If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov.

139962 U.S. Department of Justice National Institute of Justice

This document has been reproduced exactly as received from the person or organization originating It. Points of view or opinions stated In this document are those 01 the authors and do not necessarily represent Ihe official position or poHclas of the Natlonallnslltute of Justfce. Permission to reproduce this ...,.,....,. material has been granted by Public Pomain/aJP/NIJ u. S. Department of Justice to the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS). Further reproduction outside of the NCJRS system requires permission of the !JI; j .I'owner. U.S. Department 01' Justice Office or Justice Programs Naliollallllslillllr! 0/ JUslicr!

March 1993 ~. , • Videotaping Interrogations and Confessions by William A. Geller

The use of video technology in criminal • Should videotaping of interrogations be Since no study had been perfonned in the interrogations is well known. but-at least overt or covert? United States to examine such issues. the in tlie United States-unexamined. It is National Institute of Justice (NIJ) commis­ • Are videotaped "recaps" adequate estimated that in 1990. about one-sixth of sioned the Police Executive Research or should an entire interrogation be ull police and sheriffs' departments in the Forum to conduct a study of the nature videotaped? United States-almost 2,400 agencies­ and prevalence of the videotaping of videotaped at least some interrogations or • What are the effects of videotaping for stationhouse interrogations and confes­ confessions. Concerns and questions about the prosecutor. the defense attorney, the sions for use by police, attorneys. and the use of this technology have emerged: judge. and the jury? courts . • Why are police departments video­ ., Who makes the decision to videotape . The study consisted of three parts: aping interrogations rather than relying and how many professionals (e.g .• detec­ • solely on written reports. verbatim steno­ tives, audiovisual specialists) are needed? • A review of English-language literature graphic records of interviews. or audio (primarily from the United Kingdom, Aus­ • What are the financial implications of recordings? tralia. and Canada) on the subject to iden­ videotaping? tify important issues. • Does videotaping outperfonn these • How does videotaping affect the out­ • A nationwide survey in 1990 of police other methods without creating offsetting come of cases where tap!;:., are used as complications? and sheriffs' departments to identify agen­ evidence? cies that videotape interrogations or

hen videocameras reached record statements by witnesses and officers technology and its potential to assist consumer markets in the United involved in police shootings. criminal justice agencies nationwide. NIl W States in the late 1970's, they commissioned this study to examine where were used to document family parties and During the 1990's, citizens attempted to use and how videotaping is being used to vacations and provide surveil1ance in retail videocameras to record crime in action, document stationhouse interrogations and stores and banks. They had little impact on pUlticularly drug dealing in their neigh­ confessions of suspects. It is a preliminary police work until the mid-1980's when borhoods. The videotape of Rodney King's study. analyzing the extent of the poac­ audio-video technology began to find a beating, the best known of citizens' video­ tice, the procedures in place, and why place in the criminal justice setting. tapes, is widely regarded as a compelling vldeotaping is viewed as an asset or a illustration of the power of video technology liability by various sectors of the criminal In the 1990's, police use of audio-video to illuminate for courtroom participants the justice sYI.'em. technology to document encounters with details of disputed events that occurred at a suspects became more widespread. For different time and place. The findings discussed in this Research example, in July 1991, the Chris~opher ill Brie/are preliminary, but the weight Commission in Los Angeles recommended Views on appropriate roles of videotaping of opinion among criminal justice placing videocameras in squad cars both to have varied as the criminal justice community practitioners with firsthand knowledge redur:e police abuse of force and to pro­ explores its utility and cost as well as ethical of videotaping seems to clearly favor tect officers against unfair accusations and legal issues. Research on these issues has videotaping interrogations for certain of brutality. A year later. the Kolts been. however, minimal. felonies. Commission criticized the Los Angeles The National Institute of Justice (NIl) has a National Institute of Justice Sheriff's Department for failing to tape responsibility to evaluate cutting-edge confessions, and a follow up telephone sur­ The aim of this exploratory study was to videotape to document interrogations or • vey of a sample of agencies that do and do identify issues and practices pertaining to confessions in at least some types of cases. not videotape. videotaping interrogations as a possible prelude to evaluative research. This Re­ When surveyed in 1990, most departments • Interviews of local detectives, police search ill Brie/describes a variety of had been videot~lping interrogations for at supervisors, prosecutors, public and private videotaping policies and procedures in least 3 years; 41 percent had done so for at defense attorneys, and judges in 11 diverse various locales and explores the percep­ least 5 years. Usually departments employ cities or counties where interrogations are tions of criminal justice practitioners audiotapes (a technique f;lising many of videotaped. The 11 sites were Denver, about videotaping and its effects. the same issues as videotapes) for at least 4 Colorado; Fort Wayne, Indiana: Houston, years after relying solely on written meth- Texas: Huntington Beach, California; Kan­ ods before they advance to video docu­ sas City, Missouri; New York City (Bronx Overview of departments mentation. A few leapfrogged directly County), New York; Orange County, Cali­ videotaping interrogations from paper to video. In the latter agencies. fornia; S1. Louis, Missouri; San Diego, one might expect videotaping to present California; Tulsa, Oklahoma; and Wash­ On the basis of the survey and analysis of more of a culture shock to criminal justice ington, D.C. Personal interviews were other data (see exhibit 1), researchers piactitioners. Evidence from the study's also conducted in Denver with police calculated that one-third of all American interviews indicates that even when such from Adams County and the City of police and sheriffs' departments serving culture shllCk occurred, its effects were not Westminister, Colorado, and with police populations of 50,000 or larger are video­ necessarily negative. in Burlington, Massachusetts, where the taping at least some interrogations. Based department had previously decided to on surveyed agencies' plans to adopt vid­ Types of cases videotaped. In 1990 U.S. restrict video documentation of booking eotaping, it is estimated that by 1993 more police and sheriffs' deputies (hereafter procedures. than 60 percent of such law enforcement generally referred to simply as police) agencies in the United States will use videotaped suspects' statements in an

