The essence and purpose of psychological contact. Method of establishing psychological contact

PLAN:

1. Psychological contact in investigative work as an object of research in legal psychology.

2. Psychological contact between the investigator and the interrogated at the initial stages of the interrogation.

3. Psychological contact between the investigator and the interrogated in the main and final parts of the interrogation.

Psychological contact in investigative work as an object of research in legal psychology. In psychological science, psychological contact in the broad sense of the word is understood as a case of communication with feedback. In this meaning, psychological contact is an attribute of any interpersonal interaction. If we are talking about investigative work, then, according to G. A. Zorin, psychological contact is an integral component of any investigative action related to the process of professional communication. The forms of interpersonal interaction in these conditions can be very different: from deep conflict to complete mutual understanding with coincidence of goals (5, C.4). As we can see, the presence of feedback in the process of communication between the investigator and the participant in the investigative action is a criterion for the presence of psychological contact.

What is the phenomenon of psychological contact in the narrow sense of the word? Let's consider a number of points of view regarding psychological contact in the work of an investigator. They belong to venerable scientists of our country and neighboring countries.

In the psychological and criminological literature there is no common understanding of the essence of the concept of “psychological contact”. First group Scientists tend to interpret psychological contact in the narrow sense of the word as some kind of factor in the investigative action: a condition, a technique, a complex integrated method, and even a stage. Here are a number of examples.

Zorin G. A. believes that psychological contact is “a complex integrated method that combines a series of tactical techniques subordinated to a single goal and permeates the entire process of interpersonal interaction between the investigator and the participant in the investigative action” (5, P.3).

Vasilyev V.L. interprets psychological contact as the stage at which both interlocutors finally develop a common line of behavior in relation to each other, and also determine such parameters as the pace, rhythm of communication, the basic states of the interlocutors, postures, facial expressions and, in some cases, the main argumentation (1, p. 485).

Dulov A.V. defines psychological contact as a purposeful, planned activity to create conditions that ensure the development of communication in the right direction and the achievement of its goals. Contact allows you to rationalize the mode of communication in a specific investigative action (4, p. 107).

Second group researchers emphasize that psychological contact in investigative work is the optimal option for communication between the investigator and the interrogated in its communicative, perceptual and interactive terms.

For example, Soloviev A.B. interprets psychological contact as the emergence of a kind of emotional trust in the investigator. The presence of trust is a desirable element of psychological contact. Sometimes the investigator cannot inspire emotional trust in himself. His goals are often the opposite of those of the person being interrogated. In these cases, the participant in the process comes into psychological contact with the investigator, but only in order to simply find a compromise solution to the problems that have arisen (11, P.42).

Glazyrin F.V. defines psychological contact as the readiness of the interrogated person to communicate with the investigator, to give truthful and complete testimony (3, P.58).

Psychological contact in law enforcement, according to Stolyarenko A.M., is the manifestation by a law enforcement officer and a citizen of mutual understanding and respect for goals, interests, arguments, proposals, leading to mutual trust and assistance to each other in solving a professional problem by a lawyer (10, C . 373).

On the issue that is the subject of discussion in this article, the point of view of a person who is far from legal psychology and criminology is of interest. The famous figure of Russian culture Stanislavsky K.S. wrote that psychological contact is the art of optimizing the tactical relationships of people in the process of communication; this is an adaptation, these are internal and external tricks with the help of which people apply to each other when communicating (12, p. 281). In our opinion, this understanding of psychological contact very clearly reflects the essence of this phenomenon and is quite acceptable for extension to the activities of the investigator.

Among criminologists and specialists in the field of legal psychology, opinions were expressed about the failure of the very term “psychological contact.” Ratinov A.R., Karneeva L.M., Stepichev S.S. argue that it is better to talk not about contact, but about the correct psychological approach to the person being interrogated, about understanding his thoughts, feelings and states in order to influence his behavior. However, even this group of scientists is inclined to share the idea that the long-term use of the term “psychological contact” in domestic criminology and legal psychology allows its use in the future (13, p. 154).

Why is psychological contact necessary? Is it possible to induce a person to give truthful testimony without psychological contact? Of course you can, some investigators say. In the face of irrefutable evidence, the person being interrogated becomes more interested in establishing good relations with the investigator. But the investigator doesn’t seem to need them; it’s an additional waste of physical strength and nervous energy. All this is correct. Nevertheless, some facts and arguments deserve attention, which in connection with this conversation cannot be passed over in silence.

Researcher Glazyrin F.V. found that even in cases where the accused comes to the conclusion that it is necessary to give truthful testimony and is ready for this, he often still tries to hide certain details related to the criminal event (2, P.103). If you can establish psychological contact with the person under investigation, you have a better chance of getting the maximum truth from him. Consequently, other things being equal, the psychological contact of the investigator with the accused is very useful for establishing the truth in the case. The investigator must strive to achieve it.

Psychological contact is necessary when working with a witness. Sometimes situations arise when it is easier for a witness to say: “I don’t remember...”, “I didn’t see...” than to fulfill the obligations imposed on him by the legislator “... to tell the truth and nothing but the truth.” In the absence of a reliable witness protection system in the country, the investigator is often able to obtain truthful testimony from the witness only through personal charm, achieving a relationship of trust and complete mutual understanding with him, i.e. through psychological contact.

Psychological contact between the investigator and the interrogated at the initial stages of interrogation. How can an investigator ensure psychological contact with a participant in an investigative action? Zorin G.A. substantiated 5 stages of the formation of psychological contact when carrying out investigative actions (5, pp. 11-12). This system of stages is most consistent with interrogation tactics. With minimal modifications, it can be used in other investigative actions. Let us consider these stages, equipping them with appropriate psychological content.

First stage the formation of psychological contact is a diagnosis of the psychological qualities of the person being interrogated. The investigator’s activity algorithm at this stage is as follows:

1.1. collection and analysis of information about the future participant in the investigative action, including his psychological characteristics;

1.2 forecasting the goals that the future participant in the investigative action will try to realize, his positions during interrogation and when carrying out other investigative actions;

1.3 preparation of optimal tactics aimed at ensuring psychological contact and obtaining complete and truthful information.

It is advisable to implement this stage in accordance with the scheme for studying personality proposed by Yu. V. Chufarovsky (14, pp. 201-203). Due to the rather in-depth coverage of this issue in the scientific literature, technologies at this stage will not be considered in this lecture.

Second stage- the investigator enters into contact with a participant in the investigative action. The investigator’s activity algorithm at this stage:

2.1 creating a good impression of the investigator during the first meeting with the interrogated person;

2.2 accumulation of initial consent from the interrogated person with the investigator.

