Recording Victim Interviews

[rebeccaKeymaster]

Having trouble viewing this message? Click here to view this message online.

 

Training Bulletin: Recording Victim Interviews While preparing for an interview with a sexual assault victim, one of the critical decisions to make is whether or not to tape it (either audio or video).  This can be a controversial issue in some communities (although this is becoming less true), and both police and prosecutors must weigh the advantages and disadvantages before implementing any policy.  However, it is worth noting that interviews with child victims have been taped for years, and law enforcement professionals and others typically recognize the important advantages of this practice.  Many of the same advantages exist for adult and adolescent victims.     Advantages of Taping The primary advantage of taping a victim interview is that it provides a more reliable method of documentation than written notes.  In other words, it provides the “best record” of the interview.  Taping records more details than could be summarized in a police report, which increases the amount of information recorded and can often reduce any redundancy in follow-up interviews. Investigators are much better able to listen carefully to the victim – without constantly interrupting and disrupting the victim’s narrative (which can create inconsistencies) – because they are not also trying to take notes and/or write a report at the same time. When the interview is taped, the investigator can simply listen to the victim’s narrative and jot down questions to ask later when it is complete.  Taping communicates to the victim that the investigator is taking the case seriously and investigating it thoroughly. It also conveys that the investigator wants to make sure that all of the details are recorded accurately. In addition, tapes of an interview can make it possible to determine the source of any inconsistent information. In many cases, the recording reveals that the person responsible for the inconsistency is not the victim but the investigator who documented a fact incorrectly or simply misunderstood something the victim said. This can be a tremendous help for successful prosecution, because such inconsistencies can otherwise damage the victim’s credibility. Because taping more accurately records all of the details of an interview, it can help investigators to synopsize statements, and this may be especially important for cases that do not move forward for prosecution. With these cases, the victim may later want the investigation re-activated or additional victims may be identified, and it is easy to review the taped interview from the previous investigation and use it as evidence for the reactivated investigation.  Taping can have the additional benefit of protecting the investigator if a complaint or misunderstanding should arise as a result of what was said. Tapes can also be reviewed for training or supervisory purposes, to improve the quality of interviews conducted by the law enforcement agency.  Finally, taping can better convey to prosecutors, judges, and jurors the immediate response of victims to sexual assault.   Law enforcement professionals often have the unique opportunity to talk with victims in the aftermath of a sexual assault, while their emotions are still raw. Their words and demeanor – whether angry, withdrawn, in shock, etc. – can be important in conveying the  actual response of victims and bolstering their credibility. Victims often act very differently later, when they encounter prosecutors or jurors – months or years after the assault and perhaps after the benefit of counseling. Taping can therefore document the immediate response of the victim to trauma, which can be an important benefit for the prosecution. This last advantage also suggests the importance of preserving the tape of the 911 call that the victim made regarding the assault, if there is one. To read more and print the training bulletin, click here.   EVAW International P.O. Box 33 Addy, WA 99101-0033 509-684-9800 Phone 509-684-9801 Fax info@evawintl.org        For more information on the Start by Believing campaign,  visit our website or  check us out on Facebook.     Jan. 31 – Feb. 1, 2013 2 Day Training on the   Criminal Justice Response to   Sexual Assault and Domestic Violence.   The Westin Charlotte,   Charlotte, NC       April 3-5, 2013 International Conference on Sexual Assault, Domestic Violence and Stalking.   Hilton Inner Harbor,   Baltimore, MD      April 2, 2013  PRE CONFERENCE TRACK  Forensic Clinical Response to Victims of Violence Against Women       EVAWI CFC Designation # 11400

End Violence Against Women International (EVAWI)   Vision Statement:  We envision a world where gender-based violence is unacceptable; where perpetrators are held accountable, and victims receive the compassion, support, and justice they deserve. Mission Statement:  We inspire and educate those who respond to gender-based violence, equipping them with the knowledge and tools they need to support victims and hold perpetrators accountable.  We promote victim-centered, multidisciplinary collaboration, which strengthens the response of the criminal justice system, other professionals, allies, and the general public — making communities safer.   PLEASE DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL.  Contact EVAWI at: info@evawintl.org

 

EVAW International | PO Box 33 | Addy | WA | 99101

Forward email This email was sent to mspradling@denversaic.org by donotreply@evawintl.org |   Update Profile/Email Address | Instant removal with SafeUnsubscribe™ | Privacy Policy.