w Exhibit 1. Calculation of the Number of U.S. Police and Sheriffs' Departments That Videotape at Least Some Suspects' Interrogations or Confessions

Percentage of Surveyed Estimated Number of Estimated Number of Departments That Departments in U.S. • Service Population Group Departments in U.S: Videotape That Videotape

Under 10,000 9,948 12.2 1,214 10,000-24,999 2,408 28.9 696 25,00D-49,999 936 25.9 243 50,000-99,999 434 31.8 138 100,000-249,999 184 32.4 59 More than 250,000 91 34.5 34 National Total 13,999 16.4 2,384

,.. Extrapolated from 1985 Uniform Crime Reports (UCR) data on 9,228 law enforcement agencies in the United States. The number of agencies listed in UCR data in each of the service population categories was as follows: under 10,000=6,557; 10.000-24,999=1,587; 25,000-49,999=617; 50,000-99.999=286; 100,000-249,999=121; and more than 250.000=60. Researchers extrapolated as follows: assuming there are 14,000 police and sheriffs' departments in the United States.l.hey compared 14,000 to the UCR total of 9,228. They found they must multiply 9,928 by a factor of 1.5171 to equal 14.000. They then multiplied the number of agencies in each UCR service population group by this same factor (1.5\71) to estimate the number of agencies in each category. This method necessarily assumes that. in each of the popUlation groups, a similar proportion of the agencies will participate in the voluntary Unifonn Crime Reporting program. Of course, this may not be true. That is, it is possible, for example, that virtually all of the agencies serving populations of 250.000 or larger participate in the UCR, while only three-fourths of the departments serving the smallest popUlations participate. If that were true, then multiplying the UCR participant tally in eath category by the same corrective factor of 1.5171 to estimate the actual number of agencies in the Nation would produce errors of both under- and overestimation. In the absence of definitive national counts of police and sheriffs' departments, researchers necessarily fall back on such imperfect bases for estimating the number of departments. • 2 -

eStimated 57,000 criminal cases. I They videotaping interrogations. Financial serious felony cases. These criminal jus­ • were most likely to use videotapes in hom­ concems included the cost of video tice practitioners argued that failure to icide cases; 83 percent of agencies that equipment, remodeling interview rooms, videotape when the capacity to do so videotaped any suspects' statements did so storing tapes, and maintaining the video exists would result in the court's suppres­ in homicides. and audio recording equipment. Among sion of nonvideotaped statements offered other reasons cited were, "It's not needed," by the prosecution, or adverse findings by Interrogation videotaping is used in inves­ and "If it [the investigative process] ain't judges and juries who would find a writ­ tigating many other crimes but as the se­ broke, don't fix it." ten confession unconvincing. verity of the felony decreases, so does the likelihood of videotaping. The following In fact, evidence was found both for are types of cases where videotaping was Selective versus and against the prediction that a police used to document interrogations or confes­ nonselective taping department that tapes allY serious felony sions, and percentages of surveyed agen­ interrogatiolls or confessions will have to cies using the technology: Officials in some departments had another tape most or all. In the national survey, 70 concern: the fear of having to videotape percent of responding agencies reported • Rape, 77 percent. all suspects' statements in most types of that after introducing videotaping they • Aggravated battery or assault, 71 percent. • Armed robbery, 61 percent. Other Police Uses of Video • Drunk driving, 59 percent. TI\lchnology • Unarmed robbery. 45 percent. The widespread use of video are thousands in the United States) were technology by local law enforcement omitted from the calculations, no doubt • Burglary, 44 percent. officials is seen in the results of the " these percentages 3Vou1d be much • Other property crimes, 34 percent. 1990 survey. ThefoUowing are higher,as they are fonecording percentages of surveyed local police interrogations and confessions. and sheriffs' departments that Other possible objectives of police use To tape or not to tape? repoltedly employed video tech~ of video technology are to: .AgencieS that videotape suspects' nology-at least occasionally-to! " statements gave a variety of reasons for • Document crime scenes, 63 percent. • Show the physical condition of a initiating the practice: suspect when booked. • Record victim testimony, 51 perct;lnt. • Avoiding defense attorneys' challenges • Document the notification of a of the accuracy of audiotapes and the • Record sobriety tests of drunk suspect regarding his or her completeness of written confessions. driv,ing sl,lspects, 49 percent. constitutionalcights. • Helping reduce doubts about the volun­ • Conduct surveillance and document • Assist in mental health evaluations tary nature of confessions. undercover operations;48 percent. of defendants whose sanity is at issue. • Jogging detectives' memories when • Document vehicle accident scenes, testifying. 41 petcent. • Enable parties or witnesses who are absent from court to participate via • Countering defense criticism of "nice • Monitor prisoners in lockups with closed-circuit TV or videophone closed-circuit TV, 31 ~rcent. guy" or "softening up" techniques for in pretrial proceedings (such interrogating suspects. • Record crime reenactments by as arraignment, bail hearings, Most police agencies use video technology suspect, 20 percent. and preliminary hearings) and in some way; it is not lack of exposure in court presentations (with • Record eyewitness testimony, prerecorded testimony). that explains the reluctance of some in 8 percent. the profession to videotape suspects' • Monitor convicts under electronic statements. Conversations with police • Record in-progress events (e.g., uhouse arresf." officers and prosecutors who do not robberies and building checks) videotape suspects' statements revealed from cameras mounted in police • Present the testimony of probation or strong views against doing so. Some said vehicles. 5 ix'rcent. paroteofficers in revocation hearings. that suspects would be afraid to start • Document lineups, 4 percent. talking with a videocamera rolling since • Show trainees how tbey took and they knew everything they said would be Smaller departments generally do not sound to others in Simulation _ recorded and heard in court. make as much use of video technology exercises involving fellow officers, as larger departments. Consequently, if witnesses, suspects, and the news Cost was the explanation most police the smallest agencies (of which there agencies around the country gave for not rnedia.

