Working PIby Brian J. Harris, M.S.
Concrete round stools that numb your backside after 20 minutes. Thick glass partitions separating you from your client. Phones that cut out mid-sentence. The constant intrusion of fire alarms and jail announcements echoing in the distance. This is the environment defense investigators routinely navigate when conducting defendant interviews.
Given these conditions, it is no surprise some in the profession ask why bother—what’s the point of talking to the defendant at all?
Why the Defendant Interview Matters
Defendants (particularly those with appointed counsel) exist in an information vacuum. They have had brief meetings with their attorneys, sometimes just minutes before court appearances. Many do not understand the charges against them, the potential penalties, or even basic aspects of how the criminal justice system works. The waiting period between arrest and trial can stretch for months or years, during which they receive minimal information and maximum anxiety.
When you walk into a jail for an interview, you may be the first person who has sat down and explained to the defendant what is happening in their own case. You may be the first person who has shown them the evidence against them. Answer their questions honestly or treated them like a human being whose story matters.
But here is what too many investigators miss: the defendant interview is not just a box to check. It is not something to rush through so you can bill for it and move on. Done properly, it is the foundation of the entire defense. Done poorly, it is a wasted opportunity that can never be recovered.
Fast Food vs. Fine Dining
Think about the last time you grabbed fast food. You probably don’t remember it. You pulled up, ordered through a speaker, grabbed a bag through a window, and ate while driving. It is forgettable by design, optimized for speed rather than experience (although, at my age, that kind of meal doesn’t just fade from memory—it causes indigestion).
Now think about a fine dining experience. You remember that meal. The anticipation as you reviewed the menu. The appetizer that set the tone. The glass of wine carefully selected. The steak dinner, perfectly prepared. The conversation flowed naturally because no one was rushing you. The meal was savored, not consumed. It stays with you.
The defendant interview should be a fine dining experience — not for your enjoyment, but for its effectiveness.
When you rush a defendant interview — when you treat it like fast food — you get fast food results. Surface-level information. Missed details. A defendant who does not trust you enough to share what really matters. An interview that is forgettable for everyone involved, including the jury, who will never hear the context they needed.
When you take your time—when you create a fine dining experience—you get something memorable. You build rapport that enables honest communication. You gather details that change defense strategies. You develop an understanding of your client that translates into effective testimony preparation and meaningful mitigation.
The Appetizer: Building Rapport
Do not dive straight into the offense. Start with who they are. Ask about their family, their work, their background. Find common ground. Ask about their tattoos; they often tell stories that matter. Names are important so ask them what they want you to call them. Let them ask questions about you and the process. This is not wasted time; it is the appetizer that prepares them for the main course. A defendant who trusts you will tell you things; a defendant who sees you as just another official never will.
(story continues)
The Wine: Explaining the Process
Before you get into the substance, make sure they understand what is happening. Explain your role. Explain attorney-client privilege and how it protects your communications. Explain the charges they are facing and what the state must prove. Explain potential penalties honestly—they deserve to know the stakes. This context is like the wine that accompanies the meal; it enhances everything that follows.
The Main Course: Their Account
Now you are ready for the substance. Let them tell their story from the beginning. Do not interrupt. Do not rush to your next question. Listen. Take notes. Ask follow-up questions that show you are engaged: “What happened next?” “What were you thinking at that moment?” “What did you see?” Build your questions from their answers rather than racing through a checklist. This is the steak dinner that deserves your full attention and cannot be rushed.
Dessert: The Details That Matter
After the main narrative, go back for the details. Mitigation information. Family contacts. Employment history. Mental health background. Prior criminal history and context. Jail conduct. These are the finishing touches that complete the meal—the details that will matter at sentencing even if they do not matter at trial.
Documenting the Interview
A fine dining experience is not complete without proper presentation. Your interview documentation is how the defense attorney experiences your work. It must be thorough, organized, and useful.
The Defendant’s Account
Document the defendant’s version of events in detail. Use their words where possible. Include:
• The complete narrative of the offense as they describe it.
• Specific quotes and phrases they used.
• Their explanation of their state of mind at key moments.
• Details about other people involved—names, relationships, descriptions.
• Their responses to specific evidence or witness claims.
• Any exculpatory information or alternative explanations they offer.
Compare your interview to the Police Statement
This section is critical. If your defendant gave a statement to police, your documentation must include a detailed comparison:
• Consistencies: What elements of their story remain unchanged? When a defendant tells you the same account they gave police months earlier—when the truth has not wavered—that’s significant. Document it explicitly.
• Inconsistencies: What differs? Are the differences material or minor? Can the inconsistencies be explained by stress, the passage of time, or the circumstances of the police interview? The defense attorney needs to know what the prosecution will exploit on cross-examination.
