DepartmentsFeaturesJune 2007Volume 76Number 6United
StatesDepartment of JusticeFederal Bureau of
InvestigationWashington, DC20535-0001Robert S. Mueller
IIIDirectorContributors opinions and statementsshould not be
considered anendorsement by the FBI for any policy,program, or
service.The attorney general has determinedthat the publication of
this periodicalis necessary in the transaction of thepublic
business required by law. Useof funds for printing this periodical
hasbeen approved by the director of theOffice of Management and
Budget.The FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin(ISSN-0014-5688) is
publishedmonthly by the Federal Bureau ofInvestigation, 935
PennsylvaniaAvenue, N.W., Washington, D.C.20535-0001. Periodicals
postage paidat Washington, D.C., and additionalmailing offices.
Postmaster:Sendaddress changes to Editor, FBI LawEnforcement
Bulletin, FBI Academy,Madison Building, Room 201,Quantico, VA
22135.EditorJohn E. OttAssociate EditorsCynthia L. LewisDavid W.
MacWhaBunny S. MorrisArt DirectorDenise Bennett SmithAssistant Art
DirectorStephanie L. LoweStaff AssistantsCynthia H. McWhirtGabriel
E. RyanThis publication is produced bymembers of the Law
EnforcementCommunication Unit, Training Division.Issues are
available online athttp://www.fbi.gov.Internet
[email protected] PhotosKurt CrawfordSend article
submissions to Editor,FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin,FBI Academy,
Madison Building,Room 201, Quantico, VA22135.Perfect PracticeMakes
PerfectBy Douglas A. KnightThe StructuredInvestigative Interview By
Andre B. Simonsand Brian Parsi BoetigReligion in thePublic
Workplace By Richard G. Schott1Law enforcement ofcers can use
aneight-phase structured interview thatthey can adapt to many
police-citizenencounters.Only through perfect practice canofcers
master the shooting skillsnecessary to protect the citizensthey
serve.923Law enforcement executives must beknowledgeable of First
Amendmentrights when supervising employeesof different faiths.
8Leadership SpotlightWant to Be a Better Leader?21 ViCAP AlertTruck
Driver Serial Killings22 Notable SpeechReflection and
RemembranceISSN 0014-5688 USPS 383-31059923x.indd4
5/21/200710:56:50 AMJune 2007 / 1f youre dealing with an ofcer, hes
going to have a professional I mean, how many guys do you know that
would hand-cuff themselves and sit in their apartment night after
night thinking of ways to get out of them...? I watch you
guys....You people dont know me as well as I know you. Like I
showed you, I didnt feel the cuff loos-en. I heard it. Why? Because
I trained myself to do that.My biggest fear was run-ning out of
ammunition. Hes coming at me ring, and Ive got one or two rounds
left. I was not going to get caught in that situation. Instinct
took over, and I cant even remember pulling the magazine out of my
pouch.... It was so trained into me because of the training we have
in the police department. Everything came together and it was done
smooth. It would not have been that smooth had I not had that
training.Imanner if hes a professional. They go to the range two,
three times a week. They practice arms so they can hit anything.
So, that was my object. I aint got no range, but I got the
back-yard.... Im going to put some targets up, and Im going to see
what I can hit. After about 2 or 3 months, I was very good.1Perfect
Practice Makes PerfectThe Importance of Accurate Firearms
TrainingBy DOUGLAS A. KNIGHT59923.indd 1 4/26/2007 4:46:23 PM2 /
FBI Law Enforcement BulletinTraining, it saved my life; theres no
doubt about it. I think the trainers, which were our people, were
excellent. They drilled us to the point where we had to wear
Band-Aids on our hands. The repetitive training that they did, you
can do this stuff in your sleep. The days that we were doing it,
when you got home, thats all you were thinking....These statements
from of-fenders and law enforcement ofcers involved in violent
encounters dramatically demon-strate the importance of qual-ity,
ongoing rearms training. Criminals constantly hone their shooting
skills, and of-cers must do the same if they are to survive
confrontations with these lawless members of society. To this end,
ofcers must receive correct instruction that will enable them to
acquire superior abilities with rearms. After all, practicing the
wrong techniques never will make ofcers competent shooters because
only perfect practice makes perfect.SHOOTINGFUNDAMENTALSFirearms
training, particu-larly in the law enforcement application,
includes seven basic concepts or fundamentals. Variations of these
can occur but generally fall within the parameters outlined.1)
Trigger control: the uid and continuous increase in pres-sure
applied to the trigger to release the ring pin and subsequently
discharge the handgun without disturbing the sights or
unintention-ally moving the muzzle off target. Pistol conguration
does not provide the same three-point stability of a long gun
anchored to the shooters shoulder and stabi-lized with the forearm.
The slightest twisting or torqu-ing of the pistol immedi-ately
prior to discharge can signicantly alter the bul-lets point of
impact. Proper trigger control also includes an immediate reset of
the trigger in preparation of delivering another round if
necessary.2) Sight alignment: the estab-lishment of the
relationship between the front and rear sights to ensure
consistency of respective heights and visible light on either side
of the front sight in the rear-sight notch. The focus point is the
front sight viewed through the rear sight. Sight alignment never is
perfect due to the constant motion of the human body, referred to
as innite weave or wobble.3) Sight picture: the relation-ship of
the acquired sight alignment and the intended target.4) Grip: the
connection of the handgun to the body. Proper grip makes the pistol
a natu-ral extension of the body and facilitates recoil man-agement
to keep the muzzle on target without unwanted torque or
twisting.Special Agent Knight, formerly with the Firearms Training
Unit, currently is assigned to the FBIs Counterterrorism
Division.Criminalsconstantly hone their shooting skills, and ofcers
must do the same if they are to survive confrontations with these
lawless members of society.59923.indd 2 4/26/2007 4:46:38 PMJune
2007 / 35) Stance: the bodys supportstructure of the weapon sys-tem
during shooting. Stancemust have the ability to ef-fectively adapt
to conditionsand circumstances presentedto the shooter (e.g., cover
orsupport).6) Breath control: the neces-sary breathing to keep
thebody charged with oxygenand minimize unwantedmovement or
visiondistortion.7) Follow-through: the con-tinuation of the other
sixfundamentals and criticalfor follow-up shots.The correct
application ofshooting fundamentals becomesmore critical as
distance in-creases. Within 5 to 7 yards,shooting is more of a
condi-tioned response and instinctthan the precise application
ofrened skill. Some argue that,statistically, law enforcementofcers
are involved in shoot-ing confrontations within a10-foot radius,
and, therefore,all training should be conductedwithin those
parameters. Whilestatistics are useful tools incapturing trends and
identifyingprobabilities, an indisputablefact of rearms training is
thatonce ofcers master shooting at25 yards, conditioning them
toshoot quicker at closer targetsgenerally proves much easierthan
trying to transition themfrom shooting only at closerange to ring
their weapons atextended distances.With this in mind, no
dis-cussion of rearms training canbe complete without referenc-ing
the signicance of triggercontrol. Improper trigger con-trol results
in far more shootingerrors than all other mistakesanswer is a
smooth, steady, uidpress that consistently buildspressure and moves
the triggeruniformly to the rear all the waythrough the range of
motionfrom the moment the slack isout until the weapon
discharges.The trigger press mustcontinue its travel smoothlyand
uniformly all the waythrough its range of motionuntil discharge,
without the of-cer growing impatient and ac-celerating the press or
stoppingto realign the sights. The con-cept remains the same
whethershooting fast or slow. To shootfaster, the ofcer simply
appliesmore pressure to overcome theresistance quicker. Once
theweapon discharges, the ofcershould strive to immediatelyreset
the trigger and preparefor another shot if necessary.Time wasted
with the triggerlingering to the rear and notengaged for another
shot couldbe a matter of life and deathin a violent confrontation.
Inlethal encounters, ofcersshould shoot until they havestopped the
threat. They musttrain vigilantly because theyght like they train
and alwaysmust be prepared to deliverone more
well-placedshot.2Trigger control seems likea simple skill to master
at facevalue. So, how could ofcersever miss? After all,
shootingaccurately has only threerequirements.combined. Trigger
control alonecan destroy the ideal contribu-tions of the other six
conceptsand, therefore, is the most criti-cal fundamental of
deliveringan accurate shot with a hand-gun. Proper trigger control
en-hances the ability to shoot fastand
accurate.UnderstandingTrigger ControlWhat constitutes a cor-rect
trigger press? The simpleanswer involves pressing thetrigger
without disturbing thesights accurately aligned on theintended
target. The detailedOne of the mostcommon errorsis to allow
thesubconscious mindto interrupt thetrigger press in aninvoluntary
effort torealign the sightsperfectly.59923.indd3 4/26/20074:46:44
PM4 / FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin1) Line up the sights
andunderstand that they neverwill be perfect due to thecontinuous
wobble orinnite weave associatedwith being human.2) Apply proper
triggercontrol.3) Accept and manage therecoil without
anticipatingand pushing on the pistolprematurely.Diagnosing
ErrorsUnfortunately, diagnos-ing shooting errors can provecomplex.
