Science-Based Interviewing focuses on gathering accurate, unbiased information—but some common questions quietly sabotage that goal. Self-handicapping questions like “Were you a witness?” embed assumptions that cause people to self-exclude, cutting off valuable information before it emerges. This article explains how these questions harm investigations, why they persist, and how open-ended, information-generating prompts protect investigative integrity.

Detective Geyer’s relentless pursuit of justice unraveled Holmes’ web of deceit, leading to his conviction and execution.

Frederick Porter Wensley’s career at Scotland Yard offers enduring lessons for modern Criminal Investigation. Long before formal models or buzzwords, Wensley understood that information is the lifeblood of every case. His success came from patience, careful listening, and respect for evidence, not tricks or rigid systems. That same philosophy underpins today’s science-based approach: gather reliable information, avoid contamination, and seek understanding before conclusions.