Practical Guidelines and Suggestions for the Investigator


Administrators are faced with a wide array of circumstances, involving both staff and students, where quick, competent interviews must be done in a thorough fashion.  Below, we identify generally applicable guidelines for such investigations.  We also discuss considerations for interviewing students, and the accused.

A. General Principles:

1. Interviews should ideally take place promptly while the incident is still fresh in the witnesses' minds and memories.
2. Identify and gather any documents or other physical evidence promptly before they are lost or destroyed.
3. Take good quality color photographs where appropriate, e.g., of bruises.
4. Record an interview if necessary or helpful.  If a tape recorder is used, inform the witness about it, secure their permission, and keep it in plain view throughout the interview.
5. Keep detailed notes of all questions asked and all answers.  The investigator should never rely on his or her memory.
6.  The notes should be dated accurately to demonstrate that the investigation was performed promptly and that the notes were made in contemporaneous manner.
7. Assume that the notes will be discoverable by the employee's attorney or union representative, or that they may be subpoenaed in a subsequent criminal proceeding.
8. Keep a time line of the events that took place before, during, and after the incident(s) in question.
9. Ask the witness to keep the investigation confidential.
10. Consider whether a statement should be written out and/or signed by the witness.
11. Consider using language such as the following in a typewritten statement:
“I was given this statement to review before signing it.  I was given an opportunity to add to, delete, and/or change anything I wanted to ensure its accuracy.  I am signing the statement voluntarily and of my own free will, and with the understanding that it may be used to assist in a disciplinary proceeding that the District has brought [or may file] against [name of employee].  I affirm that the statements herein are true and accurate.
12. Save unfriendly or embarrassing questions until the end of the interview.

B. Credibility Determination – Factors to Consider:

1. Corroboration.
2. Motive to lie.
3. Demeanor: Did the witness seem to be telling the truth?  Was he or she evasive, sweating, or nervous?  Was he or she unduly reluctant to sign a statement?
4. “Body language” communicated through posture, arm position, eye contact, or avoidance, restlessness, and the like.
5. What is the witness' reputation for truth and veracity?
6. What is known about the witness' criminal record, student discipline record, or moral character?
7. Did the alleged perpetrator have a history of similar behavior in the past?
8. Relationships/interactions/past involvements among individuals involved.
9. Any other relevant past history.

C. Conducting the Interview

1. Consider who should conduct the interview.
2. The truth, the whole truth, and nothing bu the truth – explain this standard and that this is a serious matter.
3. The investigator should be prepared to testify at any hearing.
4. Interview strategy: Order of interviews

a. Complaining witness should be interviewed first, then
b. Eyewitnesses,
c. Corroborating witnesses, and
d. Suspect/alleged perpetrator should be interviewed last.

5. Each witness should ideally be interviewed separately rather than in a group.
6. Consider whether it is strategic or advisable to conduct interviews after hours and/or away from the employee's usual workplace.
7. Have a prepared checklist of questions to ask.



INTERVIEWING STUDENTS – SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS


A. Is the student the accuser, the accused, a victim, or a witness?
B. Conduct involved

1. Criminal
2. Non-Criminal

C. Parental Contact

1. Does the District have rules, guidelines, or preferred practices?
2. Dealing with anxious, angry, or non-cooperative parent

D. Consider whether an administrator or counselor should be present.
E. Interview Techniques

1. Gravity of situation
2. Vocabulary
3. Don't “lead” with questions

F. Special Considerations

1. Age
2. Maturity
3. Trauma
4. Involvement of other agencies
5. Fear
6. Retaliation
7. Special Ed
8. Student records
9. Confidentiality
10. Peer pressure
11. Sex cases


INTERVIEWING THE ACCUSED


A. In order to do a thorough and fair investigation, the suspect/accused/alleged perpetrator's “side of the story” must be elicited.
B. The alleged perpetrator generally should be directed to meet with the investigator for this purpose.
C. Weingarten principles should be followed when questioning a union employee suspected of misconduct?

1. The union representative can:

a. meet privately with the employee before questioning begins;
b. counsel an employee against losing his or her temper;
c. object to confusing questions and request clarification so that the employee understands what he or she is being asked;
d. object to unreasonably intimidating tactics;
e. raise extenuating factors; and
f. later serve as a witness to the fairness or thoroughness of the investigation.

2. The union representative cannot:

a. insist that the interview be ended;
b. answer questions for the employee – it is the employee's obligation to answer questions himself or herself; or
c. counsel the employee to refuse to answer questions (except in those limited circumstances where, e.g., a tenured teacher in some states may have such a right).