The extraction of evidence from sex offender suspects is a task that presents many challenges for officers of the law. The literature states that best practice guidelines for conducting investigative interviews of possible sexual offenders, emphasise the importance of asking open-ended questions to obtain a free narrative account of the situation at hand. (Read & Powell, 2011). Despite best practice guidelines, research suggests that investigators underutilize open ended questions, as well as, have difficulty adhering to the application of a free narrative interviewing (Wright & Powell, 2005).
Purpose of the Research
The research article examined aims to provide interviewers of suspects of sexual offenders with suggests in order to assist that in the adherence of a free narrative framework. It also aims to support best practice research literature already existing. An additional goal to to research is to demonstrate that best practice guidelines are truly best practice. The research approach involved in-depth interviews with police trainers, detectives, expert witnesses, defence barristers, and prosecutors. In total, 16 experts were interviewed for this research project. “The experts were asked to talk about the process of interviewing and what constitutes a good interview with a sex offender suspect” (Read & Powell, 2011, p.163). Qualitative analysis of the data was done in order to obtain suggest strategies for adhering to best practice guidelines.
Best practice interview guides have been in existence for many years in an
…show more content…
attempt to provide police officers and interviewers with guidance for conducting forensic interviews. According to Read & Powell (2011), most guides suggest there are five discrete elements to a best practice forensic interviewing: “(i) establishing rapport; (ii) introducing the topic of concern; (iii) eliciting narrative detail; (iv) clarification/specific questioning; and (v) closure” (163). Of these five elements, elicitation of a free narrative account is the most critical aspect. Powell, Fisher, & Wright (2005) defines this by saying, “a free narrative account is where the interviewee has the opportunity to report what happened with little prompting from the interviewer, at his or her own pace, and without interruption” (as cited Read & Powell, 2011. p. 163). This means that the interviewee is able to freely give their account of the situation without interruption or guidance from the interviewer, which suggests that narrative theory is vital to a successful interview of sexual offender suspect. This requires the interviewer to be able to as open-ended questions, which require elaborate answers and also gives the suspect a broad starting point. The goal of using open-ended questions is to guide the interviewee towards the next point as well as to elicit more elaborate accounts of what has happened. Theory of Change There are three main reasons for using a narrative interview style, which relies heavily on narrative theory, when working with sex offender suspects. The first reason is it builds a solid rapport with the interviewee. It reassures that they are being treated fairly and this creates cooperation and increases the likelihood of honest disclosure. The unique psychological processing that occurs with sex offenders makes this style of interviewing especially important. Second, accounts given during a free narrative interview is likely to be accurate versus responses that are guided. According to Lipton, 1977; Powell et al., 2005, “This is because open-ended questions encourage an elaborate or deeper form of memory processing, allowing the suspect to use a more stringent, meta-cognitive level of control” (as cited in Read & Powell, 2011, p. 164). Third, free narrative interviewing allows a full understanding of the interviewee’s language limitations and it gives both parties time to collect their thoughts (Read & Powell, 2011). Despite the research and best practice guidelines this guide or framework does not imply that interviewers actually follow through with these guidelines. “The discrepancy between recommending and actual investigative interviewer behaviour reflects three known barriers to the application of formal best-practice interview guidelines” (Read and Powell, 2011, p. 164). According to Powell, Wright & Clarke, 2010, “First the importance of a narrative framework in the interview context is not well understood nor is it reinforced within police organizations” (as cited in Read & Powell, 2011, p. 165). Second, there is limited understand of how free narrative interviewing is applied in the field. Finally, most training programs are not set in up a way that promotes change for interviewers who have been in the field. The research article examined focuses on the second barrier to narrative framework. This research and best practice around this type of interviewing appears to rely a lot on narrative theory.
