DepartmentsFeaturesJune 2007Volume 76Number 6United StatesDepartment of JusticeFederal Bureau of InvestigationWashington, DC20535-0001Robert S. Mueller IIIDirectorContributors opinions and statementsshould not be considered anendorsement by the FBI for any policy,program, or service.The attorney general has determinedthat the publication of this periodicalis necessary in the transaction of thepublic business required by law. Useof funds for printing this periodical hasbeen approved by the director of theOffice of Management and Budget.The FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin(ISSN-0014-5688) is publishedmonthly by the Federal Bureau ofInvestigation, 935 PennsylvaniaAvenue, N.W., Washington, D.C.20535-0001. Periodicals postage paidat Washington, D.C., and additionalmailing offices. Postmaster:Sendaddress changes to Editor, FBI LawEnforcement Bulletin, FBI Academy,Madison Building, Room 201,Quantico, VA 22135.EditorJohn E. OttAssociate EditorsCynthia L. LewisDavid W. MacWhaBunny S. MorrisArt DirectorDenise Bennett SmithAssistant Art DirectorStephanie L. LoweStaff AssistantsCynthia H. McWhirtGabriel E. RyanThis publication is produced bymembers of the Law EnforcementCommunication Unit, Training Division.Issues are available online athttp://www.fbi.gov.Internet Addressleb@fbiacademy.eduCover PhotosKurt CrawfordSend article submissions to Editor,FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin,FBI Academy, Madison Building,Room 201, Quantico, VA22135.Perfect PracticeMakes PerfectBy Douglas A. KnightThe StructuredInvestigative Interview By Andre B. Simonsand Brian Parsi BoetigReligion in thePublic Workplace By Richard G. Schott1Law enforcement ofcers can use aneight-phase structured interview thatthey can adapt to many police-citizenencounters.Only through perfect practice canofcers master the shooting skillsnecessary to protect the citizensthey serve.923Law enforcement executives must beknowledgeable of First Amendmentrights when supervising employeesof different faiths. 8Leadership SpotlightWant to Be a Better Leader?21 ViCAP AlertTruck Driver Serial Killings22 Notable SpeechReflection and RemembranceISSN 0014-5688 USPS 383-31059923x.indd4 5/21/200710:56:50 AMJune 2007 / 1f youre dealing with an ofcer, hes going to have a professional I mean, how many guys do you know that would hand-cuff themselves and sit in their apartment night after night thinking of ways to get out of them...? I watch you guys....You people dont know me as well as I know you. Like I showed you, I didnt feel the cuff loos-en. I heard it. Why? Because I trained myself to do that.My biggest fear was run-ning out of ammunition. Hes coming at me ring, and Ive got one or two rounds left. I was not going to get caught in that situation. Instinct took over, and I cant even remember pulling the magazine out of my pouch.... It was so trained into me because of the training we have in the police department. Everything came together and it was done smooth. It would not have been that smooth had I not had that training.Imanner if hes a professional. They go to the range two, three times a week. They practice arms so they can hit anything. So, that was my object. I aint got no range, but I got the back-yard.... Im going to put some targets up, and Im going to see what I can hit. After about 2 or 3 months, I was very good.1Perfect Practice Makes PerfectThe Importance of Accurate Firearms TrainingBy DOUGLAS A. KNIGHT59923.indd 1 4/26/2007 4:46:23 PM2 / FBI Law Enforcement BulletinTraining, it saved my life; theres no doubt about it. I think the trainers, which were our people, were excellent. They drilled us to the point where we had to wear Band-Aids on our hands. The repetitive training that they did, you can do this stuff in your sleep. The days that we were doing it, when you got home, thats all you were thinking....These statements from of-fenders and law enforcement ofcers involved in violent encounters dramatically demon-strate the importance of qual-ity, ongoing rearms training. Criminals constantly hone their shooting skills, and of-cers must do the same if they are to survive confrontations with these lawless members of society. To this end, ofcers must receive correct instruction that will enable them to acquire superior abilities with rearms. After all, practicing the wrong techniques never will make ofcers competent shooters because only perfect practice makes perfect.SHOOTINGFUNDAMENTALSFirearms training, particu-larly in the law enforcement application, includes seven basic concepts or fundamentals. Variations of these can occur but generally fall within the parameters outlined.1) Trigger control: the uid and continuous increase in pres-sure applied to the trigger to release the ring pin and subsequently discharge the handgun without disturbing the sights or unintention-ally moving the muzzle off target. Pistol conguration does not provide the same three-point stability of a long gun anchored to the shooters shoulder and stabi-lized with the forearm. The slightest twisting or torqu-ing of the pistol immedi-ately prior to discharge can signicantly alter the bul-lets point of impact. Proper trigger control also includes an immediate reset of the trigger in preparation of delivering another round if necessary.2) Sight alignment: the estab-lishment of the relationship between the front and rear sights to ensure consistency of respective heights and visible light on either side of the front sight in the rear-sight notch. The focus point is the front sight viewed through the rear sight. Sight alignment never is perfect due to the constant motion of the human body, referred to as innite weave or wobble.3) Sight picture: the relation-ship of the acquired sight alignment and the intended target.4) Grip: the connection of the handgun to the body. Proper grip makes the pistol a natu-ral extension of the body and facilitates recoil man-agement to keep the muzzle on target without unwanted torque or twisting.Special Agent Knight, formerly with the Firearms Training Unit, currently is assigned to the FBIs Counterterrorism Division.Criminalsconstantly hone their shooting skills, and ofcers must do the same if they are to survive confrontations with these lawless members of society.59923.indd 2 4/26/2007 4:46:38 PMJune 2007 / 35) Stance: the bodys supportstructure of the weapon sys-tem during shooting. Stancemust have the ability to ef-fectively adapt to conditionsand circumstances presentedto the shooter (e.g., cover orsupport).6) Breath control: the neces-sary breathing to keep thebody charged with oxygenand minimize unwantedmovement or visiondistortion.7) Follow-through: the con-tinuation of the other sixfundamentals and criticalfor follow-up shots.The correct application ofshooting fundamentals becomesmore critical as distance in-creases. Within 5 to 7 yards,shooting is more of a condi-tioned response and instinctthan the precise application ofrened skill. Some argue that,statistically, law enforcementofcers are involved in shoot-ing confrontations within a10-foot radius, and, therefore,all training should be conductedwithin those parameters. Whilestatistics are useful tools incapturing trends and identifyingprobabilities, an indisputablefact of rearms training is thatonce ofcers master shooting at25 yards, conditioning them toshoot quicker at closer targetsgenerally proves much easierthan trying to transition themfrom shooting only at closerange to ring their weapons atextended distances.With this in mind, no dis-cussion of rearms training canbe complete without referenc-ing the signicance of triggercontrol. Improper trigger con-trol results in far more shootingerrors than all other mistakesanswer is a smooth, steady, uidpress that consistently buildspressure and moves the triggeruniformly to the rear all the waythrough the range of motionfrom the moment the slack isout until the weapon discharges.The trigger press mustcontinue its travel smoothlyand uniformly all the waythrough its range of motionuntil discharge, without the of-cer growing impatient and ac-celerating the press or stoppingto realign the sights. The con-cept remains the same whethershooting fast or slow. To shootfaster, the ofcer simply appliesmore pressure to overcome theresistance quicker. Once theweapon discharges, the ofcershould strive to immediatelyreset the trigger and preparefor another shot if necessary.Time wasted with the triggerlingering to the rear and notengaged for another shot couldbe a matter of life and deathin a violent confrontation. Inlethal encounters, ofcersshould shoot until they havestopped the threat. They musttrain vigilantly because theyght like they train and alwaysmust be prepared to deliverone more well-placedshot.2Trigger control seems likea simple skill to master at facevalue. So, how could ofcersever miss? After all, shootingaccurately has only threerequirements.combined. Trigger control alonecan destroy the ideal contribu-tions of the other six conceptsand, therefore, is the most criti-cal fundamental of deliveringan accurate shot with a hand-gun. Proper trigger control en-hances the ability to shoot fastand accurate.UnderstandingTrigger ControlWhat constitutes a cor-rect trigger press? The simpleanswer involves pressing thetrigger without disturbing thesights accurately aligned on theintended target. The detailedOne of the mostcommon errorsis to allow thesubconscious mindto interrupt thetrigger press in aninvoluntary effort torealign the sightsperfectly.59923.indd3 4/26/20074:46:44 PM4 / FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin1) Line up the sights andunderstand that they neverwill be perfect due to thecontinuous wobble orinnite weave associatedwith being human.2) Apply proper triggercontrol.3) Accept and manage therecoil without anticipatingand pushing on the pistolprematurely.Diagnosing ErrorsUnfortunately, diagnos-ing shooting errors can provecomplex. In some cases, it caninvolve a collision between theconscious and subconsciousminds. From the instant theconscious mind recognizes aperfect sight alignment or sightpicture, it instinctively looks forit. Applying pressure to the trig-ger causes the sights to wobbleand naturally drift slightly outof alignment. One of the mostcommon errors is to allow themiss by several inches at 15 to25 yards away.The opposite extreme allowsthe subconscious solution to in-tervene after nding the perfectsight picture and abruptly slam-ming the trigger to dischargethe pistol before the alignmentcan move again. This methodmay work every once in a whilebut never with the consistencynecessary in a law enforcementapplication.Finding CuresPressing a trigger is aunique movement isolated toshooting. Few, if any, other ac-tivities require the same degreeof individual effort of one n-ger. The human hand is geneti-cally engineered to move thengers together as a unit. Thecommon, daily actions of drink-ing a glass of water, opening adoor, answering the phone, orholding a piece of paper can ef-fectively illustrate this.In addition, although subtle,the application of pressure tothe trigger can result in a sym-pathetic response from one ormore of the other ngers orhand muscles that can createunwanted twisting and move-ment of the