What could be the technologies for ensuring psychological contact at this stage? Let's look at the most important of them.

Our research shows that privacy between the investigator and the person being interrogated is a fundamental psychological factor in the successful conduct of an interrogation. It is easier for the suspect, accused, witness, victim to give evidence to the investigator, to reveal his soul, being alone in the room with him. Therefore, for conducting interrogations in the investigative unit, separate quiet rooms should be allocated, if possible, specifically designed only for these purposes. Unauthorized persons should not work in these rooms.

It was possible to confirm the conclusions of American scientists that ideally the interrogation room should not remind the participant in the investigative action that he is in the police or in a pre-trial detention center. The bars on the windows should be made in the form of an ornament. It's better to do without windows altogether. There should be no paintings or decorations on the walls, or they are recommended to be placed out of sight of the interrogated person. For obvious reasons, it is advisable to turn off telephones in the interrogation room during the interrogation period.

It is well known that at the moment of the first meeting, relationships between people are determined more by emotions than by reason. The first impression of the investigator often plays a decisive role when the interrogated person chooses a certain position during the interrogation. If the interrogated person assessed the investigator negatively: “I didn’t like him right away...”, then all subsequent communication with the investigator at a conscious and unconscious level will be subordinated to this thought. After all, the very procedural position of the investigator in relation to the suspect or accused being interrogated cannot evoke any sympathy.

What needs to be done by the investigator in order to make a positive first impression on the participant in the investigative action?

A survey of experts and observations show that it is better to conduct an interrogation in civilian clothes, without additionally reminding the defendant that he is talking with a representative of law enforcement agencies. The investigator's clothing should be conservative and neat. If the weather is not too hot, it is better not to take off your jacket. This style of clothing evokes more respect for the investigator.

The investigator should not forget about basic etiquette standards when communicating with those being interrogated. He should not force people summoned for questioning at the appointed time to wait for himself, always be polite and delicate, address himself as “you,” and try not to create unnecessary inconvenience for people. A suspect or accused should be treated with dignity and respect, regardless of the nature of his crime. This is especially true for women and sexual minorities, who exhibit increased sensitivity in the area of ​​interpersonal relationships.

In addition, for the first meeting it is necessary to think through actions that could evoke positive emotions in the interrogated person. In this regard, you can show goodwill, express regret about the anxiety caused by the interrogation, and inquire about the state of health of the interrogated person, if, of course, he was really sick and did not avoid appearing before the investigator under the pretext of illness.

The investigator must stop smoking if the person being interrogated does not smoke. If the interrogated smokes, then, when planning to light up, it is advisable for the investigator to invite the interrogated to do the same. In some cases (for example, conflict behavior of the person under investigation), it makes sense to insist that the person being interrogated postpone smoking until the end of the interrogation.

It is advisable for the investigator, after greeting the interrogated person, to sit not in his “investigation chair”, but to take a place at the side table, inviting the interrogated person to sit opposite him. Physical proximity also creates psychological closeness. The presence of distance and obstacles in the form of furniture create a psychological barrier.

It seems that the distance between the interlocutors should be 120-140 cm, which will allow the investigator to use the communication stereotype characteristic of familiar people (7, pp. 25-26). In this case, the investigator will not emphasize his official position, but, on the contrary, will put himself on the same level as the person being interrogated.

Correctly determining the distance between the investigator and the interrogated person contributes to the establishment of trusting relationships already in the first stages of communication. If the needs of establishing psychological contact require that the investigator be as close as possible to the person being interrogated, then the investigator should not smell strongly of perfume and should not have bad breath.

It is important to determine a place for the interrogated person so that the non-verbal manifestations of his body are clearly visible. To achieve this, it is recommended to use a hard chair without armrests and bright interrogation room lighting.

In an effort to ensure psychological contact with the interrogated person, the investigator should not go to extremes. You should not give the person being interrogated psychological advantages over the investigator. For example, seat him in places that are psychologically advantageous: the investigator takes a seat with his back to the door, and the interrogated with his back to the wall, etc.

By staying at an optimal distance from the person being interrogated for communication, you can conduct the entire interrogation, and the protocol can be drawn up in your usual place. If the interrogated person demonstratively does not want to communicate in contact conditions, it makes sense to move to his work chair, thereby emphasizing the extremely official nature of the relationship with him.

The correct choice of the topic of conversation preceding the interrogation is of great importance for the formation of contact. It is well known that in order to win over a person, you should talk about what interests him and meets his actual needs.

However, in our studies, when investigators began to talk to the interrogated “for life” or artificially tried to start conversations about the weather or hobbies, this caused antipathy towards the investigator. Psychological contact did not work. There was only one explanation why the routine technique described in almost all detective novels did not work. The interrogated person should not feel that he was being deliberately brought to a pre-planned topic of conversation.

Establishing psychological contact with the person being interrogated is a very subtle and delicate matter. You could say it requires filigree work. Entering the interrogated person’s favorite topic should be natural, and best of all, if carried out on the initiative of the interrogated person.

How to do it? Here is one of the possible options. In the field of view of the interrogated, advises Zorin G. A., it is necessary to include any objects related to his interests and causing a positive emotional response (5, P.23). The presence in the investigator's office of books, magazines, fishing rods, spare parts for a car, etc., related to the interests of the interrogated person, can be a good reason to provoke the interrogated person into active communication.

The problem of establishing psychological contact with a minor witness and victim deserves special attention. All conditions must be created for the interrogation of a child. In the room chosen for the interrogation of a minor, all distracting objects should be removed.

It is recommended to allow the child to choose who will talk to him or his gender, if possible. It is advisable to place the investigator and the child at the same level: side by side on chairs or on the floor.

The effectiveness of interrogating children largely depends on the investigator’s ability to take into account and correctly use their psychological characteristics. Many preschool children and some primary schoolchildren, in order to get comfortable in a new place, in an unfamiliar room, need to look around and even touch the objects there and walk around the room. There is no point in immediately sitting the child on a chair and interrogating him. He should feel that at any moment he can approach the objects that interest him, change his position, take what attracted his attention.

When talking to children, adults often use unnatural intonations and abuse diminutive forms of words, naively believing that this will make children understand them better and gain confidence in them. We must not forget that children, as a rule, are sensitive to falsehood and do not respect people who are too openly trying to please them. The best way to win over a child is to maintain natural behavior and take seriously what interests or worries the child.

Communication with shy children who find it difficult to communicate should not be started by addressing them directly. The child needs time to get used to a new environment and the presence of unfamiliar people. Therefore, it is better to start a conversation not with the child, but about the child with the person accompanying him or with the teacher, gradually involving the child in the conversation so that he, as it were, clarifies what is being said about him.

