within the values the
technique was founded upon.
Detectives and investigators have learned to rely on their suspicions and experience to
carry out a successful interrogation. When trained properly and implemented with good
intentions, this reliance exceeds the success of the structured Reid Technique.
However, when detectives forget the value of gathering true confessions and implement
illegal strategies with the hope of making a suspect talk, the entire interrogation process
implodes. If done properly, the Reid Technique is bulletproof, but if done illegally, it is a
death sentence for the suspect.

By the end of the interrogation I was on the floor sobbing uncontrollably.

In January 1991, Jeffrey Deskovic was charged and convicted with second degree murder
and first degree rape at the age of 16.
Born and raised in New York, Deskovic grew up in a single family home with no father,
raised solely by his mother and his grandmother. He was not a popular kid at Peekskill
High School, and tended to keep to himself and remain quiet during the school day. One of
the few students who was nice to him was Angela Correa, who even went so far as to help
him with algebra when he was struggling.
Until one day when she wandered off after school with a camera for photography class and
never came back.
Two days later, her naked body was found. She had been beaten, raped, and strangled.
7

Deskovic was devastated, crying during her funeral and wake. Even though the two had not
been close friends, he was upset that one of the few people to show him kindness in school
was gone.
It was this emotional behavior, a reaction detectives said was disproportionate to his
relationship with the victim that put Deskovic on their suspect list from the beginning of
the investigation.
Combined with his emotional reaction, he was tardy to school the day after she went
missing because he played wiffle ball for too long with a friend. The kids at school pointed
the detectives in Deskovics direction, suggesting they take a longer look at him because of
his quiet and introverted behavior.
Most kids have an idea of what they want to be when they grow up by high school age, and
Deskovic was no exception. He wanted to be a police officer. As the investigation became
more involved, he jumped at the early opportunity to be a detective. For six weeks he
voluntarily appeared at the local police station with leads he had found and submitted
himself to voluntarily questioning by the detectives leading the case.
The detectives, however, had already pinned Deskovic as a person of interest, and they
monitored him closely and kept him within close reach. They would sometimes talk to him
like a fellow detective helping to solve the crime, asking questions regarding whether he
had heard rumors in school, what he thought of certain evidence or scenarios, and then
congratulate him on his opinions.
Other times, they talked to him as if he was a suspect in the murder. Deskovic was aware of
this dynamic, but he also knew that other students at school were being questioned and did
not think anything of it.
Eventually, the detectives convinced him to take a polygraph test. Again, he knew other
students had been polygraphed, and so he thought nothing of the request and agreed to the
test.
The next day he went to the local police station for the polygraph after telling his mother he
would be at that police station. The detectives proceeded to drive him 40 minutes away
from his hometown to another county police office, making it impossible for him to leave
on his own and ensuring his mother now knew nothing regarding the whereabouts of her
son. Little did either of them know he was never coming home.
8

And there he sat for the next seven hours, given countless cups of coffee, a small glass of
water and no food. The coffee on an empty stomach made him jittery, nervous and on edge,
as if he needed more of a push to feel this way while being aggressively interrogated in an
unfamiliar police station.
They attached a polygraph to Deskovic and after about 20 minutes of being polygraphed
the polygrapher began interrogating him, bringing two other detectives who joined in the
interrogation. Throughout his interrogation, Deskovic was polygraphed a total of three
times.
Like an old school movie, the detectives performed the good cop/bad cop routine. The
detectives geared their routine towards Deskovic not having a father figure in his life. The
good cop took on this paternal role, leading Deskovic to begin looking at him as more of a
father figure and trusting him more than he should have.
This technique of good cop/bad cop is specifically spoken out against in the Reid
Technique. It states that detectives should avoid the tactic of having two or three
investigators simultaneously bombarding the suspect or working as a tag team to wear the
suspect down over an extended period of time.
You dont want the backup to run over the lead, says Det. Spremulli. Too much input from
the backup interrogator leads to issues concerning the execution of the interrogation.
Having multiple interrogators simultaneously questioning the suspect is inherently
dangerous, increasing the stress and pressure while hammering away until the suspect
cracks.
The polygrapher began invading Deskovics personal space, getting right in his face. He
raised his voice and kept asking the exact same questions over and over and over and over
again, hoping to, if nothing else, get Deskovic to break down.
And it worked.
As each hour went by, my fear increased in proportion with the time, said Deskovic.
After several hours had passed, the good cop walked into the interrogation room and
simply said he needed a statement. He said that one of the polygraph tests confirmed that
Deskovic had lied during the course of the test and had committed the murder; they just
needed him to verbally confirm it so they could get him home. Minimizing the legal
9

consequences of a crime is prohibited by the Reid Technique, as this increases the