handgun prior toand during discharge. Moreover,the more difcult the trigger isto press, the more pronouncedthe sympathetic response orunwanted movement.The most effective way tomanage the natural tendencyof a sympathetic response ofsubconscious mind to interruptthe trigger press in an involun-tary effort to realign the sightsperfectly.3When ofcers stop the trig-ger press or dramatically slowit down as the tension starts tomount on the trigger, they mustovercome the frictional resis-tance to get the trigger movingagain. As they apply more andmore pressure, searching forjust enough to get the trigger inmotion, they experience un-wanted rapid acceleration or theinfamous jerk as they sur-pass the resistance, causing thetrigger to abruptly slam to therear. Because of the compressedtravel distance available withmost semiautomatic pistols,not enough time and distanceexists to smooth out the press,and the unintended jerk resultsin unwanted movement of themuzzle prior to discharge. If themuzzle unintentionally rotates1 inch at the point of discharge,the results can be a dramaticUponactivation,apenlinemovesconstantlyfromlefttorighttocapturetimeandmotionasagraph.Whenthetriggerisfullyextended,thepenlinetravelsacrossthebottomofthescreen.Whenthe trigger is held in place fullycompressed, the pen line goes across the top. The lower horizontal line isadjustedtorecognizethepointwheretheslackisoutofthetriggerpressand tension is starting to mount. The upper horizontal line reects the ap-proximate point of discharge.Upper LineLower LineTrigger Graph59923.indd4 4/26/20074:46:52 PMJune 2007 / 5supporting ngers is to keep the trigger in constant, steady mo-tion. Even if the sights wobble slightly out of alignment, the end result of bullet placement will be far more desirable by keeping the trigger in motion as opposed to interrupting the ac-tion to nd the visually elusive perfect sight picture and then slamming the trigger. Pressing the trigger smoothly with an independent motion generally is more of a coordination issue, rather than strength, for most shooters.Ofcers should focus on ev-ery shot and remind themselves to keep their trigger ngers constantly moving once they make the decision to shoot. This internal reminder helps transfer their intellectual intent into a desired motor action.TRAINING APPROACHESTraining time always is a precious commodity, whether in a basic training academy environment or during desig-nated instruction for veteran ofcers. Firearms training is particularly daunting because nothing is inherently natural about operating a little machine, which is what a pistol is, that prompts a small explosion every time it functions. The effective use of technological teaching aids by knowledgeable instruc-tors can dramatically enhance the learning curve by saving time and improving the level of understanding. Experienced Track, the most effective and practical is the trigger graph diagnostic equipment. This technological aid saves training time in understanding and mastering trigger control, allowing more time for realistic scenario-based training.Technologys RoleThe computer-based trig-ger graph equipment captures the application of trigger pres-sure and time in an easy-to-read format that quickly conveys volumes of information about a trainees trigger characteristics to a knowledgeable instructor. The results can be captured and played back for review or recorded on DVD for future comparison.ofcers can benet from this technology as much as recruits.To illustrate how these modern advances can help, the author presents a brief overview of the FBIs intensive remedial rearms training program.4In use for over 10 years, Fast Track employs sophisticated rearms training technology to convey vital information in real time to new agent trainees who have failed to qualify with their service weapons within the prescribed length of time.One-on-one instruction and total immersion in rearms training during a 2-week time frame creates a productive learning environment. Of the numerous technological advances developed for Fast The air-recoil system, appli-cable for both live and dry re, simulates recoil and resets the trigger for use in a classroom environment.Dry re with air-recoil systemLive-re application provides capability for training with duty ammunition.59923.indd 5 4/26/2007 4:46:58 PM6 / FBI Law Enforcement BulletinWith the aid of equipment to address the most likely cul-prit of poor performance, the instructor can design training to maximize effectiveness. Prior to the availability of diagnostic equipment, instructors wasted precious training time establish-ing that trainees understood and could demonstrate each shooting fundamental until the problem was isolated.Proper use of the trigger graph also can help veteran ofcers improve their shooting skills. Firearms are a critical tool of the law enforcement profession, and lives may hinge on an ofcers ability to shoot accurately. Ofcers do not want to perform poorly, especially in front of their peers during regular qualications. Ofcers do not fail by choice. Some fail because they lack direction or knowledge. Others fail because they have allowed bad habits to creep into their process. The trigger graph equipment can help these ofcers improve their shooting skills by validating the contribution of proper trigger control to a well-placed shot in an easy-to-read, real-time graph format that can be captured and reviewed. The development of proper trigger control is learnedbehavior.In marksmanship training, practice alone does not make perfect. Practicing incorrect techniques creates deeply in-grained bad habits. The trigger graph provides a method to The Rubber Band TestTo determine if you can move your trigger nger independently, simply hold your hand in front of you, simulating a grip on a handgun. With the trigger nger at the proper 90-degree angle, move it back and forth, duplicating the motion of a trigger press. Try looping a rm rubber band around your nger with the pres-sure against the pad to simulate a rmer trigger press. Move only your trigger nger with absolutely no mo-tion from any other nger or part of your hand. Note even the most subtle movement. Daily repetitions can help isolate and develop the unique motion of a trigger press to avoid unwanted movement during shooting.Rubber band provides resistance representative of a trigger press.As a training aid, it can develop independent trigger-nger movement and coordination.Trainees can use this system in a live-re environment with a standard duty weapon, modi-ed with the addition of the associated instruments. They also can operate the equipment with a pneumatic air system for indoor training and unsu-pervised use. Live-re practice with the equipment, in conjunc-tion with corresponding video input to determine the point of impact for each round, provides positive reinforcement instanta-neously when the trigger press is smooth and consistent. The ability to capture and observe this correlation between the prescribed trigger press and accurate shot placement also dramatically builds the trainees condence.59923.indd 6 4/26/2007 4:47:05 PMJune 2007 / 7evaluate the quality of a triggerpress that did not exist previ-ously. Only perfect practicemakes perfect.Instructors ImportanceTechnology never will bea substitute for the knowledge,skill, and experience of a giftedrearms instructor. However,it can greatly enhance an in-structors ability to convey thelifesaving lessons of the law en-forcement profession. Technol-ogy, such as the trigger graph,gives instructors the ability todemonstrate, as well as evalu-ate, subtle characteristics thatcan have a dramatic inuenceon shooting performance.Ofcers may only need tore their weapons once in a le-thal force encounter during theirentire careers, but that one timewill prove crucial. Shootingability for a law enforcementprofessional can easily becomea matter of life and death withinseconds. To further complicatematters, shooting skills athigher levels are perishable andrequire regular maintenance.Therefore, knowledgeableinstructors with procienteducational and interpersonalskills perform a vital role inofcer safety. As pointed out inthe opening statements of thisarticle, both ofcers creditedtheir rearms training as havingsaved their lives during violentconfrontations. One ofcer wenton to say, I think the practicingand the repetitiveness of ourtrainers saved my life. I actuallythanked those guys. I went backand talked to them.5CONCLUSIONThe importance of accu-rate rearms training for lawenforcement ofcers cannot beoverstated. Superior shootingskills can be the difference be-tween ofcers protecting the in-nocent from violent criminals orsuccumbing to vicious attacksby lawless individuals. In to-days world of terrorists bent oncausing death and destructionto U.S. citizens and property,ofcers may face even greaterefciently demonstrate andevaluate successful techniquesthat could mean the differencebetween life and death. Knowl-edgeable instructors can ensurethat ofcers receive accuratetraining and do not repeatedlyperform incorrect techniques.Only through perfect practicecan ofcers master the shootingskills they will need to remainthe stalwart guardians of peaceand justice.Endnotes1 All statements are excerpts fromAnthony J. Pinizzotto, Edward F. Davis,and Charles E. Miller III, U.S. Departmentof Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation,Violent Encounters: A Study of FeloniousAssaults on Our Nations Law EnforcementOfcers (Washington, DC, 2006).2 For additional information, seeAnthony J. Pinizzotto, Harry A. Kern, andEdward F. Davis, One-Shot Drops, FBILaw Enforcement Bulletin, October 2004,14-21.3 For additional information, see VishnuKarmakar and Thomas Whitney, MentalMechanics of Shooting (Littleton, CO:Center Vision, Inc., 2001); and Bruce K.Siddle, Sharpening the Warriors Edge(Belleville, IL: PPCT Research Publica-tions, 1995).4 For additional information, see GeneP. Klopf, Fast Track, FBI Law Enforce-ment Bulletin, October 1999, 10-15.5 Supra note 1.The author gratefully acknowledges theassistance that Mr. Gary Hutchinson,an instructor in the Firearms TrainingUnit at the FBI Academy, provided inthe preparation of this article and theguidance and unswerving supportthat Mr. Hutchinson always demon-strated as his mentor and world classinstructor/shooter.dangers than reigned in this na-tion during the outlaw era of theOld West or the gangster-riddenyears of the Great Depression.All involved in the criminaljustice system must remaincognizant of the need for of-cers to have the appropriatetime and funds to maintainthe skills necessary to protectthe public. Properly appliedtechnology has the ability toThe effective use oftechnological teachingaids by knowledgeableinstructors candramatically enhancethe learning curve....59923.indd7 4/26/20074:47:16 PMLLeadership SpotlightKnow thyself. The unexamined life is not worth living.SocratesWant to Be a Better Leader?Look in the Mirror.Michael O. McAuliffe, a special agent in the LeadershipDevelopment Institute at the FBI Academy, prepared thisLeadership Spotlight.hequestionofwhetherleadersarebornormadeoftenarisesaswe Texplorenewwaystodevelopmoreeffectiveleaders.Someareconvincedthatleadersaresimplyborn,thatgeneticsdetermineapersons