The theory of change is not explicitly discussed however, the heavy reliance and best practice guidelines for free narrative work is a great indicator that narrative theory fits the theory of change. Narrative theory places emphasis on stories and conversation in order to obtain information from, in this case, interviewees(Stewart,
2012). Appropriateness of Research Methodology The researchers used appropriate research methodology based on best practice. They gathered a sample of 16 experts that consisted of five women and eleven men ranging in years of experience from thirteen to 32 years. The experts were recommended by professional peers and are considered experienced in the field of interviewing sexual offender suspects. Once the potential participants were identified the researchers contacted them to ascertain their interest in being a part of the research project. “The sample included six police detectives, four academics, and six legal professionals from three states/territories of Australia and one jurisdiction in England” (Read & Powell, 2011, p. 165). Participants were giving confidential folders prior to their interviews that contained four police recordings of interviews of adult alleged child sexual offenders, a consent form and a summary of both documents. Researchers purposefully chose child sexual assault perpetrators because it focused the experts’ focus on the process of the interview only. Following the collection of these surveys individual in-depth interviews were done by the first named author of the research piece. The interviews were 34 to 188 minutes in length and were conducted in a semi-structured fashion. Four questions guided the process. Data was organized, coded and analysed by hand using content analysis and using grounded theory. Open coding approach was used in order to identify emerging themes within the data. This work was done by the first named author of the research piece. The second named author verified the emerging themes and were later discussed and debated. Clarity of the Reported Results The results found in this piece were consistent with best practice guidelines for interviewers working with child sex offender suspects and were very clear within the report. “Consistent with best practice interview guides, the general principle that emerged was that the elicitation of evidence that carries probative value (i.e. sufficiently useful to prove the existence of other facts during the trial) is largely determined by the interviewer's’ skills in using open-ended questions and other techniques that encourage narrative detail” (Read & Powell, 2011, p.167). It was also discovered that experts agree that too many closed questions and too specificity in leading the interview is done to be considered effective. The results of this report were clearly reported and very evident based on the information provided. Relevance for Social Work Practice The implications for social work are not clearly stated within the research article. However, social workers are seen in a variety of roles and disciplines, therefore there is great potential that these best practice guidelines reinforced through this research are applicable to the social work field. From a social work perspective, it is important to be ethical and humane no matter what population the social worker is working with however, for police officers, being ethical, humane and understanding may also lead to an increase in the chance of obtaining a confession from guilty suspects. Should a social worker, within their role, be the person interviewing offenders this research reaffirms how the interview should be conducted. Should a social worker be working with the victim, it is important there is an understanding of the narrative framework used in interviews because in an effort to be trauma informed, a social worker should explain the process of the investigation accurately to their client. Conclusion This research helps readers understand the importance of sticking with best practice modalities in terms of interviewing suspected offenders of child sexual assault. This research article does a exceptional job explaining their purpose, method and results of their study; ultimately finding that they experts they interviewed agreed with the importance of a narrative style interview. The implications of this study not only benefit those interviewing the accused offender but also others working within the field so as to gain an understanding of how interviews should be executed within an investigation.
Lord, V. B., & Cowan, A. D. (2011). Interviewing in criminal justice. Ontario: Jones and Bartlett.
This essay begins with the introduction of the Risk-Needs-Responsivitiy Model which was developed to assess offending and offer effective rehabilitation and treatment (Andrews & Bonta, 2007). The R-N-R model “remains the only empirically validated guide for criminal justice interventions that aim to help offenders” (Polashek, 2012, p.1) consisting of three principles which are associated with reductions in recidivism of up to 35% (Andrew & Bonta, 2010); risk, need and responsivity. Firstly, the risk principle predicts the offenders risk level of reoffending based on static and dynamic factors, and then matched to the degree of intervention needed. Secondly, the R-N-R targets individual’s criminogenic needs, in relation to dynamic factors. Lastly, the responsivity principle responds to specific responsivity e.g. individual needs and general responsivity; rehabilitation provided on evidence-based programming (Vitopoulous et al, 2012).
The information will begin by introducing to the public on what exactly defines a sex offender. Background information
Sex offender notification laws have been among the most widely discussed and debated criminal justice policy issues in recent years. Numerous studies have been conducted on various views of sex offender notification laws. A vast majority of these studies have mixed research, some showing that sex offender notification laws are more beneficial than harmful and should continue, and others showing the exact opposite. Reasons such as public safety, the fear factor, and the hope for future recidivism to go down are some examples of why many believe that sex offender notification laws are beneficial to society. Others believe that such laws are a continuation of punishment for those who were convicted of a sex offense.
According to RAINN, (2009) approximately 10 per cent of all victims of sexual assault and abuse are adult and juvenile males. In terms of the nature of assault, real figures include a compendium of reported incidents ranging from unwanted sexual touching to forced penetration. To qualify this statement, it must be understood that the percentage does not reflect a vast number of crimes that go unreported due to issues that will be discussed in the present paper.
Sex offender legislation has been encouraged and written to protect the community and the people at large against recidivism and or to help with the reintegration of those released from prison. Nevertheless, a big question has occurred as to if the tough laws created help the community especially to prevent recidivism or make the situation even worse than it already is. Sex offenders are categorized into three levels for example in the case of the state of Massachusetts; in level one the person is not considered dangerous, and chances of him repeating a sexual offense are low thus his details are not made available to the public (Robbers, 2009). In level two chances of reoccurrence are average thus public have access to this level offenders through local police departments in level three risk of reoffense is high, and a substantial public safety interest is served to protect the public from such individuals.
Although they may be out of jail, they cannot be considered free. They are unable to make their own decisions: where they can work, where they can live, and how they can live their lives are all under control of the government. These people look the same as everyone else, but underneath the mask, lay a title they cannot shake. These people are sex offenders. A sex offender is defined as anyone who has committed a sexual crime. These crimes range from serious crimes, like rape, to minor offenses, such as urinating in public, or under age consensual sex. All sex offenders are placed on the registry and are required to follow a careful protocol. Registered sex offenders are paired with a Community Corrections Officer (CCO) who oversees and supervises the offender's actions. Many restrictions are placed on the offender, and although the laws can vary from state to state, there are some basic restrictions that apply to every offender. Some of these restrictions include: a sex offender cannot move without the permission and approval of their CCO, they can only live and work in certain areas, they cannot own any firearms, their personal computers are monitored and controlled by their CCO (many websites are blocked, including pornographic content), they are not allowed to take or consume any mind altering substances such as drugs or even alcohol, and they are required to get regular counseling (“Rules”). Currently there are 747,408 registered sex offenders in the United States. Some states such as Delaware and Oregon have a higher concentration of sex offenders (500 per 100,000) where as Pennsylvania has the lowest concentration of sex offenders (94 per 100,000) (“Sex Offender Statistics”). Due to the inefficiencies ...
