What best describes the difference between an interview and an interrogation?

• A. An interview is questioning of a person not in custody; an interrogation is custodial questioning about a crime.
• B. An interview is conducted by a civilian, while interrogation is conducted by police.
• C. Both are conducted only after a formal arrest.
• D. An interview is used to elicit confessions.

Answer: (A)

The difference hinges on custody and purpose. An interview is questioning someone who is not in custody; you’re gathering information from a person who is free to leave, typically in a noncoercive, informal setting. Because there’s no custodial environment, the questioning doesn’t trigger the same constitutional safeguards as a police interrogation.

An interrogation, on the other hand, occurs when the person is in custody and the questions are directed at obtaining information about a crime with the aim of eliciting a confession or incriminating statements. In this custodial context, officers must be mindful of rights and procedural protections, such as providing appropriate warnings before questioning.

That’s why the best description is that an interview is noncustodial information gathering, while an interrogation is custodial questioning aimed at getting a confession or incriminating statements. The other options miss these distinctions: a is incorrect because interviews can be conducted by police and aren’t limited to civilians; C is wrong because interviews can happen before any arrest; D is inaccurate because interviews aren’t solely used to elicit confessions.