THE POSSIBILITY OF LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS USING A HYPNOTIC INTERVIEW IN PLACE OF A SODIUM PENTATHOL INTERVIEW OR A POLYGRAPH EXAMINATION HAS NOT BEEN FULLY EXPLORED. ARONS (1972) ADMITS THAT WE HAVE NO EXISTING WAY OF USING HYPNOSIS TO INDUCE A SUSPECT TO CONFESS A CRIME WHEN HE IS DETERMINED NOT TO CONFESS. THE MOTIVATION OF THE SUBJECT, THE ABILITY OF THE SUBJECT TO BE HYPNOTIZED, THE AMOUNT OF EMOTIONAL BLOCKING ASSOCIATED WITH THE EXPERIENCE, AND THE ACTUAL KNOWLEDGE THE SUBJECT HAS OF EVENTS TO BE RECALLED ARE CRITICAL FACTORS IN DETERMINING WHETHER THERE WILL BE HEIGHTENED RECALL OF EVENTS THROUGH THE USE OF THE HYPNOTIC INTERVIEW. TWO CASE HISTORIES ARE PRESENTED TO SHOW RESULTS OF HYPNOTIC INTERVIEWS IN CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS. THE FIRST INVOLVED A SOLDIER WHO CLAIMED TO HAVE ACCIDENTALLY KILLED A FRIEND, DISPOSED OF HIS BODY IN A PANIC, AND COULD NOT REMEMBER THE WHEREABOUTS OF THE BODY. UNDER HYPNOSIS, HE WAS ABLE TO RECALL DETAILS OF THE EVENT THAT LED TO DISCOVERY OF THE BODY, ALTHOUGH LATER HE CLAIMED NOT TO HAVE BEEN IN A DEEP HYPNOSIS TRANCE. THE SECOND CASE INVOLVED HYPNOTIZING PERSONS VICITIMIZED BY A MAN WHO COMMITTED THE SAME SEXUAL OFFENSE AT LEAST TWENTY TIMES, EACH BLINDFOLDING THE VICTIM. DURING A HYPNOSIS TRANCE, ONE OF THE VICTIMS CLAIMED THAT SHE FELT SHE KNEW THE ASSAILANT, ALTHOUGH DETAILS SHE GAVE DID NOT HELP TO DISCOVER HIS IDENTITY. THE ASSAILANT WAS LATER APPREHENDED, AND IN FACT, THE WOMAN DID NOT KNOW HIM. HAD SHE REALLY KNOWN HIM, HOWEVER, IT IS POSSIBLE THAT SHE WOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO HELP IDENTIFY HIM WHILE HYPOTIZED. THE TENTATIVE CONCLUSION CAN BE DRAWN THAT NEITHER COOPERATING ON THE PART OF THE SUBJECT NOR DEEP HYPNOTIC TRANCE IS NECESSARY FOR HYPNOSIS TO BE A USEFUL TECHNIQUE IN OBTAINING INFORMATION WHEN WORKING WITH POLICE OFFICIALS ON A CRIME. REFERENCES ARE INCLUDED. (STB)