ability to become a successful leader.If that were the case, the works of renownedleadershipauthors,suchasKenBlanchard,StephenCovey,andWarrenBennis,wouldprovide nothing more than entertaining read-ing. Regardless of your outlook on this ques-tion,expandingyourknowledgethroughreadingliteratureonleadership,althoughasignicantinitiative,isjustthebeginningtoward self-improvement.Ifyouwanttobecomeamorevaluableleaderforyourorganization,your rststepinvolves taking a long, hard look in the mirror.Thesecondstepistobecompletelytruthfulabout what you see. While examining your re-ection as a leader, you might nd it helpful toponder, Do people trust me? Do I treat peoplethe way I would like to be treated? Do I keepmy promises? Am I honest in my interactionswith those around me? Do I lead by example?DoImakeeffectivedecisions? AmIagoodlistener?Thismaynotbeacomfortableorenjoy-able endeavor, especially if you are not accus-tomed to honest, self-reection. Rest assured,objectiveself-assessmentiswherebecominga more effective leader begins. How many ofus have worked for people who have an opendoor policy? Yet, when you stop to see them,they hardly acknowledge your presence. Theycontinue to respond to e-mail, answer the tele-phone,andbarelylistentoawordyouhaveto say. Or, take the executive who promises tofollow up on an issue that is important to youyet never mentions it again. Can you be hon-estwithyourselfifyouhavedevelopedanyof these ineffective leadership qualities? Onlythrough candid self-reection and assessmentwill you be ready to begin the journey of self-improvement as a leader.Eachdayprovidesmanyopportunitiestoenhanceourleadershipskills.Inaworldwherewearetaskedtodomorewithlessandaddressendlessdemands,wemusttaketimetoreectonhowwecanbecomemoresuccessful in our leadership roles. These mo-mentsofself-examinationmayrepresentthemostinsightfulmeanstobecomingagreatleaderandsuccessfullyfacingthedynamicleadership challenges of the 21st century.8 / FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin59923x.indd12 5/21/200710:59:23 AMJune 2007 / 9Investigative interviews are the most critical element of any law enforcement inquiry. Success in conducting effective and comprehensive ones improves when ofcers follow a structured interviewing process that provides a frame-work for the interview and alleviates haphazard attempts to obtain complete and accurate information.1 Ofcers can use an eight-phase structured interviewing process adaptable to many encounters between the police and citizens.Productive investigative interviewing constitutes more than a series of questions posed by an ofcer to elicit a response from the interviewee. A struc-tured investigative interview is a dynamic, conversational interaction between an ofcer and an interviewee with a goal of obtaining the maximum amount of accurate and relevant information while reducing the possibility of contaminating and inuencing the information provided by the interviewee or placing him under an undue amount of stress. The structured interview provides ofcers with a road map exible enough to adapt to most situations they encounter, ranging from minor trafc accident investigations to complex criminal cases and sensitive administrative in-quires. The process is structured but not standardized. While The Structured Investigative InterviewBy ANDR B. SIMONS, M.A., and BRIAN PARSI BOETIG, M.S. Los Gatos-Monte Sereno, CA Police59923.indd 9 4/26/2007 4:47:30 PM 10 / FBI Law Enforcement BulletinSpecial Agent Boetig is assigned to the FBIs San Francisco ofce.Special Agent Simons serves in the Behavioral Analysis Unit, Critical Incident Response Group, at the FBI Academy.ofcers should employ all of the phases of the process, they can tailor each interview to meet the needs of the ofcer, interviewee, and situation. With the exception of the rst and last phases (preparation and critique), which do not occur in the presence of the interviewee, the phases may not always happen in the sequential order presented.THE PROCESSPreparation PhaseFor consistent effective-ness, ofcers must prepare for interviews prior to conducting them. This encompasses several different categories, including strategic, tactical, operational, and legal considerations. At times, circumstances may limit the amount of preparation, but ofcers should try to plan as thoroughly as possible prior to an interview. As elementary as it may appear, knowing why aninterview is conducted provides a logical start.Strategic preparation should involve knowing the ultimate purpose of the interview. Of-cers should ask themselves, Why was this person chosen to be interviewed and what infor-mation is being sought? Next, ofcers should decide who would best conduct the inter-view to maximize the amount of information collected. All too often, lead investigating ofcers handle interviews and want to participate in each one. But, strategically, the lead of-cer may not always be the best person to do so. This premise of selecting the best person usually appears in cases where female ofcers are chosen to interview female victims of sexual assault. The person selected to conduct the interview should have the ability to develop better rap-port and, therefore, maximize the collection of accurate and relevant information.The legal preparation for an interview includes assisting in the collection of relevant infor-mation. Knowing the statutory elements of crime will help ofcers explore appropriate areas during the questioning phase. Without this knowledge, ofcers might fail to cover is-sues, such as intent or malice, necessary in satisfying the legal requirements or thresholds for prosecuting a criminal viola-tion. For example, an ofcer responding to and investigating domestic violence incidents should understand the legal def-inition of domestic relationships as it relates to the applicable statute. During the interview, the ofcer then can inquire as to whether a relationship exists between offenders that satises the legal denition under the statutes. Further legal prepara-tions consist of determining if interviews with minors require parental presence, if interview-ees need Miranda warnings, or if interviewee benets or pro-tections must or can be made. Certain states and the federal government require that victims and witnesses receive informa-tion about programs and ben-ets available to them through both the government and private organizations that can help reduce the impact of the 59923x.indd 14 5/21/2007 11:00:34 AMJune 2007 / 11interview.2 Ofcers also shouldprepare to explain to interview-ees about protections possiblyavailable if they fear for theirsafety as a result of cooperatingwith law enforcement.While the intervieweessafety is paramount, the of-cers should not be compro-mised either. Tactical prepara-tion for an interview shouldinclude ensuring that victimsand suspects do not encountereach other. At the residence ofa domestic violence incident,this distance may be as little asseparating the occupants in dif-ferent rooms. In an internationalterrorism investigation thatinvolves complex counterintel-ligence operations, the distanceneeded for adequate securitymay be as large as on anothercontinent.While strategic and tacticalpreparation is critical, ofcersmust consider operational plan-ning because it often proves themost limiting factor in creatingthe ideal interview environ-ment. The best strategy for aninterview might involve havinga female ofcer conduct it, butone may not readily be avail-able. Therefore, operationally, amale ofcer will have to con-duct the interview. Tactically,it might be suitable to offer awitness 24-hour police protec-tion, but, operationally, witnesssecurity is not an option becauseof a lack of resources availableto complete the task. Ofcershave to consider the limita-tions of operational resourcesalong with other preparatoryfactors.This overview of thepreparation phase, while not anexhaustive list of what tasks toexplore prior to each interview,provides a method for analyzingpreinterview preparations in dif-ferent categories. Ofcers oftenwill nd conict between thebest strategic, tactical, opera-tional, and legal approaches toan important role in setting thetone, as well as providing infor-mation critical to the efcientand accurate educing of infor-mation. During the introductionphase, ofcers should properlyidentify themselves and theiragency, helping establish thelegal or administrative author-ity they have over the case.Ofcers not wearing a uniformcan display ofcial credentials.In the event that an intervieweeprovides false information, andapplicable laws permit prosecu-tion for such an act, the presen-tation of credentials can helpreduce the interviewees laterclaims of not being convincedof the ofcers ofcial identity.As a second task in theintroduction phase, ofcersshould provide the intervieweewith the purpose or nature ofthe interview. This directs thefocus of the interviewee to aspecic topical area of inquiry.Good afternoon. Im JohnBarry, a special agent with theGeorgia Bureau of Investiga-tion. Im here to talk with youabout the death of Alan Smith.During some instances, anofcer may not want to immedi-ately disclose the purpose of theinterview to prevent contami-nating a witness statement or toconceal the identity of sources,among other reasons. In thiscase, the ofcer should providethe interviewee with a brief de-scription of the nature of it. Forexample, the ofcer can addressOfficers canuse an eight-phasestructured interviewingprocess....conducting interviews. They al-ways should design planning toconform to the necessary legalrequirements associated withthe interview. After addressinglegal considerations and remov-ing them from the matrix, theymust determine the best balancefor the remaining preparationcategories prior to beginningthe interview.Introduction PhaseAlthough a seemingly sim-ple task, introductions duringinvestigative interviews play59923.indd11 4/26/20074:50:07 PM 12 / FBI Law Enforcement Bulletininterview activities, such asquestioning and duration but notnecessarily the specic reason.Hello. Im Mike Taylor, adetective with the StatesboroPolice. Im conducting an in-vestigation in the neighborhood,and Id like to take a few mo-ments of your time to ask youa few questions. The purposeand nature of the interview arenot mutually exclusive, and of-cers may provide both duringthe introduction.Rapport PhaseEveryone has experiencedthe presence and absence ofrapport. When a sense of con-nectivity and understanding ex-ist, where empathy and disclo-sure occur, there is rapport. Inthe unfortunate circumstanceswhere confusion, awkwardsilence, miscommunications,and discomfort happen, rapportis lacking. Law enforcementprofessionals often overlookand rush the art of establish-ing rapport in the investigativeinterviewing process. Yet, astrong rapport and connectionmade between the ofcer andinterviewee can promote thefree ow of information anddialogue. When a solid founda-tion of rapport exists, the inter-viewee perceives that the ofcerunderstands, appreciates, orshares common experiences oropinions. These links and con-nections serve as the foundationfor empathy and understanding,the precursors to