Another approach to avoid is attempting to interview someone at their job . That can sometimes get them in hot water at work , give them unwanted attention from coworkers , and violate their privacy . It can make a witness angry , which is the opposite effect you ’ re looking for when you ’ re trying to build rapport and get some information with nothing really to give in return . I ’ ve approached witnesses at work and had success , but it ’ s a last resort — as a show of respect to the witness .
When your client doesn ’ t have a big budget or is on a tight deadline but has many witnesses , in-person interviewing with everyone can ’ t happen . Sometimes , witnesses are dispersed around the state or country and aren ’ t at home the first time you attempt them — multiple trips and attempts can get expensive fast . But , I still recommend highlighting some of your most important witnesses and trying them in person until you catch them at home . It could be the difference between getting the interview or getting hung up on .
ABA Guidelines
Even if you are unlikely to be working on a death penalty case , some of the same investigative principles apply — from a simple assault case to a complex civil lawsuit . In the American Bar Association Guidelines for the Appointment and Performance of Defense Counsel in Death Penalty Cases , guideline 10.11 of the Supplementary Guidelines for the Mitigation Function of Defense Teams in Death Penalty Cases , subsection C , states :
“ Team members must conduct in-person , face-to-face , one-onone interviews with the client , the client ’ s family , and other witnesses who are familiar with the client ’ s life , history , or family history or who would support a sentence less than death . Multiple interviews will be necessary to establish trust , elicit sensitive information , and conduct a thorough and reliable life-history investigation . Team members must endeavor to establish the rapport with the client and witnesses that will be necessary to provide the client with a defense in accordance with constitutional guarantees relevant to a capital sentencing proceeding .”
The ABA guidelines require in-person , face-to-face , one-on-one interviews because it is the most effective method , hands down . The stakes in a capital case are high : it ’ s truly life or death , so it is expected that we settle for nothing but the best . Someone ’ s life in prison or financial future is also critical . Interviews in all types of cases , not just capital mitigation , should be conducted in person and face-to-face . Very rarely have I been in a situation where an in-person interview would have been detrimental . Law enforcement conducts most of their interviews in person , so trying to connect with a witness by phone puts an investigator at a major disadvantage . Yes , it ’ s more time-intensive but the interviews are almost always more valuable .
The Why
When you get together with your colleagues for lunch , do you spend more time talking and sharing more deeply than on a phone call ? I know I do . The same goes for witnesses . There ’ s no replacement for face-to-face human interaction .
Getting sensitive information from someone has to be earned through trust building . Making that phone call as a stranger typically won ’ t get you that . A caring nod that you ’ re actively listening or noticing and commenting on something meaningful to the witness ( like their garden or the meal they are preparing ) is a major component of human connection . That ’ s how we build trust ; we notice each other ’ s humanity .
Receiving a phone call about what could be the most traumatic experience of their life might feel insensitive to a witness . In person , it ’ s easier to read their reactions to your inquiries and patch the witness up — so they ’ re not a total mess when you leave . Talking to someone in person this way can often be more considerate .
When I was a green investigator , knocking on a stranger ’ s door felt funny . I just had to remind myself : This is my client ’ s future , and this is a legal matter . I have a legitimate purpose for being here . On occasion , I ’ ve had the door slammed in my face . It ’ s not personal . But more often , I ’ ve been invited inside to sit on the couch and been told stories that helped to turn the tide in my client ’ s case . This is part of turning over every stone and creating an environment where the truth surfaces naturally , the right way : through in-person , human-to-human connection .
Amber Kaset is a private investigator and mitigation specialist with over 20 years of experience . She is the owner of AK Investigations , a private investigation agency based in Nashville , TN and Louisville , KY . For more information , visit www . akinvestigations . com .