possibility of a false confession.
When he said that, it really shot my fear through the roof, says Deskovic.
The friendly detective further stated that the other officers wanted to hurt Deskovic, and he
could only hold them off for so long before something bad happened. The only way to solve
this was for Deskovic to help himself.
The Reid Technique and Det. Spremulli condemn this tactic of threatening the suspect. Det.
Spremulli does the exact opposite during his interrogations; rather than threaten the
suspect if he doesnt talk, he states that he will do his best, not promise, to minimize the
punishment if he does talk.
Being young, naive, frightened, 16 years old, not thinking about the long-term
ramifications, instead just being concerned with my own safety. Just being in fear of my life,
thinking the way they were conducting themselves was really frightening, and I was really
aware of the fact that nobody knew where I was. So I made up a story based upon just
being totally overwhelmed emotionally and psychologically and I made up a story based
upon information he had given me in the course of the interrogation [] By the end of the
interrogation I was on the floor sobbing uncontrollably.
Deskovic was charged, convicted, and sentenced for a crime he did not commit.
His age, the length of the interrogation, separating Deskovic from a familiar place,
minimizing the consequences of confessing to the crime, continuing to ask questions, not
videotaping or audio recording the interrogation, not being given food, evidence already
found by the police not matching with the statement provided by Deskovic, DNA from the
victim not matching Deskovics DNA, and so many other things should have screamed and
waved red flags when Deskovic was brought to court.
But they didnt.
Up until the day he was sentenced, Deskovic held out hope that he would be found
innocent. His family believed him and convinced him that he would not serve time for a
crime he did not commit.
I didnt think innocent people got convicted, he said.
10

They were all wrong.

Deskovic spent the next 16 years serving a 23 year sentence, most of which was spent at
the max security Elmira Correctional Facility in New York for a crime he did not commit.
And throughout the entire sentence, he held out hope that in the next appeal, the next
letter, someone would prove he was innocent.
But after exhausting all of his appeals, he now no longer had access to an investigator or an
attorney to take his case and argue his innocence. And to get his own investigator and
attorney he needed money, money he did not have. So he spent the next four years writing
letter after letter to pro bono attorneys (attorneys who take on cases for free), all of which
went unanswered.
In that last year, he finally gave up hope of ever walking outside of the prison gates a free
man.
Finally, however, a letter was answered and an attorney agreed to take on his case. They
successfully proved that the DNA found on the victim did not match Deskovics, and they
successfully pointed out all the red flags that appeared in Deskovics interrogation. In the
process, his lawyers proved that the detectives were liars and coerced Deskovic into falsely
confessing. The true perpetrator later confessed to the crime, already in jail for another
murder committed two years after the original murder Deskovic was convicted of.
To this day, the detectives still maintain that Deskovic is guilty and they did nothing wrong
in the course of their interrogation.
Deskovics case is the textbook example of what happens when the detective decides to
step off the tightrope and disregard nearly every core principle of the Reid Technique.

The Game of Interrogation

Playing with the fundamental principles of an interrogation is like playing a game of Jenga:
all is well until one accidentally attempts to move the wrong block, and the tower comes
loudly crashing down, announcing to the world that a mistake was made.
In this game, the one fateful block is the innocent suspect who, after being imprisoned for a
crime they did not commit because they were coerced into giving a false confession, is
suddenly revealed.
11

When done properly, detectives can play with the nine steps of the Reid Technique in a way
that brings forth a true confession in an efficient manner. By keeping an open mind,
corroborating the evidence and sticking to the values of the technique, detectives can
legally and ethically make a suspect confess.
In fact, all detectives really need is to lock the suspect into a single story that they can later
disprove.
If you cant get a confession, disprove all his lies, said Det. Spremulli.
With modern technology, all of the interrogations are videotaped in the East Providence
Detective unit, so anything the suspect says is permanent.
Theres a lot of stress on them trying to create lies and stories, Det. Spremulli said.
The reason for this is he can later come back with physical evidence that disproves their
story, thus completely destroying their credibility, which is just as good as getting a
confession in a courtroom.
Det. Spremulli does a good job of making the suspect paint his story, oftentimes going over
the suspects version at the end of the interrogation just to make sure he is clear and the
suspect has no avenue to back out from. He does this while simultaneously making sure to
follow the Reid Technique principles, maneuvering the interrogation in a way so as to
decrease the chances of a false confession.
But other times, blinded by their own cockiness and pessimistic attitudes, detectives dont
admit to themselves that maybe the suspect seated before them didnt commit the crime.
These detectives will go to any lengths to force their suspect to confess, even if they didnt
commit the crime, as was the case with Deskovic.
The Reid Technique, among other purposes, was designed to avoid taking advantage of
innocent suspects while simultaneously convincing those who are guilty to blurt out a
confession. The need for this standard for interrogations is vital, for in its very essence it
holds interrogators responsible for the legal, ethical treatment of suspects. This is why Det.
Spremulli makes sure to stay within the moral scope of the technique.

