The Power of Trust

We are pleased to release a new Reflection piece, written by Advisory Council member Mark Severino, Detective Supervisor (Ret) at the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD). As the reader will know, in science-based interviewing rapport is a major and frequently discussed concept. Here, Mark writes about the importance of a related – but different – concept: trust. Mark elaborates in a compelling manner on why trust is fundamental to effective interviewing, how to cultivate it, and what benefits it reaps. This piece is fully in line with psychological theory and findings on the importance of trust in legal settings (e.g., the vast literature on procedural justice), and it is enriched with enlightening examples drawn from Mark’s long and illustrious career as a professional. Many thanks are due to Mark for his exemplary writing, and for consistently contributing significantly to Project Aletheia.

The Power of Trust

Mark Severino

Numerous articles on the science of investigative interviewing highlight the crucial importance of establishing rapport with individuals being questioned. While building this initial connection is vital, cultivating trust is even more critical. Trust is the foundation of effective communication and is a strong motivator, encouraging individuals to come forward and disclose illicit activities occurring in their communities. Without this essential trust, the willingness to share important information decreases, making it imperative for interviewers to create an environment where trust can thrive.

When the bond of trust between community members and law enforcement is weakened or absent, investigations may remain unresolved or go unreported entirely. To effectively nurture this trust, interviewers must build rapport and exhibit behaviors that reflect trustworthiness. Combining rapport-building with demonstrations of integrity, reliability, and consistency, this dual approach is essential for creating an atmosphere where individuals feel safe and empowered to share their experiences and concerns. By prioritizing establishing trust from the outset, investigators can significantly enhance their chances of achieving successful interview outcomes.

Building trust is crucial from the initial interaction between a subject and law enforcement personnel. This foundational connection is initiated by crafting a favorable first impression, one that is deeply rooted in genuine mutual respect. By displaying competence and credibility, the interviewer instills confidence in the subject, reassuring them that they engage with empowered professionals who care about their well-being and safety.

Open communication plays a pivotal role in this. By prioritizing trust, law enforcement can foster deeper connections and more effective collaboration with the individuals they serve, as it allows the subject ample space and time to express their narrative in their own words, liberated from interruptions or the pressure to conform. When subjects are afforded this opportunity, they often feel valued and heard, cultivating a sense of partnership rather than creating an adversarial atmosphere. This collaborative environment is a fertile foundation for more meaningful and productive dialogue, enhancing trust and fostering cooperative interactions.

Factors to consider for building trust:

Keeping promises made during the initial engagement is vital. Such actions reinforce reliability and integrity in the subject’s eyes. Identifying common ground, whether through shared experiences, backgrounds, or interests, helps build a genuine connection and understanding between the interviewer and the subject. 

Empathy – often characterized as understanding another person’s experience by adopting their perspective. It involves understanding their emotions and thoughts and genuinely feeling and resonating with their situation. This connection may allow the interviewer and subject to relate to one another on a deeper, more personal level.

Perspective-taking is considering another individual’s thoughts and feelings by adopting their viewpoint. This capability enhances interpersonal understanding and encourages benevolent behaviors, such as showing kindness and goodwill, that foster social connections and play a vital role in establishing trust. By engaging in perspective-taking, individuals can promote open communication and create an environment conducive to collaboration and mutual respect.  

Evocation refers to uncovering a witness’s deeply held beliefs and values. Through our experiences, we quickly recognized the significance of asking thoughtful questions about a witness’s opinions and convictions. This approach enriched the witness’s narrative and revealed insights that might have otherwise remained hidden. By actively engaging in discussions about their perspectives, we communicated our genuine interest in understanding them, fostering trust and openness in our interactions. This method enhanced the quality of the information we gathered and built a stronger connection with the witnesses, making them feel valued and respected. 