In some cases, when contact with the child is not established, you can resort to the following technique, based on numerous observations of psychologists and teachers. Children often become interested in people who do not pay attention to them, and, having become accustomed to their presence, they themselves begin to try to communicate with them. In such cases, the investigator can take a wait-and-see attitude, pretending that he is going about his own business that has nothing to do with the child, while the teacher or accompanying person is talking to the child.

When trying to calm a child down and help him overcome fear, embarrassment, and tension, one should not go to the other extreme: the child should not take what is happening too lightly.

Concluding the analysis of the second stage, it should be noted that during its implementation, the investigator adjusts his idea of ​​the psychological characteristics of the interrogated based on the personal perception of the participant in the investigative action. This will allow him to continue developing a contact relationship with the person being interrogated on a deeper level.

Third stage- formation of a situational attitude towards contact interaction in the interrogated person. What are the main directions of the investigator’s activity at this stage?

3.1 deepening knowledge about the participant in the investigative action by asking additional questions characterizing his personality.

3.2 the investigator conveys to the participant in the investigative action some information about himself, about his attitude towards his positive qualities.

Let's look at some technologies that can be used to implement this stage.

The investigator can deepen the contact relationship with the person being questioned by discussing the following issues. When recording your date of birth, advises G.A. Zorin (6, pp. 224-225), you can ask how the interrogated person’s childhood was, you can ask him to tell about his parents, brothers, sisters. By filling out the column about your place of birth, you can show some knowledge about these places and speak positively about them.

When recording information about education, it is advisable to clarify where and when the interrogated person studied, what impression he retained about the educational institution, about the teachers, etc. You can deepen the question about the profession of the interrogated, about its advantages and disadvantages. Contact relationships are best formed on this topic.

Particularly noteworthy is information about the awards of the interrogated person, his service in the army and, in general, the positive qualities of the person and his family members. A conversation on this topic almost always evokes a positive reaction from the person being interrogated and is a platform for forming psychological contact.

If the person being interrogated started talking about his childhood or another period of his life, about his merits, etc. don't interrupt him. This can damage the entire subsequent course of the interrogation, not to mention the psychological contact. The investigator must listen patiently and sympathetically to the person being interrogated. The lost time will pay off in the future, when you don’t have to spend time and effort to overcome the negative position of the interrogated person who is in conflict with the investigator.

When filling out criminal history information, it is inappropriate to ask additional questions. This information can be obtained from copies of sentences and the prisoner’s personal file if the person being interrogated was previously convicted and served a sentence of imprisonment.

When warning a conscientious witness or victim about liability for giving false testimony, it is necessary to show delicacy and tact. Citizens with a positive reputation should not have the impression that the investigator initially considers them people capable of lying. This can permanently disrupt existing contact relationships.

At the third stage of forming psychological contact, the investigator tells the interrogated some information about himself. Namely: that he is the same age as the person being interrogated, that he is his fellow countryman, that he is also his father, etc. The investigator must provide the interrogated with such information about himself that would facilitate the continuation of work in conflict-free conditions.

The investigator needs to reassure the witness by explaining that this interrogation is a certain formality, that there are other witnesses in the case who have already been interrogated or who are about to be interrogated.

The investigator is advised to note that he believes in the innocence of the suspect or accused. At the same time, he can emphasize that there are a number of circumstances in the case that indicate the opposite and force the investigator to ask the interrogated a number of questions. After such an introduction, there is reason to hope that the person being interrogated will not refuse to testify and will express his opinions regarding the evidence presented. Then, in the correct form, without disturbing the existing contact relationships, you can ask questions in accordance with the prepared plan.

At the third stage, according to Zorin G.A. (5, P. 26), the investigator must convince the interrogated person of the following thought: “The investigator is a pleasant and cultured person. He won't cause me any unnecessary trouble. He understands my condition and respects me."

Psychological contact between the investigator and the interrogated in the main and final parts of the interrogation.Fourth stage: contact interaction at the stage of the interrogated person’s free story. The investigator’s activity algorithm at this stage:

4.1 motivation for contact relationships among a participant in an investigative action during a free story;

4.2 continuing to study the personality of the participant in the investigative action in order to deepen psychological contact with him.

This stage of communication may begin with a question from the investigator, for example: “Tell me what happened on September 20, 2003 between 15 and 16 hours...”. The question should be of a general nature. It is not advisable that it contain any psychologically traumatic information for the interrogated person. It is not permissible for this question to have a rude form. For example: “Tell me how you raped and killed young K.?”

The interrogated person himself understands well who he is in the eyes of the investigator. But since something human still remains even in the most inveterate criminal, it is unpleasant for him when the investigator prematurely calls him a rapist, murderer, etc. Ignoring this fact by the investigator can destroy the developing contact relationships. In addition, the suspect or accused may provide evidence of his innocence, which at the first stage of the investigation the investigator will not be able to refute.

When the interrogated person presents his testimony in the form of a free story, the investigator must be an active listener, showing attention and interest with his whole appearance. It is permissible to interrupt the person being interrogated only in exceptional cases. At the same time, the investigator needs to deepen his knowledge about the personal qualities of the interrogated person, carefully observing him during the monologue.

It is unacceptable to make critical comments about the behavior of a victim or witness before and (or) at the time of the commission of a crime. This will disrupt contact relationships.

Fifth stage- reflexive management of contact interaction when asking questions to the interrogated and at the end of the interrogation. The investigator’s activity algorithm at this stage:

5.1 optimization of psychological contact when asking a series of questions aimed at obtaining complete and truthful testimony.

5.2 approval by the investigator of the position taken by the contact participant in the investigative action when reading and signing the protocol.

5.3 strengthening contact relationships in subsequent investigative actions with the participation of this person.

After a free story from the interrogated, he must be asked a series of questions to which he will obviously answer in the affirmative. The investigator can emphasize that he is glad that the opinion of the interrogated and his own on most issues coincide, and the disagreements are only of a private nature. After that, you can move on to the issues that might actually cause disagreement. This technique allows you to maintain contact relationships. The fact is that after a series of “Yes”, it is more difficult for a person to say “No” than after uttering repeated denials.

The investigator must be ready to communicate in a language that is understandable to the participant in the investigative action, taking into account the gender, age, social class, education and procedural status of the person being interrogated.

The interrogated person gave truthful testimony on a number of episodes. It is advisable for the investigator to praise him. Then the investigator can ask a question that will evoke positive emotions in the interrogated person. Then the investigator can ask a question again to clarify the circumstances of the crime. After this, neutralize the negative reaction again.