[HowardLParticipant]

The advantages of taping in this training bulletin are presented from a law enforcement perspective. No disadvantages are presented.  Would the victim’s informed consent be sought? What are the potential impacts on the victim? What training should  be required for the investigator?

Some of the impacts could be more fully understood if a qualified professional would interview a significant sample of victims. The interviewer, perhaps a sociologist, should not be associated in any way with law enforcement so that the results of the study would be unprejudiced.

According to Susan Herman, former Exec. Director of the National Center for Victims of Crime, “Too often, when victims are interviewed by a police officer or a prosecutor, the veracity of the victim’s statements is immediately questioned. The officer thinks– and may act as though– the victim is making up his or her story, is distorting the truth, or concealing evidence. The prosecutor may think the victim is covering up his or her complicity in the crime. This is one of the most damaging realities for victims because this attitude undermines a victim’s faith in government, and in the legitimacy of the rule of law itself.”

There is a propensity among victim service people to gather like-minded together and come up with “best practises.” They present their views as the victims’ views without consulting the victims. When asked why victims are not consulted, some victim service people reply “They are too emotional” or “We don’t want to remind them of the trauma.”

Victims deserve to be heard. Their point of view must be included when trainings are proposed and developed. “Best practises” developed without the victims perspective may turn out to be bad practises.

 

 

[SAIC_MichelleParticipant]

Howard raises some great points about the importance of ensuring policies and practices remain victim-centered.
This particular bulletin was created by a national organization whose staff is pretty multidisciplinary which hopefully means that all points were considered before forming the opinion. The reason it most likely is presented from a law enforcement perspective is because it relates to a law enforcement practice and the bulletin was meant for law enforcement officers.Generally speaking, to gain buy-in for policies, stakeholders need to understand why— from their role—the policy would be helpful in doing their job, thus it would make sense that it presents the benefits of a recorded interview to a law enforcement investigation.
That being said, we all have to strive to ensure that our policies are victim-centered which is sometimes a balancing act—as we also have to strive to ensure that we are staying within our respective roles, following state and federal laws, and completing our respective duties (in this case—for example–law enforcement has a duty to investigate, help build a case and hopefully apprehend a suspect if possible). Of course, these duties are very different from those of a victim advocate, a medical provider and a prosecutor—which in itself is another balancing act.
I do agree that there are some questions left unanswered which perhaps is the drawback of training bulletins in general—they are short and direct. (although I will say that on the surface I see some advantages to a recorded interview for victims—one being the ability for LE officers to watch the videos and learn from their successes and mistakes to help improve interview techniques and make victims more comfortable in these interviews, but I am not an expert on this topic).
The victim’s voice definitely needs to be a part of the conversation when developing best practices, and since the original training bulletin specifically addresses sexual assault victims, this seems like the perfect opportunity to mention that the Denver Sexual Assault Interagency Council is hoping to gain that valuable insight from victims through an National Institute for Justice research project in partnership with the University of Denver Traumatic Stress Studies Group. Without getting too technical, part of the project will include interviews of sexual assault survivors by 3rdparty, trauma-informed researchers about their experiences with sexual assault response agencies in the city and county of Denver. This 3-year project just began January 1, but we are excited about the potential outcomes and how that may help us shape future best practices.
And, you don’t have to have a ton of financial resources to gain victim insight in your agencies: to name a few examples, the Crime Victim Advisory Council through VSN, Survivor Task Force through CCASA, or the WINGS Foundation Speaker’s Bureau are all examples of victims of crime who are willing to offer their perspective to us as service providers.

[Author]

Posts