Which statement best describes the difference between an interview and an interrogation?

• A. Interview is non-coercive questioning; interrogation is designed to elicit information about criminal activity and typically triggers Miranda.
• B. Interview and interrogation are always the same.
• C. An interview is used only for witnesses; interrogation is used for suspects.
• D. Miranda warnings are never required for interviews.

Answer: (A)

The main idea is that questioning styles differ by custody and purpose. An interview is typically non-custodial and non-coercive, used to gather information from someone like a witness or victim without asserting power over them. Because there’s no restraint on freedom and no coercive environment, Miranda warnings aren’t required for this kind of questioning. An interrogation, on the other hand, happens when a person is in custody or reasonably feels not free to leave, and the goal is to elicit information about criminal activity from a suspect. In that setting, officers use more controlled, pressure-filled techniques, and Miranda warnings are required before custodial interrogation to protect the suspect’s rights, with a valid waiver needed for any statements to be admissible. So the statement that best captures the distinction is that an interview is non-coercive questioning, while an interrogation is designed to elicit information about criminal activity and typically triggers Miranda.