Via the Curmudgeonly Clerk,
a Mr.
Bowden has a long
and interesting article on interrogation techniques in The Atlantic. Here is one
example, from Israel:
In one case Koubi had information suggesting that two men he was
questioning were secretly members of a terrorist cell, and knew of an
impending attack. They were tough men, rural farmers, very difficult to
intimidate or pressure, and so far neither man had admitted anything
under questioning. Koubi worked them over individually for hours. With
each man he would start off by asking friendly questions and then grow
angrier and angrier, accusing the subject of withholding something. He
would slap him, knock him off his chair, set guards on him, and then
intervene to pull them off. Then he would put the subject back in the
chair and offer him a cigarette, lightening the mood. "Let him see the
difference between the two atmospheres, the hostile one and the friendly
one," Koubi says. Neither man budged.
Finally Koubi set his trap. He announced to one of the men that his
interrogation was over. The man's associate, hooded, was seated in the
hallway outside the room. "We are going to release you," Koubi said. "We
are pleased with your cooperation. But first you must do something for
me. I am going to ask you a series of questions, just a formality, and I
need you to answer 'Yes' in a loud, clear voice for the recorder." Then,
in a voice loud enough for the hooded man outside in the hall to hear,
but soft enough so that he couldn't make out exactly what was being
said, Koubi read off a long list of questions, reviewing the prisoner's
name, age, marital status, date of capture, length of detainment, and so
forth. These were regularly punctuated by the prisoner's loud and
cooperative "Yes." The charade was enough to convince the man in the
hall that his friend had capitulated.
Koubi dismissed the first man and brought in the second. "There's no
more need for me to question you," Koubi said. "Your friend has
confessed the whole thing." He offered the second prisoner a cigarette
and gave him a good meal. He told him that the information provided by
his friend virtually ensured that they would both be in prison for the
rest of their lives ... unless, he said, the second prisoner could offer
him something, anything, that would dispose the court to leniency in his
case. Convinced that his friend had already betrayed them both, the
second prisoner acted promptly to save himself. "If you want to save
Israeli lives, go immediately," he told Koubi. "My friends went with a
car to Yeshiva Nehalim [a religious school]. They are going to kidnap a
group of students ..." The men were found in Erez, and the operation was
foiled.
The article has interesting practical ideas like this one, and raises lots of hard
moral questions. Practically everyone has some occasion to interrogate someone else, so
we should all be interested. I didn't get to use torture, but I remember thinking hard
about some of the things in the article when I had a cheating scandal in my large
lecture a couple of years ago and had 13 students into my office, one by one. All but
two confessed (and those two probably had the strongest physical evidence against them!)
.
[ permalink, http://php.indiana.edu/~erasmuse/w/03.12.13c.htm ]
To return to Eric Rasmusen's weblog, click http://php.indiana.edu/~erasmuse/w/0.rasmusen.htm.