The Creepy Uncle

12

False confessions plague the interrogation room like the creepy uncle at a holiday party: no
matter how much preparation you do to avoid his presence, he inevitably shows up
uninvited.
The easy answer is there is no easy way to tell if a confession is true or false. If there was,
this would be a lot less scary, says Roger Williams University Associate Professor of
Criminal Justice Melissa Russano.
Analysts and detectives work like hell to uncover false confessions before they have made
their way through the judicial system and ultimately land the victim in jail. Russano has
studied how to elicit both true and false confessions since 2002, and has worked with
criminal attorneys suspicious of a false confession to uncover the truth.
The first thing she looks at are the risk factors, checking to see if there was any coercion in
the interrogation room, which is only found if she was a witness to the interrogation or the
interrogation was video taped, neither of which are common occurrences.
The risk factors she identifies coincide with five elements the Reid Technique bans to
safeguard against the chances of obtaining a false confession: interrogations lasting more
than three to four hours, threats of harm to the suspect, promises of leniency or no
consequences for the suspects actions, denying the suspect his rights, and knowing the
difference between questioning juveniles compared to adults.
If these elements are avoided, the chance of a false confession is slashed. However, if any of
these elements occur, the likelihood of a false confession is raised.
In the case of Deskovic, all five of these elements occurred during the course of his
interrogation. His interrogation lasted seven hours, during which he was denied the right
to leave and given no food. He was a juvenile being questioned as an adult and physically
threatened by the detectives.. The detectives also promised he could go home after he
confessed, clearly leaving out that he would be imprisoned for the murder.
During a proper interrogation following the Reid Technique, Det. Spremulli makes sure the
interrogation is short, with most of his interrogations lasting around one hour on average.
If necessary, he will bring the suspect back to the interrogation room later for more
questioning, but once he knows that the suspect is mentally breaking down too much, he
ends the questioning. This ensures that the suspect does not become overwhelmed and
have a mental breakdown leading to a false confession.
13

In addition, even when his suspect does not legally have to be read his rights if he is not in
custody or the interrogation has not yet commenced, Det. Spremulli always makes a point
of reading them their rights. He will read the rights, have them read the rights aloud, and
then have them sign to ensure they fully understand. He offers them food and water
throughout the interrogation, and if they need to stop, he respects that and gives them a
break.
He also advocates against promising any form of leniency to the suspect. Rather than make
a promise, he will make a statement like, Im gonna arraign you, but I will make it as easy
as possible. Thanks for cooperating, or I will do the best I can, and I will tell the judge that
you cooperated. He does not promise anything nor does he minimize the legal
consequences.
After the interrogation is complete and a detective or attorney believes the confession is
false, Russano can also perform a reliability analysis. To do this, she looks at the evidence
police knew before the interrogation and compares it to the information contained in the
suspects confession statement.
The gold standard for establishing reliability is: did the suspect provide information the
police did not know about that can later be corroborated? In the case of Deskovic, the
answer is no. Deskovic admitted to hitting the victim over the head with a glass Gatorade
bottle, yet the detectives did not find any glass on the scene or on the victim. He also had an
alibi that was ignored. His statement was contaminated through the interrogation process,
where he was shown pictures of the crime scene and other evidence.
Det. Spremulli constantly checks the credibility of his suspects during the interrogation
process, just to make sure that they are telling the truth.
I will ask questions I already know the answer to just to check credibility, he says.
This trick is useful for determining whether the suspect is trustworthy or not, and whether
to believe the suspects confession.
In addition to this tactic, detectives leave out specific details when giving information to the
media or when talking with the suspect. Det. Spremulli uses the example of a robbery. He
will tell the media that the store was broken into but he will not explain how. This way,
when a suspect comes in claiming that the window was pried open, and Det. Spremulli
14

knows this is true, he can confirm that he has the right suspect. This corroboration of
specific details is a reliable way to safeguard against false confessions.
False confessions look amazingly like true confessions in that false confessions tend to be
richly detailed, they tend to be compelling just like true confessions, and people cannot
possibly imagine why anyone would confess to a crime they didnt commit, said Russano.
That is why it is vital for detectives to stick with the Reid Technique. As demonstrated by
Deskovics case, when an interrogator strays from these values, the results are a false
confession and an innocent man being imprisoned.
According to the
Innocence Project

, 2.3 percent to 5 percent of all prisoners are innocent.

Out of those that have been exonerated for a crime they did not commit, one in four people
provided false confessions because of the unintended bad practice of detectives who did
not conduct the interrogation properly. This means that for each innocent person currently
sitting in prison for a crime they are innocent of, a guilty perpetrator detectives are no
longer looking for continues to run the streets, potentially committing more crimes and
harming more citizens.
Had these detectives followed the Reid Technique and made sure their practices were in
line with the values advocated for, those numbers would be a lot less scary.
Its all hit and miss, said Det. Spremulli. You have to rely on yourself as an investigator
and trust your gut.

Its All Intuition

As Det. Spremulli conducts the interrogation, he watches and observes nearly everything.
His senses are hyperactive; noticing minute details like the flick of the suspects eyes, the
bounce of a leg, and the subtle sigh the suspect released not realizing Det. Spremulli could
hear it.
He uses all of these clues to know when to say what, when to lie, when to tell the truth, if
the suspect is innocent, and when the suspect is on the brink of confessing.
Its all intuition, learning when to change from letting him talk to when to take control, he
said.
15

The Reid Technique allows for this manipulation and reordering to make sure the
interrogation is successful, advocating that the intuition of detectives is extremely reliable.
By straying from the nine steps, detectives can often do a better job in catering the
interrogation to the suspect..
As an interrogator, you have to assess the situation to determine the best course of action.
Theres not one set of criteria, and theres a lot of trial and error. Most is based on
personality, said Det. Spremulli. Every interrogator, suspect, crime, and person is
different.
A detectives intuition is extremely accurate, as proven by a
2014 study

published in
Human Communication Research
. This study
found that detectives were able to detect