Addressing the subject’s distinct needs and concerns is crucial for fostering meaningful communication and profound understanding. Interviewers must strive to uncover the subject’s values, focusing on their core interests and priorities. This deeper exploration can be effectively achieved during the interviewer’s investigation and planning phases. By engaging in thoughtful inquiry and active listening, interviewers can create a more tailored and impactful dialogue, leading to richer insights and connections.

Effective communication hinges on a foundation of transparency; being open and honest about the facts and evidence is essential, while misleading information or dishonesty can severely undermine trust. Establishing a solid foundation of trust is vital to minimizing resistance during conversations. When an interviewer consistently embodies traits that foster trustworthiness, such as honesty, reliability, and openness, the individual being questioned is far more inclined to engage positively. This dynamic can significantly enhance the individual’s overall perception of the interviewer’s integrity and credibility, which is the ultimate objective in fostering a productive dialogue.

It is crucial to understand that while establishing rapport is a foundational element in the interview process, it does not necessarily translate into a profound level of trust. Rapport can be understood as the relational dynamic between the interviewer and the subject, characterized by a generally positive and engaging exchange. This interaction involves a mutual attentiveness to one another’s concerns and an emphasis on cultivating respect; however, it often lacks the depth required to create genuine trust. 

On the other hand, trust represents a more complex and significant relationship that necessitates empathy and a deeper understanding of the subject. It requires a consistent application of reliable behavior and authentic engagement over time. This richer bond fosters a strong sense of safety and encourages an atmosphere of openness, creating opportunities for more meaningful and impactful dialogue. While rapport lays the groundwork for communication, trust builds the bridge for deeper connections and understanding.

Key principles we implemented to cultivate and strengthen trust:

We introduced the Suspicious Activity Report to foster a safer environment for our community members. This initiative enabled individuals to report any suspicious or criminal behavior they observed without disclosing their identity if they preferred to remain anonymous. As we built trust within the community and demonstrated that their reports would be treated with the utmost confidentiality and sensitivity, more residents began to feel comfortable coming forward. This increased trust led to more individuals volunteering to meet investigators in person, allowing for deeper discussions and collaboration in addressing community safety concerns.

During our engagement with the community, we stumbled upon a remarkable dynamic. When one person openly expressed their trust in law enforcement, it had a ripple effect, encouraging others to share their own experiences and insights. This growing atmosphere of mutual trust acted as a catalyst, greatly enhancing the exchange of vital information. The intelligence garnered from these candid disclosures laid the groundwork for a series of large-scale investigations, which, over time, produced a wealth of fruitful outcomes. A critical lesson emerged from our interactions: law enforcement cannot simply impose trust upon a community but must earn that trust through consistent, sincere actions. Once community members agreed to meet with investigators, the investigators needed to demonstrate their reliability continually. 

To foster a more open and comfortable dialogue during these interviews, we made a significant adjustment to the context in which they were conducted. Many discussions occurred in private, offsite locations, far removed from the public’s view. This approach allowed community members to share information on their terms and at their own pace. We approached every piece of information respectfully, never pressuring individuals for specific details or dismissing any contributions, regardless of how minor they might seem. This respectful and accommodating atmosphere was crucial in building a trusting relationship between law enforcement and the community.

In many communities, particularly those grappling with high levels of crime, both witnesses and victims often face significant barriers when it comes to engaging with law enforcement. A prevalent issue is their hesitance to come forward, which can be deeply rooted in fear, mistrust, or previous negative experiences with authorities. To address this challenge, interviewers need to build a foundation of trust. This can be achieved by highlighting their expertise, expressing genuine empathy, and demonstrating a strong understanding of different perspectives. 

During the interview process, the interviewer must create an environment where witnesses feel secure enough to share their narratives comfortably. This means allowing them to recount their experiences in a way that aligns with their comfort levels. It is common for a single interview to be insufficient to capture a complete and thorough account of the event. Often, the initial conversation serves primarily as a means to forge a connection, establish rapport, and convey trustworthiness. In these early interactions, the focus may be less on gathering detailed information about the incident and more on nurturing a relationship that encourages open dialogue in future discussions.

