Theories of Victimology and Investigation Analysis - Assignment Example

This will identify the ‘holes’ that the interviewer will need to lay particular emphasis on. After doing this, the interviewer has to prepare the questions that would investigate as many details as possible. However, as Walsh & Bull (2010) points out, this should be rehearsed so that the interview session would not appear so formal. Rapport building is very important during interviews and formal questioning might hinder its effectiveness. According to Kort‐Butler & Hartshorn (2011), when the material day is finally here, the interviewer should try to lessen any anxieties that might have built up before he or she conducts the interview.

Although it might seem impossible to do away with feelings of anxiety, it is imperative that it has to be dealt with as not to impede the investigative skills of the investigator. This usually has disruptive effects on the interviewing process, so it’s best to purge anxiety. Attorneys may be present at the time of interviewing the witness, and this can be a source of anxiety (Boetig, 2008). This should not be a hindrance to the process, the interviewer should stand firm and focus on getting the most information from the witness.

Before carrying out the interview, the interviewer should not have any sort of prejudices or preconceptions. He or she should not expect a certain predetermined answer from the witnesses. This tends to restrict the flow of information from the witnesses. There should not be any forms of expectations since unexpected information can easily set the interviewer off course (Dahl, Brimacombe & Lindsay 2009). Engage and ExplainThe second phase of conducting an investigative interview is perhaps the most important.

This is the part where the interviewer identifies himself to the interviewee and explains carefully the rationale and procedure of the investigative interview. This is the omission that the investigator on the video made and it is not a healthy practice. There is no prescribed mode of introducing oneself to the interviewee. One has to produce some form of identification and credentials for each interviewee before the commencement of the investigative interview. The purpose of such familiarizing is to identify the investigator with a formal or authentic institution and reduce the feeling that privacy is being exposed for the interviewee.

The interviewee may give inadequate or no information which might hinder the success of the interview. The interviewer should be cautious enough to use the right form of expression so as not to inculcate some form of trepidation in the correspondents, who in this case is the suspect. In this phase, the interviewer has to frame the questions. The investigator must keep the interviewee's hub. It is significant to treat the interviewee well because when another suspect becomes aware of any mistreatment, they might withdraw from the interview.

This is very helpful since the interview will be conducted with some form of agenda that will be strictly adhered to. This makes the interviewee feel at ease since he or she has a clear map of what is expected of them. This is proven to yield better results since the interviewee will be relaxed and hence will give more pertinent information (Yeschke 2003).