The suspect's statement in interaction: Responding to ‘formulations’ in the investigative interview

Abstract

This study explores suspects' responses to ‘formulations’ – retellings by police officers of what the suspect has said – in investigative interviews. It involves a data set of 73 audio recordings of interviews with suspects in Norway. Police investigators regularly ‘formulate’ the gist of the suspect's statement, preserving what is relevant and transforming a lay narrative into one that is legally adequate. This study focuses on response preference and forms of resistance in suspects' responses to such formulations. When police officers propose a formulation of what has been said, suspects may either confirm or disconfirm it, or do neither. The analysis shows that (1) preferred responses may take form either as minimal yes responses or repetitional responses, which confirm the candidate understanding; and (2) non-preferred responses come in two formats: as active resistance in that they explicitly reject or challenge a formulation, or as passive resistance which withholds acceptance, leading police officers to pursue an answer and seek for confirmation. By focusing on the way in which formulations function in interaction and how suspects may challenge them, the analysis explores how suspects may assert their right to ‘own’ and retain control over their story and how it is developed and transformed during the interview.