The defining moment of any interrogation is the behavior of the person being interrogated. It doesn’t matter in what status you are participating in the interrogation - they accuse you or are simply waiting for an explanation of the case - you need to behave equally calmly and confidently. The task of the Investigative Committee employees is to bring the citizen to confession. Your task is not to harm yourself in any way.
To avoid becoming a victim of provocation or psychological pressure, enlist the support of a lawyer. This is the main rule - never come to interrogation without your lawyer.
Only a lawyer will be able to impartially assess the situation, find the right approach and develop the optimal behavior strategy for you.
Do you want to figure it out, but don’t have time to read the article? Lawyers will help
Entrust the task to professionals. Lawyers will complete the order at the cost you specify
25 lawyers on RTIGER.com can help with this issue
Solve the issue >
How is the interrogation going?
Questioning and interrogation are two legal terms that seem similar, but differ significantly in their composition. Before opening a case, it is checked and a survey is organized to identify key circumstances.
The investigators are interviewing, not the investigator. Their task is to check the basic facts and provide evidence to the investigative committee. A citizen has the right to refuse to participate in the survey; this will not be a reason for imposing additional liability.
If a case is opened following an inspection, it will be dealt with by an investigator. He also calls the citizen for questioning. The challenge can be either oral or official - in the form of a summons.
You cannot ignore it, otherwise it will be regarded as evasion and will lead to corresponding consequences. The summons is always handed over against signature - personally or to any adult family member. If you are summoned verbally (by telephone), still request a subpoena form. An official summons must indicate the date, time, place of interrogation, the status of the person being summoned, and the consequences for avoiding testifying.
Let us say right away that all summoned persons are required to testify. Only suspects or those already accused in a case can refuse to testify.
The order of interrogation depends on the status of the person being interrogated. A citizen can be involved in a case as a witness, suspect or person giving explanations. Therefore, before starting a conversation, find out this point from the investigator and only after that work out your line of behavior.
So, you have received a summons for questioning - you need to go to the investigator, there is no other option. Your further task is to monitor the correctness of his actions. Here are the basic rules for interrogation:
- the first thing the investigator must do is to establish the identity of the person being interrogated;
- then the law enforcement officer explains the reason for the call and lists all the rights and obligations of the person being interrogated;
- then the official conversation itself begins in the format “investigator’s question - answer of the person being interrogated”;
- the entire course of the interrogation is noted in the protocol;
- The investigator is obliged to keep a protocol, and the citizen has the same right - the interrogated person can record all questions and answers on paper in his own hand.
The suspect and the accused may not testify, but the witness is obliged to answer the investigator all questions asked during the interrogation. Here's what absolutely everyone should remember - the Constitution of the Russian Federation gives citizens the opportunity not to testify against themselves and their close relatives (Article 51 of the Russian Federation).
Don't forget about the physical rules. The interrogation is limited in time - the maximum time for conversation is 8 hours. If a conversation lasts four hours without a break, then the parties are required to break for an hour to rest.
Another rule is the tone of communication. The investigator should not cross boundaries, threaten, pressure or dictate. The interrogated person, in turn, must communicate strictly, but politely and not be rude to the representative of the law.
Well, the most important rule is that all conversations during interrogation are best conducted only in the presence of a lawyer. If it is not possible to use private legal services, you can request a human rights defender from the investigation, but this is definitely not the best solution.
A lawyer you can completely trust is not only your defense, but also a guarantee of a positive outcome of any interrogation.
“You know why you were taken”...