3 iature microphones, however, may occur in. Exhibit 2. Effect of Videotaping on the Presentation overt as well as covert tapings. Police of Untaped Confessions in Court investigators who are committed to overt taping may also wish to keep distractions to a minimum during an interrogation. For Percentage c-f Surveyed Local Police Departments'n the United States example, the Tulsa, Oklahoma, police 70 department. which has an overt taping 65 policy. plans to move the camera operator 60 and the videocamera and its tripod from 60.7 the interview room. placing them behind a 55 one-way mirror in an adjacent room. as 50 some other agencies do. 45 A department may decide against covert 40 taping for severa] reasons: 35 • State or local law may bar surreptitious 30 30.1 taping. Federal constitutional law should 25 not be a bar. however. since a suspect 20 would be hardpressed to prove that he or 15 she had a "reasonable expectation of pri­ vacy" while under police interrogation in a 10 9.2 stationhouse interview room. Indeed. the 5 Miranda warning makes explicit that any­ o thing suspects say can and probably will be Easier To No Effect Harder To lIsed against their interests. Present Untaped Present Untaped • A department may realize that. as a practical matter, word spreads too rapidly • in jail and on the streets to keep covert tap- found it no harder to present in court possibility remains that selective taping ing practices a secret long. suspects' confessions without video docu­ might cause problems, and this is an area mentation. But 30 percent reported it was where further research is needed. • Covert taping may not square with the harder to secure the admission of nonvideo image of fairness in handling criminal sus­ confessions after adopting the video pro­ pects that a department wants to present to gram (exhibit 2). Overt versus covert taping the public. In most communities visited, defense The national survey found that nearly all attomeys had at times insinuated to judges agencies videotape openly. either telling Full interrogations that police failure to videotape a confes­ suspects they are being taped or leaving the versus recaps sion implied that the interrogation could camera or a microphone visible during the not stand scrutiny. In most locales these session. Still, those agencies that tape co­ Departments are sharply divided between arguments rarely proved helpful in motions vertly thought highly of the procedure and taping the entire stationhouse interrogation to suppress. Nor did they normally seem to its apparent benefits. and a recapitulation. that is. a videotaped summary of highlights of information that aid the defense much in raising judges' or The ethics of surreptitiously videotaping a jurors' doubts about a defendant's gUilt. the suspect is willing to repeat. after a suspect during an interrogation are hotly previously untaped interrogation. A recap Those interviewed who expressed concern debated in this and in other countries. The might include both incriminating and ex­ about having to videotape all confessions police cannot force a suspect to submit to a culpatory statements or consist largely of a generally turned out to be investigators videotaped interrogation; the suspect can confession. A few of the visited depart­ who were lIot engaged in videotaping. In foil the interview by exercising his or her ments also record recaps they expect to Houston. Texas, for example. homicide Miranda right to refuse to talk. This is one consist primarily of denials of guilt. detectives who rarely videotape their inter­ reason that covert videotaping is sometimes rogations cited this concern. while robbery done: to portray a suspect talking willingly. At agencies visited. fully videotaped inter­ investigators who videotape many confes­ who might, if aware of it. object to a video views took an estimated average of2 to 4 sions did not. In addition. it appears frorn record being made. Another reason is to hours; the longest videotaped interview the survey that most detective units that avoid distracting the suspect-and interro­ was approximately 7 hours. Recaps were introduced videotaping avoid the possible gators-with the videocamera. micro­ estimated to take an average of 15 to 45 consequences of selective videotaping phone. and equipment operator. minutes. The distinction has cost impIica- • because they find the practice sufficiently tions both for the purchase of blank video- Concealing cameras using pinhole lenses or tapes and the creation of transcripts from beneficial to do it uniformly. 2 Still. the behind one-way mirrors and using submin- recorded tapes.

