Part III Investigative interviewing | Section I Who to interview and how to interview them 4. DECIDING WHICH WITNESSES TO INTERVIEW In some cases, the NHRI may be able to identify hundreds of possible witnesses to an event, or series of events, or people who have been affected by a systemic human rights issue. There may simply not be the resources available to interview them all, even if it would be ideal to do so. Few organizations do. In these situations, the role of the investigator is to triage. Triaging is the process by which an investigator uses their judgment to decide who must be interviewed and who it may not be necessary to interview. The goal is to identify those individuals who are likely to have the most information about the issue being investigated and to concentrate on those individuals. In deciding who to interview, and who not to interview, it is important to consider: • the seriousness of the investigation • the resources available • the time constraints set out in the investigation plan • the proximity of the witness to the event or issue • the potential uniqueness of the person’s evidence • the availability of the person to be interviewed • any concerns about credibility or identity • ensuring that the voices of those most affected are given appropriate consideration.32 Proximity is particularly important. As a rule, those who are closer to an event or issue are more likely to provide the most valuable evidence. THE MULRUNJI CASE WHO SHOULD HAVE BEEN INTERVIEWED? In the Mulrunji case, all the officers at the police watch-house on duty that day should have been segregated, if practical, and interviewed immediately. Even if they did not directly witness the interaction between S/Sgt. Hurley and Mulrunji, they may have had conversations with those directly involved or heard utterances from them. One officer who directly witnessed parts of the event, Cst Steadman, was not interviewed until 8 December, several weeks after the event. He was not on duty at the time but he was clearly a key witness, as he was present when Mulrunji was brought into the watch-house. The same principle of immediate interviewing applies to the ambulance personnel who attended the police station shortly after the event and any other prisoners or any civilian staff, such as cleaners, who may have been at the watch-house any time that day. They may, or may not, have important evidence, such as information they received about what had happened from S/Sgt. Hurley or any other source, or any utterances they heard made by anyone. Roy Bramwell, who was at the police station and was apparently the only civilian inside the watch-house, was allowed to leave before investigators arrived. He was not interviewed until the following day. 32 Refer the elements of the human rights approach in Chapter 4. Chapter 6: Identifying the people to be interviewed | 47