The situation when a “stout” man in a leather jacket comes to your office and asks you to “walk” with him in an unknown direction, you must admit, is extremely exciting and unpleasant. Even if the same individual entrepreneur with an annual turnover of no more than one million rubles did not commit anything illegal, regularly contributed money to the funds for one single employee, and also honestly bore the burden of “simplified”, he will still have a problem in his head. many questions: “Why me”? "For what"? “What do they want from me?” The effect of surprise and the state of uncertainty aggravate the emotional component of this moment, and at this stage many people begin to experience jitters. In general, this is what the investigator was trying to achieve when he “accidentally” visited our individual entrepreneur. What happens next? And then everything is “according to Stanislavsky”: an office, a table, chairs, a thick folder “Case” and the feeling that the investigator here is the master of the situation. If a representative of law enforcement agencies has real suspicions about an entrepreneur, or he may be a defendant in some other case, then the investigator will begin to ask him questions, but first he will make one more curtsey towards the suspect. It sounds something like this: “So, Pal Palych, will you tell me yourself or will we extract testimony? Just think about it... Think well”... At this moment the investigator leaves the office, leaving our hero in alien territory with a bunch of questions that are disparate in their content. It is precisely the state of confusion, fear and uncertainty that will become a solid opportunity for the detective to find out the necessary information. In this case, we recommend that everyone understand one important rule - you must remain as firm as a rock, answer only “Yes” or “No” to closed questions, and try to avoid open questions. Remember that Russian legislation requires interrogation to be conducted without interruption for no more than 4 hours in a row and no more than 8 hours during the day. The investigator himself will get tired of torturing you.
How to behave during interrogation
Presumption of innocence - always think about this concept when going for interrogation in any status. What does it mean? Until guilt or innocence is proven, no one has the right to accuse the suspect. This is a basic legal principle that must be respected both during interrogation and in court. If the investigator or judge has certain doubts, until guilt is proven, they are interpreted in favor of the suspect.
Remember to maintain the presumption of innocence when speaking with government officials. Moreover, the law does not prohibit answering only a number of questions - if you consider it necessary to remain silent or not give your answer, you have the right to do so, and no liability will follow for this.
The investigator should ask direct questions - not leading or hinting, but only those that are directly related to the case. If the question is not related to the investigation, do not give your answer. Any third-party statement from the person being questioned can be used against him in court.
In general, the procedure for behavior during interrogation can be formulated through several key factors. Here are some things to keep in mind during a formal conversation with law enforcement.
Behavior
Remember one golden rule. It is better for the interrogated person to remain mostly silent. Speak only by answering the questions posed, and strictly on the topic, without citing unnecessary facts. You must be calm and confident; emotions are definitely not necessary here. Before starting each answer, pause and always think about your remarks.
Take your time, don’t push yourself, and don’t be rude to the investigator under any circumstances. At the same time, try not to look into his eyes - find a distracting object and study it with your eyes.
This technique will help you concentrate and not say too much. Do not show your fear and do not ask the investigator for anything. And, of course, don’t lie—focus on the real facts and their consistency. This is the main line of behavior - calmness, confidence, politeness (but in no case ingratiation) and clarity.
Protocol
This is an important point. The entire conversation must be recorded. The records compiled will play an important role in court. Therefore, the interrogated person must control the progress of drawing up the protocol.
If the investigator does not keep this document, demand that it be drawn up. The report must be signed by all participants in the conversation - the investigators and the person being interrogated.
If you are not provided with a recording document to sign, it automatically becomes invalid. The signature must appear on every page.
If the conversation is conducted by an investigator who is not listed in the protocol, this is an offense, and his questions may not be answered. Always read the protocol before signing and note any procedural violations therein. If the investigator did not include or concealed important details received from the person being interrogated, note this fact and only then sign the protocol.
"Think about your family"
Family is the most important thing in a person’s life, no matter what anyone says. The investigators also share the same opinion, at least within the framework of the interrogation. Realizing that the person being interrogated is in an extremely vulnerable position, even with an irrefutable alibi, they still try to “talk” the person, pointing out key aspects of his life. The dialogue here could be like this:
- Pal Palych, don’t you understand what you’ve gotten yourself into?
- No, I don’t understand.
- Do not understand? So I’ll explain to you... For fraud you face up to 7 years in prison. A sincere confession and work with the investigation will help you, you can apply for a suspended sentence... Think about your family, you are their only breadwinner...