trust that ulti-mately lead to disclosure. Thetrust developed helps build theinterviewees condence thattestimonial investments are se-cure and that the ofcer will notexploit exposed vulnerabilities.such as trafc patterns aroundthe city or current weatherconditions, and then changesnonverbal behaviors whenquestioned about the speciccrime, this may indicate stressand even deception.Third, through rapportbuilding, the ofcer can beginto collect intelligence on theinterviewees likes, prefer-ences, opinions, and beliefs,all of which become usefulinformation for subsequentinterrogative theme develop-ment if the interviewee becomesresistant to providing truthfulinformation. For example, aninterviewee who enjoys talk-ing about children may respondto an interrogation theme thatfocuses on the need for honestyto serve as a positive role modelfor children.Finally, strong rapportbuilding allows ofcers to relaxand diminishes any anxietythey may feel as the interviewcommences. Many times,interviewers fail to recognizethe nervousness that comes withentering into a new interactionwhere they have, potentially, agreat deal at stake. By establish-ing rapport, they can reducethe anxiety, which acts as ahindrance to active listening.Many ofcers recognize theimportance of establishingrapport as a key to promotingtrust and disclosure, but theyoften struggle with the mechan-ics of how to achieve it. WhileRapport building servesseveral important purposes.First, it allows the intervieweeto relax, and it diminishes fear,anxiety, or distrust. Rapportbuilding humanizes the ofcerand promotes the identicationof similarities between the of-cer and the interviewee.Second, strong rapportbuilding allows the ofcer toobserve the interviewee in anonthreatening setting wherethe ofcer can establish abaseline of normative behaviorsfor comparison with subse-quent ones that may indicatedeceptive answers when theinterviewee becomes stressed.For instance, if the intervieweeexhibits certain nonverbalbehaviors while discussingroutine, nonthreatening topics,Rapportbuilding servesseveral importantpurposes.59923.indd12 4/26/20074:50:14 PMJune 2007 / 13the dynamic nature of human interaction makes a one size ts all methodology of rapport building impractical, ofcers can apply certain rules. They should choose a nonthreatening topic, such as common, shared experiences to which both parties can relate, irrelevant to the primary investigative issue. For example, the ofcer prob-ably should avoid talking about the perils and tribulations of law enforcement if the interviewee cannot identify with the topic. However, if both the ofcer and the interviewee endure trafc, enjoy the same sporting events, have children, live in the same city, or appreciate other shared experiences, the ofcer should mine this prime rapport-build-ing material. If the interview occurs at the interviewees residence or place of employ-ment, the ofcer should look for rapport-building topics in that particular environment. People typically tend to decorate space with signicant objects and pictures, which provide a natural springboard for rap-port-building discussions. A nonthreatening topic should allow for a free, two-way ow of information where the of-cer discloses personal facts, opinions, or observations. True rapport building is not a ques-tion-and-answer session but a conversation that requires the ofcer to make disclosures to the interviewee.Ofcers need to recognize the idiosyncratic nature of rap-port buildingdifferent topics will resonate with particular people and should be applied dynamically. For example, an interviewee clearly busy and in a rush will not want to chat about window treatments, but the ofcer still can accomplish rapport building by stating, I understand youre in a rush. This shouldnt take too long. eat, the ofcer can paraphrase and reect back by saying, It sounds like youre pretty upset and that its beginning to impact your health.By observing nonverbal behaviors, the ofcer also can subtly encourage rapport build-ing. Mirroring the interviewees body language, position, and posture fosters an atmosphere of similarity and understanding. The ofcer also can demon-strate empathy using paralan-guage by modulating the rate, pitch, and tone of speech to match the interviewees. With-out crossing over into mimicry, if an interviewee talks slow, the ofcer should try to speak at a similar pace.Questioning PhaseProperly formatted, phrased, and sequenced questions will educe more accurate and com-plete information from the interviewee than haphazardly delivered and poorly phrased ones. Phraseology is critical; the questions format should not lead or direct the interviewee to certain answers desired by the ofcer. Two types provide the backbone for questioning dur-ing the investigative interview: open-ended and close-ended.Open-ended QuestionsNearly every investigative interviewing questioning phase should begin with an open-ended question that prompts the By acknowledging and respect-ing the interviewees needs, the ofcer can further enhance rapport and trust.Using active-listening techniques can augment rapport building by demonstrating the ofcers interest and attentive-ness. Through paraphrasing, the ofcer restates the interviewees words in a different way that still captures the content and essence of the message. If an interviewee says, Ive never felt this way...I cant sleep or Sterling Heights, Michigan Police59923.indd 13 4/26/2007 4:50:20 PM 14 / FBI Law Enforcement Bulletininterviewee to produce a narra-tive response, rather than a yes,no, or short answer. Much likean essay test, the open-endedquestion provides intervieweesan opportunity to speak in fullsentences and tell their story.Would you please tell mewhat happened? or Will youdescribe everything that youwitnessed?As the interviewee beginsto comply with the open-endedquestion, ofcers must resist theurge to jump in with additionalquestions. Interruptions duringnarrative responses are one ofthe most common errors duringthe interviewing process.3 Of-cers should only provide mini-mal encouragers, such as Goon, or Tell me more, to keepthe person talking. Using open-ended questions is the mosteffective manner to retrieve themaximum amount of informa-tion without tainting or inu-encing the response becauseminimal verbal interaction orprompting by the ofcer occursbeyond the initial request.Open-ended questions arethe logical starting point forboth investigative interviewswhere ofcers know little aboutthe case and where they haveintimate, detailed knowledge.For example, a citizen goes toa police station to le a com-plaint. Without any foresighton the citizens issue, ofcersgenerally start an interview byWere you home all day?How fast were you travel-ing when you hit the tele-phone pole?Close-ended questions canbe categorized in several elds.Identication questions helpclarify specic information.For example, What color wasthe robbers hat? specicallyseeks to identify a color andnot solicit a narrative response.This close-ended identicationquestion could have appropri-ately followed an open-endedquestion asking the witness todescribe the hat. If the witnessprovided a thorough descriptionbut failed to address the colorof the hat (a wool hat thatcovered the top of his head andears), the close-ended questionassists in identifying the specicdetails of color.Selective, or multiple choice,questions present more than oneoption from which the witnessmay choose an answer. Forexample, Was the victim cross-ing the street or standing on thecorner? Selective questionshelp narrow the focus of a ques-tion to specic answers. Theyalso are useful when trying toestablish specic elements of acrime or an incident, but theycan prove limiting if ofcers donot provide the correct answeras one of the available choices.In the example above, the vic-tim may not have been crossingthe street or standing on thesaying, Tell me why you havecome here today?Even if they are relativelycertain of what a particularperson might contribute to aninvestigation, they should beginby posing open-ended ques-tions to avoid contaminating orleading the witness responses.Close-ended questions willpermit ofcers to home in onspecic information not pro-vided during the intervieweesnarrative response.Close-ended QuestionsInterviewing ofcers usuallywill need to clarify informationprovided by interviewees duringtheir narrative responses. An-swers to close-ended questionstypically are shorter and addressspecic information requestedby the ofcers.Did you see any strangersin the area last night?What time do you typicallyarrive at work?Nearlyevery investigativeinterviewingquestioning phaseshould begin withan open-endedquestion....59923x.indd18 5/21/200711:10:59 AMJune 2007 / 15corner but, rather, walking on the sidewalk.Finally, close-ended ques-tions can require a simple yes or no response. While informative at times, yes or no questions may not provide sufcient detail to explain the answer. For example, Do you know the victim? is a yes or no question. While the response may be yes, it provides insufcient investi-gatory detail. If the witness only learned of the victims identity after the incident occurred, an-swering in the afrmative when queried by the ofcer about knowing the victim provides little useful information. Ad-ditionally, research has identi-ed a higher tendency toward acquiescence by interviewees, answering the question how they believe they should answer and not necessarily with what they actually think or know as fact.Indicator QuestionsThe most overlooked ques-tion that ofcers fail to ask an interviewee suspected of com-mitting a crime is, Did you do it? Perhaps, out of fear that it will damage rapport or, perhaps, due to its provocative nature, ofcers rarely ask this vitally important question that occa-sionally produces an admission. While open- and close-ended questions are designed to elicit data or information from the interviewee, ofcers can use indicator questions to evaluate an interviewees level of truth-fulness or deception. These are not asked to solicit a factual response but, rather, permit the ofcer to assess the answer for particular responses against likely ones. Examples of indica-tor questions includeDo you know why Im here to interview you today?What should happen to the person who did this?Does the person who did this deserve a second chance?Would you be willing to take a polygraph examina-tion? What do you think the results will be?Inappropriate PhraseologyThe phrasing of questions often can prove counterproduc-tive or contaminate a witness response. Therefore, the ofcer should avoid certain types of questions that lead the inter-viewee by revealing or provid-ing information within the context of the question (Was the car a green sedan?). An easily inuenced interviewee who knowingly or subcon-sciously wants to please the ofcer may answer in the afr-mative without having any true knowledge of the cars color. A less suggestive approach would involve an open-ended question, such as Describe the car.Ofcers should refrain from asking compound ques-tions, those phrased to cover more than one topic in a single inquiry. For example, Do you know the victim, and does he work with you? The compound question