Principle: As the initial point of contact for the witness, the 9?1?1/emergency call-taker or dispatcher should obtain and disseminate, in a nonsuggestive manner, complete and accurate information from the caller. This information can include the description/identity of the perpetrator of a crime. The actions of the call-taker/dispatcher can affect the safety of those involved as well as the entire investigation.

Policy: The call-taker/dispatcher should answer each call in a manner conducive to obtaining and disseminating accurate information regarding the crime and the description/identity of the perpetrator.

Procedure: During a 9?1?1/emergency call?after obtaining preliminary information and dispatching police?the call-taker/dispatcher should?

1. Assure the caller the police are on the way.

   This will help to calm the caller so he/she can focus on providing information.

2. Ask open-ended questions (e.g., ?What can you tell me about the car??) and augment with closed-ended questions (e.g., ?What color was the car??).

   An open-ended question allows for an unlimited response from the witness in his/her own words (e.g., ?What can you tell me about the perpetrator?? or ?Tell me in your own words what happened.?) Open-ended questions allow the caller to play an active role, thereby generating a greater amount of unsolicited information. Open-ended responses also tend to be more accurate and promote more effective listening on the part of the call-taker. The call-taker also is less likely to lead the witness when framing questions in this manner.

   A closed-ended question, in contrast, limits the amount or scope of information that the witness can provide (e.g., ?Did the perpetrator have a beard?? or ?What color was the car??). Although it is preferable to use open-ended questioning, the call-taker should follow with more directed questions if the caller is unresponsive to open-ended questions or provides imprecise responses. If, for example, when answering an open-ended question, the witness states that the perpetrator had a weapon, the call-taker should ask the witness what type of weapon it was.

3. Avoid asking suggestive or leading questions (e.g., ?Was the car red??).

   Leading questions suggest an answer and may distort the caller?s perception or memory. The call-taker needs to determine only what the caller knows, uninfluenced by what the call-taker might expect or know from other sources. For example, the call-taker may have been informed by another caller that the car was red, but should not ask, ?Was it a red Honda?? Or, if the call-taker receives a call about a domestic situation, the call-taker should not ask, ?Did your husband hit you?? but should ask, ?What happened?? or ?What is going on now??

4. Ask if anything else should be known about the incident.

   This gives the caller a chance to recall and report any extra information they may have and also contributes to the safety of responding officers.

5. Transmit information to responding officer(s).

   This is necessary for officer safety. Complete information in the hands of responding officers also can result in faster resolution of the incident.

6. Update officer(s) as more information comes in.

Summary: The information obtained from the witness is critical to the safety of those involved and may be important to the investigation. The manner in which facts are elicited from a caller can influence the accuracy of the information obtained.

Principle: Preservation and documentation of the scene, including information from witnesses and physical evidence, are necessary for a thorough preliminary investigation. The methods used by the preliminary investigating officer have a direct impact on the amount and accuracy of the information obtained throughout the investigation.

Policy: The preliminary investigating officer should obtain, preserve, and use the maximum amount of accurate information from the scene.

Procedure: After securing the scene and attending to any victims and injured persons, the preliminary investigating officer should?

1. Identify the perpetrator(s).

   Question persons present at the scene to obtain a description of the perpetrator if still at large.

   1. Determine the location of the perpetrator(s).

      Determine location of perpetrator if it is known or direction/means of travel if the perpetrator fled the scene.

   2. Detain or arrest the perpetrator(s) if still present at the scene.

2. Determine/classify what crime or incident has occurred.

3. Broadcast an updated description of the incident, perpetrator(s), and/or vehicle(s).

   New information can affect resource deployment and type of response (e.g., personnel, support services, or equipment needed).

4. Verify the identity of the witness(es).

   Witnesses will need to be contacted later. Obtain and document valid forms of identification and contact information for each witness. List all witnesses in a written report.

5. Separate witnesses and instruct them to avoid discussing details of the incident with other witnesses.

   Witnesses should not hear others? accounts because they may be influenced by that information. Independent witness statements can corroborate other witnesses? statements and other evidence in the investigation. The following example demonstrates how failure to separate witnesses could mislead an investigation: Suppose that a crime is committed by a perpetrator who is clean shaven. If one witness incorrectly states that the perpetrator had a beard and other witnesses overhear that statement, it could lead them to report that they also saw a beard when in fact they did not. This would direct investigators to search for a bearded suspect.

   It also may be helpful to ascertain whether witnesses have spoken with each other about the incident prior to being separated.

