Differentiate an interview from an interrogation.

Differentiate an interview from an interrogation.

• A. An interview is questioning of a witness or non-custodial person.
• B. Interviews require you to read rights, while interrogations do not.
• C. Interrogations are the same as interviews in all circumstances.
• D. Interviews only involve non-witnesses.

Answer: (A)

The main idea here is the difference in custody status and purpose when police talk with someone. An interview is noncustodial questioning of a person who is typically a witness or someone who is free to leave, and the goal is to gather information or facts. Because the person isn’t under arrest, the interaction tends to be less formal and coercive, and there’s no requirement to give Miranda rights. Interrogation, on the other hand, targets a suspect or someone in custody, with the aim of eliciting information about a crime and a potential confession. It happens in a more controlled, persistent setting and raises constitutional considerations, such as when warnings are required before questioning about the offense. That’s why the statement about interviewing a witness or non-custodial person best captures the distinction. The other options don’t fit: rights advisement is tied to custodial interrogation rather than all interviews; interrogations are not identical to interviews in every situation; and interviews can involve witnesses, not only non-witnesses.

The main idea here is the difference in custody status and purpose when police talk with someone. An interview is noncustodial questioning of a person who is typically a witness or someone who is free to leave, and the goal is to gather information or facts. Because the person isn’t under arrest, the interaction tends to be less formal and coercive, and there’s no requirement to give Miranda rights.

Interrogation, on the other hand, targets a suspect or someone in custody, with the aim of eliciting information about a crime and a potential confession. It happens in a more controlled, persistent setting and raises constitutional considerations, such as when warnings are required before questioning about the offense.

That’s why the statement about interviewing a witness or non-custodial person best captures the distinction. The other options don’t fit: rights advisement is tied to custodial interrogation rather than all interviews; interrogations are not identical to interviews in every situation; and interviews can involve witnesses, not only non-witnesses.