In some cases, it caninvolve a collision between theconscious and
subconsciousminds. From the instant theconscious mind recognizes
aperfect sight alignment or sightpicture, it instinctively looks
forit. Applying pressure to the trig-ger causes the sights to
wobbleand naturally drift slightly outof alignment. One of the
mostcommon errors is to allow themiss by several inches at 15 to25
yards away.The opposite extreme allowsthe subconscious solution to
in-tervene after nding the perfectsight picture and abruptly
slam-ming the trigger to dischargethe pistol before the
alignmentcan move again. This methodmay work every once in a
whilebut never with the consistencynecessary in a law
enforcementapplication.Finding CuresPressing a trigger is aunique
movement isolated toshooting. Few, if any, other ac-tivities
require the same degreeof individual effort of one n-ger. The human
hand is geneti-cally engineered to move thengers together as a
unit. Thecommon, daily actions of drink-ing a glass of water,
opening adoor, answering the phone, orholding a piece of paper can
ef-fectively illustrate this.In addition, although subtle,the
application of pressure tothe trigger can result in a sym-pathetic
response from one ormore of the other ngers orhand muscles that can
createunwanted twisting and move-ment of the handgun prior toand
during discharge. Moreover,the more difcult the trigger isto press,
the more pronouncedthe sympathetic response orunwanted movement.The
most effective way tomanage the natural tendencyof a sympathetic
response ofsubconscious mind to interruptthe trigger press in an
involun-tary effort to realign the sightsperfectly.3When ofcers
stop the trig-ger press or dramatically slowit down as the tension
starts tomount on the trigger, they mustovercome the frictional
resis-tance to get the trigger movingagain. As they apply more
andmore pressure, searching forjust enough to get the trigger
inmotion, they experience un-wanted rapid acceleration or
theinfamous jerk as they sur-pass the resistance, causing
thetrigger to abruptly slam to therear. Because of the
compressedtravel distance available withmost semiautomatic
pistols,not enough time and distanceexists to smooth out the
press,and the unintended jerk resultsin unwanted movement of
themuzzle prior to discharge. If themuzzle unintentionally rotates1
inch at the point of discharge,the results can be a
dramaticUponactivation,apenlinemovesconstantlyfromlefttorighttocapturetimeandmotionasagraph.Whenthetriggerisfullyextended,thepenlinetravelsacrossthebottomofthescreen.Whenthe
trigger is held in place fullycompressed, the pen line goes across
the top. The lower horizontal line
isadjustedtorecognizethepointwheretheslackisoutofthetriggerpressand
tension is starting to mount. The upper horizontal line reects the
ap-proximate point of discharge.Upper LineLower LineTrigger
Graph59923.indd4 4/26/20074:46:52 PMJune 2007 / 5supporting ngers
is to keep the trigger in constant, steady mo-tion. Even if the
sights wobble slightly out of alignment, the end result of bullet
placement will be far more desirable by keeping the trigger in
motion as opposed to interrupting the ac-tion to nd the visually
elusive perfect sight picture and then slamming the trigger.
Pressing the trigger smoothly with an independent motion generally
is more of a coordination issue, rather than strength, for most
shooters.Ofcers should focus on ev-ery shot and remind themselves
to keep their trigger ngers constantly moving once they make the
decision to shoot. This internal reminder helps transfer their
intellectual intent into a desired motor action.TRAINING
APPROACHESTraining time always is a precious commodity, whether in
a basic training academy environment or during desig-nated
instruction for veteran ofcers. Firearms training is particularly
daunting because nothing is inherently natural about operating a
little machine, which is what a pistol is, that prompts a small
explosion every time it functions. The effective use of
technological teaching aids by knowledgeable instruc-tors can
dramatically enhance the learning curve by saving time and
improving the level of understanding. Experienced Track, the most
effective and practical is the trigger graph diagnostic equipment.
This technological aid saves training time in understanding and
mastering trigger control, allowing more time for realistic
scenario-based training.Technologys RoleThe computer-based trig-ger
graph equipment captures the application of trigger pres-sure and
time in an easy-to-read format that quickly conveys volumes of
information about a trainees trigger characteristics to a
knowledgeable instructor. The results can be captured and played
back for review or recorded on DVD for future comparison.ofcers can
benet from this technology as much as recruits.To illustrate how
these modern advances can help, the author presents a brief
overview of the FBIs intensive remedial rearms training program.4In
use for over 10 years, Fast Track employs sophisticated rearms
training technology to convey vital information in real time to new
agent trainees who have failed to qualify with their service
weapons within the prescribed length of time.One-on-one instruction
and total immersion in rearms training during a 2-week time frame
creates a productive learning environment. Of the numerous
technological advances developed for Fast The air-recoil system,
appli-cable for both live and dry re, simulates recoil and resets
the trigger for use in a classroom environment.Dry re with
air-recoil systemLive-re application provides capability for
training with duty ammunition.59923.indd 5 4/26/2007 4:46:58 PM6 /
FBI Law Enforcement BulletinWith the aid of equipment to address
the most likely cul-prit of poor performance, the instructor can
design training to maximize effectiveness. Prior to the
availability of diagnostic equipment, instructors wasted precious
training time establish-ing that trainees understood and could
demonstrate each shooting fundamental until the problem was
isolated.Proper use of the trigger graph also can help veteran
ofcers improve their shooting skills. Firearms are a critical tool
of the law enforcement profession, and lives may hinge on an ofcers
ability to shoot accurately. Ofcers do not want to perform poorly,
especially in front of their peers during regular qualications.
Ofcers do not fail by choice. Some fail because they lack direction
or knowledge. Others fail because they have allowed bad habits to
creep into their process. The trigger graph equipment can help
these ofcers improve their shooting skills by validating the
contribution of proper trigger control to a well-placed shot in an
easy-to-read, real-time graph format that can be captured and
reviewed. The development of proper trigger control is
learnedbehavior.In marksmanship training, practice alone does not
make perfect. Practicing incorrect techniques creates deeply
in-grained bad habits. The trigger graph provides a method to The
Rubber Band TestTo determine if you can move your trigger nger
independently, simply hold your hand in front of you, simulating a
grip on a handgun. With the trigger nger at the proper 90-degree
angle, move it back and forth, duplicating the motion of a trigger
press. Try looping a rm rubber band around your nger with the
pres-sure against the pad to simulate a rmer trigger press. Move
only your trigger nger with absolutely no mo-tion from any other
nger or part of your hand. Note even the most subtle movement.
Daily repetitions can help isolate and develop the unique motion of
a trigger press to avoid unwanted movement during shooting.Rubber
band provides resistance representative of a trigger press.As a
training aid, it can develop independent trigger-nger movement and
coordination.Trainees can use this system in a live-re environment
with a standard duty weapon, modi-ed with the addition of the
associated instruments. They also can operate the equipment with a
pneumatic air system for indoor training and unsu-pervised use.
Live-re practice with the equipment, in conjunc-tion with
corresponding video input to determine the point of impact for each
round, provides positive reinforcement instanta-neously when the
trigger press is smooth and consistent. The ability to capture and
observe this correlation between the prescribed trigger press and
accurate shot placement also dramatically builds the trainees
condence.59923.indd 6 4/26/2007 4:47:05 PMJune 2007 / 7evaluate the
quality of a triggerpress that did not exist previ-ously. Only
perfect practicemakes perfect.Instructors ImportanceTechnology
never will bea substitute for the knowledge,skill, and experience
of a giftedrearms instructor. However,it can greatly enhance an
in-structors ability to convey thelifesaving lessons of the law
en-forcement profession. Technol-ogy, such as the trigger
graph,gives instructors the ability todemonstrate, as well as
evalu-ate, subtle characteristics thatcan have a dramatic inuenceon
shooting performance.Ofcers may only need tore their weapons once
in a le-thal force encounter during theirentire careers, but that
one timewill prove crucial. Shootingability for a law
enforcementprofessional can easily becomea matter of life and death
withinseconds. To further complicatematters, shooting skills
athigher levels are perishable andrequire regular
maintenance.Therefore, knowledgeableinstructors with
procienteducational and interpersonalskills perform a vital role
inofcer safety. As pointed out inthe opening statements of
thisarticle, both ofcers creditedtheir rearms training as
havingsaved their lives during violentconfrontations. One ofcer
wenton to say, I think the practicingand the repetitiveness of
ourtrainers saved my life. I actuallythanked those guys. I went
backand talked to them.5CONCLUSIONThe importance of accu-rate
rearms training for lawenforcement ofcers cannot beoverstated.
Superior shootingskills can be the difference be-tween ofcers
protecting the in-nocent from violent criminals orsuccumbing to
vicious attacksby lawless individuals. In to-days world of
terrorists bent oncausing death and destructionto U.S. citizens and
property,ofcers may face even greaterefciently demonstrate
andevaluate successful techniquesthat could mean the
differencebetween life and death. Knowl-edgeable instructors can
ensurethat ofcers receive accuratetraining and do not
repeatedlyperform incorrect techniques.Only through perfect
practicecan ofcers master the shootingskills they will need to
remainthe stalwart guardians of peaceand justice.Endnotes1 All
statements are excerpts fromAnthony J. Pinizzotto, Edward F.
Davis,and Charles E. Miller III, U.S. Departmentof Justice, Federal
Bureau of Investigation,Violent Encounters: A Study of
FeloniousAssaults on Our Nations Law EnforcementOfcers (Washington,
DC, 2006).2 For additional information, seeAnthony J. Pinizzotto,
Harry A. Kern, andEdward F. Davis, One-Shot Drops, FBILaw
Enforcement Bulletin, October 2004,14-21.3 For additional
information, see VishnuKarmakar and Thomas Whitney, MentalMechanics
of Shooting (Littleton, CO:Center Vision, Inc., 2001); and Bruce
K.Siddle, Sharpening the Warriors Edge(Belleville, IL: PPCT
Research Publica-tions, 1995).4 For additional information, see
GeneP. Klopf, Fast Track, FBI Law Enforce-ment Bulletin, October
1999, 10-15.5 Supra note 1.The author gratefully acknowledges
theassistance that Mr. Gary Hutchinson,an instructor in the
Firearms TrainingUnit at the FBI Academy, provided inthe
preparation of this article and theguidance and unswerving
supportthat Mr. Hutchinson always demon-strated as his mentor and
world classinstructor/shooter.dangers than reigned in this na-tion
during the outlaw era of theOld West or the gangster-riddenyears of
the Great Depression.All involved in the criminaljustice system
must remaincognizant of the need for of-cers to have the
appropriatetime and funds to maintainthe skills necessary to
protectthe public. Properly appliedtechnology has the ability toThe
effective use oftechnological teachingaids by
knowledgeableinstructors candramatically enhancethe learning
curve....59923.indd7 4/26/20074:47:16 PMLLeadership SpotlightKnow
thyself. The unexamined life is not worth living.SocratesWant to Be
a Better Leader?Look in the Mirror.Michael O. McAuliffe, a special
agent in the LeadershipDevelopment Institute at the FBI Academy,
prepared thisLeadership
Spotlight.hequestionofwhetherleadersarebornormadeoftenarisesaswe
Texplorenewwaystodevelopmoreeffectiveleaders.Someareconvincedthatleadersaresimplyborn,thatgeneticsdetermineapersons
ability to become a successful leader.If that were the case, the
works of
renownedleadershipauthors,suchasKenBlanchard,StephenCovey,andWarrenBennis,wouldprovide
nothing more than entertaining read-ing. Regardless of your outlook
on this
ques-tion,expandingyourknowledgethroughreadingliteratureonleadership,althoughasignicantinitiative,isjustthebeginningtoward
self-improvement.Ifyouwanttobecomeamorevaluableleaderforyourorganization,your
rststepinvolves taking a long, hard look in the
mirror.Thesecondstepistobecompletelytruthfulabout what you see.