How to record an interrogation? Psychologists do not recommend keeping a pen and paper on the table during interrogation. By immediately recording the words of the interrogated, the investigator thereby reminds him of the official nature of his testimony. The recordings should be reserved for a later stage of the interrogation. If it is necessary to record any information for memory, the investigator must make a note and immediately remove the pen and notepad.

The investigator should not create the impression on the suspect or accused that he is trying to achieve his confession and incrimination. It is better for the investigator to appear in the role of a person who wants to establish the truth. The sincerity of the investigator's position on this issue is a reliable basis for psychological contact with the interrogated person.

Now about words and expressions. Our research shows that in order to implement psychological contact, it is preferable for the investigator to avoid such words and expressions: “killed”, “stole”, “confess to committing a crime”, etc. From a psychological point of view, it is more acceptable to use neutral terminology: “shot,” “took,” “tell the truth.” Don't tell the person being interrogated, "You lied to me." Better put it this way: “You didn’t tell me the whole truth.”

Having exposed the interrogated person in a lie, the investigator should not scold him. It is better to hide indignation or surprise by pretending that he already knew that this participant in the process was telling a lie.

If the interrogated person demonstrates a persistent attitude towards giving false testimony, then the investigator can choose two ways to maintain psychological contact:

a) the investigator allows a false alibi of the interrogated person, although he has strong evidence of his guilt, and waits for the interrogated person to become entangled in his own lies;

b) the investigator correctly suppresses the lies of the interrogated person; at the same time, the first convinces the second that without truthful testimony, all mitigating circumstances will not be established, the consideration of which by the investigation and the court is beneficial to the interrogated.

If the suspect or accused belongs to a national minority, the investigator should not tell him that his criminal activity is a result of his nationality. On the contrary, it is necessary to cite as an example some outstanding personality - a representative of a given nationality and invite the interrogated person to follow the example of her honesty and courage in interacting with government officials and in fulfilling civic duty.

Psychological contact with the interrogated person is facilitated by providing him with psychological assistance. For example, the investigator allows the victim to speak out and cry, sometimes at the expense of his own time. In this situation, the investigator carries out a psychotherapeutic measure to relieve the interrogated mental stress. The person feels better, and he gains trust and respect for the investigator.

When implementing psychological contact with the interrogated, musical works are sometimes used. This could be the defendant’s favorite melody or a piece that evokes memories of various events. The sound should be unobtrusive, and the impact should be indirect, indirect.

At the end of the interrogation, it is advisable to stabilize contact relationships using any means discussed: return to information that evokes a positive attitude of the interrogated person, remind him of his merits, provide information about his family, children’s successes at school, etc., thank him for his cooperation.

TASKS AND QUESTIONS FOR SELF-TEST :

1. Make a comparative table “Psychological contact in investigative work: points of view of scientists.”

2. Using the personality study scheme proposed by Yu. V. Chufarovsky (14, pp. 201-203), draw up a plan for studying the personality of the person being interrogated in order to make psychological contact with him.

3. What are the psychological techniques of the investigator at the second stage of ensuring psychological contact with the interrogated?

4. What are the psychological techniques of the investigator at the third stage of ensuring psychological contact with the interrogated?

5. What are the psychological techniques of the investigator at the fourth stage of ensuring psychological contact with the interrogated?

6. What are the psychological techniques of the investigator at the fifth stage of ensuring psychological contact with the interrogated?

LITERATURE:

1. Vasilyev V. L. Legal psychology: A textbook for university students. - St. Petersburg: Peter, 1997. – 656 p.

1. Glazyrin F.V. Studying the identity of the accused and investigative tactics. – Sverdlovsk, 1983.
2. Glazyrin F.V. Psychology of investigative actions. – Volgograd, 1983.
3. Dulov A.V. Forensic psychology: Textbook. – Minsk: Higher School, 1973.
4. Zorin G.A. Forensic heuristics: Textbook. - T.2. – Grodno: Grodno State University, 1994. – 221 p.
5. Zorin G.A. Guide to Interrogation Tactics: Educational and Practical Guide. – M.: Yurlitinform, 2001. – 320 p.

7. Pease A. Sign language. - Voronezh: Modek, 1992.- 218 p.

1. Porubov N.I. Interrogation in Soviet criminal proceedings. – Minsk, 1973.
2. Porubov N.I. Scientific foundations of interrogation during the preliminary investigation. – Minsk, 1978.
3. Applied legal psychology: Textbook for universities / Ed. A.M. Stolyarenko. – M.: Unity – Dana, 2001. – 639 p.
12 ..

Items found in the corpse's clothing.

The body of the corpse and the damage on it.

Clothes found on the corpse.

Corpse bed.

Instruments of death found on the corpse.

External state of clothing on the corpse.

The pose of the corpse and its position at the scene.

At the end of the examination, the corpse of the victim, whose identity has not been established, is necessarily fingerprinted and, after giving the face of the corpse a lifetime appearance (a “corpse toilet” is performed), is photographed according to the rules of signal photography.

General interrogation tactics. 1. Individual approach to the interrogated person, establishing psychological contact with him. Since each interrogated person is individual and unique, and since there are always reasons why he may unintentionally distort real facts or evade giving truthful testimony, the ways for the investigator to obtain complete and objective information must be individual. Therefore, an individual approach to each person with whom the investigator has to communicate is a general rule, without which one cannot count on success.

An individual approach is an indispensable condition for establishing psychological contact - a special kind of relationship that develops between the investigator and the interrogated.

Interrogation as a form of human communication is specific. On the one hand, it is a legal relationship, since it is carried out in cases and in the manner prescribed by law. On the other hand, this is communication between two people, possible only under certain conditions, the creation of which is the task of the investigator.

To establish relationships, outside of which a fruitful exchange of information is impossible, the investigator must understand the personality of the interrogated: understand his strong-willed qualities, temperamental characteristics, level of intelligence, as well as intentions - readiness to give truthful testimony or desire to evade them. If the person being interrogated distorts some circumstances, the reason for this is clarified.

1. The establishment of psychological contact with the interrogated person is also facilitated by the investigator’s objectivity, restraint, and sense of tact in communicating with him. It is thanks to them that an atmosphere that encourages frankness can be created during interrogation. It is clear that this only happens when communicating with a person who, in the opinion of the interlocutor, is able to understand the reasons for the actions committed. Without crossing the boundaries permitted by his official status, the investigator needs to prove himself to be an attentive and friendly listener, interested not only in the information necessary for the case, but also in the person who, due to an unfavorable combination of circumstances, finds himself in a difficult situation.