4 In favor of videotaping the entire gUilt gives them even more confidence and focus group discussions among • interrogation. As a nile, defense attorneys in the authenticity, sincerity, and vol un­ knowledgeable interrogators from depart­ interviewed said they strongly prefer entire tariness of the incriminating statemt:nts. ments using a variety of videotaping procedures. interviews to recapitulations. They ob­ Some practioners asserted that recaps can jected to recaps full of "leading questions lead to accusations that intc!

5 • Use of old tapes to train both new and counterproductive formality on were made typically were pro forma and • and experienced detectives in interview interrogators. were offered by defense attorneys prima- techniques. rily to avoid a client's claim of inadequate Detectives reverted to a more balanced representation by counsel. • Ability to show an accomplice's taped approach once they became accustomed to confession to an uncooperative suspect being taped; they realized that they could and thus possibly stimulate a change in maintain professionalism while using Effects of videotaping on attitude. traditional tactics. For example, when charging, case preparation, Both the national survey and site visits interrogators use profanity, as long as they and plea negotiations produced information on how videotaping are following up on the suspect's choice of affects the interrogation process. words to communicate clearly rather than Prosecutors' views. Prosecutors visited gratuitously or in an intimidating manner, could point to no substantial effect of Suspects' willingness to talk. The survey it does not seem to bother judges or juries. videotaping on decisions to charge did not support the notion, advanced in Indeed, an interrogator's fastidious polite­ suspects, but they were in virtually unani­ some studies in other countries, that ness often backfires, suggesting to suspect, mous agreement that videotaping helped videotaping, because it is seen as fairer to Judge, and jury alike that the interrogator is them assess the State's case and prepare suspects, makes them more willing to talk. either naive or disingenuous. for trial. Said one district attorney: "You Since their adoption of videotape proce­ learn a lot frem the videotape-how dures, for each agency that reported sus­ Claims of police misconduct. The survey sophisticated the defendant is, how he pects more willing to talk, three others results, confinned by many officers inter­ answers questions, how you might cross­ reported suspects less willing (8.6 percent viewed, indicated that because of videotap­ examine." versus 28.3 percent; 63.1 percent of the ing fewer allegations of coercion or agencies reported no change in suspects' intimidation were made by defense attor­ Prosecutors credited videotaping with propensity to talk due to the adoption of neys (see exhibit 4). On-camera adminis­ providing details impossible to capture videotaping). Detectives in St. Louis, trations of the Miranda warning by the from written interview notes or a transcript Missouri, noted that the camera attracts police are one major reason for this result. and mostly lost in an audiotape as well: the some suspects and repels others. Some are Those officers interviewed also noted they suspect's and officer's physical condition, intimidated by the prospect of seeing felt less pressure in the courtroom and demeanor, attire, intonation in speaking, themselves on television. Others play to faced fewer defense assertions that police body language, and the situation on the the camera; for them, "it's show time." had fabricated confessions;4 claims that night (or day) of the arrest. Such nonverbal. Type of information obtained. The sur­ vey found that most of the suspects who appear on camera provide more incrimi­ Exhibit 4. Videotaping's Effect on Defense Claims of nating information than suspects did pre­ Improper Police Interrogations viously. Sixty percent of responding ~------agencies found they profited in this way, Percentage of Surveyed Local Police Departments in the United States although 13 percent reported suspects 70 provided less incriminating information. 65 Yet most agencies visited during the study reported obtaining more of both incrimi­ 60 nating and exculpatory infornlation 55 through videotaping. However, exculpa­ 50 tory statements generally were made in interviews in which the suspect offered an 45 admission or confession. Most prosecutors 40 43.5 said the added exculpatory information 35 38.7 had not presented a problem for them. 30 Interrogation techniques. Some worried 25 that taping would inhibit certain legiti­ 20 mate, effective inten'ogation tactics through fear that judges and juries might 15 17.8 not like them. These include friendly 10 gestures to build rapport and the use of 5 any profanity or street talk. Although such o fears seem to be unfounded, police in Allegations Remained Allegations some agencies visited reported that video .. Decreased Same Increased • taping temporarily forced an artificial ------