might be too cognitive-ly overloading and cause wit-nesses to misinterpret, forget, or Los Gatos-Monte Sereno, CA Police59923.indd 15 4/26/2007 4:50:33 PM 16 / FBI Law Enforcement Bulletininadvertently only answer por-tions of the question. Further-more, if they answer the entirequestion with a single responseof yes, ofcers cannot be sure ifthe response was meant for bothanswers or just one part.Finally, ofcers shouldavoid lagging-order questions,which are those they ask duringthe interview that correspond toan earlier response given by theinterviewee but is incompatiblewith the current line of ques-tioning or ow of the interview.Lagging-order questions oftenoccur after an appropriatelyasked open-ended questionwhen an ofcer is too eager tocontinue questioning or wantsto begin verifying informa-tion, rather than listening to theinterviewees entire narrativeresponse. For example, duringa narrative response, a witnessmay mention a person namedTom and then continue to speakfor an additional 5 minutes.Once the narrative responseends, ofcers sometimes fol-low by saying, You mentioneda man named Tom. Could youtell me more about him? Thisis an appropriate question, andit certainly is a better tactic thaninterrupting when the witnessrst mentioned Tom. But, itis inappropriately sequenced.Rather than maintaining thenatural ow, pace, and timingof the interview by having thewitness continue after conclud-ing the narrative response, theofcer brings the witness all theway back to the beginning ofthe statement to further identifythe information provided ear-lier. The lagging-order questioncould prohibit further elabo-ration on the current topic inwhich the witness may naturallyprovide the information soughtwithout any investigatoryprompting. Ofcers should asksuch a question after the witnesshas given all narrative respons-es, and they are returning to thestatement to verify the details.active-listening skills, or ac-cents or other language barriers.During this phase, the inter-viewee can make correctionsto the ofcers version of thestatement.Next, the ofcer shouldprompt further recall from theinterviewee during this phase.While rehashing the statement,the interviewee will have theopportunity to add additionalinformation. Recollection canbe enhanced when the inter-viewee is not actively engagedin speaking but, instead, listen-ing to the ofcer.At the conclusion of ques-tioning or after a phase of ques-tioning, the ofcer then canengage in the verication phase.All too often, ofcers attempt toimmediately clarify each sen-tence or individual answer thatan interviewee provides. Thisproves counterproductive toeffective questioning becauseopen-ended questions will so-licit narrative responses, and theverication process will hamperthe free-owing nature of theresponses and the intervieweescognitive thought processes.Once an interviewee has pro-vided the statement or has n-ished giving information on aparticular topical area, ofcershave an opportunity to engagein the verication phase. Theymight begin the process by ex-plaining the value of the infor-mation provided and the impor-tance of ensuring the accuracyVerication PhaseThe verication phase hastwo purposes: to ensure theaccuracy of the intervieweesstatement and to prompt furtherrecall. First, the ofcer shouldrepeat the interviewees entirestatement to the intervieweeto prevent inaccuracies in theofcers memorialization ofthe interview that could occurbecause of misinterpretations,biases, interruptions, poorSimply addressingeach phase ofthe structuredinterview will notensure success....59923.indd16 4/26/20075:07:31 PMJune 2007 / 17of the notes taken. Next, they should explain the verication process to the interviewee, en-couraging the person to inter-rupt to correct, clarify, or add information. The information you have provided throughout our conversation is so impor-tant to our investigation. I want to ensure that I have accurately interpreted and recorded what you have told me. What Id like to do is go back through your entire statement as I have re-corded it. While Im doing this, I may develop additional ques-tions to ask you. Also, I want you to stop me at any time to correct, clarify, or add informa-tion because that is exactly what this process is designed for you to do. With each correction or addition, ofcers should revert to the appropriate questioning phase.Universal Inquiry PhaseThe universal inquiry phase gives ofcers an opportunity to solicit additional information from the interviewee that they may have overlooked. It also allows interviewees an unre-stricted opportunity to provide additional information that they deem important but had not been asked about or had not been able to expand upon dur-ing the interview. Essentially, the universal inquiry is a nal endeavor to acquire information from the interviewee. The of-cer can present it in a succinct but effective manner by saying, If you were in my shoes as the investigator of this case, is there any additional information that you would want to know that I have not asked you about during our interview? The of-cer should use dialogue that engages the interviewee more than what results with a simple, uninterested, anything else?information for two reasons. First, all information is impor-tant in an era of intelligence-led policing because it may serve as the predicate for other criminal, counterterrorism, and national security investigations, as well as assist in the recruitment and development of informants. Second, the universal inquiry will provide insight to ofcers on topical areas interviewees considered critical, relevant, or important simply because they disclosed this information without a specic solicitation for it. Ofcers should capitalize on this opportunity to establish greater rapport with interview-ees by expressing a genuine concern for input.Departure PhaseAfter completing all of the previous phases of the inter-view process, ofcers should begin the departure phase. They should not begin this phase prematurely because it clearly signals the end of the interview. Interviewees may be reluctant to provide additional informa-tion or to elaborate on what they previously provided be-cause of an innate feeling of closure.The departure phase estab-lishes the foundation for mutual recontacting by interviewees or ofcers. While exchanging tele-phone numbers and addresses for postal delivery or e-mail, ofcers should inquire about The interviewee can provide case-related or noncase-related information during the uni-versal inquiry phase. Case-re-lated includes any information directly correlated to the in-quiry conducted. The universal inquiry may generate additional case-specic information that the ofcer either overlooked or did not develop. Conversely, the interviewee may provide noncase-related information on a topic that was not the focus of the inquiry. Ofcers should not discourage the interviewee from providing noncase-related Los Gatos-Monte Sereno, CA Police59923.indd 17 4/26/2007 5:07:40 PM 18 / FBI Law Enforcement Bulletinany restrictions associated with recontacting the interviewee, such as at particular times or telephone numbers not to call. Interviewees may not want to be contacted at work, home, or other locations for security, pri-vacy, or other reasons; ofcers should discuss these restrictions with them.Quite often, ofcers provide witnesses and victims with busi-ness cards and request that they contact them with any addition-al information they might recall. The business card exchange has become so commonplace in corporate relationships that it almost rings with insincerity. Providing a business card is not discouraged, but it only slight-ly enhances the likelihood of a witness recontacting the ofcer. Witnesses have several reasons for not communicating with law enforcement ofcers after interviews. First, most citizens underestimate the importance of the statements they provided as witnesses and victims; physi-cal evidence and suspect con-fessions are perceived as more valuable. Next, most people believe that the police are thor-ough in conducting investiga-tions. Even if they remember something not disclosed during the interview, they may assume that the police have obtained the same information elsewhere and, therefore, do not recog-nize the importance of provid-ing it to law enforcement. Once interviewees leave, they likely will ruminate for several hours or even days over the exchange of dialogue and information that occurred. Much akin to the verication process, this replay-ing of information may prompt further recall of details not pro-vided during the interview. This new information may or may not be relevant to the investi-gation, but, without it, ofcers cannot assess its potential. Furthermore, while ofcers already may have acquired the information from different sources, receiving it from other independent witnesses can help corroborate or conrm it. An ofcer may encourage a recontact by stating, I know that after we end this interview, Ill think of more questions I should have asked you. Also, it is perfectly natural that you will recall more details, think of top-ics we did not discuss, or have questions for me. What Id like to do is call you in 2 days, and we can discuss any additional information you recall. Even if the information seems minor or irrelevant to you, it may be crucial to our investigation. Ofcers rarely recontact inter-viewees, but the attempt will more likely solicit additional information than the impersonal passing of a business card.Critique Phase The interview critique en-sures a thorough and complete interview and helps improve performance during future ones. While the critique phase can range from an informal review by the ofcer to a highly critical peer or supervisory evaluation, ofcers should remember to perform it. When evaluating an interview, the ofcer and other reviewers should assess the ef-fectiveness of each of the previ-ous seven steps. For example, in the preparation step, reviewers Sterling Heights, Michigan Police59923.indd 18 4/26/2007 5:07:50 PMJune 2007 / 19could examine if the location ofthe interview was comfortingor distracting (operational), safe(tactical), or more productivethan another location (strate-gic). Did the ofcer introducehimself and make it clear tothe interviewee the purpose ornature of the interview? Wasan appropriate amount of timespent building rapport? Wasthe rapport effective? Did theofcer employ active-listen-ing techniques? Were questionsdelivered haphazardly? Did theofcer contaminate the inter-view with too much additionalinformation? Were any cogni-tive interview techniques used?Was all information veried?Did the ofcer employ the uni-versal inquiry phase and con-duct follow-up questions on allinformation received? Was thestage set for a recontact betweenthe ofcer and interviewee? Didthe ofcer use techniques dur-ing this interview that provedhighly effective? Were certaintechniques distracting to theofcer or interviewee? Arethere topical areas that need tobe explored immediately or inthe future with the witness thatthe ofcer did not clear up oraddress in the interview? Whatimprovements can the ofcermake to increase the effective-ness of future interviews?BIOGRAPHICAL