Wicklander-Zulawski and Associates

International training organization, Wicklander-Zulawski & Associates (WZ) announced Dave Thompson, CFI and VP of operations as a partner of the firm joining fellow leaders...

The great thing about the enticement question is that we can use it regardless of whether we have any evidence. The wording of the question thus becomes very important.

A common question that comes up in training seminars is: "How the heck do we get that written statement?"

The participatory approach is specifically used when there’s circumstantial evidence or that there’s a possibility that your subject might have an excuse, an explanation, so some type of alibi that may or may not be true.

It's not uncommon for investigators to see the end goal of an investigation as the interview with the accused subject or involved subject.

The Wicklander-Zulawski (WZ) method is a non-confrontational interview that allows the interviewer to build credibility through a brief introductory statement—and then show understanding through rationalizing.

Even though there's going to be a third person in the room, we need to create a one-on-one conversation with the subject.

What's really important when it comes to fact-gathering interviews is an understanding of question formulation. It's necessary to understand when to ask an open-ended, expansion, closed-ended, enticement, assumptive, or even echo question.

Even though we might ultimately deny a request, we don't want to do so in a way that creates an adversarial relationship with the subject. Think about it like this: nobody likes being told no.

A well-crafted statement freezes the moment of the admission or confession, providing the reader a snapshot into the mind of the guilty party.