2. Even when communicating with an accused person who arouses understandable hostility, the investigator is obliged to restrain his emotions. The task of obtaining accurate information is too important to complicate its solution with inconsistency.

3. The criminal environment has its own unwritten rules of behavior, its own concepts of honor and solidarity. A professional investigator must have the appropriate knowledge and take into account the characteristics of people of this category when establishing contact with the person being interrogated who is related to this circle.

4. The investigator must instill in the interrogated person respect for himself, his intellectual, moral and professional qualities. The interrogated subject will only feel the desire to be sincere with the investigator when he sees him as an intelligent, honest and competent representative of the state. The person being interrogated should not have secrets from the investigator, even in the most difficult circumstances.

5.Creating conditions for free storytelling. Such a story as an interrogation technique consists of giving the interrogated the opportunity to independently state everything he knows about the case. Having filled out the biographical part of the protocol and explained to the interrogated the rights and obligations, the investigator invites him to tell in detail what he knows about a specific fact or incident. At the same time, the narrator should not be interrupted or stopped unless absolutely necessary, giving the opportunity to show his awareness to the extent he deems necessary.

6. By observing the behavior of the interrogated person, his gestures, facial expressions, psychophysiological reactions, comparing the testimony with the case materials, the investigator can:

– get a more complete picture of the personality of the person being interrogated: his character, intelligence, strong-willed qualities, etc.;

– find out the degree of his awareness of the circumstances of the case, his desire or unwillingness to give truthful testimony;

– to obtain information about facts that the investigator was not aware of at all or that the person was not expected to clarify.

Free storytelling is a technique that has been tested over many years of practice and has proven its effectiveness. There is one peculiarity of its use when interrogating persons who are likely to distort the actual circumstances of the case. They are asked not to tell everything known about the case, but to describe some separate circumstance (episode) that was most fully studied during the investigation. Having heard false testimony, the investigator can expose the unscrupulous person being interrogated, which will encourage him to tell the truth about this and other circumstances of the case. Criminologists call this technique narrowing the topic of a free story.

3. Clarifying the data obtained by asking questions to the person being interrogated. The information received is always subject to careful analysis and verification, so the investigator cannot limit himself to what the interrogated person reported through a free story. It is necessary to find out the details of the events described: time, place, conditions in which they occurred and were perceived by the interrogated; other persons who can confirm what was said, etc. That is why the investigator begins to clarify the testimony and fill in the gaps in it by asking questions.

Criminologists classify issues. Those in which the main topic of the interrogation is determined are called the main ones. To clarify circumstances that for some reason were not touched upon by the person being interrogated, supplementary questions are asked. If it is necessary to encourage a person to state the circumstances of the case in more detail, to detail the information, clarifying questions are asked. To check the degree of awareness and truthfulness, control questions are asked regarding particulars and related circumstances that must be known to the person being interrogated. Asking leading questions is not allowed.

Forensic analysis and assessment of the testimony of the interrogated during the interrogation is carried out continuously. You can understand the degree of awareness and sincerity of the interrogated person by observing his manner of presentation. He will speak confidently about well-known and firmly remembered circumstances, without getting confused in the details and without referring to forgetting. Failure to detail an event may indicate forgetfulness or gaps in perception. Confused and unclear answers to security questions, silence about events that the interrogated should have known and remembered, give reason to believe that he does not want to be frank.

The main way to evaluate evidence is to compare it with the verified evidence available in the case and operational investigative data that does not raise doubts. Otherwise, the assessment of evidence must be approached with caution, because previously obtained information may be inaccurate.

show genuine interest in other people;
2) smile;
3) remember that for a person the sound of his name is the sweetest and most important sound of human speech;
4) be a good listener, encourage others to tell you about themselves;
5) conduct a conversation in the circle of interests of your interlocutor;
6) make people feel important and do it sincerely. The banality of some techniques is obvious, but this does not deprive them of practical significance with a certain interpretation.

The choice of pretext for acquaintance is of great importance. The practice of legal work shows that direct “conspiracy” causes a state of psychological discomfort in people and leaves a negative connotation on the first impression. Therefore, if the pretext of acquaintance turns out to be natural and understandable, then communication is established and develops quite easily. If the pretext is unclear and does not correspond to the situation, then the development of contact is hampered and its prospects remain far from clear. The pretext should not only justify addressing the person, but also provide an opportunity to continue the conversation. Particularly important here are the resourcefulness, wit, and originality of the lawyer, thanks to which the subject is naturally and imperceptibly drawn into the conversation.
The first impression of a legal worker plays a big role in establishing and developing contact with the person concerned. Therefore, a lawyer needs to learn how to create a favorable impression of himself.
Research shows that the first impression is formed based on the perception of: 1) a person’s appearance; 2) his expressive reactions (facial expressions, gestures, gait, etc.); 3) voices and speeches*.
_____________________________________________________________________________
*Cm. more details: Bodalev A.A. Formation of the concept of another person as a person. L., 1970.

The peculiarity of a lawyer-practitioner’s understanding of a person in the course of communication is that the perceiving subject seeks to understand not only the conditionality of the partner’s external signs, but also his intentions, plans, his subjective world. It can be argued that the process of forming a first impression itself logically breaks down into several stages. The first is the perception of objective characteristics. Here, the partner for the upcoming communication is perceived rather as a physical individual with externally understandable characteristics (gender, height, facial expressions, clothing, gait, role characteristics, etc.). These are qualities that seem to speak for themselves. In this regard, they are called nonverbal components of communication. Psychologist V.A. Labunskaya identifies at least 15 functions of nonverbal behavior (creating an image of a partner, masking undesirable traits, etc.)*.
_____________________________________________________________________________
*See: Labunskaya V.A. Nonverbal behavior (social-perceptual approach). Rostov, 1986.

The second stage is the perception of emotional and behavioral manifestations, the general mental state of the communication partner.
The third stage is the synthesis of our rational conclusions, emotional impressions, linking past experience and our own intentions towards the partner and the creation of a so-called dynamic image, which includes evaluative ideas about the other as the owner of social-role and individual personality traits that make him suitable or unsuitable for communication under the given conditions*.
________________________________________________________________________
*Gubin A.V., Chufarovsky Yu.V. Communication in our lives, pp. 50-51.