6 ------~~-~-~-~--

cues can greatly add to--or subtract lost in a written documentation. In another prosecutors' offices. Sometimes they send • from-what the suspect is saying. instance, a private attorney recalled a case blank videotapes to the prosecutor's office in which his client was told that if he coop­ to have a copy made; sometimes they must Although most prosecutors claimed that erated with the police he would not be purchase copies (with exceptions typically videotaping is an asset in negotiating ac­ charged; a codefendant would be charged made for indigent defendants); in rare ceptable pleas. one noted that it can cut instead. Because the videotape of his instances they can obtain a copy only both ways: Sometimes the video raises client's response showed an eagerness to through discovery motions. hopes among defense attomeys that they confess, the lawyer succeeded in his claim may be able to assert a defense (such as of improper promises. The point after arrest at which defense insanity or intoxication) that otherwise attorneys and their clients can view video would not be credible. Even when video­ Another public defender pointed out that a statements varies from jurisdiction to taped statements produce unfavorable defendant's behavior and speech on cam­ jurisdiction. In Bronx County, New York, results for the State. they often help pros­ era can heip an attomey assess whether it defense attorneys can view videos only ecutors prepare for either trial or plea bar­ would be useful to put him or her on the after the client hac; been indicted. In gaining. For example. one prosecutor witness stand. Orange County. California, attomeys noted that videotapes help her distinguish generally see the tapes within 2 to 4 Videotapes were also deemed useful to the genuine remorse in a suspect from feigned weeks after an arrest. But their clienfs­ remorse. an advantage in either situation. defense when the police use interpreters to those featured in the videos-often see question non-English speaking suspects. their videotaped statements for the first Even if "the news is going to be bad." at The tape captures the precise translation, time in court. at trial. An Orange County least the prosecutor is warned about what facial expressions. and gestures used in public defender pointed out that this puts lies in store. And should a tape reveal the the police questions or comments, the him at a disadvantage. State's case against a defendant to be interpreter's translation. and the suspect's weak, it may help the prosecution decide statement. The defense can hire a translator whether to charge the defendant with a less to study the video for erroneous ~ransla­ Procedural issues of serious crime or to drop charges entirely. tions that might be prejudicial to the Videotaping defendant. Defense attorneys' views. Defense attor­ The decisionmaker. Most of the 11 de­ neys' opinions of videotapes were much Some attorneys also said videotapes help partments visited leave the decision of more mixed than those of prosecutors. them achieve "client control" by cutting whether to videotape an interrogation or • Some were flatly opposed to videotaping, through lies clients try to tell attorneys confession to the interrogating detective. In primarily because it generally gives the about how they were interrogated or what two of the agencies. however, a sergeant State a strategic edge. Written and. to a incriminating remarks they made. Tapes makes the decision; in two others, video­ certain extent. audiotaped confessions are can also help attorneys persuade clients taping is standard in certain types of cases. easier for the defense to attack as the they are better off pleading gUilty to a However, standard procedure is not product of coercion or fabrication; these reduced charge because a taped confession always followed; some detectives and types of documentation also permit the virtually assures conviction. Most defense assistant prosecutors, who do not share defense to explore more areas of ambiguity attorneys agree that if their clients confess, positive views about videotaping held in courtroom interpretations than can be they prefer they do so on videotape; the by colleagues with whom they work done with videotaped statements. others who prefer written confessions say side-by-side, sometimes try to prevent they are easier to attack as the product of Others-particularly public defenders with videotaping. But in the visited locales most improper promises, coercion, fabrication, officials reportedly comply willingly with daunting caseloads-appreciated the cli­ or other forms of interrogator misconduct. ent-control benefits of videotaping. They the standard videotaping routines. also claimed the nonverbal information Videos can be useful to attorneys not only Written guidelines. Some agencies visited conveyed was useful; for example, tom in getting the client to admit what he did, had comprehensive written guidelines for clothing could cOIToborate a defendant's but also in helping a defendant's family conducting such videotapings; others had claim that he got into a fight with the hom­ accept the fact of his or her wrongdoing. only brief memos on how to use the video icide victim and the killing was not pre­ And for defendants trying to be honest equipment. Still others had nothing in meditated. Two of them separated their with their attorneys, videotapes can help writing; they said the detectives conduct­ professional and personal reactions to jog memory about details that may help the ing video interrogations were experienced videotaping. Said one private attorney who defense. enough not to need such reminders. specializes in murder cases: "As a defense lawyer, I hate videotaping. As a citizen Prosecution and defense access fo tapes. Personnel at videotaped interviews. In needing the protection of the police against Tn most locales visited for this Gtudy, pros­ the literature review, the researchers found criminals, I love it," ecutors are given duplicates of the video­ that some commentators estimated that tapes recorded by the police but defense videotaping would save the criminal jus­ One public defender said that videotapes attorneys' acquisition of them is not auto­ tice system money because fewer officers can help the defense by capturing mean­ matic. Sometimes defense attomeys view would have to attend an interrogation. • ingful pauses in an interview that would be videotapes at police stations, more often in