Witnesses will cooperate with law enforcement based on their readiness rather than adhere to the interviewer’s preferred timing. An efficient approach we discovered involved being open and transparent with the witnesses. By clearly explaining the forthcoming investigative steps that would be taken in light of the information they were about to provide, we could ease their concerns and enhance their willingness to participate.  

We noted that allowing a witness to have a trusted family member accompany them during the interview fostered a greater trust in our team. A familiar face created a more comfortable atmosphere, allowing the witness to share their experiences and feelings openly. 

Building trust with criminal suspects can significantly enhance their willingness to cooperate. Our experiences have shown that conveying an air of trustworthiness often leads to more open dialogue. We achieved this by engaging in small, seemingly informal gestures that the suspects interpreted as deviations from standard policy. This fostered the perception that we genuinely trusted them not to disclose these moments. For instance, we would take the suspect outside the interview room for a cigarette break, creating a sense of comfort and camaraderie. Similarly, we allowed them to make additional phone calls to family members or employers, illustrating that we valued their connections.  

Even during apprehension, such as transporting a suspect from the field, we took the time to pause for food and drinks. This simple act demonstrated respect for their basic needs and helped to humanize them in a highly stressful situation. In addition, we prioritized transparency regarding the facts of the investigation whenever it was deemed appropriate. We believed this approach was crucial, as many criminal suspects distrust law enforcement. By openly sharing information, we aimed to bridge this gap and foster a more trusting relationship.    

On the contrary, any effort to mislead a suspect by offering false information or fabricated evidence can irreparably shatter the confidence we have painstakingly built. This underscores the critical significance of upholding integrity in every aspect of communication during these pivotal encounters. Furthermore, we learned that when the interviewer opens up and displays a willingness to trust the suspect, it significantly enhances the sense of trust, leading to greater cooperation from the suspect. 

Drawing from our previous investigations and operational experiences, we believed that a criminal suspect’s response to our trustworthy gestures could strongly predict their willingness to cooperate in an upcoming interview. We observed a clear trend: when a suspect embraced our gestures of trust, it often indicated a higher likelihood of cooperation. Conversely, those who rejected these overtures typically demonstrated a significantly lower willingness to engage with us. This pattern highlighted the importance of fostering a sense of trust as a key strategy in our investigative approach.   

Example of an interviewer’s willingness to trust:

Hanns Scharff, an interrogator for the Luftwaffe during World War II, faced skilled prisoners of war resistant to questioning. His innovative approach focused on building rapport and trust by offering privileges and creating a relaxed environment. Instead of strict interrogation settings, Scharff took the POWs outside for leisurely walks and organized informal meetings with German pilots. These gestures fostered human connection and helped him gather intelligence amidst the chaos of war.

Establishing trust in interactions with communities or individuals is fundamentally rooted in consistently fulfilling prior promises. Our observations indicated that dedicating the initial ten minutes of an interview to honoring these commitments, such as allowing phone calls, reaching out to family members when necessary, ensuring breaks, and communicating the purpose of the discussion, sets a positive and receptive tone for the conversation. In stark contrast, failing to follow through on these commitments can swiftly dismantle any semblance of trust that may have been established, severely impeding future dialogues.

Building trust within historically skeptical law enforcement communities presents significant challenges. Establishing trust is a central goal during investigative interviews, as it lays the groundwork for open and honest communication. While initial efforts to connect can help develop rapport, nurturing that trust must remain the primary focus. This foundation is crucial for enabling meaningful dialogue and promoting collaborative efforts, ultimately strengthening community relationships. Law enforcement can foster deeper connections and more effective collaboration with the individuals they serve by prioritizing trust. 

The opinions expressed in this article, which was prepared in Mark Severino’s capacity, are his own and do not reflect the views of the Los Angeles Police Department.