Editing KUBARK Counterintelligence Interrogation Review: Observations of an Interrogator (section)

== Objective: Standard: Limits: Protections: Confession:==
Criminal Case
Conviction
Legal Code
Rules of Evidence Fifth Amendment Considerable Value
Foreign Intelligence
Understanding Analytical Methodology None30
None31
Relative Value32

An analysis of these critical factors would suggest that interrogators operating in support of foreign intelligence requirements be afforded a considerably greater degree of flexibility than law enforcement personnel. While the two interrogation contexts have numerous areas of commonality, it is imperative that the strategies, tactics, and techniques developed for each reflect the differences between them. Without this understanding, the potential exists for significant error in application and practice.
One explanation for this can be found in the specificity principle. Arising from studies in the field of kinesiology (the science of human movement), the specificity principle suggests that the closer two activities are to one another — without becoming the same activity — the more practice in one will degrade skills in the other. To borrow an example from sports, the individual who plays softball and also participates in a bowling league (activities that require vastly different skill sets) would not find his or her skill in one sport impaired by participation in the other. Conversely, the individual who plays both racquetball and squash would likely encounter difficulties in transitioning from one activity to the other, especially in areas such as strategy, timing, and focus. It is precisely in the areas of strategy, timing, and focus that law enforcement and intelligence interrogation are critically different.

30 Any and all information collected by the U.S. Intelligence Community outside the United States from non-U.S. Persons may be used for intelligence analytical purposes.

31 While the Constitution of the United States specifically protects individuals from unreasonable searches and self-incrimination, the non-U.S. Person intelligence source does not enjoy these same protections.

32 A “confession” obtained from an intelligence source only has value to the extent that it establishes direct access to the information reported. For intelligence purposes, the other interrogatives (e.g., why, how, how many, when again) are more important than confirmation of an individual “who.”