6. Canvass area for other witnesses.

   Witnesses may be reluctant to come forward for any number of reasons or may have departed the scene before law enforcement personnel arrived. Also, other persons in the vicinity, such as neighbors or shopkeepers, may have heard or seen something that could assist in the investigation.

Summary: The preliminary investigation at the scene forms a sound basis for the accurate collection of information and evidence during the followup investigation.

Principle: The manner in which the preliminary investigating officer obtains information from a witness impacts the amount and accuracy of that information.

Policy: The preliminary investigating officer should obtain and accurately document and preserve information from the witness(es).

Procedure: When interviewing a witness, the preliminary investigating officer should?

1. Establish rapport with the witness.

   The development of rapport between the witness and investigator will make the witness more comfortable during the interview process. Comfortable witnesses will generally provide more information. In the course of developing rapport with the witness, the investigator can learn about the witness?s communication style (e.g., how the witness describes everyday events compared with how the witness describes the incident).

2. Inquire about the witness?s condition.

   A simple question, such as ?How are you doing?? will not only contribute to rapport development, but it can alert the investigator to physical or mental conditions (e.g., intoxication, medication, shock) that could potentially impair the witness?s ability to recall or report information effectively.

3. Use open-ended questions (e.g., ?What can you tell me about the car??) and augment with closed-ended questions (e.g., ?What color was the car??). Avoid leading questions (e.g., ?Was the car red??).

   	An open-ended question allows for an unlimited response from the witness in his/her own words (e.g., ?What can you tell me about the perpetrator?? or ?Tell me in your own words what happened?). Open-ended questions allow the witness to play an active role, thereby generating a greater amount of unsolicited information. Open-ended responses also tend to be more accurate and promote more effective listening on the part of the investigator. The investigator also is less likely to lead the witness when framing questions in this manner.
   	A closed-ended question, in contrast, limits the amount or scope of information that the witness can provide (e.g., ?Did the perpetrator have a beard?? or ?What color was the car??). Although it is preferable to use open-ended questioning, the investigator should follow with more directed questions if the witness is unresponsive to open-ended questions or provides imprecise responses. If, for example, when answering an open-ended question, the witness states that the perpetrator was dressed in ?shabby? clothing, the investigator should ask the witness to elaborate on the type of clothing (e.g., ?What do you mean by ?shabby???).
   	For each new topic of information being sought, the investigator should begin with open-ended questions and augment them with closed-ended questions if necessary. For example, if, after having elicited all information from the witness about the perpetrator, the next topic of information is the getaway car, the investigator should begin this line of inquiry with open-ended questions about the car.
   	Leading questions suggest an answer and may distort the witness?s perception or memory. The investigator needs to determine only what the witness knows, uninfluenced by what the investigator might expect or know from other sources. For example, the investigator may have been informed by another witness that the car was red, but should not ask, ?Was it a red Honda??

4. Clarify the information received with the witness.

   Asking the witness about what they have reported ensures that the information has been understood and accurately recorded.

5. Document information obtained from the witness, including the witness?s identity, in a written report.

   This information will be necessary when the witness is contacted for a followup interview.

6. Encourage the witness to contact investigators with any further information.

   Witnesses will often remember additional, useful information after an interview. Remind the witness that any information, no matter how trivial it may seem, is important. For example, if the witness later remembers that the perpetrator drank from a soft drink can at the scene, there could be fingerprints or saliva on the can. Additionally, in such cases as sexual assault or arson, the witness may later recall or recognize a distinct smell that was either on the perpetrator (such as cologne) or at the scene (such as gasoline) that could be useful in developing leads.

7. Encourage the witness to avoid contact with the media or exposure to media accounts concerning the incident.

   Media information may contaminate the witness?s memory. Media requests for a story or offers of compensation may encourage a witness to fabricate information.

8. Instruct the witness to avoid discussing details of the incident with other potential witnesses.

   Witnesses should not hear others? accounts because they may be influenced by that information. The independence of witnesses is important to see if the information they have provided is consistent with other witnesses? statements and other evidence in the investigation. As an example of the importance of independent sources for corroboration, suppose you wanted to corroborate a crime report that appeared in a local newspaper. Finding a second copy of that newspaper that reports the same story does not corroborate the first newspaper story because they are from the same source. Proper corroboration requires that the source be a second, independent news report.

Summary: Information obtained from the witness can corroborate other evidence (e.g., physical evidence, accounts provided by other witnesses) in the investigation. Therefore, it is important that this information be accurately documented in writing.