Interrogating Suspects
Policy text
Source details
Source file: 1.10 Interrogating Suspects.pdf. Policy dates appear on the original cover. Page links use the PDF's page order.
01PDF page 1Read textHide text
Policy & Procedures No. 1.10
Subject:
Interrogating Suspects
Issuing Authority: Effective Date: Review Date:
Chief of Police 10/30/2012 10/15/2023
References:
Review
Revision
Reissued
Dates:
2/15/2016
11/19/18
11/29/19
CALEA Standards
42.2.0
GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS AND GUIDELINES
Interrogations of persons who are in police custody must conform to the standards set forth in the
Miranda decision and to Due Process. Police interrogation techniques include any words or
actions that are designed to elicit incriminating statements. 42.2.0 (2C)
If a police interrogation does not conform to legal standards, it can result in otherwise good
evidence being declared inadmissible in court. If the suspect "knowingly and intelligently"
waives his/her rights to this constitutional protection, the interrogation can begin. The critical
elements to be considered are whether there is a coercive environment and whether the person
being questioned is free to leave.
It is important to understand that Miranda procedures only apply if both of the following
situations are present: 42.2.0 (2E)
- A person is in police custody or is otherwise deprived of his/her freedom of
movement in a significant manner and
- There is police questioning or its functional equivalent, including any words or
actions that are reasonably likely to elicit an incriminating response.
A suspect can stop any police questioning at any time by invoking his/her right to remain silent
or by requesting the services of an attorney.
The ultimate goal of a police interrogation should be to obtain the truth - not just to produce a
confession or an admission of guilt.
Canton Police Department’s Interrogating Suspects Policy Page 102PDF page 2Read textHide text
"Spontaneous" statements are statements made to the police before, during or after the arrest by a
person in custody. They are admissible in evidence even though the arrested person was not
warned of his/her rights, provided that such statements are voluntary and are not made in response
to police questioning or other actions that are reasonably likely to elicit an incriminating response.
In order to obtain results, every police investigator should recognize the objectives of an
interrogation, which should include the following:
1. Learning the truth;
2. Ascertaining the identity of criminal participants and accessories;
3. Obtaining an admission or a confession of guilt;
4. Acquiring all the facts, circumstances and method of operation of the crime under
investigation;
5. Gathering information which may corroborate or disprove information obtained
from other sources;
6. Eliminating suspects;
7. Uncovering information of any other crimes in which the suspect being
questioned is, or has been involved;
8. Recovering evidence or property; and
9. Reporting all information obtained for subsequent court action.
PROCEDURES
I. POLICY: It is the policy of this department that: 42.2.0
A. Persons in custody shall be given their Miranda rights prior to any police
interrogation; and
B. The Due Process rights of persons in custody will be respected.
II. DEFINITIONS
A. Custody: When a person is under arrest, or deprived of his/her freedom in a
significant manner; or when they are not free to leave.
B. Interrogation: Express questioning of a suspect about a crime or suspected crime
as well as any words or actions on the part of the police that the officers should know
are reasonably likely to elicit an incriminating response.
Canton Police Department’s Interrogating Suspects Policy
203PDF page 3Read textHide text
C. Electronic Recording: The preservation by analog (audio and/or VHS videotape) or
digital (digital audio tape, CD and or DVD non-rewritable discs) means through the
use of audio or audio/video recording equipment.
III. Providing Miranda Warnings 42.2.0 (2E)
A. Officers shall give Miranda warnings as soon as practical whenever a person is
placed in custody or deprived of his/her freedom in a significant manner and is
subject to interrogation.
1. The Miranda warnings shall be read from a preprinted card or form in a
clear and unhurried manner prior to questioning.
2. Persons who do not speak English must be given these warnings in a
language that they understand.
3. Sample Miranda Warning Language:
You have the right to remain silent;
If you choose to speak, anything you say can be used against you in a
court of law;
You have the right to consult with an attorney before being questioned;
You have the right to have the lawyer present during the interrogation;
42.2.0 (2D) and
If you cannot afford a lawyer, one will be appointed for you at the expense
of the Commonwealth;
You have the right to stop answering questions at any time.
B. The suspect shall then be asked the following questions:
1. Do you understand each of these rights that have been explained to you?
2. Having these rights in mind, do you wish to answer questions now?
C. All arrested persons to be interrogated shall have the Miranda warnings read to
them prior to questioning, whether the warnings were previously given or not.
The suspect should then be asked to sign a waiver form acknowledging that the
warnings were given. The officer giving the warnings shall also sign the form as
a witness, noting the date and time the suspect was advised of his/her rights.
Canton Police Department’s Interrogating Suspects Policy
304PDF page 4Read textHide text
D. If there is any substantial delay between the Miranda warnings and the police
questioning, the suspect shall be advised of these rights again before the
questioning begins.