Salter, Anna C. (2004). Predators: pedophiles, rapists, & other sex offenders: Who they are and how they operate, and how we can protect ourselves and our children. New York, NY: Basic Books.
There are several identifiable psychological factors that increase the likelihood an individual will demonstrate deviant sexual behavior. One of the most important contributing factors is physical or sexual abuse endured as a child. According to Becerra-García, García-León and Egan (2012), sex offenders are twice as likely to report being sexually, emotionally, or physically abused as a child in comparison to other offenders. There are also other factors besides abuse that must be taken into consideration. A recent study on female sex offenders by Roe-Sepowitz and Krysik (2008) states, “the data reveal that many of the 118 female juvenile sex offenders came from chaotic and disorganized families and had poor parental supervision and serious school and mental health problems”. As Becerra-García, García-León and Egan (2012) discuss further, there are also personality traits that sex offenders are likely to possess, which makes it possible for psychologists to distinguish general characteristics of sex offenders. These personality traits can be identified using the Five Factor Model, which scales an individual’s level of neuroticism, extraversion, openness, agreeableness, and conscientiousness.
Some studies have been done to examine the resiliency of victims of CSA. Resiliency can be defined as the ability of a person to adjust to adverse life events or circumstances, or possibly both (Lambie, Seymour, Lee, & Adams, 2002). In terms of CSA, resiliency refers to the ability of a victim to “snap back” into normal life and to successfully cope with the sexual trauma they have been through. When this resiliency is absent, individuals have a hard time adjusting back to normal life and often act out as a result. Research by Lambie et al. shows that female victims of CSA that had a strong social support system self-reported successful lifestyles, stable jobs, and happy lives (Lambie et al., 2002, p. 33). These females also are more likely to have a good relationship with peers and parents, as well as had a positive response to the incident from those peers. On the other hand, lack of support and negative responses towards childhood victimization seem to have a significant negative impact on psychological health and developing behavior (Lambie et al., 2002). Lambie et al.’s research led them to believe that “the critical factor in determining whether someone would become a child molester or not was whether, as a child, they had a close relationship with someone they could confide in” (2002, p. 33). In addition, victims that come from a disadvantaged background are less likely to have this resiliency.
Due to the previously discussed concept, women are largely discriminated against by the criminal justice system and denied their right to justice. This is specifically true of women who have been involved in prior sexual activities whether with or other than their offender. “Officials deny justice to women who have been engaged in non marital sex” , as well as those who may have been engaged in a ‘flirtatious’ relationship with their offender by directing their attention on the women’s character. If she was involved in any ‘provocative’ behaviour such as dancing near the offender, prior to the incident she is seen to have “violated traditional norms of female prudence or morality” causing the blame to shift making the victim the primary suspect.
By broadening the understanding of the inner workings of these offenders minds communities, clinicians, and criminologists the necessary tools to better treat, manage , and identify potential problems in this small but complicated sexual offender population.
When walking around your neighborhood, town, local mall, or other places you frequent, are you constantly thinking about if or when you may encounter a registered sex offender? For most people, that is not the first thing that is on their mind. In reality you probably encounter many in your life without even knowing it. The Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act was initially implemented to give people the ability to know who is living around them, what they were charged with, and potentially give the community a sense of security. While most people in the community think this act is doing them a great service, what they typically do not know is the many loopholes involved in this act, and how it negatively impacts many people, such
Sex offenders have been a serious problem for our legal system at all levels, not to mention those who have been their victims. There are 43,000 inmates in prison for sexual offenses while each year in this country over 510,000 children are sexually assaulted(Oakes 99). The latter statistic, in its context, does not convey the severity of the situation. Each year 510,000 children have their childhood's destroyed, possibly on more than one occasion, and are faced with dealing with the assault for the rest of their lives. Sadly, many of those assaults are perpetrated by people who have already been through the correctional system only to victimize again. Sex offenders, as a class of criminals, are nine times more likely to repeat their crimes(Oakes 99). This presents a
Interviews can be conducted in several different ways. There are positive and negative things an interviewer can do during the interview verbally, as well as non-verbally. In the video “An Overview of Investigative Interviewing” an older lady is interviewed as a victim, pertaining to a crime where she was thrown to the ground and robbed of her purse. This paper will reflect on the verbal and non-verbal usage the interviewer used, the specific interview technique style used, and an evaluation based on the seven steps he took during the interview process.