7 =

However, in three-quarters of the agel1cies to th05e inside. Methods for doing so at cutors participating in videotaped inter- • surveyed, videoltlping produced no change visited agencies ranged from the low-tech views because he thought it would appear in the number of officers on hand. (e.g .. knocking on the door and calling the to juries watching the tapes that he was interrogator out on the pretext of taking a taking unfnir advantnge of the suspect. Most commonly, two detectives nre pres­ phone call) to the high-tech (e.g., sending a ent during the videotaping of a suspect's message in silently on the interrogator's Equipment operation. During video- interview. With documentation techniques digital pager). In two departments visited. taping, an equipment operator is usually other than video, one of the key justifica­ prosecutors also monitor the interrogation present-either inside the room or in an tions for having a second detective present in certain cases: homicides, shootings by adjacent video control room, depending on is often that he 01' she can corroborate the police, and major cases with possible where the camera and backup audio re- details of the interview and appear in court "political overtones." corder controls are located. Sometimes the to testify if the first detective is unavail­ video operator is a civilian technician, but able. For videotaping, the role of the sec­ In New York City (at least in Bronx often he or she is a fellow detective. The ond detective varies among detective units County, New York), the roles of prosecu~ operator's role is to ensure that the equip. and across types of cases. Sometimes the tors and police officers during a video ment does not malfunction, to replace second detective participates actively in inteo'ogation are reversed. Once a suspect video- and audiotapes if they run out, and. asking questions; in other instances he or is willing to provide a statement to authori n if the camera setup ullows, to zoom in she is primarily a listener, an adviser to the ties in a homicide or other serious crime, on such details as a suspect's face or an lead interrogator, or the equipment opera­ the police summon the district attorTIey's item of evidence or to pan the room to tor. If the "good cop-bad cop" routine is office to send an assistant prosecutor to the show who is and isn't present during the employed, the second detective becomes precinct station to conduct the video ses­ interview. the friendly alternative to the first sion. Police personnel are in the interview interrogator's "tough guy" approach. room tor security and guidance. The survey found high levels of satisfac­ tion with videotaping equipment techni­ In addition to the officers conducting the In certain other jurisdictions, prosecutors cally. Equipment malfunctions or operator interrogation, a supervisor or other investi­ believe they should stay out of the inves­ errors were described as a major problem gative person may sometimes be outside tigation of a case because of the pro­ by only 7 percent of police agencies. More the room. monitoring the interview on a secutorial role they will play should the than one-half reported having no problems TV screen with a speaker or headphones. suspect be charged. One assistant district at all. Those outside the room may offer advice attorney expressed opposition to prose- Room layout. To take video stu.tements, • agencies visited had from 1 to 16 rooms; (16 Bronx County police stations each • had a videotaping room). The rooms Exhibit 5. Denver Police Department Interview Room Layout differed a good deal in physical layout, including the placement of interviewers and interviewees. (The Denver setup is depicted in exhibit 5.) In some agencies, the officer(s) conducting the interview was Clock and n visible; in others. only the suspect was calendar on wall ""_ .) Suspect behind sus )ect ._ seen. In some room arrangements, detec- TV-audio tives were shown only in a protile shot. It monitor and ~·"W could be detrimental if detectives were off­ conference table are camera or taped solely from the rear, as located in a o this could give rise to a defendant's claims Police room across Officer that the interrogator used menacing facial the hall ~ expressions to intimidate him. Police Officer In each agency visited, the camera photo­ O graphs the suspect's face from the front, but cnmera angles differ. If the camera is Bulletin board ie-way mirror for diagrams mounted too high on the wall and looks down at the suspect, it is frequently diffi­ cult to see the suspect's facial expression if he tilts his head down during questioning. The clarity of the recorded pict"re depends VideocameraO F1 additionally on whether color or black- Operator l-d Control Room and-white video equipment is used, on • room lighting, tmd-particularly when taping persons with dark skin-on the color of the wall or o~her backdrop behind WiD r the person's chair. 8 .Equipment and remodeling costs. When of having a transcript before deciding making a backup copy, preventing the purchasing video equipment. agencies can whether to charge a suspect. Some found tapes from being accidentally recorded choose between high-quality consumer it facilitated their review of the case. Oth­ over by removing the tab on the tape hous­ gear or professional television equipment. ers did not mind its absence; they relied on ing, storing tapes in rooms with humidity Professional facilities permit an agency to the video und police summal'ies of the and temperature controls, and maintaining produce high-quality tapes and duplicate investigation. logs to monitor who is given access to the or edit expeditiously. (Typically. editing is Prosecutors who prefer to work with tran­ tapes. minimal to avoid raising doubts about tape scripts noted that they can read and flip tumpering; perhaps an inadmissible state­ pages more quickly than they can watch, Videotapes in the courtroom ment about other crimes will be excised.) rewind, or fast-forward a video, looking Professional equipment. which is much for a pmticular section. Some also noted Videotapes as evidence. Videotaping is more costly, is not needed to make uccept­ the difficulty of getting ready access to a thought to help win acceptance into evi­ able videos of police interrogations. how­ video player and TV monitor when they dence of incriminating statements by ever. Several departments surveyed paid want to prepare a case. accused persons. This is primarily because nothing for their video and backup audio it makes it easier to show the voluntary recording equipment: they use recovered An emerging technology could speed the nature of a confession. Most judges property. location of key information on videotapes interviewed saw such benefits in video­ or video disks. Interactive video technol­ taping. One noted, "It makes police work Departments that paid for audio-video ogy, in conjunction with voice recognition equipment and renovated interview rooms credible." Another said. "Juries realIy like and automated transcription equipment, with soundproofing and proper lighting videotapes. This form of evidence holds can generate a written transcript on screen spent between $5,000 and $40.000. The the jurors' interest." Judges believe (or in a plintout if necessary) as well as an Bronx district attorney's expert on decisions to admit confessions in evidence audio and visual recording. Using this videotaping, with more than 20 years of and to convict or acquit are more credible technology prosecutors would be able to first-hand experience in setting up and when the suspect is questioned on camera. search for and find key words or even key running a video recording program for Others interviewed substantiated that visual images in the video recording of the serious felony confessions, reported that it videotaping facilitates court admission interrogation as quickly as one searches for costs $25,000 to construct "one complete of confessions, even if they are recapitula­ . interview setup, including playback equip­ and locates a particular selection on a tions of long statements. compact disk or a key word in a word­ • ment and top-of-the-line editing equip­ processed document today. Further re­ Effects on convictions and sentences. ment. This," he observed, "is slightly more search and development is needed to adapt Prosecutors interviewed reported that than the cost of one police car and cer­ these technologies for criminal justice videotaping was a factor in their tainly less than a police officer's salary." applications. negotiating more guilty pleas and higher He acknowledged that "multiple setups for sentences. Likewise, the vast majority of larger departments will be more." and Safeguarding tapes. Criminal justice police departments surveyed reported that reported that the Bronx district attorney's practitioners in other countries have ex­ videotaping had helped secure gUilty pleas office "replaced all [its] equipment-five pressed concern that electronic documenta­ (exhibit 6). Tulsa police reported: field units, five playback setups, and edit­ tiorl of interviews-key evidence in ing-for $60,000. I doubt," he suggested. trials-can be tampered with, lost, dam­ As soon as the defense attorneys "anyone in tile world really will need more aged, or destroyed either purposely (for around here find out that their clients than we have, so cost is very low." example, by placing a tape next to a pow­ have given a videotaped confession, erful motor whose magnet will erase the the cases are plea bargained out. Transcripts and their costs. Police and tape) or inadvertently through poor storage With audiotape, we didn't get nearly prosecutorial officials in some jurisdictions techniques. However, among those so many pleas. The defendant could worry that everyone involved in a case interviewed for this study, no one ex­ still claim the police held a gun to will. as a matter of routine, insist on verba­ pressed concern about intentional tamper­ his head or had a foot on his throat. tim transcripts of the audio of entire inter­ ing; some expressed minimal concerns rogation tapes. which can run 5 hours As for securing convictions. an equally about accidental damage to or loss of or longer. In many jurisdictions transcrip­ overwhelming proportion of agencies tapes. tion has become the rule rather than the surveyed believed videotaping had helped exception. To control access to master tapes and do this. Those interviewed generally protect them from accidental damage, agreed. Police in Washington, D.C., said: Making so many and such lengthy tran­ departments typically inventory the tapes "We have obtained convictions that might scripts could be problematic for some like other case evidence. In no instance not otherwise have been obtained through criminal justice budgets. However, if agen­ was the master tape treated as the investi­ use of the videotapes; for instance, in cases cies videotape only short recaps, transcrip- gating officer's personal "electronic note­ in which the suspect's body lunguage was tions are more affordable. book," although duplicates of tapes very important to the jury." • Other issues were raised about transcripts involving cases under investigation were A prosecutor in San Diego. California, in addition to their cost in time and money. often held by detectives. Other measures however, indicated that videotapes can cut Prosecutors differed about the importance taken to safeguard recorded tapes include both ways:

