ABSTRACT
Trap: Remarkably, some fact finders choose not to interview anyone. Based on the results developed using one or more of the other methods of investigation, they conclude that interviewing is unnecessary. Regardless of the quality of information at hand, at least interview your subject. As reasoned by the Court in Cotran,4 the term good cause when for the purpose of deciding discipline is a “reasoned conclusion … supported by substantial evidence gathered through an adequate investigation that includes notice of the claimed misconduct and a chance for the employee to respond.” [Emphasis added]
In summary, the advantages of the investigative interview method include:
◾ A nonaccusatory approach ◾ It does not use intimidation or coercion ◾ A process that is highly structured ◾ Consistent results ◾ It is easily learned and replicated
Additionally, the method diminishes the likelihood of false admissions (commonly referred to as false confessions), is court admissible, and time-tested and proven. Figure 4.1 illustrates these points.