While examining your re-ection as a leader, you might nd it helpful
toponder, Do people trust me? Do I treat peoplethe way I would like
to be treated? Do I keepmy promises? Am I honest in my
interactionswith those around me? Do I lead by
example?DoImakeeffectivedecisions?
AmIagoodlistener?Thismaynotbeacomfortableorenjoy-able endeavor,
especially if you are not accus-tomed to honest, self-reection.
Rest assured,objectiveself-assessmentiswherebecominga more
effective leader begins. How many ofus have worked for people who
have an opendoor policy? Yet, when you stop to see them,they hardly
acknowledge your presence. Theycontinue to respond to e-mail,
answer the tele-phone,andbarelylistentoawordyouhaveto say. Or, take
the executive who promises tofollow up on an issue that is
important to youyet never mentions it again. Can you be
hon-estwithyourselfifyouhavedevelopedanyof these ineffective
leadership qualities? Onlythrough candid self-reection and
assessmentwill you be ready to begin the journey of
self-improvement as a
leader.Eachdayprovidesmanyopportunitiestoenhanceourleadershipskills.Inaworldwherewearetaskedtodomorewithlessandaddressendlessdemands,wemusttaketimetoreectonhowwecanbecomemoresuccessful
in our leadership roles. These
mo-mentsofself-examinationmayrepresentthemostinsightfulmeanstobecomingagreatleaderandsuccessfullyfacingthedynamicleadership
challenges of the 21st century.8 / FBI Law Enforcement
Bulletin59923x.indd12 5/21/200710:59:23 AMJune 2007 /
9Investigative interviews are the most critical element of any law
enforcement inquiry. Success in conducting effective and
comprehensive ones improves when ofcers follow a structured
interviewing process that provides a frame-work for the interview
and alleviates haphazard attempts to obtain complete and accurate
information.1 Ofcers can use an eight-phase structured interviewing
process adaptable to many encounters between the police and
citizens.Productive investigative interviewing constitutes more
than a series of questions posed by an ofcer to elicit a response
from the interviewee. A struc-tured investigative interview is a
dynamic, conversational interaction between an ofcer and an
interviewee with a goal of obtaining the maximum amount of accurate
and relevant information while reducing the possibility of
contaminating and inuencing the information provided by the
interviewee or placing him under an undue amount of stress. The
structured interview provides ofcers with a road map exible enough
to adapt to most situations they encounter, ranging from minor
trafc accident investigations to complex criminal cases and
sensitive administrative in-quires. The process is structured but
not standardized. While The Structured Investigative InterviewBy
ANDR B. SIMONS, M.A., and BRIAN PARSI BOETIG, M.S. Los Gatos-Monte
Sereno, CA Police59923.indd 9 4/26/2007 4:47:30 PM 10 / FBI Law
Enforcement BulletinSpecial Agent Boetig is assigned to the FBIs
San Francisco ofce.Special Agent Simons serves in the Behavioral
Analysis Unit, Critical Incident Response Group, at the FBI
Academy.ofcers should employ all of the phases of the process, they
can tailor each interview to meet the needs of the ofcer,
interviewee, and situation. With the exception of the rst and last
phases (preparation and critique), which do not occur in the
presence of the interviewee, the phases may not always happen in
the sequential order presented.THE PROCESSPreparation PhaseFor
consistent effective-ness, ofcers must prepare for interviews prior
to conducting them. This encompasses several different categories,
including strategic, tactical, operational, and legal
considerations. At times, circumstances may limit the amount of
preparation, but ofcers should try to plan as thoroughly as
possible prior to an interview. As elementary as it may appear,
knowing why aninterview is conducted provides a logical
start.Strategic preparation should involve knowing the ultimate
purpose of the interview. Of-cers should ask themselves, Why was
this person chosen to be interviewed and what infor-mation is being
sought? Next, ofcers should decide who would best conduct the
inter-view to maximize the amount of information collected. All too
often, lead investigating ofcers handle interviews and want to
participate in each one. But, strategically, the lead of-cer may
not always be the best person to do so. This premise of selecting
the best person usually appears in cases where female ofcers are
chosen to interview female victims of sexual assault. The person
selected to conduct the interview should have the ability to
develop better rap-port and, therefore, maximize the collection of
accurate and relevant information.The legal preparation for an
interview includes assisting in the collection of relevant
infor-mation. Knowing the statutory elements of crime will help
ofcers explore appropriate areas during the questioning phase.
Without this knowledge, ofcers might fail to cover is-sues, such as
intent or malice, necessary in satisfying the legal requirements or
thresholds for prosecuting a criminal viola-tion. For example, an
ofcer responding to and investigating domestic violence incidents
should understand the legal def-inition of domestic relationships
as it relates to the applicable statute. During the interview, the
ofcer then can inquire as to whether a relationship exists between
offenders that satises the legal denition under the statutes.
Further legal prepara-tions consist of determining if interviews
with minors require parental presence, if interview-ees need
Miranda warnings, or if interviewee benets or pro-tections must or
can be made. Certain states and the federal government require that
victims and witnesses receive informa-tion about programs and
ben-ets available to them through both the government and private
organizations that can help reduce the impact of the 59923x.indd 14
5/21/2007 11:00:34 AMJune 2007 / 11interview.2 Ofcers also
shouldprepare to explain to interview-ees about protections
possiblyavailable if they fear for theirsafety as a result of
cooperatingwith law enforcement.While the intervieweessafety is
paramount, the of-cers should not be compro-mised either. Tactical
prepara-tion for an interview shouldinclude ensuring that
victimsand suspects do not encountereach other. At the residence
ofa domestic violence incident,this distance may be as little
asseparating the occupants in dif-ferent rooms. In an
internationalterrorism investigation thatinvolves complex
counterintel-ligence operations, the distanceneeded for adequate
securitymay be as large as on anothercontinent.While strategic and
tacticalpreparation is critical, ofcersmust consider operational
plan-ning because it often proves themost limiting factor in
creatingthe ideal interview environ-ment. The best strategy for
aninterview might involve havinga female ofcer conduct it, butone
may not readily be avail-able. Therefore, operationally, amale
ofcer will have to con-duct the interview. Tactically,it might be
suitable to offer awitness 24-hour police protec-tion, but,
operationally, witnesssecurity is not an option becauseof a lack of
resources availableto complete the task. Ofcershave to consider the
limita-tions of operational resourcesalong with other
preparatoryfactors.This overview of thepreparation phase, while not
anexhaustive list of what tasks toexplore prior to each
interview,provides a method for analyzingpreinterview preparations
in dif-ferent categories. Ofcers oftenwill nd conict between
thebest strategic, tactical, opera-tional, and legal approaches
toan important role in setting thetone, as well as providing
infor-mation critical to the efcientand accurate educing of
infor-mation. During the introductionphase, ofcers should
properlyidentify themselves and theiragency, helping establish
thelegal or administrative author-ity they have over the
case.Ofcers not wearing a uniformcan display ofcial credentials.In
the event that an intervieweeprovides false information,
andapplicable laws permit prosecu-tion for such an act, the
presen-tation of credentials can helpreduce the interviewees
laterclaims of not being convincedof the ofcers ofcial identity.As
a second task in theintroduction phase, ofcersshould provide the
intervieweewith the purpose or nature ofthe interview. This directs
thefocus of the interviewee to aspecic topical area of inquiry.Good
afternoon. Im JohnBarry, a special agent with theGeorgia Bureau of
Investiga-tion. Im here to talk with youabout the death of Alan
Smith.During some instances, anofcer may not want to immedi-ately
disclose the purpose of theinterview to prevent contami-nating a
witness statement or toconceal the identity of sources,among other
reasons. In thiscase, the ofcer should providethe interviewee with
a brief de-scription of the nature of it. Forexample, the ofcer can
addressOfficers canuse an eight-phasestructured
interviewingprocess....conducting interviews. They al-ways should
design planning toconform to the necessary legalrequirements
associated withthe interview. After addressinglegal considerations
and remov-ing them from the matrix, theymust determine the best
balancefor the remaining preparationcategories prior to
beginningthe interview.Introduction PhaseAlthough a seemingly
sim-ple task, introductions duringinvestigative interviews
play59923.indd11 4/26/20074:50:07 PM 12 / FBI Law Enforcement
Bulletininterview activities, such asquestioning and duration but
notnecessarily the specic reason.Hello. Im Mike Taylor, adetective
with the StatesboroPolice. Im conducting an in-vestigation in the
neighborhood,and Id like to take a few mo-ments of your time to ask
youa few questions. The purposeand nature of the interview arenot
mutually exclusive, and of-cers may provide both duringthe
introduction.Rapport PhaseEveryone has experiencedthe presence and
absence ofrapport. When a sense of con-nectivity and understanding
ex-ist, where empathy and disclo-sure occur, there is rapport.
Inthe unfortunate circumstanceswhere confusion, awkwardsilence,
miscommunications,and discomfort happen, rapportis lacking. Law
enforcementprofessionals often overlookand rush the art of
establish-ing rapport in the investigativeinterviewing process.
Yet, astrong rapport and connectionmade between the ofcer
andinterviewee can promote thefree ow of information anddialogue.