when a suspect was lying to them in 97.8 percent of instances. In this study, an expert using
the Reid Technique was 100 percent accurate in determining which suspect was lying and
which suspect was not.
The goal is for the intuition of the detective and the Reid Technique to counterbalance each
other where the intuition guides the detective in the right direction in formulating
questions while the Reid Technique sets the boundaries for how far the detective is
allowed to go without jeopardizing the interrogation. When this balance occurs, the result
is the capturing of a legal, true confession even without following the steps perfectly. Det.
Spremulli is able to stay within the moral and legal bounds of the Reid Technique during
his interrogation while simultaneously relying on his intuition.
This reliance on intuition is not reserved to just Det. Spremulli. Superintendent of the
Rhode Island State Police, Department of Public Safety
Colonel Steven ODonnell

has also
learned to rely on his intuition and experience when conducting interrogations.
Each suspect brought into the interrogation room is different, and thus a vital part of police
work is learning how to adapt to the suspects culture. If the interrogator makes the subject
feel comfortable and good about himself, then the suspect is already predisposed to talk to
the interrogator. He must then cater the steps of the interrogation process to fit each
individual suspect, and understand that not every suspect that walks into the interrogation
room is the same person.
So long as the investigator understands the facts of the case and does not step off the road
paved by the values of the Reid Technique, the reliance on intuition in an interrogation is
not only moral, but also largely successful.
16

Deception and Trickery Join the Fun

Piggybacking on the use of intuition are deceit and trickery, both of which are allowed
within reason.
Misrepresenting evidence in an otherwise proper interrogation does not cause innocent
people to confess, but the aggravating circumstances within the interrogation can create
an environment conducive to a false statement, states the John E. Reid & Associates
position paper.
In other words, deceiving a suspect or lying to a suspect about evidence is not wrong, so
long as the rest of the interrogation is properly carried out.
Det. Spremulli proudly boasts about his skills of deception. He will lie to suspects or
deceive them into thinking he has evidence that he really doesnt have. The trick to this
matter is to know the facts of the case.
You can use lies and deceit, but you gotta be careful, he says. If he knows you lied to him,
its done.
Once a suspect has caught the detective in the middle of a lie, the detectives credibility is
thrown away. When the entire interrogation is based upon the leverage that the detective
knows more than the suspect, this loss of credibility is devastating.
The example provided by Det. Spremulli is as follows: the detective can say that he has the
suspects fingerprints from a robbery he allegedly committed, but if the suspect did commit
the robbery and knows he was wearing gloves, then he has just figured out the detectives
game and knows the detective has no hard evidence. And why would a suspect confess to a
crime if he knows that the detective cant prove he did it? The interrogation room revolves
around leverage: making the suspect believe it is in his best interest to talk, despite the fact
that his confession will land him in prison.
However, while a detective can say he has evidence, he cannot show the suspect evidence,
whether it is false or true. The detective must make sure that the false or exaggerated
evidence is nothing the suspect can point to or verify. The standard answer if they want to
see the evidence? Its at the lab, says Det. Spremulli. This usually shuts down every
inquiry to see the evidence.
17

In the fingerprint example, the Reid Technique allows Det. Spremulli to say he has the
robbers fingerprints in connection with the crime, but he cannot then go and get
fingerprints, real or fake, to show the suspect. Once he does this, he is no longer in line with
the Reid Technique.
Colonel ODonnell says that the detective needs to know every fact of the case and every
fact of the suspects personal life. Most of the suspects brought in to the police station are
what Colonel ODonnell calls street wise and they can easily see through an interrogators
lies.
If you bullshit them, they know it, he said. Youve got to be smooth and respectful, and
you have to be in command of the situation. If they think you know the facts, theyll spill.
Colonel ODonnell also says that the use of deception and trickery are just a part of the
game. He has worked in law enforcement since 1983, and during his time he has served,
among many other positions, as an undercover detective infiltrating the Mafia and a
detective in the Divisions Intelligence Unit, which was responsible for investigating and
prosecuting organized crime activities, outlaw motorcycle gangs, and terrorism.
The techniques of deception and trickery are not only used, but are considered vital in an
interrogation. He says that there is this idea that an officer cant deceive or trick the suspect
and many detectives should try to stay away from these techniques. That simply isnt the
case. These techniques are not only considered necessary in the interrogation room when
an interrogator cant draw out a confession, but it is also a permitted and accepted practice
during the legal process. An officer can get on the stand in a courtroom and say that he lied
to the suspect for the safety of the public and the officer, and there are no consequences.
Sometimes, deception is the only way to get a suspect to talk and confess, that final push at
the end of the interrogation.
I lied my ass off, Colonel ODonnell says.
He used the example of laying out several blank video tapes and CDs on the table in front
of the suspect and saying that he knows the suspect was at such and such a place at a
specific time because the information is all right there on those tapes. Thats when the
suspect will confess, certain the interrogator knows theyre guilty. Det. Spremulli is guilty
of using this trick as well.
Detectives can lie, deceive, and trick, so long as their techniques are all moral and legal. It
all requires the detective to walk that fine line between what the Reid Technique advocates
18

and what their instincts tell them is the best way to get the confession. Learning how to
play with the mind of their suspect is largely important, and knowing when their suspect
has had enough, or is innocent, is vital in the work they do.
While detectives have learned to stay away from physically forcing a suspect to talk, they
do know how to play with the mind of their suspect. They are well-versed in the psychology
of interrogation, questioning and redirecting their suspect in such a way so as to confuse
his unknowing mind until he no longer knows what to say or do.