DATAWhile ofcers know theimportance of obtaining aninterviewees personal andbiographical information, whento ask for it presents particularchallenges. Do ofcers requestpersonal information at thebeginning of the interview ortoward the conclusion? In thisage of identity theft, how doofcers overcome resistanceto providing this importantinformation?beginning of the interview mayhinder rapport building, re-minding the interviewee of theofcious nature of the interac-tion. Further, the interview-ees frequently perceive suchquestions as invasive. Ofcersshould prepare to encounter aninterviewees resistance to pro-viding their personal informa-tion and respond appropriately.If ofcers determine a need toobtain biographical data earlyon, then they should begin withthe caveat that the request isroutine, necessary for the report,and vital to ensuring that the in-terviewee is correctly matchedwith the information the personprovides. Also, ofcers maysuggest that obtaining accuratebiographical data will ensurethat other ofcers seeking to ob-tain the same information willnot unnecessarily or repeatedlycontact the interviewee.Biographical data, on occa-sion, may provide material thatthe ofcer can use as a rapport-building tool. For example, byrequesting the intervieweesplace of birth, the ofcer maydiscuss that city or state andshare personal experiences in-volving travel to that area. If of-cers request biographical datain an overly serious, ofcious,or dramatic manner, they willstunt rapport. If they solicit it ina more conversational, relaxedmanner, then they can stimulaterapport. Ofcers may decideto collect biographical data atThe minimum biographi-cal information ofcers shouldobtain during an interviewincludes the persons full namewith correct spelling, dateof birth, residential address,telephone number, and socialsecurity number. Request-ing additional, optional bio-graphical data may entail theinterviewees drivers licenseand cell phone numbers, oc-cupational and employmentinformation, e-mail address,place of birth, passport number,and scars/marks/tattoos. Ask-ing for biographical data at theAsking forbiographical dataat the beginning ofthe interview mayhinder rapportbuilding.59923.indd19 4/26/20075:07:59 PM 20 / FBI Law Enforcement Bulletinthe conclusion of the universal inquiry phase of the interview after establishing rapport and after the willing disclosure of information has previously been ascertained and demonstrated by the interviewee. Following the universal inquiry phase, requesting biographical data creates a seamless transition into the departure phase and the mutual exchange of contact information. To request bio-graphical data in the departure phase, ofcers could state, Id like to exchange information with you, so we can reestablish contact. But, before I do, I need to get a few more details to complete my report. Because they express a willingness to provide their own telephone and contact information, the inter-viewee may follow the example and feel more comfortable doing the same.STRUCTURED, NOT STANDARDIZEDThis eight-phase process provides the structure for con-ducting an effective investiga-tive interview. To successfully apply this approach, ofcers should understand that struc-tured interviews are not stan-dardizedeach one will take on dynamics and directions of its own. While ofcers should ad-dress all eight phases, they may initiate certain ones at different, logical points of the interview. For example, while in the ques-tioning phase of an interview, the interviewee may broach a topic suitable for additional rap-port building.The objectives of the veri-cation and universal inquiry phases exemplify the uid na-ture of the structured interview. Each phase is designed to solicit additional information from the witness. If the verication phase prompts further recollections and information by the witness, the ofcer should revert to the questioning phase to collect the most accurate and complete in-formation that then will be veri-ed and may spawn even more data to question and verify.Simply addressing each phase of the structured in-terview will not ensure suc-cessrecognizing the need to return to previous phases and follow through with the appro-priately sequenced additional phases will. If ofcers generate additional information during the universal inquiry phase, they should adequately question the witness about it, verify it, and ask yet another universally probing question. Failure occurs if ofcers simply question the witness about the new informa-tion and neglect to verify it and probe for more information. While this can become time consuming, it is critical to effective interviewing. CONCLUSIONInvestigative interviews are a crucial part of any law enforcement inquiry. Using this eight-phase structure will guide law enforcement ofcers in con-ducting professional, thorough, and complete interviews. They can adapt this exible process to any interview, according to the particular needs of the ofcer, interviewee, and situa-tion. To effectively employ this method, ofcers should remem-ber that structured interviews are not standardized and initiate each phase at practical times during the interview. Supervi-sors, training personnel, and ofcers can improve their skills by using a structured interview-ing process.Endnotes1 The authors use the term ofcer throughout the article to encompass the entire gamut of law enforcement ofcers, including police ofcers, deputy sheriffs, troopers, investigators, and agents. They employ masculine pronouns for both of-cers and interviewees or witnesses for illustrative purposes. Research consistently has identied the lack of structure during interviews as a major impediment to ob-taining complete and accurate information. See, R.P. Fisher, R.E. Geiselman and D.S. Raymond, Critical Analysis of Police Interview Techniques, Journal of Police Science and Administration 15 (1987): 177-185; G. Gudjunsson, The Psychology of Interrogations, Confessions, and Testimony (New York, NY: Wiley, 1992).2 The Victim and Witness Protection Act of 1982, Victims Rights and Restitu-tion Act of 1990, Victims of Child Abuse Act of 1990, and Victim Rights Clarica-tion Act of 1997 are several examples of U.S. federal victim rights acts.3 R.P. Fisher, Interviewing Victims and Witnesses of Crime, Psychology, Public Policy, and Law 1, no. 4 (1995): 732-764. 59923x.indd 24 5/21/2007 11:15:29 AMJune 2007 / 21ViCAP AlertTruck Driver Serial Killingsnthebeginningof2004,lawenforcementofcersacrosstheUnitedStatesidentiedtheentireUnitedStates,areavailabletodepart-ments that have rape and homicide victims meet-ing the following description: prostitutes workingfrom truck stops, hitchhikers, transients, strandedmotorists, unidentied dead bodies, and any othervictims at risk where the suspect is likely to be along-haul truck driver.IntheearlymorninghoursofSaturday,May25, 2002, Memorial Day weekend, Jennifer Whip-key was at the Adelphia Restaurant and Nightclubin Deptford, New Jersey. She needed a ride homeandeithergotoneorstartedwalkingtowardClarksboro, New Jersey, around 3:20 a.m.On Sunday morning, May 26, 2002, Jennifersbody was discovered in a wooded area near a truckstop and motel off Interstate 295 in West Deptford,New Jersey. She had been stabbed, strangled, andredressed. This recovery site is within 5 miles fromthe club, near Route 42, which is a direct route toPhiladelphia,Pennsylvania;Interstate295N/S;and Atlantic City, New Jersey. Her murder remainsunsolved.Alert to Law EnforcementLawenforcementagenciesshouldbringthisinformationtotheattentionofallcrimeanalysisunits, ofcers investigating crimes against persons,and missing persons units. Any agency with infor-mation on the Jennifer Whipkey case may contactDetective Grant Worrell, West Deptford, New Jer-sey, Police Department at 856-853-4599, x162, orDetective Langdon Sills, Gloucester County, NewJersey, Prosecutors Ofce at 856-384-5604. Anyagency with victim or suspect information for thetruckdriverserialkillingsongoinginvestigationmay contact Crime Analyst Jayne M. Stairs of theViolent Criminal Apprehension Program (ViCAP)at 703-632-4168 or jstairs@leo.gov.Victim Jennifer WhipkeyIapatternofhomicidesinvolvingthekillingofprostitutes who worked in and around truck stops.These killings have taken place over a number ofyearsandinitiallyinvolvedthestatesofOklaho-ma,Texas,Arkansas,Mississippi,Pennsylvania,and Indiana.Overthelast3years,theFBIandlocalandstate law enforcement agencies have met for jointcaseconsultations,resultingintheidenticationofseveraltruckdriversuspects.Timelineshavebeen compiled on 45 suspects to date, with severalmoreinprogress.Thesetimelines,whichcover59923x.indd25 5/21/200711:16:11 AM22 / FBI Law Enforcement BulletinReflection and RemembranceBy Hugh E. LovellTAssistant SuperintendentLovell of the Trinidad andTobago Police Servicedelivered this speechon July 26, 2006, at theNational Law EnforcementOfcers Memorial inWashington, D.C.his evening, I am humbled by the privilegeandhonorbestoweduponmetoaddressyou. Our purpose here is one of reection and re-membrance. Reection to take time to review theperformances of our fellow ofcers who have beentragicallyandwithoutwarningtakenawayfromus. Remembrance of those families that have beencheated and deprived to remember the love, care,andhappinesstheyonceknewandsharedwiththeir departed loved one.Losingalovedoneisnoteasytoovercomefromtheperspectiveofthoseplacedinsuchaposition. Those left behind lose the wind beneaththeir wings and sometimes drift aimlessly. Fellowofcers miss the presence of their fallen hero andtheir source of inspiration, advice, mentoring, pro-fessionalism,camaraderie,laughter,andpeculiarmannerisms.Today, some of us continue to weep and mourntheirloss,aswellasmissthem.Letusneithermourn nor miss them too long for weeping mayendureforthenight,butjoycomesinthemorn-ing. The joy is in the knowledge that those gallantmen and women died in the pursuit of what theyloved doing bestselessly protecting the lives ofevery one of us and creating a safe and secure en-vironment in which all citizens can go about theirdaily business in peace.Law enforcement is amoebic in nature; so aresocieties. As such, we, as practitioners, must adaptto keep pace with the changes because change, myfellow ofcers, is the only constant factor in life.Therefore,itisincumbentuponusto ndwaysandmeansanddevisesystemstostemtheever-increasing tide of crime and criminal activities. Wealso must try our utmost best to engender a feelingof camaraderie among ourselves by looking out forone another and being kind, trustworthy, respect-ful, and understanding, thereby upholding the ide-als of this honorable institution.It is common knowledge that the problems andchallengesfacedbylawenforcementofcersaresimilar throughout the world, and it is mandatorythat we share our thoughts and ideas to ght thisscourge of crime and criminal activities within ourrespectivejurisdictions.Letusbeourbrotherskeeper and a bundle of sticks that cannot be bro-ken. For united we stand and divided we fall. Wecannot afford to fall because anarchy will reign tothe detriment of our nations.Tothewives,husbands,children,mothers,fathers,andsiblingsofallthoseheroicmenandwomen,Isaythanksforgivingthemtous. You,as