9 ...u ______~ ___ • The big question in homicide cases is intent. If the suspect on the videotape Exhibit 6. Effect of Videotaping on Guilty Pleas i~ crying his eyes out, saying he didn '( menn to shoot the victim. this can hurt Percentage of Surveyed Local Police Departments In the United States the prosecution's ability to prove intent. On the other hand, I have used 70 the video to refute claims by a suspect 65 that he was high on dope or insane 60 during the interrogation. 55 55.4 As to how videotaped confes<;ions affected 50 sentences, most but not all of those inter­ 45 viewed felt longer sentences resulted. A 40 private defense attorney cited two or three of his cases in which a videotaped confes­ 35 sion. showing a remorseful and coopera­ 30 tive defendant. opcrtlted to mitigLite the 25 27.3 sentence, and another case in which his 20 client got u longer sentence because he was 17.3 cooperative but appeared unremorseful. A 15 judge in Denver, Colorado. indicated that 10 seeing a defendant's honesty or remorse on 5 a video can foster leniency. But a judge in o 0 New York City observed that in 12 years Hindered No Effect Helped Helped A lot on the bench he had yet to encounter a Somewhat Somewhat killer who expressed remorse. - WM A consensus favoring Videotaping • They foster humane treatment of sus­ asked, knowing what they know of video­ Police tools and tactics must be employed pects, fairness. and respect for civil rights taping now, if they would do it again. in a wny that balances several sometimes and liberties. Every agency said yes. • competing objectives. A balance must be struck between effectiveness, efficiency. • They can help to persuade other au­ In devartments that have adopted video and legitimacy. On the basi,; of this explor­ thorities and the public that police interro­ documentation of suspects' statements. atory study, videotaping appears to be a gations are conducted professionally and early resistance by detectives has been distinctly useful tool. because it is seen thereby reduce some of the stresses that transformed into active support among as simultaneollsly furthering the criminal impede excellence in police work. most. The survey found that 60 percent of agencies switching to videotape reported justice system"; pursuit of disparate In the national survey, a striking 97 per­ objectives: that their detectives at first disapproved of cent of all departments that have ever or had mixed feelings about the practice. • Videos can help police accurately videotaped suspects' statements continue By the time of the survey, however. and efficiently assess a suspect's guilt or to find such videotaping, on balance, to be after most of these agencies had several innocence. useful. Likewise, agencies visited were years of experience with videotaping, the

