This topic contains 3 replies, has 3 voices, and was last updated by  Graham Jones
5 years, 3 months ago.

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • Author
  • #489 Report Abuse

    Hartwig, Maria, Granhag, Pär Anders and Strömwall, Leif A.(2007) ‘Guilty and innocent suspects’ strategies during police interrogations’, Psychology, Crime & Law, 13: 2, 213 — 227

    Is anyone familiar with the SUE technique outlined in the above paper?

    #539 Report Abuse

    Hi Jeff,
    The SUE technique (strategic Use of Evidence) is in essence a system we used prior to PEACE. It may work in volume crime investigations where the suspect may not be legally represented but has some major weaknesses with major crime investigations and the presence of legal advisers. The system relies on the suspect answering questions and then to feed evidence in throughout the interview process. There appears to be a lack of legal knowledge, in that, because somebody lies does not mean they are guilt

    #540 Report Abuse

    Hi Kerry,

    Thanks for your post. I did feel that it had the same elements of what we called ‘drip feed disclosure’ which we were taught by Gary Shaw in about 1999. It was effective until the legal reps caught on and refused to speak until full disclosure had been made.

    I did feel that in a non-legal setting (i.e. with no disclosure rules) it may be worth exploring, as I think with proper training, it would have the ethical elements that we are promoting, and avoids the ‘body language’ type detecting deception techniques that we are opposing.

    I have sent an email to Professor Granhag regarding the technique and am awaiting a reply.

    #546 Report Abuse

    Hi Jeff. The drip feed disclosure as you say is now very much ‘old hat’. Legal reps just let the client keep quiet knowing no adverse inference is likely.

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Back to top

Latest News