When a solid founda-tion of rapport exists, the inter-viewee
perceives that the ofcerunderstands, appreciates, orshares common
experiences oropinions. These links and con-nections serve as the
foundationfor empathy and understanding,the precursors to trust
that ulti-mately lead to disclosure. Thetrust developed helps build
theinterviewees condence thattestimonial investments are se-cure
and that the ofcer will notexploit exposed vulnerabilities.such as
trafc patterns aroundthe city or current weatherconditions, and
then changesnonverbal behaviors whenquestioned about the
speciccrime, this may indicate stressand even deception.Third,
through rapportbuilding, the ofcer can beginto collect intelligence
on theinterviewees likes, prefer-ences, opinions, and beliefs,all
of which become usefulinformation for subsequentinterrogative theme
develop-ment if the interviewee becomesresistant to providing
truthfulinformation. For example, aninterviewee who enjoys talk-ing
about children may respondto an interrogation theme thatfocuses on
the need for honestyto serve as a positive role modelfor
children.Finally, strong rapportbuilding allows ofcers to relaxand
diminishes any anxietythey may feel as the interviewcommences. Many
times,interviewers fail to recognizethe nervousness that comes
withentering into a new interactionwhere they have, potentially,
agreat deal at stake. By establish-ing rapport, they can reducethe
anxiety, which acts as ahindrance to active listening.Many ofcers
recognize theimportance of establishingrapport as a key to
promotingtrust and disclosure, but theyoften struggle with the
mechan-ics of how to achieve it. WhileRapport building
servesseveral important purposes.First, it allows the intervieweeto
relax, and it diminishes fear,anxiety, or distrust. Rapportbuilding
humanizes the ofcerand promotes the identicationof similarities
between the of-cer and the interviewee.Second, strong
rapportbuilding allows the ofcer toobserve the interviewee in
anonthreatening setting wherethe ofcer can establish abaseline of
normative behaviorsfor comparison with subse-quent ones that may
indicatedeceptive answers when theinterviewee becomes stressed.For
instance, if the intervieweeexhibits certain nonverbalbehaviors
while discussingroutine, nonthreatening topics,Rapportbuilding
servesseveral importantpurposes.59923.indd12 4/26/20074:50:14
PMJune 2007 / 13the dynamic nature of human interaction makes a one
size ts all methodology of rapport building impractical, ofcers can
apply certain rules. They should choose a nonthreatening topic,
such as common, shared experiences to which both parties can
relate, irrelevant to the primary investigative issue. For example,
the ofcer prob-ably should avoid talking about the perils and
tribulations of law enforcement if the interviewee cannot identify
with the topic. However, if both the ofcer and the interviewee
endure trafc, enjoy the same sporting events, have children, live
in the same city, or appreciate other shared experiences, the ofcer
should mine this prime rapport-build-ing material. If the interview
occurs at the interviewees residence or place of employ-ment, the
ofcer should look for rapport-building topics in that particular
environment. People typically tend to decorate space with signicant
objects and pictures, which provide a natural springboard for
rap-port-building discussions. A nonthreatening topic should allow
for a free, two-way ow of information where the of-cer discloses
personal facts, opinions, or observations. True rapport building is
not a ques-tion-and-answer session but a conversation that requires
the ofcer to make disclosures to the interviewee.Ofcers need to
recognize the idiosyncratic nature of rap-port buildingdifferent
topics will resonate with particular people and should be applied
dynamically. For example, an interviewee clearly busy and in a rush
will not want to chat about window treatments, but the ofcer still
can accomplish rapport building by stating, I understand youre in a
rush. This shouldnt take too long. eat, the ofcer can paraphrase
and reect back by saying, It sounds like youre pretty upset and
that its beginning to impact your health.By observing nonverbal
behaviors, the ofcer also can subtly encourage rapport build-ing.
Mirroring the interviewees body language, position, and posture
fosters an atmosphere of similarity and understanding. The ofcer
also can demon-strate empathy using paralan-guage by modulating the
rate, pitch, and tone of speech to match the interviewees. With-out
crossing over into mimicry, if an interviewee talks slow, the ofcer
should try to speak at a similar pace.Questioning PhaseProperly
formatted, phrased, and sequenced questions will educe more
accurate and com-plete information from the interviewee than
haphazardly delivered and poorly phrased ones. Phraseology is
critical; the questions format should not lead or direct the
interviewee to certain answers desired by the ofcer. Two types
provide the backbone for questioning dur-ing the investigative
interview: open-ended and close-ended.Open-ended QuestionsNearly
every investigative interviewing questioning phase should begin
with an open-ended question that prompts the By acknowledging and
respect-ing the interviewees needs, the ofcer can further enhance
rapport and trust.Using active-listening techniques can augment
rapport building by demonstrating the ofcers interest and
attentive-ness. Through paraphrasing, the ofcer restates the
interviewees words in a different way that still captures the
content and essence of the message. If an interviewee says, Ive
never felt this way...I cant sleep or Sterling Heights, Michigan
Police59923.indd 13 4/26/2007 4:50:20 PM 14 / FBI Law Enforcement
Bulletininterviewee to produce a narra-tive response, rather than a
yes,no, or short answer. Much likean essay test, the
open-endedquestion provides intervieweesan opportunity to speak in
fullsentences and tell their story.Would you please tell mewhat
happened? or Will youdescribe everything that youwitnessed?As the
interviewee beginsto comply with the open-endedquestion, ofcers
must resist theurge to jump in with additionalquestions.
Interruptions duringnarrative responses are one ofthe most common
errors duringthe interviewing process.3 Of-cers should only provide
mini-mal encouragers, such as Goon, or Tell me more, to keepthe
person talking. Using open-ended questions is the mosteffective
manner to retrieve themaximum amount of informa-tion without
tainting or inu-encing the response becauseminimal verbal
interaction orprompting by the ofcer occursbeyond the initial
request.Open-ended questions arethe logical starting point forboth
investigative interviewswhere ofcers know little aboutthe case and
where they haveintimate, detailed knowledge.For example, a citizen
goes toa police station to le a com-plaint. Without any foresighton
the citizens issue, ofcersgenerally start an interview byWere you
home all day?How fast were you travel-ing when you hit the
tele-phone pole?Close-ended questions canbe categorized in several
elds.Identication questions helpclarify specic information.For
example, What color wasthe robbers hat? specicallyseeks to identify
a color andnot solicit a narrative response.This close-ended
identicationquestion could have appropri-ately followed an
open-endedquestion asking the witness todescribe the hat. If the
witnessprovided a thorough descriptionbut failed to address the
colorof the hat (a wool hat thatcovered the top of his head
andears), the close-ended questionassists in identifying the
specicdetails of color.Selective, or multiple choice,questions
present more than oneoption from which the witnessmay choose an
answer. Forexample, Was the victim cross-ing the street or standing
on thecorner? Selective questionshelp narrow the focus of a
ques-tion to specic answers. Theyalso are useful when trying
toestablish specic elements of acrime or an incident, but theycan
prove limiting if ofcers donot provide the correct answeras one of
the available choices.In the example above, the vic-tim may not
have been crossingthe street or standing on thesaying, Tell me why
you havecome here today?Even if they are relativelycertain of what
a particularperson might contribute to aninvestigation, they should
beginby posing open-ended ques-tions to avoid contaminating
orleading the witness responses.Close-ended questions willpermit
ofcers to home in onspecic information not pro-vided during the
intervieweesnarrative response.Close-ended QuestionsInterviewing
ofcers usuallywill need to clarify informationprovided by
interviewees duringtheir narrative responses. An-swers to
close-ended questionstypically are shorter and addressspecic
information requestedby the ofcers.Did you see any strangersin the
area last night?What time do you typicallyarrive at
work?Nearlyevery investigativeinterviewingquestioning phaseshould
begin withan open-endedquestion....59923x.indd18 5/21/200711:10:59
AMJune 2007 / 15corner but, rather, walking on the
sidewalk.Finally, close-ended ques-tions can require a simple yes
or no response. While informative at times, yes or no questions may
not provide sufcient detail to explain the answer. For example, Do
you know the victim? is a yes or no question. While the response
may be yes, it provides insufcient investi-gatory detail. If the
witness only learned of the victims identity after the incident
occurred, an-swering in the afrmative when queried by the ofcer
about knowing the victim provides little useful information.
Ad-ditionally, research has identi-ed a higher tendency toward
acquiescence by interviewees, answering the question how they
believe they should answer and not necessarily with what they
actually think or know as fact.Indicator QuestionsThe most
overlooked ques-tion that ofcers fail to ask an interviewee
suspected of com-mitting a crime is, Did you do it? Perhaps, out of
fear that it will damage rapport or, perhaps, due to its
provocative nature, ofcers rarely ask this vitally important
question that occa-sionally produces an admission. While open- and
close-ended questions are designed to elicit data or information
from the interviewee, ofcers can use indicator questions to
evaluate an interviewees level of truth-fulness or deception. These
are not asked to solicit a factual response but, rather, permit the
ofcer to assess the answer for particular responses against likely
ones. Examples of indica-tor questions includeDo you know why Im
here to interview you today?What should happen to the person who
did this?Does the person who did this deserve a second chance?Would
you be willing to take a polygraph examina-tion? What do you think
the results will be?Inappropriate PhraseologyThe phrasing of
questions often can prove counterproduc-tive or contaminate a
witness response. Therefore, the ofcer should avoid certain types
of questions that lead the inter-viewee by revealing or provid-ing
information within the context of the question (Was the car a green
sedan?). An easily inuenced interviewee who knowingly or
subcon-sciously wants to please the ofcer may answer in the
afr-mative without having any true knowledge of the cars color. A
less suggestive approach would involve an open-ended question, such
as Describe the car.Ofcers should refrain from asking compound
ques-tions, those phrased to cover more than one topic in a single
inquiry. For example, Do you know the victim, and does he work with
you? The compound question might be too cognitive-ly overloading
and cause wit-nesses to misinterpret, forget, or Los Gatos-Monte
Sereno, CA Police59923.indd 15 4/26/2007 4:50:33 PM 16 / FBI Law
Enforcement Bulletininadvertently only answer por-tions of the
question. Further-more, if they answer the entirequestion with a
single responseof yes, ofcers cannot be sure ifthe response was
meant for bothanswers or just one part.Finally, ofcers shouldavoid
lagging-order questions,which are those they ask duringthe
interview that correspond toan earlier response given by
theinterviewee but is incompatiblewith the current line of
ques-tioning or ow of the interview.Lagging-order questions
oftenoccur after an appropriatelyasked open-ended questionwhen an
ofcer is too eager tocontinue questioning or wantsto begin
verifying informa-tion, rather than listening to theinterviewees
entire narrativeresponse. For example, duringa narrative response,
a witnessmay mention a person namedTom and then continue to
speakfor an additional 5 minutes.Once the narrative responseends,
ofcers sometimes fol-low by saying, You mentioneda man named Tom.
