Cover not available

Article published In: Police interviews: Communication challenges and solutions
Edited by Luna Filipović
[Pragmatics and Society 10:1] 2019
► pp. 9–31

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

Evidence-gathering in police interviews

Communication problems and possible solutions

 | University of East Anglia
Published online: 28 May 2019
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/ps.00013.fil
Abstract
In this paper I discuss the many complexities that police officers have to deal with in their communication with suspects. Investigative interviewing is a very complex communicative situation in itself, with a number of different psychological and sociological variables at play during each interview. In addition, suspect interviews bring about an additional dimension of complexity, which is driven by the fact that a basic principle of conversation, cooperation (. 1975. “Logic and Conversation”. In Syntax and Semantics, Vol. 3: Speech Acts, ed. by Peter Cole and Jerry L. Morgan, 41–58. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar) is often not respected and is sometimes severely and purposefully violated, for example when suspects are guilty and want to obscure that very fact or when they believe that their situation would worsen if they cooperated with the police. A further layer of complexity is added when the interviews are carried out via an interpreter, where the fact that the officer and the suspect speak different languages during the interview creates additional barriers to straightforward communication.
In the present paper, I identify a number of points at which communication difficulties are encountered in this highly sensitive legal context. For this purpose, I analyse authentic interview datasets provided by two UK police constabularies, and also make comparisons with examples from transcripts of authentic US police interrogations. In addition, I highlight the issues that arise when professional interpretation is not available and when bilingual police officers assume the dual role of investigator-interpreter. Finally, I suggest possible solutions that can help remove the hurdles standing in the way of efficient and accurate gathering of communication evidence.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Relevant research on police interviews, in brief
  • 3.Data and methodology
  • 4.Data analysis: Complex and negative questions
    • 4.1Complex questions
    • 4.2Negative questions
  • 5.Uncooperativeness
  • 6.Cross-linguistic difficulties: Interpreting language differences
  • 7.Conclusions and future directions
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (48)
References
Berk-Seligson, Susan. 1990. The Bilingual Courtroom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2002. “The Miranda Warnings and Linguistic Coercion: The Role of Footing in the Interrogation of a Limited-English Speaking Murder Suspect”. In Language in the Legal Process, ed. by Janet Cotterill, 127–143. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2009. Coerced Confessions: The Discourse of Bilingual Police Interrogations. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2011. “Negotiation and Communicative Accommodation in Bilingual Police Interrogations: A Critical Interactional Sociolinguistic Perspective”. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 20 (7): 29–58.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carston, Robyn. 2002. Thoughts and Utterances: The Pragmatics of Explicit Communication. Oxford: Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dando, Coral, Rachel Wilcock, and Rebecca Milne. 2009. “The Cognitive Interview: The Efficacy of a Modified Mental Reinstatement of Context Procedure for Frontline Police Investigators”. Applied Cognitive Psychology 231: 138–147. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Groot, Annette M. B. 1997. “The Cognitive Study of Translation and Interpretation: Three Approaches”. In Cognitive Processes in Translation and Interpreting, ed. by Joseph H. Danks, Gregory M. Shreve, and Stephen B. Fountain, 25–56. London: Sage.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Elder, Chi-He, and Kasia Jaszczolt. 2016. “Towards a Pragmatic Category of Conditionals”. Journal of Pragmatics 981: 36–53. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fausey, Caitlin M., and Lera Boroditsky. 2010. “Subtle Linguistic Cues Influence Perceived Blame and Financial Liability”. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 17 (5): 644–650. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Filipović, Luna. 2007. “Language as a Witness: Insights from Cognitive Linguistics”. International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law 14 (2): 245–267. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2013a. “Constructing Causation in Language and Memory: Implications for Access to Justice in Multilingual Interactions”. International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law 20(1): 1–19. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2013b. “The Role of Language in Legal Contexts: A Forensic Cross-linguistic Viewpoint”. In Law and Language: Current Legal Issues (15), ed. by Michael Freeman and Fiona Smith, 328–343. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Filipović, Luna and John A. Hawkins. 2013. Multiple factors in second language acquisition. The CASP model. Linguistics 51(1): 145–176.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Filipović, Luna, and Iraide Ibarretxe-Antuñano. 2015. “Motion”. In Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics [Handbooks of Linguistics and Communication Science 39], ed. by Ewa Dąbrowska and Dagmar Divjak, 527–545. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Filipović, Luna and Alberto Hijazo-Gascón. 2018. “Interpreting Meaning in Police Interviews: Applied Language Typology in a Forensic Linguistics Context”. Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics VIAL 151: 67–103.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Filipović, Luna and Suzanne Abad Vergara. 2018. “Juggling Investigation and Interpretation: The Problematic Dual role of Police Officer-Interpreter”. Law and Language/Linguagem e Direito 5 (1): 62–79.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gibbons, John. 1990. “Applied Linguistics in Court”. Applied Linguistics 11 (3): 229–237. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2003. Forensic Linguistics. London: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2017. “Towards Clearer Jury Instructions”. Language and Law/Linguagem e Direito 4(1): 142–160.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gile, Daniel. 1997. “Conference Interpreting as a Cognitive Management Problem”. In Cognitive Processes in Translation and Interpreting, ed. by Joseph H. Danks, Gregory M. Shreve, and Stephen B. Fountain, 196–214. London: Sage.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grice, H. Paul. 1957. “Meaning.” The Philosophical Review 66(3): 377–388.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1975. “Logic and Conversation”. In Syntax and Semantics, Vol. 3: Speech Acts, ed. by Peter Cole and Jerry L. Morgan, 41–58. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1989. Studies in the Way of Words. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hale, Sandra. 2002. Community Interpreting. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hales, Liz, and Luna Filipović. 2016. “Language Rights in Danger: Access to Justice and Linguistic (In)equality in Multilingual Judicial Contexts”. In Endangered Languages and Languages in Danger: Issues of Ecology, Policy and Documentation, ed. by Martin Pütz and Luna Filipović, 61–85. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hawkins, John A. 2004. Efficiency and Complexity in Grammars. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haworth, Kate. 2006. “The Dynamics of Power and Resistance in Police Interview Discourse”. Discourse and Society 171: 739–759. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2010. “Police Interviews in the Judicial Process: Police Interviews as Evidence”. In Routledge Handbook of Forensic Linguistics, ed. by Malcolm Coulthard and Alison Johnson, 169–194. Abingdon, Oxon.: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hayes, Alejandra, and Sandra Hale. 2010. “Appeals on Incompetent Interpreting”. Journal of Judicial Administration 20 (2): 119–130.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heydon, Georgina. 2005. The Language of Police Interviews: A Critical Analysis. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ibarretxe-Antuñano, Iraide. 2012. “Placement and Removal Events in Basque and Spanish”. In The Events of Putting and Taking: A Crosslinguistic Perspective, ed. by A. Kopecka and B. Narasimhan, pp. 123–143. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ibarretxe-Antuñano, Iraide, and Luna Filipović. 2013. “Lexicalisation Patterns and Translation”. In Cognitive Linguistics and Translation, ed. by Ana Rojo and Iraide Ibarretxe-Antuñano, 253–284. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kredens, Krysztof. 2016. Making sense of adversarial interpreting. Unpublished ms. Aston University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kredens, Krysztof and Ruth Morris. 2010. “Interpreting outside the courtroom: ‘A shattered mirror?’ Interpreting in legal contexts outside the courtroom”. In The Routledge Handbook of Forensic Linguistics, ed. by Malcolm Coulthard and Alison Johnson, 455–472. Abingdon, Oxon.: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Krouglov, Alex. 1999. “Police Interpreting: Politeness and Sociocultural Context”. The Translator 5 (2): 285–302. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levinson, Steven C. 2000. Presumptive Meanings: The Theory of Generalized Conversational Implicature. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Linfoot-Ham, Kerry. 2006. “Conversational Maxims in Encounters with Law Enforcement Officers”. The International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law 13(1): 23–54. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
MacWhinney, Brian. 1997. “Simultaneous Interpretation and the Competition Model”. In Cognitive Processes in Translation and Interpreting, ed. by Joseph H. Danks, Gregory M. Shreve, and Stephen B. Fountain, 215–232. London: Sage.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Meissner, Christian A., Allison R. Redlich, Stephen W. Michael, Jacqueline R. Evans, Catherine Camilletti, Sujeeta Bhatt, and Susan Brandon. 2014. “Accusatorial and Information-gathering Interrogation Methods and their Effects on True and False Confessions: A Meta-analytic Review”. Journal of Experimental Criminology 101: 459–486. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mikkelson, Holly. 2017 [2000]. Introduction to Court Interpreting. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishers.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mooney, Annabelle. 2014. Language and Law. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mulayim, Sedat, Miranda Lai, and Caroline Norma. 2015. Police Investigative Interviews and Interpreting: Context, Challenges, and Strategies. Boca Raton, Fla.: CRC Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Newbury, Phillip and Alison Johnson. 2006. “Suspects’ Resistance to Constraining and Coercive Questioning Strategies in the Police Interview”. International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law 13(2): 213–240.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Oxburgh, Gavin, Trond Myklebust and Tim D. Grant. 2010. “The Question of Question Types in Police Interviews: A Review of the Literature from a Psychological and Linguistic Perspective”. International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law 17(1): 45–66. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pavlenko, Aneta. 2017. “The Presentation of Rights and Obligations in Police Interviews in the USA”. Multilingualism, Forensic Linguistics and the Law Conference, University of Oslo; video available at [URL]
Reese, Brian, and Nicholas Asher. 2010. “Biased Questions, Intonation and Discourse”. In Information Structure: Theoretical, Typological and Experimental Perspective, ed. by Malte Zimmermann and Carline Féry, 139–173. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tipton, Rebecca. 2010. “On Trust: Relationships of Trust in Interpreter-mediated Social Work Encounters”. In Text and Context: Essays on Translation and Interpreting in Honour of Ian Mason, ed. by Mona Baker, Maeve Olohan and Maria Calzada Pérez, 188–208. Manchester: St Jerome Publishing.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (7)