well as the people and, by extension, the nation,havebenettedimmenselyfromtheirservices.May God continue to bless you with good health,strength, wisdom, knowledge, understanding, andguidancetodothethingsthatwouldhavemadeyour dearly departed loved one proud.Notable Speech59923x.indd26 5/21/200711:17:27 AMJune 2007 / 23Law enforcement is a unique occupation in many ways. The major-ity of law enforcement ofcers wear a uniform while working; many have grooming standards and conduct regulations to which they must adhere; some have sworn to uphold laws with which they do not necessarily agree. For example, the federal Free Access to Clinic Entrance, or FACE, law criminalizes at-tempts to interfere with a wom-ans access to an abortion clinic. Enforcing the laws also is, by its very nature, a job requiring continuous stafng24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year. These unique aspects of the profession sometimes cause personal conicts with individ-ual employees religious beliefs. For example, what happens when a uniformed patrol ofcer feels it is a religious duty to violate the departments ban on lapel pins by wearing a Chris-tian cross lapel pin or when a group of Muslim male ofcers violate a departments no facial hair policy by growing beards as required by their religion? What about the captain who refuses to assign ofcers to maintain order at the sight of an abortion clinic protest because his Catholic faith frowns upon abortion? Finally, how should a department handle a potential scheduling nightmare when its ofcers raise objections to shift assignments conicting with their Sabbaths or days of worship? This article addresses Religion in the Public WorkplaceRegulation and AccommodationBy RICHARD G. SCHOTT, J.D.Legal Digest Stockdisc59923x.indd 27 5/21/2007 11:22:34 AM24 / FBI Law Enforcement Bulletinthese issues and raises aware-ness of the myriad legal provi-sions that should govern han-dling them.FIRST AMENDMENT:FREEDOM OF RELIGIONBecause law enforcemententities necessarily are part offederal, state, or local govern-ments, they must adhere toconstitutional limits and man-dates, as well as to relevantlegislation relating to religion.In a recent First Amendmentfreedom of speech case in-volving an assistant districtattorney, the U.S. SupremeCourt pointed out that the FirstAmendment invests publicemployees with certain rights.1Therefore, law enforcementexecutives must be mindful ofthe First Amendments freedomof religion2 provision whendealing with employees ofdifferent faiths.Uniforms/GroomingStandardsUniforms are almost asmuch a part of the law enforce-ment culture as they are a partof the military culture. As such,policies and restrictions regard-ing the wearing of them arealmost universally upheld.When a department has strictrules concerning the adornmentof its uniform, an individualsability to display a religiousitem on it may be curtailed.While the assertion of a FirstAmendment-protected religiousright raises the legal bar for lawenforcement departments inthese cases,3 courts typicallynd little sympathy for thoseindividuals who nd themselvesin this predicament. In Danielsv. City of Arlington, Texas,4George Daniels, a 13-yearveteran of the police departmentchallenged his departmentsrefusal to allow him to wear asmall, gold cross pin on hisuniform. Daniels wore the pinas a symbol of his evangelicalChristianity5 while working ina plainclothes position with thedepartment, and he continued towear it after reassignment to auniformed position. The policedepartment in Arlington, as partof its general orders, had auniform policy that read Nobutton, badge, medal, or similarsymbol or item not listed in thisgeneral order will be worn onthe uniform shirt unless ap-proved by the police chief inwriting on an individual basis.6Daniels requested specicallowance, pursuant to thisgeneral order, to wear the crosspin on his uniform from thepolice chief at that time. Thechief refused permission butoffered several possible accom-modations to resolve the situa-tion, including 1) wearing across ring or bracelet instead ofthe pin; 2) wearing the pinunder his uniform shirt orcollar; or 3) transferring to anonuniformed position wherehe would be allowed to wear thepin on his shirt.7 Daniels de-clined all of the possible solu-tions and was red for insubor-dination. In upholding hisdismissal for violating theSpecial Agent Schott is a legal instructor at the FBI Academy.the Supreme Courttypically has afforded agreat deal of deferenceand latitude when itcomes to the internaladministration, includinggrooming policies,of law enforcementdepartments.59923x.indd28 5/21/200711:23:27 AMJune 2007 / 25uniform policy, the Fifth CircuitCourt of Appeals conrmed thedistrict courts determinationthat [a] police ofcers uni-form is not a forum for fosteringpublic discourse or expressingones personal beliefs.8 Rather,the appellate court concludedthat [a] police department doesnot violate the First Amendmentwhen it bars ofcers fromadorning their uniforms withindividual adornments, evenwhen those decorations includesymbols with religious signi-cance.9 In reaching this conclu-sion, the court pointed out thatthe no-pins policy serve[d] alegitimate governmental pur-pose in the context of uniformedlaw enforcement personnel,and Daniels undoubtedly ha[d]myriad alternative ways tomanifest this tenet of hisreligion.10While law enforcementagencies may not receive the al-most unbridled deference fromcourts that the military getswhen restricting uniform adorn-ments,11 the Supreme Court typ-ically has afforded a great dealof deference and latitude whenit comes to the internal admin-istration, including groomingpolicies, of law enforcementdepartments. In a 1976 casebefore the Supreme Court,12a law enforcement agencysregulation of hair styles wornby its male members was at is-sue. Though not challenged onreligious grounds, the Courtsreasoning for upholding therestriction against the Four-teenth Amendment13 libertychallenge often is cited in FirstAmendment cases.14 Namely,the Court recognized that [t]hepromotion of safety of personsand property is unquestionablyat the core of the states policepower, and virtually all stateand local governments employthe public, or a desire for theesprit de corps which such simi-larity is felt to inculcate withinthe police force itself,16 andthat either of those justicationsis sufcient to withstand Four-teenth Amendment scrutiny.While recognizing thatcourts generally afford widelatitude to law enforcementexecutives in running their de-partments, there is no proverbialrubber stamp when it comes tointernal policies. Several policedepartments have or have hadpolicies restricting male ofcersfrom wearing facial hair of anykind. Because certain religiousfaiths expect or require males togrow beards, these restrictionshave been challenged basedon First Amendment grounds.Because of religious principlesinvolved, restrictions must with-stand exacting scrutiny.17 Somepolicies have not stood up to theexacting scrutiny.In Fraternal Order of PoliceNewark Lodge No. 12 v. Cityof Newark,18 two devout SunniMuslim police ofcers chal-lenged the Newark, New Jersey,Police Departments require-ment, in place since 1971, thatmale ofcers shave their beards.The ofcers challenged therestriction on a First Amend-ment basis because [t]herefusal by a Sunni Muslim malewho can grow a beard...is amajor sin.19 In their challengeto the beard ban, the ofcerspointed out that the departmenta uniform police force to aidin the accomplishment of thatpurpose. Choice of organiza-tion, dress, and equipment forlaw enforcement personnel isa decision entitled to the samesort of presumption of legisla-tive validity as are state choicesdesigned to promote other aimswithin the cognizance of thestates police power.15 TheCourt went on to say that thechoices regarding uniform is-sues, grooming standards, andequipment issuance may bebased on a desire to make policeofcers readily identiable to...the First Amendmentwill not allow a lawenforcement ofcerto refuse a lawful orderto carry out anassignment becauseit conicts with hisreligion.59923x.indd29 5/21/200711:24:15 AM26 / FBI Law Enforcement Bulletinmade exemptions for medicalreasons, typically because ofa skin condition called fol-liculitis barbae, but refusedto make exemptions based onreligious beliefs.20 The depart-ment attempted to withstand thechallenge to its no-beard policy,even in light of the medicalexemptions, by contendingthat it wanted to convey theimage of a monolithic, highlydisciplined force and that[u]niformity [of appearance]not only benet[ted] the menand women who risk their liveson a daily basis, but offer[ed]the public a sense of securityin having readily identiableand trusted public servants.21The department also assertedthat permitting ofcers to wearbeards for religious reasonswould undermine the forcesmorale and esprit de corps.22The Third Circuit Court of Ap-peals rejected the departmentsarguments and struck down theno-beards provision as appliedto the Muslim ofcers. TheThird Circuit determined thatbecause the department grantedexemptions for nonreligiousreasons but would not grant anexemption based on religiousgrounds, heightened scrutiny ofthe denials was triggered. Thecourt concluded that the policysimply could not withstandthat scrutiny. It is worth notingthat the court only applied theheightened scrutiny standardbecause the exemption had beenmade based on secular (medi-cal) reasons. The departmentsstated reasons for denying thereligious exemption request didnot satisfy heightened scrutiny.It is arguable that safety con-cernsfor example, the needfor achieving a snug t whenwearing a gas maskwouldsatisfy the heightened scrutinyapplied in this situation. How-ever, these same safety concernsof statutory provisions, such asthose found in Title VII of theCivil Rights Act of 1964, andnot because of any obligationimposed upon employers bythe Constitution. When an FBIagent lost his job because of hisrefusal to fulll an assignmentthat conicted with his religiousbeliefs, the Seventh CircuitCourt of Appeals pointed outthat [a]fter Employment Divi-sion v. Smith,23 any argumentthat failure to accommodate [theagents] religiously motivatedacts violates the free exerciseclause of the First Amendmentis untenable.24 The appellatecourt then went on to addressthe challenge from a statutorystandpoint.The Supreme Courts Em-ployment Division v. Smith25decision concerned the denialof state unemployment benetsto individuals who lost theirjobs because of their inges-tion of peyote for sacramentalpurposes at a ceremony of theirchurch.26 The use of peyote wasin violation of Oregon statelaw,27 which led to job termina-tion and the subsequent denialby the state of unemploymentbenets. The affected churchmembers argued that the denialwas in violation of their FirstAmendment rights. In its hold-ing against the challengers, theSupreme Court pointed out thatthe free exercise of religionmeans, rst and foremost, theright to believe and professmay dictate against any exemp-tions being made to the facialhair restriction, and it was onlybecause of the previous exemp-tion that heightened scrutinywas applied to the denial ofthe subsequent, religion-basedexemption request.Job