In the process of communication between people, sympathy or antipathy arises, which usually develop on a subconscious level. The development of contact continues, naturally, only if there is a positive attitude towards each other, that is, when there is mutual sympathy. It is quite clear that in order to develop contact, a legal worker needs to arouse a feeling of sympathy on the part of the interested party. His sympathy for the legal worker will occur if the interested person anticipates the pleasant with tolerable efforts. In other words, sympathy occurs when the “gain” exceeds the “cost.”
Psychological observations show that people with similar value orientations tend to draw closer together; they arouse sympathy among each other. Personal values ​​are especially important for many people: attitudes towards good and evil, universal moral standards, enrichment, knowledge, etc. Social values ​​and attitudes that regulate the lives of most people are also of great importance. A person seeks rapprochement with those who support him. To arouse sympathy for yourself, you sometimes need to skillfully play the role of a like-minded person. People gravitate toward someone who views them as a person endowed with certain positive qualities. One of the manifestations of caring is the desire to understand the inner experiences of the person we are interested in. It has been proven that when one person sincerely wants to understand another, the latter, as it were, allows this person into the world of his experiences and sympathizes with him.
A legal worker must take into account that he can arouse the greatest interest in his personality, as well as in communication, during the conversation itself. Even if the target initially experiences a certain feeling of hostility towards the lawyer, a conversation can correct the situation.
It should be borne in mind that not every interlocutor will support a general conversation. An inappropriate topic of conversation is also fraught with its consequences: it creates awkwardness between those communicating and creates a barrier of incompatibility.
When planning the construction of a problem situation in a conversation, one must take into account the characterological characteristics of the object, its erudition, and socio-psychological data. The main attention should be paid to the asocial role of the object in society.
A legal worker must show his subject that he is listening carefully: periodically look the speaker in the eyes, nod his head and make appropriate gestures, as if reinforcing the words and conclusions of the subject.
Now, leaving the “manipulative” side of influence, let’s turn to personality traits and those techniques that are really necessary.
In one of his books, “How to Win Friends and Influence People,” D. Carnegie describes six ways to get people to like you*:
_______________________________________________________________________
*Carnegie D. How to make friends and influence people. Per. from English M., 1989, p. 28.

1. During a conversation, always show sincere interest in the interlocutor.
2. Smile more often. “A man who does not have a smile on his face should not open his own shop,” says an ancient Chinese proverb.
3. When talking to a person, use his name more often. If you immediately remember a person's name and call him without difficulty, this will be a pleasant moment for him. But if you forget the name or pronounce it incorrectly, you will put yourself in an awkward position.
4. Start a conversation on a topic that interests your interlocutor.
5. Try to give the person his superiority over himself and do it sincerely. At the same time, always remember one of the basic rules of communication: “Do for others what you would like others to do for you.”
6. Know how to listen carefully and encourage your interlocutor to talk about himself. The ability to listen to your interlocutor is an art. Anyone who wants to succeed in communicating with people must master this art.”
It should be noted that according to the manner of listening to the interlocutor, people are divided into three groups: attentive listeners, passive listeners and aggressive listeners. Attentive listeners create a favorable atmosphere for conversation and stimulate the speaker to be active. Passive - cause apathy in the speaker and thereby dampen his speech activity. Aggressive listeners evoke negative emotions in the speaker.
Often, many of the troubles associated with interpersonal conflicts arise due to the fact that we do not know how to listen. Sometimes the listener may be sincerely interested in what the interlocutor is saying, but due to his individual psychological characteristics, he does not signal this to him well. The point is that in such cases they listen only to the words of the interlocutor, and the speaker himself is let out of sight. The speaker, not feeling the listener's gaze on him, begins to get nervous and look for a reason to interrupt the conversation and leave.
The listening scheme should be built on the principle of feedback: the object pronounces words directed to the subject who listens, focusing his attention on the interlocutor and his words and trying to grasp the main idea of ​​the statement.
If you have business communication, then the first and basic rule is that you need to give the impression of a business person, that is, to be perceived as such (this is competence, democracy, disposition towards people, consistency, etc.). This is what you need to set yourself up for. In friendly communication, openness, responsiveness, sharing of values, empathy, and the ability to give timely advice and support are important.
But what if there is an obviously unpleasant conversation ahead, which is often encountered among legal professionals? Here, qualities such as openness and sincerity can be perceived (from a different partner’s position) as a sign of weakness and capitulation. In this case, there will be direct pressure on you to give in or comply. The most important quality here is to be able to show, despite all the differences in positions and divergent points of view, a willingness to understand the interlocutor and discuss his arguments, to demonstrate impartiality. The worst way to argue is to demonstrate the strength of your own “I”*.
_____________________________________________________________________________
*See: Gubin A.V., Chufarovsky Yu.V. Communication in our lives. M., 1992, p. 48.

Knowing a person and understanding him is a long process that occurs during the beginning of communication and does not end when the communication ends.

The nature of human relationships dictates the variety of psychological contacts, the content of which in the process of investigation tends to be “dominance - submission” or to purely business contacts “mutual adherence to their responsibilities”, etc.

Psychological contact is a figurative expression denoting mutual understanding, trust and the desire of two persons to communicate with each other. This is a form of relationship between persons exchanging information in any activity. The material was published on http://site

The psychological contact of the investigator with the suspect, accused, witness, victim is a specific form of relationship between the state representative entrusted with the investigation and the named persons. The psychological contact of the investigator with the participants in the criminal process is based, on the one hand, on the norms of the criminal procedural law, and on the other, on the scientific principles of criminology, forensic psychology, logic and theory of activity management.

In forensic literature to this day there is no single concept of psychological contact. In our opinion, the most successful psychological contact (as “a coordinated business relationship between the investigator and a witness, victim, suspect or accused, which arises on the basis of the correct position of the investigator and the behavior of the interrogated person, which does not contradict or does not contradict the objectives of criminal proceedings”) is defined by G. G. Dospulov . The position of A.N. resonates with him. We should not forget that Vasiliev, who said that “the psychological contact of the investigator with other participants in investigative actions consists of establishing relationships characterized by accurate and conscientious fulfillment by all participants (including the investigator) of their procedural and moral duties, the correct use of their procedural rights, as a result of which relationships and an atmosphere are created that are conducive to solving the problem of this investigative action.” Clarifying the provisions expressed by the author, we add that the relations between the participants described by him will essentially be relations of cooperation, which can be based not only on trust, but also on cooperative principles.

Some authors see the task of establishing psychological contact in finding the common interests of the investigator and the interrogated, that is, in the transition in interrogation from the psychological “I” to the psychological “We”. A. B. Solovyov, pointing out the features of psychological contact, concludes that it is one-sided in nature, since the investigator seeks to obtain as much information as possible from the interrogated person and at the same time hide his knowledge of the case.

