You would think the FBI, the agency known for their high tech tactics and their reputation for no nonsense interrogation tactics would be interested in ensuring an exact account of those interrogations and interviews was available at trial. But, you would be wrong. Instead the federal law enforcement agency relies on pen and paper and the integrity of their agents. It’s this that has many people, including defense lawyers, urging the agency to adopt a policy on recording interviews.
When the FBI interviews someone, they have an old fashioned pad and pencil. No recording device at all. Then, they go back to their office and translate their notes into a complete report, called a 302. These 302 forms become the official record, evidence at trial. But somewhere between the interview and the admission as evidence in court, there’s a concern that things may be misinterpreted, reworded, or omitted.
Attorney General Eric Holder has recently assembled an advisory committed to look at the practice and analyze if change is needed. Currently, in order for an agent to record an interview, they have to obtain permission from their supervisors, something that’s rarely granted.
Recording interrogations is seen as proof positive of what happens behind those closed doors. There’s no room for an officer to make errors and there’s no need for a subjective report. Instead, the words of the suspect can speak for themselves and there’s no reason to question the integrity of the FBI agent. With a written report, however, that’s exactly what defense attorneys will do—and rightfully so.
Those opposed to recording all FBI interviews call the idea an “inconvenience” and “cumbersome”. But isn’t an inconvenience worth it if it ensures fair carriage of justice? One agent, formerly of the New Orleans public-corruption squad believes such recording equipment makes suspects “ill at ease” and can hinder the flow of an easy conversation.
It’s interesting that the Department of Justice, the head of the FBI, criticizes law enforcement agencies that don’t record their interviews. In their analysis of the New Orleans Police Department, the DOJ pointed to a lack of recording as one of the major issues within the NOPD.
When you are questioned by the police, whether it’s the feds or a local agency, a recording can be insurance for you. You can feel better about how you will be treated and also knowing that there will be no errors in what you said. But, even when you are being recorded and you believe you are helping yourself, you could make statements that could hurt your case later on.
This is part of the reason that defense attorneys recommend you don’t answer the police’s questions without first speaking with a lawyer.
About David Matson