Conducting Effective Internal Investigations
Module Three: Reaching a Conclusion and Credibility Determinations

Katherine M. Allen, Associate General Counsel, The Pennsylvania State University
Natasha Baker, Managing Attorney, Novus Law Firm, Inc.
Pamela Heatlie, Director of the Office for Institutional Equity, University of Michigan – Dearborn

1

Module Overview
Corroborating evidence
Direct and Circumstantial evidence Other Types of Evidence
Weight of Evidence
Credibility determinations
Inconsistencies
Plausibility
Motives
Demeanor of parties and witnesses
Effects of Trauma

2

Definition: Evidence that supports other evidence (Documents that support oral reports)

What is it?
How do you get it?
What weight is accorded?

Corroborating Evidence

3

Definition: Evidence that can be used to INFER but not prove a conclusion. Contrast: direct evidence.

Example: pattern evidence. Should be VERY similar in nature.
NOT – general character/bad actor evidence
Ask: Does our process allow circumstantial evidence?
What weight is it accorded?

Circumstantial Evidence

4

Other Types of Evidence
Character evidence
Recordings
Polygraph/lie detector tests

5

Case Study Review
What corroborating evidence do we have?
What circumstantial evidence do we have?
What else do we need?

6

Weight of Evidence
Is all evidence created equal? No.
Eyewitness vs second- hand/hearsay
Corroborating evidence
Direct evidence
Circumstantial evidence
Other evidence

7

Case Study Review
Weighing the evidence
What evidence is strong?
What evidence is weak?

8

Credibility Determinations
Factors to consider: Inconsistencies Plausibility
Motive Demeanor Effects of Trauma

9

Individual is inconsistent in own report.
Trauma or fear?
Lying?
ASK!
Individual is inconsistent with others.
Anomaly?
Coached testimony?
ASK!

Credibility Determinations: Inconsistencies

10

Credibility Determinations: Plausibility
What is reasonable?
Level of detail?
Apply the appropriate standard of proof.
Preponderance of the evidence (maybe this)
Clear and convincing (maybe this)
Beyond a reasonable doubt (rare)
You will very likely feel uncomfortable. It’s okay.

11

Credibility Determinations: Motive
What is the relationship?
Classify the witness:
Witness with an axe to grind?
Witness who wants to protect?
Witness who loves the limelight?
Witness who doesn’t want to be involved?

12

Credibility Determinations: Demeanor
Controversial
Need a baseline for comparison
Don’t usually know how the person “normally” behaves
Cultural/regional/religious expectations may cloud assessment

13

Eyewitness Testimony
Reliability
Selective Attention
TIP: Seek corroborating evidence

14

Case Study Review
Assessing credibility
Inconsistencies?
Corroborating evidence?

15

Credibility Determination: Impact of Trauma (Fear-based Response)
Impacts ability to retell and recall info
Likely gaps in memory
Memories are not encoded chronologically
Shame, blame and fear
Reluctance

16

Note
The content of this presentation is to provide news and information on legal issues and all content is provided for informational purposes only and should not be considered legal advice.

The transmission of information in this presentation does not establish an attorney‐client relationship with the recipient. The recipient should not act on the information contained in this presentation without first consulting retained legal counsel.

If you desire legal advice for a particular situation, you should consult an attorney.

17