E. Whenever an officer has any doubt as to the applicability of the Miranda warnings
in any particular case, it is advisable that these warnings be given to the suspect to
avoid any subsequent legal barrier to the admissibility of any statements obtained.
F. If, at any time, a suspect requests to read his/her rights or to be informed of
his/her rights, these requests shall be granted.
G. JUVENILES: Before a juvenile between the ages of 7 and 18 is questioned, the
Miranda warnings shall be given in the presence of the juvenile and his parent,
guardian or other interested adult. The adult must acknowledge that he/she
understands the rights given and the juvenile must be afforded the opportunity to have
a meaningful consultation with the interested adult, before a valid waiver can be made.
See department policy on Handling Juveniles. 42.2.0
IV. Non-Miranda Situations
A. Spontaneous Statements
Officers may note any spontaneous and volunteered statements. When a suspect
or detainee voluntarily makes a statement, officers do not have to prevent him/her
from continuing to talk and the Miranda warnings are not a prerequisite for
admissibility. 42.2.0
1. Spontaneous and volunteered statements are statements made by a suspect
of his/her own free will and not made in response to police questioning.
2. A person who voluntarily enters a police station and makes incriminating
statements need not be given the Miranda warnings.
3. Spontaneous and volunteered statements may be taken after the suspect is
in custody and before, during, or after actual interrogation so long as the
statements are clearly voluntary.
B. Investigatory Stop and Frisks
Non-custodial preliminary or investigative questioning need not be preceded by
Miranda warnings. See department policy on Stop and Frisk and Threshold
Inquiries 4 2 . 2 . 0
C. Non-Law Enforcement Questioning
Canton Police Department’s Interrogating Suspects Policy
Page 405PDF page 5Read textHide text
Miranda does not apply to statements made in response to questioning by private
citizens, unless the private citizen is acting on behalf of the police. For a citizen
to constitute an agent of the police, the police must initiate the citizen’s help.
Thus, where a fellow detainee initiates questioning about a crime in hopes of
trading information for a lighter sentence, any statements made are admissible if
the police neither encouraged nor sought the detainee’s assistance.
D. Traffic Violations or Traffic Accidents
1. A person need not be given Miranda warnings if [s]he has been stopped
for violating motor vehicle laws.
2. An officer’s request that a motorist perform field sobriety tests does not
require that Miranda warnings be given.
V. Waiver of Rights
A. Valid Waivers
1. Statements made by an arrestee more than six hours after the arrest (safe
harbor period) are inadmissible unless the arrestee has been arraigned or
has made a valid written waiver of his/her right to be arraigned without
unreasonable delay. 42.2.0 (2J)
a. If the arrestee is incapacitated due to a self-induced disability (such as
the use of drugs or alcohol) the six-hour safe harbor period does not
begin until the disability terminates.
b. The six-hour period is also tolled when interrogation is not possible or
must be suspended for reasons not attributable to the police, such as a
natural disaster or emergency. 42.2.0 (2J)
2. The interrogating officers should be certain that the suspect understands
the rights which have been read to him/her as the burden will be on the
prosecution to prove that the waiver was valid.
3. The waiver must be made voluntarily, knowingly and intelligently to meet
the conditions of the Miranda decision.
4. In determining whether a valid waiver was made, the court examines
whether in light of the totality of the circumstances surrounding the
making of the waiver, the will of the suspect was overborne such that the
statement was not a free and voluntary act. The court considers the
circumstances of the interrogation and the individual characteristics and
conduct of the suspect, such as the length of time which transpired
Canton Police Department’s Interrogating Suspects Policy
Page 506PDF page 6Read textHide text
between the giving of the Miranda warnings and the waiver, the suspect’s
age, mental capacity and experience.
5. When the suspect waives his/her rights, the interrogating officers shall
obtain a written waiver when possible. A waiver may be made orally or in
writing, but a written and properly witnessed waiver is more likely to be
upheld in court.
6. Silence on the part of the suspect does not constitute a valid waiver.
7. The physical and emotional condition of the person being questioned is an
important consideration in determining the validity of a waiver. The police
should refrain from questioning if the suspect is clearly not capable of
understanding his/her rights.
B. Competency
1. A suspect must be competent to waive his/her rights prior to police
questioning. The question of competency is a question of fact to be
determined by the circumstances in each case. 42.2.0
2. The competency issue is more likely to be raised under the following
circumstances:
a. If the suspect is distraught or very disturbed because of any mental
or emotional condition;
b. If the suspect has been wounded or is the victim of shock or other
physical impairment;
c. If the suspect is so intoxicated or influenced by alcohol or drugs
that [s]he cannot think rationally or act sensibly; or
d. If the suspect’s intelligence level is so low, or his/her learning and
education are so minimal, that [s]he does not comprehend his/her
rights.
3. In all of the circumstances enumerated above, any waiver obtained will be
carefully scrutinized by the court.
