Accusatorial Interrogations in Schools: Parents’ Views on Coercion, Custody, and Juvenile Vulnerability

• In Event: Schoolhouse Interrogations: Current Practices and Perceptions

Abstract

School administrators and SROs across the U.S. are being trained in accusatorial interrogation methods known to increase the risk of false confession among youth. This is especially concerning because students questioned with accusatorial tactics by administrators or SROs face the same concerns posed in the broader juvenile interrogation literature. However, research on schoolhouse interrogations is scant, despite students being frequently disciplined for both minor and serious misconduct. Therefore, the current study examined parents’ (N=291) perceptions of the in-school interrogation of a student accused of serious (i.e., stealing technology) or minor (i.e., graffiti) misconduct who was questioned by a principal or SRO. Overall, principal- and SRO-led questioning were perceived similarly. Participants viewed both interrogations as coercive and believed that the student was not allowed to leave while being questioned. In addition, both groups believed the student was vulnerable. Although the severity and coerciveness of the interrogation was not different between groups, participants supported more interrogation safeguards—like mandating Miranda—for the SRO condition and serious misconduct condition. Qualitative responses are currently being coded/analyzed to provide more nuanced insight into parents’ perceptions. Implications for schoolhouse interrogations and their downstream consequences will be discussed.

Authors

• Christopher Normile, Allegheny College

• Talley Bettens, George Mason University

• Allison Redlich, George Mason University

• Amye Warren, University of Tennessee at Chattanooga