Could youtell me more about him? Thisis an appropriate question,
andit certainly is a better tactic thaninterrupting when the
witnessrst mentioned Tom. But, itis inappropriately
sequenced.Rather than maintaining thenatural ow, pace, and timingof
the interview by having thewitness continue after conclud-ing the
narrative response, theofcer brings the witness all theway back to
the beginning ofthe statement to further identifythe information
provided ear-lier. The lagging-order questioncould prohibit further
elabo-ration on the current topic inwhich the witness may
naturallyprovide the information soughtwithout any
investigatoryprompting. Ofcers should asksuch a question after the
witnesshas given all narrative respons-es, and they are returning
to thestatement to verify the details.active-listening skills, or
ac-cents or other language barriers.During this phase, the
inter-viewee can make correctionsto the ofcers version of
thestatement.Next, the ofcer shouldprompt further recall from
theinterviewee during this phase.While rehashing the statement,the
interviewee will have theopportunity to add additionalinformation.
Recollection canbe enhanced when the inter-viewee is not actively
engagedin speaking but, instead, listen-ing to the ofcer.At the
conclusion of ques-tioning or after a phase of ques-tioning, the
ofcer then canengage in the verication phase.All too often, ofcers
attempt toimmediately clarify each sen-tence or individual answer
thatan interviewee provides. Thisproves counterproductive
toeffective questioning becauseopen-ended questions will so-licit
narrative responses, and theverication process will hamperthe
free-owing nature of theresponses and the intervieweescognitive
thought processes.Once an interviewee has pro-vided the statement
or has n-ished giving information on aparticular topical area,
ofcershave an opportunity to engagein the verication phase.
Theymight begin the process by ex-plaining the value of the
infor-mation provided and the impor-tance of ensuring the
accuracyVerication PhaseThe verication phase hastwo purposes: to
ensure theaccuracy of the intervieweesstatement and to prompt
furtherrecall. First, the ofcer shouldrepeat the interviewees
entirestatement to the intervieweeto prevent inaccuracies in
theofcers memorialization ofthe interview that could occurbecause
of misinterpretations,biases, interruptions, poorSimply
addressingeach phase ofthe structuredinterview will notensure
success....59923.indd16 4/26/20075:07:31 PMJune 2007 / 17of the
notes taken. Next, they should explain the verication process to
the interviewee, en-couraging the person to inter-rupt to correct,
clarify, or add information. The information you have provided
throughout our conversation is so impor-tant to our investigation.
I want to ensure that I have accurately interpreted and recorded
what you have told me. What Id like to do is go back through your
entire statement as I have re-corded it. While Im doing this, I may
develop additional ques-tions to ask you. Also, I want you to stop
me at any time to correct, clarify, or add informa-tion because
that is exactly what this process is designed for you to do. With
each correction or addition, ofcers should revert to the
appropriate questioning phase.Universal Inquiry PhaseThe universal
inquiry phase gives ofcers an opportunity to solicit additional
information from the interviewee that they may have overlooked. It
also allows interviewees an unre-stricted opportunity to provide
additional information that they deem important but had not been
asked about or had not been able to expand upon dur-ing the
interview. Essentially, the universal inquiry is a nal endeavor to
acquire information from the interviewee. The of-cer can present it
in a succinct but effective manner by saying, If you were in my
shoes as the investigator of this case, is there any additional
information that you would want to know that I have not asked you
about during our interview? The of-cer should use dialogue that
engages the interviewee more than what results with a simple,
uninterested, anything else?information for two reasons. First, all
information is impor-tant in an era of intelligence-led policing
because it may serve as the predicate for other criminal,
counterterrorism, and national security investigations, as well as
assist in the recruitment and development of informants. Second,
the universal inquiry will provide insight to ofcers on topical
areas interviewees considered critical, relevant, or important
simply because they disclosed this information without a specic
solicitation for it. Ofcers should capitalize on this opportunity
to establish greater rapport with interview-ees by expressing a
genuine concern for input.Departure PhaseAfter completing all of
the previous phases of the inter-view process, ofcers should begin
the departure phase. They should not begin this phase prematurely
because it clearly signals the end of the interview. Interviewees
may be reluctant to provide additional informa-tion or to elaborate
on what they previously provided be-cause of an innate feeling of
closure.The departure phase estab-lishes the foundation for mutual
recontacting by interviewees or ofcers. While exchanging tele-phone
numbers and addresses for postal delivery or e-mail, ofcers should
inquire about The interviewee can provide case-related or
noncase-related information during the uni-versal inquiry phase.
Case-re-lated includes any information directly correlated to the
in-quiry conducted. The universal inquiry may generate additional
case-specic information that the ofcer either overlooked or did not
develop. Conversely, the interviewee may provide noncase-related
information on a topic that was not the focus of the inquiry.
Ofcers should not discourage the interviewee from providing
noncase-related Los Gatos-Monte Sereno, CA Police59923.indd 17
4/26/2007 5:07:40 PM 18 / FBI Law Enforcement Bulletinany
restrictions associated with recontacting the interviewee, such as
at particular times or telephone numbers not to call. Interviewees
may not want to be contacted at work, home, or other locations for
security, pri-vacy, or other reasons; ofcers should discuss these
restrictions with them.Quite often, ofcers provide witnesses and
victims with busi-ness cards and request that they contact them
with any addition-al information they might recall. The business
card exchange has become so commonplace in corporate relationships
that it almost rings with insincerity. Providing a business card is
not discouraged, but it only slight-ly enhances the likelihood of a
witness recontacting the ofcer. Witnesses have several reasons for
not communicating with law enforcement ofcers after interviews.
First, most citizens underestimate the importance of the statements
they provided as witnesses and victims; physi-cal evidence and
suspect con-fessions are perceived as more valuable. Next, most
people believe that the police are thor-ough in conducting
investiga-tions. Even if they remember something not disclosed
during the interview, they may assume that the police have obtained
the same information elsewhere and, therefore, do not recog-nize
the importance of provid-ing it to law enforcement. Once
interviewees leave, they likely will ruminate for several hours or
even days over the exchange of dialogue and information that
occurred. Much akin to the verication process, this replay-ing of
information may prompt further recall of details not pro-vided
during the interview. This new information may or may not be
relevant to the investi-gation, but, without it, ofcers cannot
assess its potential. Furthermore, while ofcers already may have
acquired the information from different sources, receiving it from
other independent witnesses can help corroborate or conrm it. An
ofcer may encourage a recontact by stating, I know that after we
end this interview, Ill think of more questions I should have asked
you. Also, it is perfectly natural that you will recall more
details, think of top-ics we did not discuss, or have questions for
me. What Id like to do is call you in 2 days, and we can discuss
any additional information you recall. Even if the information
seems minor or irrelevant to you, it may be crucial to our
investigation. Ofcers rarely recontact inter-viewees, but the
attempt will more likely solicit additional information than the
impersonal passing of a business card.Critique Phase The interview
critique en-sures a thorough and complete interview and helps
improve performance during future ones. While the critique phase
can range from an informal review by the ofcer to a highly critical
peer or supervisory evaluation, ofcers should remember to perform
it. When evaluating an interview, the ofcer and other reviewers
should assess the ef-fectiveness of each of the previ-ous seven
steps. For example, in the preparation step, reviewers Sterling
Heights, Michigan Police59923.indd 18 4/26/2007 5:07:50 PMJune 2007
/ 19could examine if the location ofthe interview was comfortingor
distracting (operational), safe(tactical), or more productivethan
another location (strate-gic). Did the ofcer introducehimself and
make it clear tothe interviewee the purpose ornature of the
interview? Wasan appropriate amount of timespent building rapport?
Wasthe rapport effective? Did theofcer employ active-listen-ing
techniques? Were questionsdelivered haphazardly? Did theofcer
contaminate the inter-view with too much additionalinformation?
Were any cogni-tive interview techniques used?Was all information
veried?Did the ofcer employ the uni-versal inquiry phase and
con-duct follow-up questions on allinformation received? Was
thestage set for a recontact betweenthe ofcer and interviewee?
Didthe ofcer use techniques dur-ing this interview that
provedhighly effective? Were certaintechniques distracting to
theofcer or interviewee? Arethere topical areas that need tobe
explored immediately or inthe future with the witness thatthe ofcer
did not clear up oraddress in the interview? Whatimprovements can
the ofcermake to increase the effective-ness of future
interviews?BIOGRAPHICAL DATAWhile ofcers know theimportance of
obtaining aninterviewees personal andbiographical information,
whento ask for it presents particularchallenges. Do ofcers
requestpersonal information at thebeginning of the interview
ortoward the conclusion? In thisage of identity theft, how doofcers
overcome resistanceto providing this importantinformation?beginning
of the interview mayhinder rapport building, re-minding the
interviewee of theofcious nature of the interac-tion. Further, the
interview-ees frequently perceive suchquestions as invasive.