Torture the Mind, Not the Body

The basic message of interrogations today is this: interrogations are a mind game. The
interrogator becomes so well-versed in psyche of their suspect that they are able to draw a
path for their unknowing suspect to follow, continuing along it until they are so far gone
with their story that there is no turning back.
The approach of violating the mind is drastically different compared to what was done in
1757. During this time, and up until the beginning of the 19th century, interrogations were
entirely physical. It was believed that ripping a guys arm off would force him to tell the
truth while simultaneously punishing him for his deeds, as described In Michel Foucaults
book,
Discipline and Punishment: The Birth of the Prison
.
According to Foucault, the body used to be the major target of punishment for a crime in
the 18th century. Men were drawn and quartered, had molten lead poured into open
wounds, had their limbs ripped apart by attaching said limbs to separate horses who
proceeded to run in opposite directions, all while a priest or authority figure came to the
wretched victim asking if there was anything they wanted to say before they died. Not that
it would have mattered. The horses still would have been instructed to run and the swords
still would have sliced the belly no matter what came out of the victims mouth.
The act of physically punishing a victim was a public spectacle where ladies, gentlemen,
and children gathered at the town square to watch the poor, helpless soul of the day be
dissected and dragged until his insides spilled out. Justice was served, and it was served
quite publicly.
Until the end of the 18th century, when the spectacle of torture and physical pain began to
die out. It was realized that people no longer wanted to see headless torsos and
19

unrecognizable men burned on the stake. Interrogations and the proceeding punishments
were to now happen in secret, and in a much more humane way.
General codes were instituted, unified rules of procedure were enacted, and the adoption of
a jury system created the need to have an admission of guilt before punishment could be
provided. And in the process, interrogation became a psychological endeavor, not a
physical one. Leaders began to understand that the mind and the body were two separate
entities, and to torture the body was useless when the information sought after was stored
in the mind. It no longer made sense to tear off a mans leg, when all that was inside was
muscle and blood. Interrogators now understood that the body was to be preserved, but
the mind was to be torn apart just like the limbs of the condemned, the answers and
information bleeding out of the brain in a closed-off room at the local police station.
Foucault wrote: One no longer touched the body, or at least as little as possible, and then
only to reach something other than the body itself.
Investigators wanted answers, not guts, and those answers were contained in the mind, not
the physical body. Physical pain and torture were replaced by the torture of the heart and
soul, the parts of the body that contained the information vital to being able to draw a
confession from a suspect to then use against said suspect to land him in jail. It was here
that the modern process of interrogation began to take its roots, and the birth of the
psychological game we have come to know and quote today.
By the beginning of the 19th century, the tortured body was avoided; no longer were
suspects physically tortured for information or to obtain a confession. It was a
psychological game between the interrogator and the suspect, and may the best brain win.

Sept. 11, 2001: When the Standard Crumbled

But on September 11, 2001, along with the World Trade Centers and Pentagon, this ideal
for interrogation crumbled to the ground. The trembles of change and anger that
permeated America resulted in the standards for mental torture being brought to the
ground, the flame of hate for those responsible continuing to fill the sky with an angry
smoke.
Suddenly, the institutionalized, systematic use of torture by the United States was set free
and the standard of torturing the mind was blockaded in a dog cage on a foreign island
20

2,500 miles away. The successful techniques of detectives like Det. Spremulli were rolled
over by the CIA, the Bush administration, and two psychologists.
The Reid Technique laid the standards and values for interrogation, and law enforcement
officers were well-trained in carrying out confession-based interrogations using this
technique. The military, however, had determined long ago that the Reid Technique was
useless and was to be avoided when conducting interrogations.
The military believes the Reid Technique is too leading, allowing for more false confessions
from innocent suspects. They state that even when you have enough, the Reid Technique
wants the interrogator to ask for more information and more details, which is sometimes
unnecessary and damaging to the interrogation process.
In addition, especially after 9/11, the military began to focus more on intelligence
interrogations. The Reid Technique was designed for confession-based interrogations, thus
rendering it even more inept.
The difference between intelligence interrogations and confession-based interrogations is
just about everything except the word interrogation.
Confession-based interrogations are the type of interrogation one would imagine based on
hit criminal television shows. These interrogations, conducted mostly by police detectives
and investigators like Det. Spremulli, work towards the sole purpose of making the suspect
admit his guilt, or at least trapping him into a story he cannot change. Suspects are then
taken to jail, tried in a courtroom, and sentenced before a judge.
On the other hand, intelligence interrogations are conducted with the purpose of gathering
detailed information from a suspect, who, in the case of the United States, is usually a
suspected terrorist. Confessions dont matter, since a confession of guilt cant usually
prevent another terrorist attack or aid the United States in its quest to capture Osama bin
Laden and other high value al Qaeda members. Also, suspected terrorists are not tried and
sentenced before a judge, so obtaining a confession is not necessary in proving their guilt.
After 9/11, intelligence interrogations crept onto Americas radar. Before this event, the
majority of interrogators were ignorant regarding the practices and procedures of these
interrogations. In addition, the military was lacking in a specific interrogation standard to
guide the process of their interrogations like the Reid Technique does for police detectives.

