Securing interview evidence just to have the court deem it unreliable is arguably one of the most devastating things that can happen to a case. Every piece of relevant information gathered by law enforcement should have the opportunity to be considered. Yet when the court questions the reliability of interviews, there’s nothing else for the court to do than ignore that evidence for their final ruling. Being aware of the most common causes for these outcomes allows agencies to do their part to ensure that every piece of interview evidence they produce will be court-admissible.
Issuing the Miranda Rights
Law enforcement professionals have been refining their methods and recommendations for conducting interrogations and interviews for generations. And with the advent of audio video recordings, the standards for court-admissible evidence have become even more specific.
Both the prosecution and defense rely on accurate interview evidence for criminal cases. Often the first step in determining the reliability of interviews is whether the suspect was given their Miranda warnings at the appropriate moment. This is one of the reasons why audio video recordings are so essential. The court needs to ensure that the Miranda warnings were delivered before an interrogation reaches the point of eliciting an incriminating response.
Improving the reliability of interviews helps ensure that our justice system remains fair, protecting the innocent and holding the guilty accountable. When we have every aspect of the interview recorded, the court has the assurance it needs to accept this crucial evidence.
Other Considerations for the Reliability of Interviews
In addition to the Miranda rights, the court also needs the opportunity to review a few other aspects of the detective’s process in order to determine the reliability of interviews. Perhaps the most obvious question is whether the evidence was legitimately relevant to the case at hand. Were there clear justifications for interviewing the suspect in the first place? And with that, was the interview completed without any misconduct?
Again, audio video recordings are key. Interrogations should never include threats or violence, and the prosecution must show that no confession has been extracted by force. All statements must be made voluntarily.
With accurate interview recordings, law enforcement and the prosecution can stand behind their evidence, eliminate the risks of a false confession, and position their case in the most effective manner possible, limiting civil liabilities and ensuring that the reliability of their interviews can’t be questioned.
iRecord Solutions Support the Pursuit of Justice
Put simply, modern interview rooms and recording solutions help dispel all doubts for the legitimacy of your evidence. The technology available today is better than ever at producing high-quality recordings that capture every word uttered. It’s also important for the recording to show that the interview subject was physically safe during the entire interrogation. That’s where a two-camera setup is key.
When an agency’s recording solution is installed correctly, it will document both the suspect’s facial expressions as well as their body language. All of these details help inform the court and guide them toward a fair and just ruling.
If your agency is looking for a way to increase the court’s confidence, our team at iRecord can help. Our accurate recording solutions and experience with interview room setups give agencies a streamlined way to defend the reliability of interviews for every case and streamline their process for recording and sharing digital evidence. We’re proud to partner with law enforcement agencies across the country, and we’re honored to support their mission to keep our communities safe!
To learn more about our process, please don’t hesitate to send us a message. We’d love to answer your questions and schedule a demo of what a difference our recording solutions can make for your employees, and our justice system as a whole.