Ofcersshould prepare to encounter aninterviewees resistance to
pro-viding their personal informa-tion and respond appropriately.If
ofcers determine a need toobtain biographical data earlyon, then
they should begin withthe caveat that the request isroutine,
necessary for the report,and vital to ensuring that the
in-terviewee is correctly matchedwith the information the
personprovides. Also, ofcers maysuggest that obtaining
accuratebiographical data will ensurethat other ofcers seeking to
ob-tain the same information willnot unnecessarily or
repeatedlycontact the interviewee.Biographical data, on occa-sion,
may provide material thatthe ofcer can use as a rapport-building
tool. For example, byrequesting the intervieweesplace of birth, the
ofcer maydiscuss that city or state andshare personal experiences
in-volving travel to that area. If of-cers request biographical
datain an overly serious, ofcious,or dramatic manner, they
willstunt rapport. If they solicit it ina more conversational,
relaxedmanner, then they can stimulaterapport. Ofcers may decideto
collect biographical data atThe minimum biographi-cal information
ofcers shouldobtain during an interviewincludes the persons full
namewith correct spelling, dateof birth, residential
address,telephone number, and socialsecurity number. Request-ing
additional, optional bio-graphical data may entail theinterviewees
drivers licenseand cell phone numbers, oc-cupational and
employmentinformation, e-mail address,place of birth, passport
number,and scars/marks/tattoos. Ask-ing for biographical data at
theAsking forbiographical dataat the beginning ofthe interview
mayhinder rapportbuilding.59923.indd19 4/26/20075:07:59 PM 20 / FBI
Law Enforcement Bulletinthe conclusion of the universal inquiry
phase of the interview after establishing rapport and after the
willing disclosure of information has previously been ascertained
and demonstrated by the interviewee. Following the universal
inquiry phase, requesting biographical data creates a seamless
transition into the departure phase and the mutual exchange of
contact information. To request bio-graphical data in the departure
phase, ofcers could state, Id like to exchange information with
you, so we can reestablish contact. But, before I do, I need to get
a few more details to complete my report. Because they express a
willingness to provide their own telephone and contact information,
the inter-viewee may follow the example and feel more comfortable
doing the same.STRUCTURED, NOT STANDARDIZEDThis eight-phase process
provides the structure for con-ducting an effective investiga-tive
interview. To successfully apply this approach, ofcers should
understand that struc-tured interviews are not stan-dardizedeach
one will take on dynamics and directions of its own. While ofcers
should ad-dress all eight phases, they may initiate certain ones at
different, logical points of the interview. For example, while in
the ques-tioning phase of an interview, the interviewee may broach
a topic suitable for additional rap-port building.The objectives of
the veri-cation and universal inquiry phases exemplify the uid
na-ture of the structured interview. Each phase is designed to
solicit additional information from the witness. If the verication
phase prompts further recollections and information by the witness,
the ofcer should revert to the questioning phase to collect the
most accurate and complete in-formation that then will be veri-ed
and may spawn even more data to question and verify.Simply
addressing each phase of the structured in-terview will not ensure
suc-cessrecognizing the need to return to previous phases and
follow through with the appro-priately sequenced additional phases
will. If ofcers generate additional information during the
universal inquiry phase, they should adequately question the
witness about it, verify it, and ask yet another universally
probing question. Failure occurs if ofcers simply question the
witness about the new informa-tion and neglect to verify it and
probe for more information. While this can become time consuming,
it is critical to effective interviewing. CONCLUSIONInvestigative
interviews are a crucial part of any law enforcement inquiry. Using
this eight-phase structure will guide law enforcement ofcers in
con-ducting professional, thorough, and complete interviews. They
can adapt this exible process to any interview, according to the
particular needs of the ofcer, interviewee, and situa-tion. To
effectively employ this method, ofcers should remem-ber that
structured interviews are not standardized and initiate each phase
at practical times during the interview. Supervi-sors, training
personnel, and ofcers can improve their skills by using a
structured interview-ing process.Endnotes1 The authors use the term
ofcer throughout the article to encompass the entire gamut of law
enforcement ofcers, including police ofcers, deputy sheriffs,
troopers, investigators, and agents. They employ masculine pronouns
for both of-cers and interviewees or witnesses for illustrative
purposes. Research consistently has identied the lack of structure
during interviews as a major impediment to ob-taining complete and
accurate information. See, R.P. Fisher, R.E. Geiselman and D.S.
Raymond, Critical Analysis of Police Interview Techniques, Journal
of Police Science and Administration 15 (1987): 177-185; G.
Gudjunsson, The Psychology of Interrogations, Confessions, and
Testimony (New York, NY: Wiley, 1992).2 The Victim and Witness
Protection Act of 1982, Victims Rights and Restitu-tion Act of
1990, Victims of Child Abuse Act of 1990, and Victim Rights
Clarica-tion Act of 1997 are several examples of U.S. federal
victim rights acts.3 R.P. Fisher, Interviewing Victims and
Witnesses of Crime, Psychology, Public Policy, and Law 1, no. 4
(1995): 732-764. 59923x.indd 24 5/21/2007 11:15:29 AMJune 2007 /
21ViCAP AlertTruck Driver Serial
Killingsnthebeginningof2004,lawenforcementofcersacrosstheUnitedStatesidentiedtheentireUnitedStates,areavailabletodepart-ments
that have rape and homicide victims meet-ing the following
description: prostitutes workingfrom truck stops, hitchhikers,
transients, strandedmotorists, unidentied dead bodies, and any
othervictims at risk where the suspect is likely to be along-haul
truck driver.IntheearlymorninghoursofSaturday,May25, 2002, Memorial
Day weekend, Jennifer Whip-key was at the Adelphia Restaurant and
Nightclubin Deptford, New Jersey. She needed a ride
homeandeithergotoneorstartedwalkingtowardClarksboro, New Jersey,
around 3:20 a.m.On Sunday morning, May 26, 2002, Jennifersbody was
discovered in a wooded area near a truckstop and motel off
Interstate 295 in West Deptford,New Jersey. She had been stabbed,
strangled, andredressed. This recovery site is within 5 miles
fromthe club, near Route 42, which is a direct route
toPhiladelphia,Pennsylvania;Interstate295N/S;and Atlantic City, New
Jersey. Her murder remainsunsolved.Alert to Law
EnforcementLawenforcementagenciesshouldbringthisinformationtotheattentionofallcrimeanalysisunits,
ofcers investigating crimes against persons,and missing persons
units. Any agency with infor-mation on the Jennifer Whipkey case
may contactDetective Grant Worrell, West Deptford, New Jer-sey,
Police Department at 856-853-4599, x162, orDetective Langdon Sills,
Gloucester County, NewJersey, Prosecutors Ofce at 856-384-5604.
Anyagency with victim or suspect information for
thetruckdriverserialkillingsongoinginvestigationmay contact Crime
Analyst Jayne M. Stairs of theViolent Criminal Apprehension Program
(ViCAP)at 703-632-4168 or [email protected] Jennifer
WhipkeyIapatternofhomicidesinvolvingthekillingofprostitutes who
worked in and around truck stops.These killings have taken place
over a number
ofyearsandinitiallyinvolvedthestatesofOklaho-ma,Texas,Arkansas,Mississippi,Pennsylvania,and
Indiana.Overthelast3years,theFBIandlocalandstate law enforcement
agencies have met for
jointcaseconsultations,resultingintheidenticationofseveraltruckdriversuspects.Timelineshavebeen
compiled on 45 suspects to date, with
severalmoreinprogress.Thesetimelines,whichcover59923x.indd25
5/21/200711:16:11 AM22 / FBI Law Enforcement BulletinReflection and
RemembranceBy Hugh E. LovellTAssistant SuperintendentLovell of the
Trinidad andTobago Police Servicedelivered this speechon July 26,
2006, at theNational Law EnforcementOfcers Memorial inWashington,
D.C.his evening, I am humbled by the
privilegeandhonorbestoweduponmetoaddressyou. Our purpose here is
one of reection and re-membrance. Reection to take time to review
theperformances of our fellow ofcers who have
beentragicallyandwithoutwarningtakenawayfromus. Remembrance of
those families that have beencheated and deprived to remember the
love, care,andhappinesstheyonceknewandsharedwiththeir departed
loved
one.Losingalovedoneisnoteasytoovercomefromtheperspectiveofthoseplacedinsuchaposition.
Those left behind lose the wind beneaththeir wings and sometimes
drift aimlessly. Fellowofcers miss the presence of their fallen
hero andtheir source of inspiration, advice, mentoring,
pro-fessionalism,camaraderie,laughter,andpeculiarmannerisms.Today,
some of us continue to weep and
mourntheirloss,aswellasmissthem.Letusneithermourn nor miss them too
long for weeping mayendureforthenight,butjoycomesinthemorn-ing. The
joy is in the knowledge that those gallantmen and women died in the
pursuit of what theyloved doing bestselessly protecting the lives
ofevery one of us and creating a safe and secure en-vironment in
which all citizens can go about theirdaily business in peace.Law
enforcement is amoebic in nature; so aresocieties. As such, we, as
practitioners, must adaptto keep pace with the changes because
change, myfellow ofcers, is the only constant factor in
life.Therefore,itisincumbentuponusto
ndwaysandmeansanddevisesystemstostemtheever-increasing tide of
crime and criminal activities. Wealso must try our utmost best to
engender a feelingof camaraderie among ourselves by looking out
forone another and being kind, trustworthy, respect-ful, and
understanding, thereby upholding the ide-als of this honorable
institution.It is common knowledge that the problems
andchallengesfacedbylawenforcementofcersaresimilar throughout the
world, and it is mandatorythat we share our thoughts and ideas to
ght thisscourge of crime and criminal activities within
ourrespectivejurisdictions.Letusbeourbrotherskeeper and a bundle of
sticks that cannot be bro-ken. For united we stand and divided we
fall. Wecannot afford to fall because anarchy will reign tothe
detriment of our
nations.Tothewives,husbands,children,mothers,fathers,andsiblingsofallthoseheroicmenandwomen,Isaythanksforgivingthemtous.