21

Unlike confession-based interrogations that had clear-cut rules, regulations, and a lengthy
history guiding the overall success, intelligence interrogations did not. Americas
inexperience and lack of guidance became key in the mis-execution of carrying out an
intelligence interrogation.
Interrogators were not properly trained to interrogate high-value, information-laden
terrorist suspects. Older military personnel, when asked if their training has prepared them
for the interrogation challenges they now face, will reply no. Russano says that after the
Bush era, there was a recognition that America had no idea what they were doing regarding
the interrogations of terrorist suspects. There were no guidelines, no studies, no science,
and no formula to conduct intelligence interrogations like there were for confession-based
interrogations. The people put in charge of interrogations, the CIA, had no idea how to
properly interrogate a suspect.
The CIA determined that it would need a set of guidelines, a program, to direct the
interrogations of terrorist suspects much like the Reid Technique does for law enforcement
officials. To begin the implementation of their program, they contracted James Mitchell and
Bruce Jessen, two U.S. military Survival, Evasion, Resistance, and Escape (SERE) program
psychologists.
The problem lies in the fact that Mitchell and Jessen had just as little experience as the CIA,
and were in no position to begin to set a precedent for interrogations. They only had
experience in training U.S. military personnel how to resist torture if they were captured by
another country that used torture techniques. Neither one had ever been part of an
interrogation nor had they administered the torture techniques they would later advocate
for.
In addition, neither psychologist had specialized knowledge of al Qaeda or a background in
terrorism, a key component to administering a successful interrogation as stated by several
experienced interrogators at both a military and law enforcement level and by the Reid
Technique.
Together, the pair enhanced and manipulated the SERE techniques they witnessed during
the trainings to use on detainees captured after 9/11 until the techniques were completely
unrecognizable. The precedent was set for intelligence interrogations and enhanced
interrogations (torture) were born.

22

They also introduced the concept of learned helplessness to interrogations. This would
soon become the foundation for the CIAs torture techniques, believing that the end result
would be a detainee providing any and all information to the interrogator.
Learned helplessness was created by psychologist Martin Seligman in the 1960s and
describes a passive state of someone believing that, because of what has already been done
to them, there is no hope of escape from the suffering they have endured. Those who enter
the state of learned helplessness give up trying to avoid the pain and suffering coming their
way, convinced there is nothing they can do. Most dont even try to avoid the pain when
given the chance.
This was the state Mitchell and Jessen wanted detainees to enter. The goal was that torture
would shape compliance and once the detainees were tortured to the point of learned
helplessness they would no longer resist interrogators and would provide all the
information the interrogators were looking for, information it was assumed the detainees
knew. They did not build a relationship with the detainee, they did not try sitting down and
having a conversation with the detainee, and they certainly did not attempt to attack the
mind over the body.
Physical torture of the body was resurrected and psychological torture of the mind was
buried, plunging the United States 300 years backward to the days when prisoners were
drawn and quartered and their limbs ripped apart. Mitchell and Jessen decided that stress
positions, placing detainees in coffin-sized boxes, beating them and waterboarding
detainees were the best way to achieve truthful information. There was no process, there
was no outline, there were no steps, and the set procedure of attacking the mind was
thrown into the bottomless ocean of Guantanamo Bay along with the values implemented
in the Reid Technique.
The principles of the Reid Technique and the procedure followed by Det. Spremulli that
safeguarded against false confessions and legally obtaining true information were
disregarded entirely so as to allow for the implementation of torture. Military interrogators
took a flying leap over the line distinguishing what can and cannot be done in an
interrogation, and the results were disastrous. Interrogators did not rely on experience or
intuition, nor did they corroborate information obtained from the interrogation. Rather,
they relied on the physical torture of detainees to get the information they needed, creating
a breeding ground for false confessions and false information.
Following a public outcry against torture after images of the Abu Ghraib prison abuse were
leaked to the public, the Senate Selection Committee on Intelligence investigated the CIAs
23

interrogation techniques and declassified the findings and conclusions of the Committee
Study of the Central Intelligence Agencys Detention and Interrogation Program, found in
what is now known as the
Senate Torture Report
.
Its findings yielded a 6,700-page report with scathing criticisms of the CIA and its use of
torture while also holding the CIA accountable for its actions. The report not only
concluded that the use of torture was not justified, but also that torture was
counterproductive; the majority of the information gained from the torture of detainees
was false and unusable.
Russano reached the same conclusion after she spent three years conducting surveys and
structured interviews with highly experienced interrogation personnel from various
intelligence and government agencies, like the FBI, Army, and the Naval Criminal
Investigative Service (NCIS, yes it is more than a television show), and others. She spoke
with interrogators, analysts, and interpreters about their perceptions about what
interrogation techniques work and what techniques dont work.
What she found was that law enforcement personnel, interrogators, analysts, and
interpreters all agree that the best approaches for a successful interrogation are
rapport-based information-gathering approaches, as opposed to aggressive confrontational
approaches.
The people who know what theyre doing do not advocate the use of torture, they do not
advocate the use of enhanced interrogation. In fact, they recognize that its
counterproductive in the interrogation room, Russano said.
When an interrogation is carried out, it is not solely for the purpose of making the person
confess or provide information. Yes, that is a component, but the end result should be
capturing a guilty perpetrator, not forcing an innocent suspect to provide false information.
The torturing of detainees is the most blaring and brutal example of what happens when
these values are left behind. Torture is opposite of what the Reid Technique advocates for,
reinforcing the notion that detectives need to stay within the bounds of the values as laid
out in the technique.