At the same time, in a number of works (N.I. Porubov, A.V. Dulov) there has been a tendency to highlight the informational aspect of psychological contact, which represents its most universal and most independent characteristic. Communication during interrogation is always associated with the process of adaptation - social, personal, situational, which requires a continuous supply of information about the conditions, the subject of communication and the means of managing communication. Moreover, information here should be understood as “a form of communication between the controlling object and the controlled object.”

Psychological contact develops in the course of communication and its obligatory prerequisite will be mutual readiness (attitude) to perceive and understand each other's faces. Communicating people exchange information through the use of various means (techniques) and, as a result, certain relationships are established between them. Hence, what is psychological contact? This is the goal that determines the readiness to communicate, and the process of information exchange undertaken to achieve the goal, and, finally, the result - those relationships that allow you to continue communication and jointly solve certain problems. Therefore, it is advisable to consider psychological contact in two ways: as a certain relationship that develops between the participants in the interrogation, and as an activity to create these relationships, taking place in the form of communication.

Establishing psychological contact is a purposeful, planned activity of the investigator in organizing and managing the flow of information in the process of communication, aimed at creating conditions that ensure its development in the direction necessary to achieve the goal and is carried out throughout the investigation. With all this, establishing psychological contact is a temporary activity, characteristic of each interrogation, creating a “mood” for communication.

The content of activities to establish psychological contact will be relations of cooperation and mutual understanding (trust), based on the desire for a common goal (or at least on the coincidence of goals at individual stages of communication) or mutual respect of the persons exchanging information. Establishing psychological contact is an active activity of the investigator, aimed at forming a positive position of the persons giving evidence or an attitude towards continuing communication and encouraging cooperation.

The possibilities of establishing psychological contact, its forms, an approach to communication conducive to achieving the goal, depend primarily on the individual psychological qualities of the person with whom a cooperative relationship is to be established, on his typological characteristics characteristic of his performance of certain duties, the role of the crime in a specific situation , life and special experience. Hence, in the activity of establishing psychological contact, the investigator’s ability to understand the psychology of people, master the techniques of permissible influence on them, and methods of analyzing their behavior and self-analysis come to the fore. This requires life experience and knowledge of the tactical techniques recommended by forensic science, based on data from psychology, logic and other sciences.

In criminology, tactical techniques for establishing psychological contact have mainly been developed, but specific recommendations for achieving it vary. Thus, A.V. Dulov names among the techniques: a) arousing the interrogated person’s interest in the upcoming interrogation; b) arousing the interrogated person’s interest in the interrogating person (investigator, prosecutor, head of the search); c) appeal to the law, explanation of the significance of the required information, familiarization with mitigating circumstances, etc.

V.F. Glazyrin recommends the following techniques to establish psychological contact: a) appealing to the logical thinking of the accused; b) arousing the accused’s interest in communication and its results (if the accused really committed a crime, then his guilt will be proven regardless of his testimony, etc.); c) increasing the emotional state - excitement (appealing to the feelings of the accused: pride, shame, regret, repentance, etc.); d) influence on the accused by the personal qualities of the investigator (politeness, fairness, goodwill, demandingness, etc.)

When establishing psychological contact, one should not allow a situation of “semantic barrier”, when mutual alienation and misunderstanding of each other occur in the process of communication. It is worth noting that it is characterized by distrust, hostility, and psychological lack of insight. All arguments seem to the accused to be an attempt to deceive him.

Summarizing what has been said, we can name the most common ways to establish psychological contact:

1) creating an appropriate interrogation environment;

2) interrogation in private;

3) correct behavior of the investigator as a representative of the state performing important public functions,

4) demonstration of goodwill, an unbiased attitude towards the interrogated person, arousing interest in the investigator as a communication partner,

5) demonstrating the ability to listen to the end without raising your tone;

6) conducting a preliminary conversation on an abstract topic;

7) appeal to logical thinking;

8) explanation of the goals and objectives of the interrogation;

9) creating an environment that arouses interest in the interrogation and its results.

When establishing psychological contact, the following must not be allowed:

1) long wait for interrogation;

2) manifestations of excessive interest, regret;

3) promises that cannot be fulfilled, the use of lies, calls for actions contrary to moral standards, etc.

Based on all of the above, we come to the conclusion that it can be concluded that in the literature the establishment of psychological contact is associated with the use of tactical techniques aimed, first of all, at inducing the readiness of the interrogated to give truthful testimony, conscientiously fulfill ϲʙᴏ moral duties, arousing feelings trust in the investigator so that the person being interrogated (including the accused) through his behavior contributes to the achievement of the truth and the fulfillment of the tasks of criminal proceedings. Unfortunately, often these idealized wishes remain “good intentions”, and nothing more, when faced with situations of conflict between people trying with all their might to hide the truth. Therefore, it seems that it would be more realistic from such persons not to demand “with their behavior to contribute to the achievement of the truth,” since the search for truth is the professional task of the investigator, but to awaken a readiness to communicate and cooperate with the investigator in solving individual problems of the case under investigation that constitute the subject of specific communication .

Psychological contact as an indispensable attribute of communication involves various types of interaction, and above all cooperation and competition. Therefore, establishing psychological contact is also possible in situations where people have divergent interests, but nevertheless show readiness and desire to exchange information and understand each other.

Analyzing the tactical methods of establishing psychological contact cited in the literature, one can also notice that they focus on the external side of information interaction - ensuring the unhindered and active participation of the interrogated in the interrogation, i.e. the presence or absence of psychological contact in the communication process is posed, mainly depending on the person’s desire to testify, and therefore the choice of methods of tactical influence on him occurs. This approach to solving this issue seems to us not entirely productive.

There is no doubt that organizing the correct relationship between the investigator and the interrogated will be an important aspect of establishing psychological contact. The investigator’s ability to demonstrate ϲʙᴏand communicative qualities (politeness, goodwill, outward expression of the desire to listen to the interlocutor, etc.) and to win over the interrogated (gain authority, gain respect, inspire trust) requires certain tactical efforts, which are exponents of the style of his behavior, in which embodies the unified focus of all the features of communication between the interacting parties during the interrogation process.

The style of behavior with ϶ᴛᴏм is characterized by two interrelated factors: firstly, external forms of manifestation of behavioral characteristics or manners (forms of addressing the interlocutor “on familiar”, “on you”, by name, by surname; an offer or permission to smoke; manifestation of attentiveness, sensitivity, etc.) and, secondly, the internal, “additional” meaning or subtext of behavior (i.e., the investigator, for example, must behave in such a way that the interrogated would see him as a representative of state power, guarding socialist legality, convinced that the investigator is trying to find out the truth, that he can be trusted, realized that the investigator knows his business, and it is useless to deceive him)

When planning an interrogation, of course, it is extremely important to take into account all these facts, however, the main emphasis when establishing psychological contact should be shifted to activating the role of the investigator in this process. In connection with this, tactical influence should not be made dependent on the desire of the interrogated to give truthful testimony, but on the contrary, his desire to communicate with the investigator (the need to convey information) should be considered as a phenomenon dependent on the tactical influence of the investigator.

