Who said what? Epistemological positioning in police investigative interview reports

This study is concerned with how suspects' statements are summarized and reproduced in writing in Norwegian police investigative interview reports. It explores epistemological positioning in such texts, understood as the expression of the source of information for what is written, and the author's commitment to its linguistic form and propositional content. The study encompasses both spoken interactional data (interview recordings) and written discourse (interview reports). It uses ethnomethodological conversation analysis (CA) as its main method to find how epistemological positioning is realized in the written version of the suspect's statement as compared to the original talk that it claims to represent. I find that epistemological positioning is expressed by (1) reporting speech in different formats; (2) obscuring the interviewer's and author's involvement in formulating the suspect's statement; (3) attributing talk to the suspect; and (4) omitting interactional detail. These practices work to either identify, obscure, ambiguate or manipulate the source of information for an utterance. They also involve varying degrees of commitment by the author to the linguistic form and propositional content of what they have written. The analysis shows that authors leave out much interactional detail and the texts display a focus on informational content, rather than on social actions and the way in which information was elicited. There is a clear tendency in these texts to underreport the police's role in shaping and (re)phrasing the suspect's story. The texts exhibit widespread use of constructions that are ambiguous and leave invisible shifts in voice – whether it is the author or someone else who should be considered responsible for what is written. The study provides insight into how interview reports function as a social and institutional practice and discusses implications for report writing practice. • A suspect’s statement undergoes several changes when transformed into a written summarized version. • Different practices in these texts work to express epistemological positioning. • Authors identify, obscure, ambiguate or manipulate the source of utterances in writing. • Authors may express more or less commitment to the linguistic form and propositional content of what they have written. • Interview reports contain constructions that are ambiguous and leave invisible shifts in voice. • The police’s role in (re)shaping the suspect’s story is underreported in writing.