A Beaten Man

24

But sitting in Det. Spremullis suspect chair is not a terrorist or a detainee; sitting before
him is a sex offender.
He is seated so close to the offender in the interrogation room that their knees almost
touch. This is another technique he uses in the interrogation room.
You want to be close to them, to be near them, he says. Sometimes sitting knee-to-knee
helps them feel comfortable.
As the interrogation progresses, the detective wants to slowly move closer to the suspect,
and eventually somehow come in contact with them. It is sometimes this slight touch that
finally makes the suspect have enough trust in the detective to confess.
The interrogation room is well designed to serve this purpose. Det. Spremulli does not sit
across from his suspect with a table between them; instead he is seated adjacent to him,
each on the other neighboring side of the table so Det. Spremulli must sit at an angle to face
his suspect.
You dont want to have a table between you and the suspect, because it acts as an invisible
barrier, Det. Spremulli said.
This barrier creates an atmosphere of separation, a feeling that is counterproductive when
the goal is to make the suspect feel close enough to the detective to confess all his
wrongdoings.
After the initial exchange, Det. Spremulli shakes his head in return to his suspect, clearly
already frustrated with the course of events that have transpired thus far. This is not going
to be an easy interrogation for him. Its not easy being nice, or civil, to a sex offender.
So you havent been seeing a girl in East Providence?
No.
Whats your Facebook name?
I dont know. Im not even sure if it is still active.
Cmon, were trying to build credibility here, man.
25

Det. Spremulli not only knows the name associated with the offenders Facebook account,
he also has screenshots of messages sent from that account sitting on his desk. This
question was a test of credibility, and the suspect failed.
This would become the theme of Det. Spremullis interrogation: building credibility. The
theme of the suspect? I dont know.
Det. Spremulli drills the offender with questions, eventually backing him into admitting he
was at least talking with the victim via Facebook messages. But thats where it ends. The
offender claims to have blocked her soon after.
What was said in the texts? Spremulli said.
If youre asking me, you probably already know.
Det. Spremulli nods. The suspect looks at Det. Spremulli with big eyes as he says. Hes a
quick learner, and he knows he is outsmarted. His nerves tick up a bit. He leans forward in
his chair again, clasping and unclasping his hands, only looking at Det. Spremulli when he is
addressed.
Have you ever been in her bedroom?
Nope.
Why did she tell me you did?
I dont know why shes telling you that.
The questions keep coming at him. Hes itching, agitatedly flailing to stop the oncoming
bombardment.
Det. Spremulli explains to him that he has DNA taken from the victims bed, and that he is
pretty sure that DNA is going match the suspects. Further, a new law in Rhode Island
mandates that a suspect arrested for a violent crime must provide DNA samples. It does not
take a seasoned detective or criminal to connect the dots. The suspect is finished if his DNA
matches the DNA found on the mattress. And by the look on his face, it does.
Im trying to figure out what kind of person you are, says Det. Spremulli. Are you an
honest person or are you trying to bullshit me?
26

This question targets Det. Spremullis own credibility of being the good guy. Hes throwing
the responsibility to the suspect, and its entirely up to him whether he chooses to catch it
and own it or drop it.
The suspect lowers his voice, leans back in his chair, covers his head with his hands before
leaning forward again. Hes not ready to catch the ball just yet.
Det. Spremulli begins the art of forcing the suspect to paint his story. So far, the suspect has
admitted to messaging the victim via Facebook but blocking her after meeting her the first
time where they met at a restaurant. He states that she lied about her age, and once she
revealed her age he stopped talking with her. He claims she told him she was 16, when in
fact she is younger than this legal age of consent in Rhode Island.
Tell me something that I dont already know. Tell me what was said, says Det. Spremulli,
referring to the Facebook message.
I dont know, it was all sexual.
This is followed by a few more questions, all of which are answered with non-verbal head
nods and eyebrow raises to indicate a yes, with the occasional arm wave as if to say, Yes,
I already told you all of this. Its the same look of an embarrassed teen caught on a date by
their father, the kind that says: Please go away now. Only Det. Spremulli isnt going away.
The suspect knows his current situation is gloomy, and does not want to dig himself a
deeper grave. Voicing his story only solidifies it that much further, and when the story is
false, he knows this is a bad choice.
But Det. Spremulli wont let him get away with it. He forces him to talk, repeatedly asking
the same question until a verbal answer is delivered.
The suspect is floundering, trying to grasp at a justification for his actions and create a new
story. His efforts are unsuccessful. Instead of providing a convincing story, he stutters and
repeatedly states the same facts over and over again. When a new question arises, he sticks
with his go-to answer: I dont know.
When I prove [your story] wrong, what are you going to say? Youre going to have to keep
telling this same story over and over and over again, Det. Spremulli said. Youre going to
have to tell the same story again, so make sure youre telling the truth.
27