Performance/Assignments/SchedulingChallenges to certainassignments based on thoseassignments conicting withreligious ideals rarely are suc-cessful. When a challenge doessucceed, it is typically becauseWhen schedulingissues arise, whatcertain employeeswant (or think isrequired) is examinedon a case-by-casebasis.59923x.indd30 5/21/200711:24:45 AMJune 2007 / 27whatever religious doctrine one desires. Thus, the First Amend-ment obviously excludes all governmental regulation of re-ligious beliefs as such.28 How-ever, the court went on to point out that its decisions have consistently held that the right of free exercise does not relieve an individual of the obligation to comply with a valid and neutral law of general applica-bility on the ground that the law proscribes (or prescribes) con-duct that his religion prescribes (or proscribes).29 Likewise, the First Amendment will not allow a law enforcement ofcer to refuse a lawful order to carry out an assignment because it conicts with his religion.30Denials of employee re-quests to have certain days off or to work particular shifts based on religious faith also are frequently challenged. These requests do not have to be hon-ored based on any constitutional obligation for the same reasons employers are not required to allow employees to refuse cer-tain assignments. The employee may be more successful making this request based on certain statutory language contained in Title VII, rather than on any af-rmative obligation imposed by the First Amendment.31TITLE VII OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 makes it an unlaw-ful employment practice for an employer to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual or otherwise to discriminate against any individual with respect to compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment because of such individuals religion.32 This antidiscrimination statute also contains a reasonable accom-modation provision, placing an afrmative duty on employers to reasonably accommodate an employees or prospective of the police uniform with any button, badge, medal, or similar symbol or item unless approved by the police chief in writing on an individual basis. It is easy to envision how this policy could be applied in a discriminatory manner. For example, if the chief allowed an ofcer of one religious sect to wear an em-blem of his faith but atly re-fused to allow an ofcer of an-other faith to display his faiths emblem, there would appear to be discrimination based on re-ligion in violation of Title VII. In Booth v. Maryland,35for ex-ample, a facially neutral groom-ing policy was challenged under both the First Amendment and under federal statutes.36 At issue in the case was the Maryland Department of Public Safe-ty and Correctional Services grooming policy and its appli-cation to certain correctional ofcers. The challenger was a uniformed correctional ofcer who wanted to wear his hair in dreadlocks, in violation of the challenged regulation, to con-form with his Rastafarian reli-gious beliefs.37 After ruling out his First Amendment argument, the Fourth Circuit Court of Ap-peals addressed the statutory challenge to the regulation pro-hibiting the dreadlock hairstyle. The appellate court remanded the case, acknowledging that if the department applied its fa-cially neutral grooming policies in an uneven manner, a statutory violation may have occurred.38employees religious obser-vance or practice as long as doing so does not create any un-due hardship for the employer.33It is from this standpoint that many employment practices are challenged as unlawful discrimination.Uniforms/Grooming StandardsIn the Daniels v. City of Ar-lington, Texas case,34 the uni-form policy challenged by Dan-iels prohibited the adornment Stockdisc59923x.indd 31 5/21/2007 11:25:10 AM28 / FBI Law Enforcement BulletinSpecically, the plaintiff allegedthat a Jewish employee and aSikh employee both had beengranted religious exemptions tothe questioned grooming policyin the past but that his requestfor exemption had been deniedbecause of his particular reli-gion.39 If, unlike the precedingsituation, a department made noexception for any religious sym-bol, it would be difcult to at-tack the policy as being appliedin a discriminatory manner;and, therefore, the same argu-ments used to support the pol-icy from constitutional attackshould withstand the discrimi-nation attack under Title VII.For this reason, courts entertainmore reasonable accommoda-tion challenges to groomingand uniform standards than theydo straightforward discrimina-tion challenges. For example,the reasonable accommodationprovision was used as one basisof challenge in Daniels.40 TheFifth Circuit ruled against Dan-iels, nding that Daniels failedto respond to the police chiefsreasonable offers of accommo-dation41 and that the only ac-commodation proposed by Dan-iels was unreasonable and anundue hardship for the city.42Job Performance/Assignments/SchedulingTitle VII, particularly itsreasonable accommodationaspect, also has been used bylaw enforcement employees toargue that they are entitled torefuse certain assignments or toreceive preference when sched-uling issues arise. In Endresv. Indiana State Police,43 Ben-jamin Endres, Jr., an IndianaState Police employee, refusedto report for a new duty assign-ment at a gambling casino. Theassignment occurred becausethe state police designated someof the gaming commissionagent position would violatehis religious beliefs because hewould be facilitating gamblingitself.45 As an accommodationto his religious beliefs, he askedfor a different assignment andwas denied. He was subse-quently red for insubordina-tion when he failed to report forwork. After rst acknowledgingthat assignment to this positionbecause of (rather than in spiteof or with indifference to) [En-dres] religious beliefs wouldviolate the Constitution,46 theSeventh Circuit Court of Ap-peals addressed the reasonableaccommodation aspect ofTitle VII.In ruling that the state po-lice was not required to affordits employee such an accom-modation, the court went togreat lengths in explaining itsdecision.Endres contends that [titleVII] gives law enforcementpersonnel a right to choosewhich laws they will en-force, and whom they willprotect from crime. Manyofcers have religiousscruples about particularactivities: to give just a fewexamples, Baptists opposeliquor, as well as gambling;Roman Catholics opposeabortion; Jews and Muslimsoppose the consumption ofpork; and a few faiths (suchas the one at issue in Smith)include hallucinogenicof its ofcers as Indiana Gam-ing Commission agents. Thoseagents duties included certify-ing gambling revenue, inves-tigating complaints from thepublic about the gaming system,and conducting licensing in-vestigations for the casinos andtheir employees.44 Upon beingassigned to a particular casino,Endres notied the state policethat he was willing to enforcegeneral vice laws at casinos butthat providing the aforemen-tioned specic duties requiredthe inquiry ends whenan employer showsthat a reasonableaccommodation wasafforded the employee,regardless of whetherthat accommodationis one that theemployee suggested.59923x.indd32 5/21/200711:25:55 AMJune 2007 / 29drugs in their worship and, thus, oppose legal prohibi-tions of those drugs. If Endres is right, all of these faiths, and more, must be accommodated by assigning believers to duties compat-ible with their principles. Does [Title VII] require the state police to assign Unitar-ians to guard the abortion clinic, Catholics to prevent thefts from liquor stores, and Baptists to investigate claims that supermarkets misweigh bacon and shell-sh? Must prostitutes be left exposed to slavery or murder at the hands of pimps because protecting them from crime would encourage them to ply their trade and, thus, offend almost every religious faith?47The courts answer, of course, was a resounding no for logical reasons. First, [j]uggling assignments to make each compatible with the varying religious beliefs of a heterogenous police force would be daunting to managers and difcult for other ofcers who would be called on to ll in for the objectors.48Second, the court recognized that [i]t is difcult for any organization to accommodate employees who are choosy about assignments; for a paramilitary organization the tension is even greater.49Finally, agencies such as police and re departments, designed to protect the public from dan-ger may insist that all of their personnel protect all members of the publicthat they leave their religious (and other) views behind so that they may serve all without favor on religious grounds.50 Based on these reasons, the Seventh Circuit concluded that Endres ha[d] made a demand that it would be unreasonable to require any training period at the Correc-tions Recruit Academy. Beadle, as a Seventh Day Adventist, did not engage in secular labor during his Sabbatha period lasting from sundown Friday to sundown Saturday.53 Beadle did not notify his employer of this restriction until he had completed the academy and was scheduled to work during the time frame that conicted with his religious beliefs. Respon-sible for securing the safety of the Hillsborough County prison, the Detention Department natu-rally operated 7 days a week, 24 hours a day, year round. To satisfy this stafng need, the de-partment employed a neutral, rotating shift system.54 Beadle requested permanent days off in deviation of the departments scheduling system. The depart-ment rejected this request but did notify Beadle that he was free to arrange for voluntary shift swaps with other employ-ees. To assist in this effort, the department provided Beadle with a roster sheet and allowed him to advertise his need for swaps during daily roll calls and on the departments bulletin board. Further, the department allowed Beadle to request the use of sick days, vacation time, and compensation time if he was not able to arrange for shift swaps.55 On one occasion when Beadle was unable to swap shifts and his request for leave was denied,56 he simply failed police or re department to tolerate,51 and, thus, his ring was lawful. When scheduling issues arise, what certain employees want (or think is required) is examined on a case-by-case ba-sis. One instructive case for law enforcement agencies is Beadlev. Hillsborough County Sheriff s Department.52 Aston Beadle was a member of the Seventh Day Adventist Church who became a member of the Hillsborough County, Florida, Sheriffs De-tention Department after com-pleting the required 11-week Stockdisc59923x.indd 33 5/21/2007 11:26:27 AM30 / FBI Law Enforcement Bulletinto report to work. On anotheroccasion, Beadle abandonedhis post during the middle of hisshift, leaving two other depu-ties alone to supervise an areaof dangerous inmates.57 Ulti-mately, Beadle was red overthis attendance/performanceissue. When Beadle challengedhis termination as a violation ofTitle VII, the Eleventh CircuitCourt of Appeals had to decidewhether the sheriffs depart-ment had satised its obligationto reasonably accommodateBeadle.The appellate court rstnoted that the phrases reason-ably accommodate and unduehardship58 are not dened inthe language of Title VII, and,[t]hus, the precise reac