Remaining silent during investigative interviews: a perspective of prisoners convicted for a serious crime

The right to remain silent is a fundamental procedural safeguard for people accused of a criminal offense. Practitioners draw conclusions from the fact that a defendant makes use of the right to silence. Conversely, we know little about defendants' perspective of the right to silence and their understanding of the possible risks involved in invoking this right. It was the aim of the current study to provide insights on defendants' decision to remain silent and the reactions and consequences they experienced. We conducted four focus group interviews with 29 prisoners who served a prison sentence for a serious crime of at least three years in the Netherlands or Belgium. Overall, prisoners were in favor of remaining silent and recommended remaining silent over the full duration of their investigation and trial, or at least the pre-trial stage. The presence of co-suspects, attitudes towards police, and perception of evidence strength played an important role in the decision to remain silent. Legal assistance informed prisoners' strategy decisions, especially for first offenders. When interpreting the findings it is important to consider that interviewees were mostly convicted of serious multiple perpetrator crimes. This might have contributed to the strong emphasis on silence as preferred strategy.