Based on all of the above, we come to the conclusion that the basis of interaction when establishing psychological contact is the movement of information ordered in a certain way, in which, as the main controlling element, it is necessary to highlight and update the measure of influence of the investigator (his enterprise, initiative, expression of internal motivations to change in the situation, to new forms of cooperation) on another participant in the interaction.

Conventionally, in order to optimize tactical methods of influencing interrogated persons, the investigator’s activity in establishing a psychological act can be divided into three relatively independent stages:

1. The stage preceding communication, which consists of:

a) predicting the process of establishing psychological con! act in preparation for interrogation;

b) creating external conditions that facilitate the establishment of psychological contact.

2. The initial stage of communication, consisting of techniques aimed at:

a) manifestation of external communicative properties at the beginning of visual-kinesthetic (non-speech) communication;

b) study of the mental state, the attitude of the interrogated to the beginning of communication.

3. The stage of subsequent communication, associated with maintaining psychological contact and overcoming a negative position. It is worth noting that it consists of:

a) actions to eliminate interference in communication;

b) tactical techniques aimed at arousing interest in the development of the communication that has begun and its continuation in the future.

The stages listed above in the behavioral aspect of the investigator’s activity in preparing and conducting an interrogation that we are considering are presented as specifically organized and controlled actions, actions and combinations of actions of the investigator, aimed at establishing, controlling and regulating interaction relations in conjunction with the set goal and the chosen model of communication. Therefore, in solidarity with A.N. We should not forget that Vasiliev, we consider it appropriate to talk about the formation of psychological contact as a tactical problem, solved by using a group of tactical techniques partially named by us and mentioned in the literature.

Terms of use:
Intellectual rights to material - Tactics of communication between the investigator and participants in individual investigative actions - V.G. Lukashevich belong to its author. This manual/book is posted solely for informational purposes without involvement in commercial circulation. All information (including “§ 3. Establishing psychological contact”) was collected from open sources or added by users free of charge.
For full use of the posted information, the project administration of the site strongly recommends purchasing the book / manual Tactics of communication between an investigator and participants in individual investigative actions - V.G. Lukashevich in any online store.

Tag block: Tactics of communication between the investigator and participants in individual investigative actions - V.G. Lukashevich, 2015. § 3. Establishing psychological contact.

(C) Legal repository website 2011-2016

While investigating a crime, the detective has to ask very delicate questions concerning purely personal problems that the interlocutor does not always want to talk about even with close friends. This especially applies to obtaining information from victims in cases of violent assault. To obtain this kind of information, it is necessary that a trusting relationship be established between the detective and the interrogated person, so that the latter, feeling goodwill, understanding, and a desire to help, wants to open up to him. In this respect, the task of the detective is similar to that of the clinical psychologist, who must first establish a “personal connection” with the client and only then try to “penetrate” his intimate experiences. An important difference is that a detective has limited opportunities to meet and talk with his “client,” while a course of psychotherapy can last for weeks or even months. Unfortunately, the detective cannot use the clinician's techniques because he does not have enough time for this. He is forced to be content with the most accessible. At the same time, it is very important to avoid mistakes that lead to the fact that the interviewee “isolates” from the very beginning of the conversation. To prevent this danger from becoming a reality, it is necessary to be guided by two principles:

1. Personalize the interrogation, i.e. give it the character of communication between two people who like each other.
2. Show signs of sympathy and empathy towards the person being interrogated, try to “put yourself in the place of the person being interviewed,” and understand his concerns and concerns.

Interview personalization

One of the obstacles to obtaining complete and reliable information is the “impersonality” of a police investigation: the detective and the witness (victim) each play their own stereotypical role. The detective, in the mind of the interrogated, is a “cog” in the police machine, doing his part of the job. For a detective, a victim (burglary, assault, rape) is only

one of the many typical victims of crimes of this kind, which he has to investigate every day. Both the person being interrogated and the detective see each other not as a specific person, not as an individual, but as a “role function,” and this, of course, does not contribute to the productivity of communication.

One of the necessary prerequisites for effective interrogation is its personalization. The detective must see the person being interrogated as a specific person, with his concerns and experiences, and in turn present himself as an identifiable person, and not just as the personification of an official organization.

The easiest way to personalize is to call the respondent by name (children, young people), by first name and patronymic (older persons), i.e. as the interrogated person identified himself when introducing himself. You can simply ask the person being interrogated how best to address him.

Another way to personalize an interview is to develop the detective's active listening skills. It is important for him to force himself to listen carefully to the person being interrogated and to show signs of interest in the information he conveys. One way to achieve this goal is to periodically repeat the last phrase of the interrogated person, commenting on it or asking a question. So, if the interrogated testified that she was scared when she saw the criminal take out a gun, then after this phrase the detective can say: “You say that you were scared when you saw the criminal take out a gun. That’s really scary. What else are you saying?” can you remember this scene?" Thus, the detective shows the interrogated woman that he is carefully listening to her story.

Active listening requires concentration. Therefore, before starting the interrogation, you need to eliminate all possible interference. The detective should not be distracted by any other thoughts in order to “listen effectively.”

When preparing for an interrogation, a detective can familiarize himself with the protocol, with the results of an interview conducted earlier by another detective, in a word, learn about some of the circumstances of the case. This information is definitely useful. However, it does not eliminate the need to carefully listen to the entire narrative of the interrogated, perceiving his testimony without bias.

When conducting such a routine procedure as an interrogation, detectives often use various speech cliches. Bureaucratic turns of phrase depersonalize the interrogation and should be avoided.

In order for the interviewee to see in the detective not just a representative of the authorities, but a specific, pleasant, benevolent person, the detective must introduce himself as such, providing, for example, some information about himself before the interview begins. Such information will help establish contact with the person being interrogated. (For example, if the detective knows that the person being interviewed has a child, he might say that he also has a child of about the same age.)

When conducting any interrogation or interview, it is necessary to collect some information about the person being interrogated (age, marital status, place of work, education, etc.). The detective needs to bring to the attention of the interrogated person that he is doing this not on his own personal initiative, but “due to operational necessity”: “this is a standard procedure, this information is collected during the investigation of any case.” Thus, the detective, as it were, separates himself from the bureaucratic investigative machine.