What Causes
Investigations to Fail?
Common Mistakes that Investigators Make
Ian Edwards
ian-edwards.com
Common mistakes that
some investigators make
(nobody in this room of course)…
They allow witnesses to say things that aren’t true
They don’t know what to investigate
They don’t know how to interview without getting
lost
They don’t know how to tell people what they have
found through the investigation
Let’s play a
game!
Say what you see
What is it that you
see?
How about this?
What can you see?
What is this a picture of?
Write down what you see
How did you do?
This picture was part of…
A sellotape dispenser
This picture was part of…
A drink can
This picture was part of…
A pencil
This picture was part of…
A battery
This picture was part of…
A USB thumb
drive
Who got this one?
A pencil
How do we know it didn’t end here?
Was it really a pencil?
Or was it…
an object with yellow and
green coloured
horizontal bands and
vertical indentations on
the middle green band?
Let’s define our behaviour
Lie?
An intentionally false statement
Deceive?
Deliberately cause (someone) to believe
something that is not true
Mislead?
Cause (someone) to have a wrong idea or
impression
Mistaken?
Wrong in one’s opinion or judgement
Assumption
A thing that is accepted as true or
as certain to happen, without proof
The dangers of making an assumption…
Witnesses want to please you.
They fill in the gaps.
You can only report on fact; don’t
try and fill the gaps
What is an investigation?
Oxford English Dictionary
noun
The action of investigating something or
someone;
formal or systematic examination or research
Systematic = Done or acting according to a
fixed plan or system; methodical
So we need a plan!
The first part of our plan…
What are we investigating?
Allegation received from Mary Smith that she
saw Peter Jones remove a ream of paper and
a box of pens from the stationery cupboard at
the Symposium Civic Offices and place them
into his briefcase before leaving the office for
home.
How should an allegation be drafted?
My suggestion…
It is alleged that you breached the Symposium Code of Conduct by taking
property of Symposium Shire without authority to do so.
Particulars
1. The Symposium Shire Code of Conduct requires that employees do
not act dishonestly or unlawfully in the course of their employment.
2. On 5 November 2014 you removed a ream of paper from the
Symposium Civic Offices and took it away from the Symposium Civic
Offices without authority to do so.
3. On 5 November 2014 you removed a box of pens from the
Symposium Civic Offices and took it away from the Symposium Civic
Offices without authority to do so.
4. If proven, the conduct alleged above may constitute a breach of the
Symposium Shire Code of Conduct.
The second part of our plan…
Who do we speak to and what do we speak
to them about?
Any action / inquiry / interview should always
relate to the particulars of the allegation.
If it doesn’t, you need to revisit your scope or
consider having the allegation redrafted and
put to the respondent again.
Allegation + Particulars = Scope
Part three of our plan…
Gathering the evidence
How do we plan a witness
interview?
Two questions:
• An opening question
• A contingency question
Don’t get lost…
Sitting at
my desk
Peter
walked in
Date/time
Who is
Peter
Describe
office
Who else
present
Where
were they
Lighting
Describe
Wearing
Carrying
Speech
Opened
cupboard
Took out
things
Shoved in
his bag
Walked off
The final part of our plan…
The Investigation Report
Consider the particular:
Can it be satisfied?
Let’s use one of our particulars as an example
On 5 November 2014 you removed a ream of paper
from the Symposium Civic Offices and took it away from
the Symposium Civic Offices without authority to do so.
Analysis
In interview, Mary Smith said that, on DATE, at TIME,
she saw Peter Jones enter the Symposium Civic
Offices. Mary Smith went on to say that, having
entered the offices, she saw Peter Jones remove a
ream of paper from a cupboard.
A stocktake undertaken by Chris Green, identified
that the paper stocks were deficient by one ream
following the alleged removal by Peter Jones.
Analysis (continued)
CCTV footage of the parking area of Symposium Civic Offices
identified that, on 5 November 2014 , at 0900hrs, a person
matching the description of Peter Jones placed a ream of
paper into the boot of a Ford Focus 1EFG 123, a vehicle
owned by Symposium Shire and used exclusively by Peter
Jones.
In interview, David Brown, the Stationery Manager, stated
that he had not provided Peter Jones with any authority to
remove any item of stationery from the Symposium Civic
Offices.
On the balance of probabilities, it is considered more likely
than not, that, on 5 November 2014 , at 0900hrs, Peter Jones
removed a ream of paper from the Symposium Civic Offices
without authority.
So what have we covered?
Challenge the assumptions of witnesses
(and our own)
Focus on the allegation(s) and particulars
Make the interview a structured conversation
Report the detail and don’t get side tracked
Do we still make assumptions???
Ian Edwards
ian-edwards.com
What Causes
Investigations to Fail?
Common Mistakes that Investigators Make
Thank you for your
participation
Ian Edwards
ian-edwards.com