Documentation witnesses interviews

The management system should specify documentation requirements for interim data and work products of the investigation. The company s legal staff may have a valuable opinion on this decision or they may offer case-by-case opinions. Several issues are obvious. Witness interviews and physical evidence are examples of notable issues with which the legal department may wish to he involved. Other important documentation issues include ... 

Employers must develop in-house capability to investigate incidents that occur in their facilities. A team should be assembled by the employer and trained in the techniques of investigation, including how to conduct interviews of witnesses, assemble needed documentation, and write reports. A multidisciplinary team is better able to gather the facts of the event and to analyze them and develop plausible scenarios as to what happened and why. Team members should be selected on the basis of their training, knowledge, and ability to contribute to a team effort to fully investigate the incident. 

Eliminate other distractions from the room if possible. Do not allow the witness to see any documents, such as causal factor charts, fault trees, showing the incident investigation team analysis of the occurrence. This may he appropriate for later interviews when only specific information is needed or a specific time gap is being filled in. 

Schedule interviews at a convenient time for each witness. Make appointments with witnesses through the appropriate charmels, such as with union and contract personnel. Select a schedule that minimizes contact between witnesses to minimize the sharing of stories between witnesses. For example, schedule each initial interview for 30 minutes. Allow 30 minutes between interviews to complete the documentation of the last interview and prepare for the next one. This gap minimizes contact between witnesses. Adjust the schedule and interview list based on data as they appear. 

Documentation of the interview should not be a covert, hidden process. The witness should not believe that hidden, secret notes are being taken during the interview. One way to address this issue is to review the interview notes with the witness near the end of the interview, although this may not be practical in a long interview. Documentation of the interview should at least include the witness s name, date, time, statement, and recorder s name. 

Witnesses should be provided documents pertinent to their statements and allowed time to review them before or during the interview. The documents may help the witness recall information that otherwise would be forgotten. Asking the witness to sort out any apparent inconsistencies in his recollection and information contained in documents before committing to a recorded version is a practice to consider. This avoids statements that he may later have to modify or retract. 

Interview witnesses individually and never in a group setting. If possible, interview a witness at the scene of the accident. It also may be preferable to carry out interviews in a quiet location. Seek to establish a rapport with the witness and document information using their words to describe the event. Put the witness at ease and emphasize the reason for the investigation. Let the witness talk and listen carefully and validate all statements. Take notes or get approval to record the interview. Never intimidate, interrupt, or prompt the wimess. Use probing questions that require witnesses to provide detailed answers. Never use leading questions. Ensure that logic and not emotion directs the interview process. Always close the interview on a positive note. 

The site visit will set the tone for the remainder of the investigation. It will probably generate as many questions as are answered by the site visit. However, the site visit and its documentation are necessary in order to effectively analyze the causes of the accident as well as being an aid in the completion of your final report. Once all the physical evidence has been gathered, it is time to interview any witnesses or victims. 

The CAIB s independent investigation lasted nearly seven months. The CAIB s 13 members had support from a staff of more than 120 and around 400 NASA engineers. Investigators examined more than 30,000 documents, conducted more than 200 formal interviews, heard testimony from dozens of expert witnesses, and reviewed more than 3,000 inputs from the general public. In addition, more than 25,000 searchers combed vast stretches of the western United States to retrieve the spacecraft s debris. In the process, Columbia s tragedy was compounded when two... 

Information obtained during investigations is given verbally, or provided in writing. Written documentation should be gathered to provide evidence of policy or practice followed on site, and witnesses should be talked to as soon as possible after the accident. The injured person should also be seen promptly and interviewed. 

The Champeyron Creek was chosen as a case study because of the availability of documentation on past debris flow events, of clearly visible tracks of past debris flow processes, and because of the presence of elements at risk. A geomorphological analysis of the basin, carried out through a multi-temporal photo interpretation, allowed to reconstruct the development of the debris flow in 3D. For this purpose also some photos of the period were used, together with interviews of witnesses and some specific field surveys. In particular the areas of debris supply for the 1981 event were identified. These latter corresponded to the extended screes visible in Fig. 24.2 and to some other areas prone to periodic rockfalls. The available DTM was adjusted to obtain the needed scale that allowed a simulation of the process. The characteristics of the debris flow mixture (solid fraction in % and dimensions of the largest boulders) were faithfully reconstructed, and this allowed to appreciate the dynamics of the process evolution and the mass transport capacity. Furthermore the expansion areas of the debris flow on the fan and the flow directions have been defined, which are essential components for the interpretation and numerical simulation of the 1981 event (Fig. 24.3). 

---