He is pushing the suspect, forcing him to want to change his story by emphasizing the
potential consequences for his false story.
The suspect has a small outburst, like hes trying to swipe away flies buzzing around his
head. He knows he did the crime, and Det. Spremulli knows it, too. All Det. Spremulli needs
to do is prove it.
He leaves the room, promising to come back to show the suspect something. In his absence,
the suspect holds his head in his hands, rubbing and shaking his head. He lets out a heavy
sigh. Det. Spremulli returns with the Facebook message screenshots, the ones that
supposedly the suspect didnt know about.
By this point, the suspect has stopped talking at an average voice. His volume is so low he
can barely be heard in the videotape, and he hangs his head against the wall. His leg
bounces, he crosses his arms, he closes his eyes. Hes given up. Det. Spremulli senses this
defeat, and begins to go for the kill. He knows that the suspect is so close to confessing, he
can almost hear it.
Det. Spremulli keeps pushing him. The suspect only needs one last shove. He is looking over
the cliff, and at the bottom lies 20 years in prison for child molestation. Its no secret how
child molesters are treated in prison, and this is enough motivation to keep him from
jumping over the edge.
If you watch football, soccer, or whatever, this is the final half, Det. Spremulli says.
The suspect remains closed-lipped. He will not reveal any more information and opens his
mouth only to deny the facts. When Det. Spremulli goes over the elements he gave in his
story, to make sure that he cannot change it later, the suspect says yes to the first
element, proceeded by the head nod, eyebrow-raise, arm wave routine for the rest of the
elements.
Is there any other pertinent information to help your situation? Det. Spremulli says.
Silence for the next 30 seconds.
Im going to put you downstairs, arraign you, and investigate. Youre gonna be proven or
disproven.
28

With that, Det. Spremulli gets up and leaves the room.

What is left on the screen is the suspect, bent forward, head in his hands, shaking his head
and sighing. The tape stops, forever freezing him in this helpless stance. He may have won
this battle, but it came at a steep emotional and mental cost.
That is the look of a beaten man, says Det. Spremulli. I beat him into submission, but he
wouldnt give it up.

29

Bibliography
Applicability of Federal Criminal Laws to the Interrogation of Detainees : Committee on the
Judiciary : Free Download & Streaming : Internet Archive. (2007, December 20).
Retrieved November 7, 2015, from
https://archive.org/details/gov.house.hbs.hrs05JUD2141_071220
Blinn, R. (2015, October 29). [Personal Interview].
Dershowitz, A. (2008).
Is there a right to remain silent?: Coercive interrogation and the
Fifth Amendment after 9/11
. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Deskovic, J. (2015, October 27). [Telephone interview].
Fallon, M. (2015, October 7). [Personal interview].
Foucault, M. (1977).
Discipline and punishment: The birth of the prison
. New York, New
York: Pantheon Books.
Frontline: The Torture Question. (2005, October 18). Retrieved November 7, 2015, from
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/torture/view/
Graham, D., Watts, S., Turner, R., & Margulies, J. (2008, November 13).
Detention and
Interrogations U.S. Compliance With International Norms
. Lecture presented at
The Rule of Law and the Global War on Terrorism: Detainees, Interrogations, and
Military Commissions in Washburn University School of Law, Topeka, Kansas.
Kassin, S.M. (2011).
Analysis of Jeffrey Deskovics Confession
.
Levine, Timothy Roland, David Daniel Clare, J. Pete Blair, Steve McCornack, Kelly Morrison,
and Hee Sun Park. "Expertise in Deception Detection Involves Actively Prompting
Diagnostic Information Rather Than Passive Behavioral Observation."
Human
Communication Research Hum Commun Res
40.4 (2014): 442-62.
Wiley Online
Library
. International Communication Association. Web. 17 Nov. 2015.
O'Donnell, S. (2015, October 9). [Personal interview].
Out of the Darkness. (n.d.). Retrieved November 11, 2015, from
https://www.aclu.org/feature/out-darkness
30

Russano, M. (2015, September 25). [Personal Interview].

Sands, Philippe (2008, November 13).
Torture Team Abuse, Lawyers, and the Possibility
of Criminal Responsibility.
Lecture presented at The Rule of Law and the Global War
on Terrorism: Detainees, Interrogations, and Military Commissions in Washburn
University School of Law, Topeka, Kansas.
Senate Selection Committee on Intelligence. (2014).
Committee Study of the Central
Intelligence Agencys Detention and Interrogation Program.
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2014/images/12/09/sscistudy1.pdf
Skerker, M. (2010).
An ethics of interrogation
. Chicago, Illinois: University of Chicago Press.
Spremulli, M. (2015, October 29). [Personal Interview].
The Dual U.S. Standard for the Treatment and Interrogation of Detainees: Unlawful and
Unworkable. (2009).
Washburn Law Journal,
48

, 325-352. Retrieved September 27,

2015, from
http://contentdm.washburnlaw.edu/cdm/ref/collection/wlj/id/5866
The Innocence Project. (n.d.). Retrieved November 11, 2015, from
http://www.innocenceproject.org
The Reid Technique of Interviewing and Interrogation. (2014, December 1). Retrieved
November 7, 2015, from
http://www.reid.com/pdfs/reid_position_paper.pdf
The Reid Technique of interviewing and interrogation--training seminars & more. (n.d.).
Retrieved November 7, 2015, from
http://reid.com
The Torture Team: Abuse, Lawyers, and Criminal Responsibility. (2009).
Washburn Law
Journal,
353-380. Retrieved September 28, 2015, from
http://contentdm.washburnlaw.edu/cdm/ref/collection/wlj/id/5866
Torturing Democracy. (n.d.). Retrieved November 7, 2015, from
http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/torturingdemocracy/documents/theme.html

31