You,as well as the people and, by extension, the
nation,havebenettedimmenselyfromtheirservices.May God continue to
bless you with good health,strength, wisdom, knowledge,
understanding, andguidancetodothethingsthatwouldhavemadeyour dearly
departed loved one proud.Notable Speech59923x.indd26
5/21/200711:17:27 AMJune 2007 / 23Law enforcement is a unique
occupation in many ways. The major-ity of law enforcement ofcers
wear a uniform while working; many have grooming standards and
conduct regulations to which they must adhere; some have sworn to
uphold laws with which they do not necessarily agree. For example,
the federal Free Access to Clinic Entrance, or FACE, law
criminalizes at-tempts to interfere with a wom-ans access to an
abortion clinic. Enforcing the laws also is, by its very nature, a
job requiring continuous stafng24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365
days a year. These unique aspects of the profession sometimes cause
personal conicts with individ-ual employees religious beliefs. For
example, what happens when a uniformed patrol ofcer feels it is a
religious duty to violate the departments ban on lapel pins by
wearing a Chris-tian cross lapel pin or when a group of Muslim male
ofcers violate a departments no facial hair policy by growing
beards as required by their religion? What about the captain who
refuses to assign ofcers to maintain order at the sight of an
abortion clinic protest because his Catholic faith frowns upon
abortion? Finally, how should a department handle a potential
scheduling nightmare when its ofcers raise objections to shift
assignments conicting with their Sabbaths or days of worship? This
article addresses Religion in the Public WorkplaceRegulation and
AccommodationBy RICHARD G. SCHOTT, J.D.Legal Digest
Stockdisc59923x.indd 27 5/21/2007 11:22:34 AM24 / FBI Law
Enforcement Bulletinthese issues and raises aware-ness of the
myriad legal provi-sions that should govern han-dling them.FIRST
AMENDMENT:FREEDOM OF RELIGIONBecause law enforcemententities
necessarily are part offederal, state, or local govern-ments, they
must adhere toconstitutional limits and man-dates, as well as to
relevantlegislation relating to religion.In a recent First
Amendmentfreedom of speech case in-volving an assistant
districtattorney, the U.S. SupremeCourt pointed out that the
FirstAmendment invests publicemployees with certain
rights.1Therefore, law enforcementexecutives must be mindful ofthe
First Amendments freedomof religion2 provision whendealing with
employees ofdifferent faiths.Uniforms/GroomingStandardsUniforms are
almost asmuch a part of the law enforce-ment culture as they are a
partof the military culture. As such,policies and restrictions
regard-ing the wearing of them arealmost universally upheld.When a
department has strictrules concerning the adornmentof its uniform,
an individualsability to display a religiousitem on it may be
curtailed.While the assertion of a FirstAmendment-protected
religiousright raises the legal bar for lawenforcement departments
inthese cases,3 courts typicallynd little sympathy for
thoseindividuals who nd themselvesin this predicament. In Danielsv.
City of Arlington, Texas,4George Daniels, a 13-yearveteran of the
police departmentchallenged his departmentsrefusal to allow him to
wear asmall, gold cross pin on hisuniform. Daniels wore the pinas a
symbol of his evangelicalChristianity5 while working ina
plainclothes position with thedepartment, and he continued towear
it after reassignment to auniformed position. The policedepartment
in Arlington, as partof its general orders, had auniform policy
that read Nobutton, badge, medal, or similarsymbol or item not
listed in thisgeneral order will be worn onthe uniform shirt unless
ap-proved by the police chief inwriting on an individual
basis.6Daniels requested specicallowance, pursuant to thisgeneral
order, to wear the crosspin on his uniform from thepolice chief at
that time. Thechief refused permission butoffered several possible
accom-modations to resolve the situa-tion, including 1) wearing
across ring or bracelet instead ofthe pin; 2) wearing the pinunder
his uniform shirt orcollar; or 3) transferring to anonuniformed
position wherehe would be allowed to wear thepin on his shirt.7
Daniels de-clined all of the possible solu-tions and was red for
insubor-dination. In upholding hisdismissal for violating
theSpecial Agent Schott is a legal instructor at the FBI
Academy.the Supreme Courttypically has afforded agreat deal of
deferenceand latitude when itcomes to the internaladministration,
includinggrooming policies,of law
enforcementdepartments.59923x.indd28 5/21/200711:23:27 AMJune 2007
/ 25uniform policy, the Fifth CircuitCourt of Appeals conrmed
thedistrict courts determinationthat [a] police ofcers uni-form is
not a forum for fosteringpublic discourse or expressingones
personal beliefs.8 Rather,the appellate court concludedthat [a]
police department doesnot violate the First Amendmentwhen it bars
ofcers fromadorning their uniforms withindividual adornments,
evenwhen those decorations includesymbols with religious
signi-cance.9 In reaching this conclu-sion, the court pointed out
thatthe no-pins policy serve[d] alegitimate governmental pur-pose
in the context of uniformedlaw enforcement personnel,and Daniels
undoubtedly ha[d]myriad alternative ways tomanifest this tenet of
hisreligion.10While law enforcementagencies may not receive the
al-most unbridled deference fromcourts that the military getswhen
restricting uniform adorn-ments,11 the Supreme Court typ-ically has
afforded a great dealof deference and latitude whenit comes to the
internal admin-istration, including groomingpolicies, of law
enforcementdepartments. In a 1976 casebefore the Supreme Court,12a
law enforcement agencysregulation of hair styles wornby its male
members was at is-sue. Though not challenged onreligious grounds,
the Courtsreasoning for upholding therestriction against the
Four-teenth Amendment13 libertychallenge often is cited in
FirstAmendment cases.14 Namely,the Court recognized that
[t]hepromotion of safety of personsand property is unquestionablyat
the core of the states policepower, and virtually all stateand
local governments employthe public, or a desire for theesprit de
corps which such simi-larity is felt to inculcate withinthe police
force itself,16 andthat either of those justicationsis sufcient to
withstand Four-teenth Amendment scrutiny.While recognizing
thatcourts generally afford widelatitude to law
enforcementexecutives in running their de-partments, there is no
proverbialrubber stamp when it comes tointernal policies. Several
policedepartments have or have hadpolicies restricting male
ofcersfrom wearing facial hair of anykind. Because certain
religiousfaiths expect or require males togrow beards, these
restrictionshave been challenged basedon First Amendment
grounds.Because of religious principlesinvolved, restrictions must
with-stand exacting scrutiny.17 Somepolicies have not stood up to
theexacting scrutiny.In Fraternal Order of PoliceNewark Lodge No.
12 v. Cityof Newark,18 two devout SunniMuslim police ofcers
chal-lenged the Newark, New Jersey,Police Departments require-ment,
in place since 1971, thatmale ofcers shave their beards.The ofcers
challenged therestriction on a First Amend-ment basis because
[t]herefusal by a Sunni Muslim malewho can grow a beard...is amajor
sin.19 In their challengeto the beard ban, the ofcerspointed out
that the departmenta uniform police force to aidin the
accomplishment of thatpurpose. Choice of organiza-tion, dress, and
equipment forlaw enforcement personnel isa decision entitled to the
samesort of presumption of legisla-tive validity as are state
choicesdesigned to promote other aimswithin the cognizance of
thestates police power.15 TheCourt went on to say that thechoices
regarding uniform is-sues, grooming standards, andequipment
issuance may bebased on a desire to make policeofcers readily
identiable to...the First Amendmentwill not allow a lawenforcement
ofcerto refuse a lawful orderto carry out anassignment becauseit
conicts with hisreligion.59923x.indd29 5/21/200711:24:15 AM26 / FBI
Law Enforcement Bulletinmade exemptions for medicalreasons,
typically because ofa skin condition called fol-liculitis barbae,
but refusedto make exemptions based onreligious beliefs.20 The
depart-ment attempted to withstand thechallenge to its no-beard
policy,even in light of the medicalexemptions, by contendingthat it
wanted to convey theimage of a monolithic, highlydisciplined force
and that[u]niformity [of appearance]not only benet[ted] the menand
women who risk their liveson a daily basis, but offer[ed]the public
a sense of securityin having readily identiableand trusted public
servants.21The department also assertedthat permitting ofcers to
wearbeards for religious reasonswould undermine the forcesmorale
and esprit de corps.22The Third Circuit Court of Ap-peals rejected
the departmentsarguments and struck down theno-beards provision as
appliedto the Muslim ofcers. TheThird Circuit determined
thatbecause the department grantedexemptions for
nonreligiousreasons but would not grant anexemption based on
religiousgrounds, heightened scrutiny ofthe denials was triggered.
Thecourt concluded that the policysimply could not withstandthat
scrutiny. It is worth notingthat the court only applied
theheightened scrutiny standardbecause the exemption had beenmade
based on secular (medi-cal) reasons. The departmentsstated reasons
for denying thereligious exemption request didnot satisfy
heightened scrutiny.It is arguable that safety con-cernsfor
example, the needfor achieving a snug t whenwearing a gas
maskwouldsatisfy the heightened scrutinyapplied in this situation.
How-ever, these same safety concernsof statutory provisions, such
asthose found in Title VII of theCivil Rights Act of 1964, andnot
because of any obligationimposed upon employers bythe Constitution.
When an FBIagent lost his job because of hisrefusal to fulll an
assignmentthat conicted with his religiousbeliefs, the Seventh
CircuitCourt of Appeals pointed outthat [a]fter Employment
Divi-sion v. Smith,23 any argumentthat failure to accommodate
[theagents] religiously motivatedacts violates the free
exerciseclause of the First Amendmentis untenable.24 The
appellatecourt then went on to addressthe challenge from a
statutorystandpoint.The Supreme Courts Em-ployment Division v.