Perhaps, in this situation, it is possible and necessary to meet the investigation halfway, if there really was a real fraud, because this could help significantly in the future. Ideally, a dialogue with a lawyer would be helpful here, because... his advice should help build a line of defense in court. However, the investigation is not guilty of making such offers to obviously innocent people, expressing a desire to hang another “hanging fruit” on them (a case that, due to the lack of evidence, has been open for a long time). In other words, to find in the form of our entrepreneur the culprit of a completely different crime. In specific circles this is called “lawlessness,” and it is very important for our hero to avoid fatal mistakes here. If you know that you are not guilty of anything, do not make any persuasion, do not succumb to psychological pressure, even if the speech of a law enforcement officer includes words about family. All this is just another trick, of all things.
Read the article: “What to do if tax authorities are knocking on your door”?
"Good and Bad Cop"
It is not known for certain where this expression was first used, but we suspect that its essence has not changed for many decades. How it works? A “kind” investigator tends to sympathize with the person with whom he has to talk. He laments how unfairly life has treated the entrepreneur, that in Russia it is impossible to conduct an honest business and that (unfortunately) he has nothing left to do but conduct an interrogation now. Essentially, this tactic comes down to shifting all negative actions onto some abstraction (life, state, events, economy), etc. At the same time, he himself must remain “good” in the eyes of the interrogated. In theory, this method should lower a person's guard and make them want to "tell something" without feeling threatened. The “bad” cop option is the exact opposite. There are sharp changes in the tone of the conversation here. It seems that he is about to scream, followed by almost threats of “death”, “life imprisonment”, the words are heard: “Do you even understand what you have done”?! In addition to this picture, some folder may involuntarily be thrown onto the table, a fist hit against the wall, or something else from the same series. The biggest problem is that both policemen manage to live in one person and within the same interrogation. The best “medicine” is not to give rise to emotions. If you answered the questions and remarks of the “bad” policeman succinctly, then you need to answer the “good” one in exactly the same way. Remember that the Constitution guarantees the right of everyone not to testify against themselves or close relatives. According to the user's prompt, we are talking about Article 51 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation.
"Intimate Conversation"
Investigators are people too, and they have both good and bad days at work. If all of the above did not work with the person being interrogated, it means that he had to “sweat a lot.” One of the few things he can still resort to is a “heart-to-heart conversation.” This technique works great in Russia, if only for the reason that our people, due to the lack of “real” conversation, are ready to tell a lot about themselves, about their acquaintances and loved ones, if they are won over. Philosophical topics are usually raised here, discussions of some unrelated events, stories about childhood, health, etc. Unfortunately, this technique made it possible to subsequently put pressure on the most persistent entrepreneurs, after which they willingly agreed to a deal with the investigation. A sample dialogue might sound like this:
- Okay, Pal Palych, I’m tired of talking to you. If you don’t want to repent, God is with you. You’d better tell me, you’re originally from the Chelyabinsk region, aren’t you? My grandfather is from there. When I was little, we often went there to his house. There, you know, the nature is like that, not like here... It used to be that the boys ran into the forest to pick berries, and there were so many different animals... Have you seen how beautiful the lakes are there?!
- Yes, of course... Unfortunately, there are no such people here. When we were young, we also loved to swim in them, we used to go fishing...
— What was your biggest catch?
- Oh, you won’t believe it! A ten-kilogram perch was once caught on a hook!
- Incredible! Tell me! Shall I pour you some tea?
Such a conversation can last a long time. Here our entrepreneur will remember such stories, tell so many “with a twinkle” that he will not regret it later. The investigator is a cunning person, he can cleverly play with facts from a past life and apply them to current realities. After a “confidential” conversation, it is usually difficult to refuse - this is elementary psychology. We recommend that our readers in a similar situation do not go into too much detail about their past life, and also very carefully evaluate events that are not related to the original topic of conversation. The main thing is to understand that the law enforcement officer is not trying to make friends with you. He just does his job and nothing more.
