Blog 5 - Lecture 12 Interviewing and Reporting fraud

If i was to put myself into the shoes of a criminal being interviewed, I think i would want as much information as possible to be able to make up better answers and also prefer the interview to not be recorded in case i said something i didn’t mean to, therefore it is clear that this statement was made without thinking of the benefits it would have on the interviewee.

The one point i do agree with is that the interview should follow a natural path and pre-determined questions need to be made and still allowing for some flexibility, otherwise there is the risk of not asking enough or receiving enough information from the interviewee. I think recording the interview is crucial as it allows for re-evaluation of the answers and the voice pitches etc. And as for how much detail is provided, that should be minimal to none to ensure that any cracks in an answer is uncovered.

When referring to Buchanan-Cook’s article, it is made apparent there are guidelines to a successful interview, which I believe to be the most important step in an interview of a fraud case (Buchanan-Cook, 2008). Interviewing requires important skills and abilities, most come with experience although some can be gained through research and understanding the importance of information. Documenting every step of the investigation and compiling your report is also an important part of the process. When referring back to the points made by the keynote speaker it is obvious how wrong those techniques are in conducting an interview for a fraud case.

-          Buchanan-Cook, D. 17 March 2008, http://www.journalonline.co.uk/Magazine/53-3/1005067.aspx, Question of Technique