+1(978)310-4246 credencewriters@gmail.com


respond to my peersDiscussion Question # 1:
In Chapter 7, Topic 5 the text discusses 10 potential factors that could impact witness
credibility. Pick two of those factors to discuss and why you think they are the most
challenging for the investigator to assess during the investigative process. For example,
the text lists: Witness Profile, Witness Bias, Witness Involvement, Location When
Viewing the Event, Awareness of the Crime, Length of Observation Time, Time Elapsed
Between Event and Interview, Ability to Record or Repetitively Recount Details, Physical
Abilities, and Cognitive Capacity and Age of Witness. Pick two of those topics for your
discussion post.
Emily Samuel’s response:
Witness credibility is vital to the investigation process. Even in the courtroom, memory
distractions and age factors of witnesses can have severe consequences that are driven
by misunderstandings and poor judgement. The judge and jury must determine with
every case whether with witness is credible in their testimony if witness statement. Two
very important factors are the age of the witness and their cognitive capacity. In the
investigation process, they both can fall hand in hand. For example, a robbery has
occurred at a gas station in a high crime rate area of a large city. The witnesses that were
the scene of the crime and are present to make a statement are a 84 year old female
who has a diagnosis of dementia, a 30 year old male and his two daughters who are ages
4 and 7. While each witness statement is taken, the are some discrepancies that the
investigator notices. The 84 year old female states that there were 2 or 3 suspects that
partook in the robbery and were all wearing black masks. The 30 year old father states
that there was only 1 suspect and was wear a dark colored hat but his daughters both
state that it wasn’t the man in the dark hat. In both witnesses, their cognitive
development impacts both their actual accuracy and perceptions of their accuracy and
credibility (IntechOpen, 2012.)
Sources: https://www.intechopen.com/chapters/40980
How can I respond to Emily?
Nathan Smith’s response:
The textbook discusses 10 potential factors that could impact witness credibility. The
two factors that I will be discussing are witness bias/motivation to lie and witness
profile. Witness bias can have a negative affect on witnesses credibility because they
may have a reason to skew the story to shine a better light on a person that they are
connected with or a negative light on someone they have a prior history with
(Brown,2019). For example, a family member of a person involved in a collision may
state that a traffic light was green or red to protect them. On the other end of that a
neighbor who has ongoing problems could claim that a neighbor was involved in certain
activity to have a negative impact on them. It is important to know if the witness has a
prior history one way or the other.
The other factor that can impact witness credibility is witness profile. Witness profile
refers to the witness having an association with criminals or criminal activity. Whether
actual involvement or association with criminals is up to debate and subject to each
individual case. Just because someone has a criminal record or is associated with a
criminal lifestyle does not exclude them from being a witness. This information will have
to be weighted when using them as witnesses (Brown, 2019).
Brown (2019) Criminal Investigation Full Text (CJT202)
How can I respond to Nathan?
Discussion Question # 2:
In Chapter 8, Topic 1, we are looking at the differences between interviewing,
questioning, and interrogation. For you initial discussion post, pick one of these 3 areas
as the focus of your initial post – explain what it is, what role it plays in the investigative
process, and then give an opinion about what kinds of mistakes an investigator can make
in this area. For example, what role does questioning serve in the process, is it possible
that an investigator may move too quickly out of the questioning phase and into
interrogation and end up making a witness feel like a suspect?
Emily Samuel’s response:
Conducting a investigational interview is a complex and difficult task for an investigator.
With proper training and techniques, investigators can gather strong, admissible
evidence in criminal cases during the interviewing phase. With success also comes the
margin of error. One common mistake is failing to collect the evidence at the time of the
incident. The best time to interview a victim and or possible suspect is at the time of the
incident or soon after when information has not been altered by physical or
environmental factors. With the physical evidence, investigators should also speak to
eye witnesses, confirming their identities and contact information prior to conducting
the interview. This ensures that the person that is being interviewed can be contacted
later for further questioning if necessary which is sometimes crucial in a criminal case
(LTL 2020.) It is also vital for investigators to give Miranda warnings, if being taken into
custody, and to inform the persons that they are interviewing of their constitutional
rights prior to questioning them. This is basically letting them know they have the right
to remain silent and a right to legal council if requested regardless of affordability.
Mistakes like these could be enough to suppress evidence and results in cases being
Sources: https://www.lindsaytaylorlawyers.com.au/in_focus/the-5-common-mistakesmade-in-investigations/
How can I respond to Emily?
Nathan Smith’s response:
Discussion 10 Interviews Questioning and Interrogation
There are three stages to the process when speaking to the suspect of a crime. These
stages are interviewing, questioning and interrogating. I will be discussing the
interviewing stage which is the least formal and begins when the investigator has the
least amount information (Brown, 2019). Interviewing can take place with witnesses,
victims and suspects of a criminal incident. Because interviewing starts as early as on the
scene of the incident the investigator may not know that the person they are
interviewing could be the suspect. Getting a witness to lock in as much information as
possible could become important if that person becomes a suspect later and their story
changes. For these reasons the interviewing investigator does not need to provide a
Miranda warning. However once the investigator has determined that the individual they
are interviewing is a suspect and there is enough reason to detain them, Miranda
warning should then be provided (Brown, 2019). Interviewing can take place at the
scene of an incident as long as the scene has been secured and has been deemed safe to
do so. Interviewing may also take place at an off-site location in an interviewing room at
the local law enforcement center.
Brown (2019) Criminal Investigation Full Text (CJT202)
How can I respond to Nathan?

Purchase answer to see full

error: Content is protected !!