Smith25decision concerned the denialof state unemployment benetsto
individuals who lost theirjobs because of their inges-tion of
peyote for sacramentalpurposes at a ceremony of theirchurch.26 The
use of peyote wasin violation of Oregon statelaw,27 which led to
job termina-tion and the subsequent denialby the state of
unemploymentbenets. The affected churchmembers argued that the
denialwas in violation of their FirstAmendment rights. In its
hold-ing against the challengers, theSupreme Court pointed out
thatthe free exercise of religionmeans, rst and foremost, theright
to believe and professmay dictate against any exemp-tions being
made to the facialhair restriction, and it was onlybecause of the
previous exemp-tion that heightened scrutinywas applied to the
denial ofthe subsequent, religion-basedexemption request.Job
Performance/Assignments/SchedulingChallenges to certainassignments
based on thoseassignments conicting withreligious ideals rarely are
suc-cessful. When a challenge doessucceed, it is typically
becauseWhen schedulingissues arise, whatcertain employeeswant (or
think isrequired) is examinedon a case-by-casebasis.59923x.indd30
5/21/200711:24:45 AMJune 2007 / 27whatever religious doctrine one
desires. Thus, the First Amend-ment obviously excludes all
governmental regulation of re-ligious beliefs as such.28 How-ever,
the court went on to point out that its decisions have consistently
held that the right of free exercise does not relieve an individual
of the obligation to comply with a valid and neutral law of general
applica-bility on the ground that the law proscribes (or
prescribes) con-duct that his religion prescribes (or
proscribes).29 Likewise, the First Amendment will not allow a law
enforcement ofcer to refuse a lawful order to carry out an
assignment because it conicts with his religion.30Denials of
employee re-quests to have certain days off or to work particular
shifts based on religious faith also are frequently challenged.
These requests do not have to be hon-ored based on any
constitutional obligation for the same reasons employers are not
required to allow employees to refuse cer-tain assignments. The
employee may be more successful making this request based on
certain statutory language contained in Title VII, rather than on
any af-rmative obligation imposed by the First Amendment.31TITLE
VII OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964Title VII of the Civil Rights
Act of 1964 makes it an unlaw-ful employment practice for an
employer to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual
or otherwise to discriminate against any individual with respect to
compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment
because of such individuals religion.32 This antidiscrimination
statute also contains a reasonable accom-modation provision,
placing an afrmative duty on employers to reasonably accommodate an
employees or prospective of the police uniform with any button,
badge, medal, or similar symbol or item unless approved by the
police chief in writing on an individual basis. It is easy to
envision how this policy could be applied in a discriminatory
manner. For example, if the chief allowed an ofcer of one religious
sect to wear an em-blem of his faith but atly re-fused to allow an
ofcer of an-other faith to display his faiths emblem, there would
appear to be discrimination based on re-ligion in violation of
Title VII. In Booth v. Maryland,35for ex-ample, a facially neutral
groom-ing policy was challenged under both the First Amendment and
under federal statutes.36 At issue in the case was the Maryland
Department of Public Safe-ty and Correctional Services grooming
policy and its appli-cation to certain correctional ofcers. The
challenger was a uniformed correctional ofcer who wanted to wear
his hair in dreadlocks, in violation of the challenged regulation,
to con-form with his Rastafarian reli-gious beliefs.37 After ruling
out his First Amendment argument, the Fourth Circuit Court of
Ap-peals addressed the statutory challenge to the regulation
pro-hibiting the dreadlock hairstyle. The appellate court remanded
the case, acknowledging that if the department applied its
fa-cially neutral grooming policies in an uneven manner, a
statutory violation may have occurred.38employees religious
obser-vance or practice as long as doing so does not create any
un-due hardship for the employer.33It is from this standpoint that
many employment practices are challenged as unlawful
discrimination.Uniforms/Grooming StandardsIn the Daniels v. City of
Ar-lington, Texas case,34 the uni-form policy challenged by
Dan-iels prohibited the adornment Stockdisc59923x.indd 31 5/21/2007
11:25:10 AM28 / FBI Law Enforcement BulletinSpecically, the
plaintiff allegedthat a Jewish employee and aSikh employee both had
beengranted religious exemptions tothe questioned grooming policyin
the past but that his requestfor exemption had been deniedbecause
of his particular reli-gion.39 If, unlike the precedingsituation, a
department made noexception for any religious sym-bol, it would be
difcult to at-tack the policy as being appliedin a discriminatory
manner;and, therefore, the same argu-ments used to support the
pol-icy from constitutional attackshould withstand the
discrimi-nation attack under Title VII.For this reason, courts
entertainmore reasonable accommoda-tion challenges to groomingand
uniform standards than theydo straightforward discrimina-tion
challenges. For example,the reasonable accommodationprovision was
used as one basisof challenge in Daniels.40 TheFifth Circuit ruled
against Dan-iels, nding that Daniels failedto respond to the police
chiefsreasonable offers of accommo-dation41 and that the only
ac-commodation proposed by Dan-iels was unreasonable and anundue
hardship for the city.42Job Performance/Assignments/SchedulingTitle
VII, particularly itsreasonable accommodationaspect, also has been
used bylaw enforcement employees toargue that they are entitled
torefuse certain assignments or toreceive preference when
sched-uling issues arise. In Endresv. Indiana State Police,43
Ben-jamin Endres, Jr., an IndianaState Police employee, refusedto
report for a new duty assign-ment at a gambling casino.
Theassignment occurred becausethe state police designated someof
the gaming commissionagent position would violatehis religious
beliefs because hewould be facilitating gamblingitself.45 As an
accommodationto his religious beliefs, he askedfor a different
assignment andwas denied. He was subse-quently red for
insubordina-tion when he failed to report forwork. After rst
acknowledgingthat assignment to this positionbecause of (rather
than in spiteof or with indifference to) [En-dres] religious
beliefs wouldviolate the Constitution,46 theSeventh Circuit Court
of Ap-peals addressed the reasonableaccommodation aspect ofTitle
VII.In ruling that the state po-lice was not required to affordits
employee such an accom-modation, the court went togreat lengths in
explaining itsdecision.Endres contends that [titleVII] gives law
enforcementpersonnel a right to choosewhich laws they will
en-force, and whom they willprotect from crime. Manyofcers have
religiousscruples about particularactivities: to give just a
fewexamples, Baptists opposeliquor, as well as gambling;Roman
Catholics opposeabortion; Jews and Muslimsoppose the consumption
ofpork; and a few faiths (suchas the one at issue in Smith)include
hallucinogenicof its ofcers as Indiana Gam-ing Commission agents.
Thoseagents duties included certify-ing gambling revenue,
inves-tigating complaints from thepublic about the gaming
system,and conducting licensing in-vestigations for the casinos
andtheir employees.44 Upon beingassigned to a particular
casino,Endres notied the state policethat he was willing to
enforcegeneral vice laws at casinos butthat providing the
aforemen-tioned specic duties requiredthe inquiry ends whenan
employer showsthat a reasonableaccommodation wasafforded the
employee,regardless of whetherthat accommodationis one that
theemployee suggested.59923x.indd32 5/21/200711:25:55 AMJune 2007 /
29drugs in their worship and, thus, oppose legal prohibi-tions of
those drugs. If Endres is right, all of these faiths, and more,
must be accommodated by assigning believers to duties compat-ible
with their principles. Does [Title VII] require the state police to
assign Unitar-ians to guard the abortion clinic, Catholics to
prevent thefts from liquor stores, and Baptists to investigate
claims that supermarkets misweigh bacon and shell-sh? Must
prostitutes be left exposed to slavery or murder at the hands of
pimps because protecting them from crime would encourage them to
ply their trade and, thus, offend almost every religious
faith?47The courts answer, of course, was a resounding no for
logical reasons. First, [j]uggling assignments to make each
compatible with the varying religious beliefs of a heterogenous
police force would be daunting to managers and difcult for other
ofcers who would be called on to ll in for the objectors.48Second,
the court recognized that [i]t is difcult for any organization to
accommodate employees who are choosy about assignments; for a
paramilitary organization the tension is even greater.49Finally,
agencies such as police and re departments, designed to protect the
public from dan-ger may insist that all of their personnel protect
all members of the publicthat they leave their religious (and
other) views behind so that they may serve all without favor on
religious grounds.50 Based on these reasons, the Seventh Circuit
concluded that Endres ha[d] made a demand that it would be
unreasonable to require any training period at the Correc-tions
Recruit Academy. Beadle, as a Seventh Day Adventist, did not engage
in secular labor during his Sabbatha period lasting from sundown
Friday to sundown Saturday.53 Beadle did not notify his employer of
this restriction until he had completed the academy and was
scheduled to work during the time frame that conicted with his
religious beliefs. Respon-sible for securing the safety of the
Hillsborough County prison, the Detention Department natu-rally
operated 7 days a week, 24 hours a day, year round. To satisfy this
stafng need, the de-partment employed a neutral, rotating shift
system.54 Beadle requested permanent days off in deviation of the
departments scheduling system. The depart-ment rejected this
request but did notify Beadle that he was free to arrange for
voluntary shift swaps with other employ-ees. To assist in this
effort, the department provided Beadle with a roster sheet and
allowed him to advertise his need for swaps during daily roll calls
and on the departments bulletin board. Further, the department
allowed Beadle to request the use of sick days, vacation time, and
compensation time if he was not able to arrange for shift swaps.55
On one occasion when Beadle was unable to swap shifts and his
request for leave was denied,56 he simply failed police or re
department to tolerate,51 and, thus, his ring was lawful. When
scheduling issues arise, what certain employees want (or think is
required) is examined on a case-by-case ba-sis. One instructive
case for law enforcement agencies is Beadlev. Hillsborough County
Sheriff s Department.52 Aston Beadle was a member of the Seventh
Day Adventist Church who became a member of the Hillsborough
County, Florida, Sheriffs De-tention Department after com-pleting
the required 11-week Stockdisc59923x.indd 33 5/21/2007 11:26:27
AM30 / FBI Law Enforcement Bulletinto report to work. On
anotheroccasion, Beadle abandonedhis post during the middle of
hisshift, leaving two other depu-ties alone to supervise an areaof
dangerous inmates.57 Ulti-mately, Beadle was red overthis
attendance/performanceissue. When Beadle challengedhis termination
as a violation ofTitle VII, the Eleventh CircuitCourt of Appeals
had to decidewhether the sheriffs depart-ment had satised its
obligationto reasonably accommodateBeadle.The appellate court
rstnoted that the phrases reason-ably accommodate and
unduehardship58 are not dened inthe language of Title VII,
and,[t]hus, the precise reac