For more information on setting up a program to videotape suspects' interrogations and confeSSions, contact any of the following: • Police Executive Research • Denver Police Department • Office of the District • Huntington Bench Forum 1331 Cherokee Street Attorney. Bronx County Police Department 2300 M Street NW.. Stet 9) 0 Denver, CO 80204-2787 215 East 161 st Street 2000 Main Street Washington. DC 20037 (303) 640-3779 Bronx, NY 10451 ';::, Huntington Beach. (202) 466-7820 Attention: Lt:,. Thomas P. Huney (212) 590-2254 CA 92648-2702 Attention: William A. Geller Division Chief, . Attentiom Sean M, Walsh (7t4) 536-5952 Associate Director Intelligence Division AssiStant District Attorney. Attention; Detective Bureau Chief Richard Hooper • 10 -

....., ...... aNP.i .... .,j ...... with relatively few serious f~~lony interrogu­ • Exhibit 7. Police Attitude Toward Videotaping lions per year. 4, Some of the advantages of videotaping Percentage of Surveyed Local Pollee Departments In the United States su~pects' interrogulions or c()nles~ions arc intangible but no lc~s vuluable. In un ern where 70 homicide tallies have set new records and 65 o When Videotaping Commenced stuffing levels in police und sherifl\' depart­ 60 ~ ments arc not gl'owing, some wonder how After Experience With Videotaping departments consider udopting u time­ 55 o consuming use of video technology, Mnny 50 criminnl justice practitioners. however. nrgue 45 tlmt videotnping could sltve time comparcd ,...--' with other wnys of documenting interrogatiolls. 40 43.S Evell if it docs not, it seems to avoid something 35 even more important-wear and tear on offic~ ers. Bucked by 1\ vidcolllpe clearly showing 30 Ihut a suspect's confession is voluntary. II 25 detective on the witness MlInd who denic~ ~ using coercion to win a confession is in (1 20 ,!!!:l 22.S ,J§.! ~ strong position. Whatever videotaping's costs 15 15.8 r:r7.6 in tcmlS of time and money, it promises sav­ 10 ings of officer slres~ and burnout. which may 5 be among its most valuable advantages. o 0.5 0 n William A. Geller is Associate Director I Strongly Mildly Mixed.- Mildly Strongly Disapprove Disapprove Feelings Approve Approve of the Police Executive Research Fo­ nlm. His full retmrt titled Police Video­ b taping ojSuspect lmcfl'ogations alld Confessions: A Preliminary Examina­ tion ofIssues lIIld Practi,'es, high~ lighted in this Research iiI Brie/. is increasingly populm' investigative tool for disapproval und mixed review figure had i available on loan from the National fallen to 26 percent (exhibit 7). Initial U.S. police. Institute of Justice/NCJRS. Box 6000. • resistance. the interviews suggested. is Rockville. MD 20850; write or call primarily a general resistance to change. Notes 800-851-3420 and request NCJ No. As one detective put it, "The only people 139584. The report is also available who like change are babies with wet I. Site visits disclo~ed that many departments' from the Police Executive Research diapers," records did not distinguish between the video­ Forum, 2300 M Street NW., Stet taping of statements by suspects and the video­ 910, Washington, DC 20037 (202) The weight uf opinion umong criminal taping or statements by willlesses or I'ietill/s. justice practitioners who have firsthand As a result. the findings of this. national sur­ 466-1820. knowledge of videotaping interrogations vey-in which respondents. forewarned of and confessions thus seems clearly posi~ researchers' telephone interviews, probably Findings tlnd conclusions of the research re­ tive. Whether these perceptions would be checked records to estimate how often their ported here arc those of the researcher lIJ1d do agencies videotape ,WSP/!CIS' statements-must not neccessarily rencet the official position or con finned by additional research that policies of the U,S. Deptlrtment of Justice. moves beyond this exploratory effort to a be taken ns preliminnry. more quantitative evaluation of process 2. Even detectives who uim to videotape inter­ Til,' NtlliOllal Instill/Ie (If Justic(' is (/ and outcome effects. remains to be seen. I'ogutions tum off the camero occasionally cO/llpollellt oftl/{! Office (J,t:! IIstice Programs. when suspects insist they will speak only if Future evaluations thst build on this pre­ whit'II also inc/udC's Ihe Bureall I!t'Juslicl' they nrc not lUped. Assis/al/cC', Burea/( of Justice SW:Wics. liminary study of issues and practices in Office ofh/I't'nile Jllslice and D£'lillqllellCY videotaping should provide more insight 3. Notnhly.the proctice oftuping entire inter­ view!> wu!> not limited just to small agencies Prel'ention, and the' Office for l';C'lilll,\' lit' into the benefits and drawbacks of an Crime.

NC.' 139962 •

11