C. Assessing Competency
1. After the Miranda rights have been read and after the suspect has shown
an initial willingness to waive those rights, the police may ask the suspect
about the following in order to properly assess the suspect's ability to
intelligently understand and waive his/her rights:
Canton Police Department’s Interrogating Suspects Policy Page 607PDF page 7Read textHide text
a. His/her age;
b. Whether [s]he is under the influence of any drugs or alcohol;
c. Whether [s]he is suffering from any mental or emotional
problem;
d. his/her education and learning;
e. His/her employment;
f. Whether [s]he has ever been given Miranda warnings previously;
and
g. Whether [s]he understands the words used by the officer in reciting
the Miranda warnings or what they mean.
VI. Presence of Attorney 42.2.0 (2D)
A. If a suspect states that [s]he wishes to consult an attorney, [s]he must not be
questioned further by police until [s]he has had an opportunity to consult an
attorney. However, if the suspect initiates statements or conversation, the police
may respond to those statements or conversation.
B. Although a suspect has voluntarily waived his/her right to remain silent, [s]he
may still invoke this right by refusing to answer any further questions or by
requesting the services of an attorney, and at this point the police questioning
must cease.
C. If the police are aware that the suspect is represented by an attorney, even on
other matters, and that the attorney desires to be present with his/her client during
any questioning, the police must inform the suspect that his/her attorney wishes to
be present during questioning. However, once so informed, the suspect may
waive his/her right to have his/her attorney present.
D. A suspect may answer some questions and refuse to answer others. The officer is
not required to discontinue questioning unless the suspect indicates that [s]he
wishes to remain totally silent, to stop the questioning or to consult with a lawyer.
Comm. V. McNulty case states that “investigators are obligated to inform a
suspect immediately of an attorney’s attempt to reach him and to immediately
relay the attorney’s message to him, including a message advising him not to
talk to investigators.” 42.2.0 (2K)
E. Once a suspect has been arraigned, [s]he has the right to counsel, whether or not
[s]he is in custody, and [s]he shall not be questioned in the absence of counsel
unless [s]he specifically waives his/her right.
Canton Police Department’s Interrogating Suspects Policy Page 708PDF page 8Read textHide text
VII. Documenting Statements and Confessions 1.2.3 B; 42.2.0 (2F,G,H,I)
A. Procedure: All officers should whenever practical electronically and visually record
in its entirety all custodial interrogations of suspects or interrogations of suspects
conducted in places of detention. This includes recording interviews and
interrogations when using interpreter services, where practical (Comm v. Glenis
A. Adonsoto). This can be accomplished by activating the in- house recording
system – main system is located in the MIS office. Before recording an
interrogation, the suspect shall be notified that the conversation will be audio
and/or visually recorded. Once the suspect has been notified of this, the officer
should while recording:
1. Inform the suspect they are being recorded
2. State the location, date, time of day of the interrogation as well as
the identities of officers, suspect or others present;
3. Execute appropriate and applicable departmental forms including
but not limited to Miranda and waiver of prompt arraignment
4. Record the time and reason for any suspension of the recording
(such as a break for water, food or the restroom) as well as record
the time when the recording proceeds
5. If the officer uses or refers to documents or other items during the
interrogation, the officer should describe those documents or items
on the recording.
6. Conclude the recording by stating the date and the time the
interrogation is completed.
B. Refusal: If a suspect refuses to make a recorded statement, the officer should
record the refusal (if possible) and documented the refusal within their written
report.
C. Discretionary Decision not to Record: An officer may decide not to record an
interrogation even where it is practical to do so if that officer believes that
recording the interrogation will jeopardize the safety of an officer, the suspect, or
any other person. The officer should fully document in their written report the
reason(s) why the interrogation was not recorded.
D. Inoperable or Unavailable Recording Device: If there is no recording device
available or it is inoperable, the officer should defer the interrogation until an
operable recording device is available. If it is impractical to defer the
interrogation, and the suspect consent to continuing the interrogation without a
recording device, that consent and the interrogation should be documented in
some manner, such as in a signed written statement by the suspect or in the
officers written report.
Canton Police Department’s Interrogating Suspects Policy Page 809PDF page 9Read textHide text
E. Preservation and Copying of Original Recordings: The officer who conducts the
interrogation must take steps to preserve the original recording. All recordings
should be properly labeled and placed into evidence per departmental procedure.
Copies should only be made by an officer authorized by the Chief of Police.
F. Written Statements: When a written statement is provided, the suspect shall be
asked to read, sign and date all written statements and confessions. The
interrogating officer(s) shall sign and date all written statements and confessions.
The interrogating officer shall prepare and submit a report in accordance with
departmental procedures which shall include the above information and any
written or recorded statements. 42.2.0
Canton Police Department’s Interrogating Suspects Policy Page 910PDF page 10Read textHide text
Canton Police Department’s Interrogating Suspects Policy Page 10