• Added information: What did they tell you that they did not tell police? Why didn’t they share it before? Is the added information helpful or harmful?
• Omissions in police statement: What did they leave out when talking to police? Was it intentional? Does it suggest they were hiding something, or were they simply not asked?
• Context for discrepancies: If there are differences, document the defendant’s explanation. Were they scared? Confused? Protecting someone? Under the influence? Facing coercion?
Assessment of the Defendant
The defense attorney needs your professional assessment of the defendant as a potential witness. This isn’t about whether you believe them—it is about how they will present to a jury:
• Credibility impression: Does the defendant come across as believable? Do they maintain eye contact? Do they answer questions directly or evade? Do they appear honest even when discussing unflattering details?
• Demeanor under pressure: How did they respond when you challenged their account or played devil’s advocate? Did they remain calm and reasonable, or did they become defensive, hostile, or evasive? A defendant who crumbles under gentle questioning from their own investigator will be destroyed on cross-examination.
• Emotional presentation: Do they show appropriate emotion? Remorse about consequences? Fear about their situation? Or do they seem flat, callous, or inappropriately casual? Juries notice emotional authenticity.
• Likability factor: This matters whether we like it or not. Does the defendant come across as sympathetic? Humble? Sincere? Or do they seem arrogant, entitled, or unsympathetic? First impressions carry into deliberations.
• Testimony recommendation: Based on your assessment, should this defendant testify? If yes, what preparation do they need? If not, why not? This is one of the most valuable opinions you can offer.
(story continues below)
(story continues)
Communication Style Analysis
Documentation of how the defendant communicates directly impacts trial strategy:
• Vocabulary and articulation: Does the defendant speak clearly and use language a jury will understand? Do they use modern slang that will need translation? Can they explain complex situations in simple terms?
• Narrative ability: Can they tell a coherent story with a beginning, middle, and end? Do they get lost in tangents? Do they need prompting to continue? Some witnesses are natural storytellers; others need extensive preparation.
• Listening skills: Do they listen to questions before answering, or do they interrupt or anticipate? Do they answer the question asked, or do they go off on tangents? Can they follow instructions about what not to say?
• Response patterns: Are their answers direct and concise, or do they ramble? Do they volunteer too much information? Do they answer yes or no questions with “yes” or “no”, or do they elaborate unnecessarily?
• Respect for authority: Do they address you respectfully? Do they follow the norms of formal conversation? This signals how they will interact with a judge and jury.
• Handling difficult questions: When you ask about sensitive subjects—prior convictions, inconsistencies, unflattering facts—how do they respond? Do they take responsibility or make excuses? Do they become defensive or remain composed?
• Specific recommendations: Based on their communication style, what preparation do they need? Practice telling their story more concisely. Work on maintaining composure? Avoid certain phrases or mannerisms? These specific notes help the attorney prepare the defendant for testimony.
Mitigation Information
Document everything relevant to sentencing, including:
• Family structure—children, spouses, dependents who rely on them
• Employment history and skills
• Mental health history and current treatment
• Substance abuse history and recovery efforts
• Childhood trauma, abuse, or neglect
• Military service
• Community ties and support system
• Jail conduct—disciplinary record, programs participated in
• Contact information for potential mitigation witnesses
Follow-Up
Conclude your report with specific next steps:
• Locate witnesses and interview them
• Obtain records (medical, employment, military, school)
• Verify evidence or investigate further
• Questions that remain unanswered
• Expert witnesses that might be needed
The Meal They’ll Remember
The defendant interview done right is a fine dining experience. It takes time. It requires preparation. It demands presence and attention. It produces something memorable—for you, for the defendant, and ultimately for the jury who will benefit from the understanding you develop.
Yes, the concrete jail stools are uncomfortable. Yes, the phones cut out. Yes, the fluorescent lighting is terrible. But when you take the time to do this work properly, when you create an experience rather than just conduct an interview, you gather information that changes cases. You build relationships that enable honest communication. You develop assessments that guide defense strategy.
Your documentation becomes the menu that helps the defense attorney understand exactly what they’re working with: the defendant’s account compared to their police statement, your assessment of how they’ll present to a jury, your analysis of their communication style, and your specific recommendations for preparation.
Go to the jail. Take your time. Do the work. Create an interview that will be savored, not consumed.
That is fine dining. That is professional defense investigation. That is how we serve justice from this side of the table.
About the Author
Brian J. Harris, M.S. is a criminal defense investigator with Willis & Associates Professional Investigations and founder of BHI Investigations and Consulting. He is a former Houston Police Department Homicide Detective Sergeant. He can be reached at brianhpd1024@gmail.com.
We’re always listening. Send your story submission/idea to the Editor: kendra@orep.org.