Cited by seven other publications

Elder, Chi-Hé & Luna Filipović
2025. “I never said that”. Pragmatics and Society 16:2 ► pp. 174 ff. DOI logo
Hope, Lorraine, Nadine Hawkins de Namor, Fiona Gabbert, Nelli Ferenczi & Gavin Oxburgh
2025. From an investigator’s perspective: challenges and opportunities in building and maintaining rapport in cross-cultural investigative interviewing contexts. Journal of Criminal Psychology DOI logo
Hijazo-Gascón, Alberto, María Gómez-Bedoya & Luna Filipović
2024. Interpreting Swearwords in Police Interviews and Perceived Offensiveness of Insults in the UK and Spain. Applied Linguistics 45:4 ► pp. 718 ff. DOI logo
Filipović, Luna
2019. Bilingualism in Action, DOI logo
Filipović, Luna
2022. The tale of two countries. Interpreting. International Journal of Research and Practice in Interpreting 24:2 ► pp. 254 ff. DOI logo
Filipović, Luna
2022. Language and Culture as Sources of Inequality in US Police Interrogations. Applied Linguistics 43:6 ► pp. 1073 ff. DOI logo
Filipović, Luna
2022. The Good, the Bad and the Ugly: Miscommunication in UK Police Interviews and US Police Interrogations. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology 37:2 ► pp. 297 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 30 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue