A records of interview (often called an ROI) is the formal record of a police interview with a suspect. It captures every question asked and every answer given, and it can be tendered as evidence against you at trial. If you have been charged or are about to be questioned, understanding how an ROI is created and what happens to it in court is not optional knowledge. It is essential.
What a records of interview actually is
When police interview a suspect about an alleged offence, they are required to record the exchange. In most Australian jurisdictions this is done by audio or video recording, though a written summary may still be produced. The recording, together with any transcription, forms the records of interview. Police then rely on that document as evidence of what the suspect knew, admitted, or denied at the time of questioning.
An ROI is different from a brief written statement or a note of a casual exchange. It follows a defined procedure: police must caution the suspect, identify those present, state the time, and confirm the recording has begun before substantive questioning starts. Any deviation from that procedure can become grounds for challenge later.
Your right to silence before and during the interview
Before any interview begins, police must administer a caution telling you that you are not obliged to say anything. That caution reflects the right to silence in Australia, which gives you the legal protection to decline to answer questions without that refusal being used as evidence of guilt. Exercising that right is not an admission. It is a constitutionally recognised protection.
In practice, suspects often feel pressure to explain themselves, particularly when they believe they are innocent. That impulse is understandable. It is also one of the most common ways a case against someone is inadvertently strengthened. Police are trained interviewers. Admissions, inconsistencies, and partial explanations are all captured verbatim and can be put to a jury later. Silence cannot.
How an ROI is used at trial
Once police have completed the interview, the ROI becomes part of the brief of evidence. Prosecutors can tender it to prove admissions, establish inconsistencies with the defence's later account, or simply show the jury what the accused said in their own words. It is direct evidence, not hearsay.
Where the accused made no comment during the interview, the prosecution generally cannot use that silence as positive evidence of guilt. However, the jury will hear the ROI played or read aloud, and the absence of any explanation can still feature in how they assess the prosecution case overall.
An ROI can also assist the defence. If the accused gave a consistent and credible account at the time of arrest, that consistency can support their version of events at trial. An early exculpatory statement, made before there was time to construct a defence, often carries real weight. You can read more about how courts treat that kind of out-of-court claim in our article on exculpatory statements and how courts approach them.
Grounds for challenging or excluding an ROI
Not every ROI that police produce will be admitted into evidence. Defence lawyers can apply to exclude all or part of an ROI through a voir dire, which is a mini-hearing held inside the trial to resolve questions of admissibility.
Common grounds for challenge include:
- Failure to administer the caution correctly before questioning started.
- Questioning continuing after the suspect clearly invoked the right to silence.
- Inducements, threats, or oppressive conduct during the interview.
- The suspect's age, language difficulties, or cognitive impairment affecting the voluntariness of any answers given.
- Failure to allow the suspect access to a lawyer before questioning, particularly in jurisdictions where that right is guaranteed.
If a court finds that the ROI was obtained improperly, it can be excluded entirely under the discretionary or mandatory exclusions in the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW). Sections 84, 85 and 90 of that Act deal specifically with admissions by defendants and the circumstances in which courts decline to admit them.
The role of a lawyer before and during the interview
In New South Wales, a person held for questioning has the right to arrange for a lawyer to be present or at least to speak to one before the interview begins. Ann Valos Criminal Law strongly advises any person facing a police interview to exercise that right without exception.
A lawyer present at the interview cannot answer on your behalf, but they can object to impermissible questions, note procedural breaches, and advise you on your right to remain silent. That early intervention often shapes whether an ROI becomes a liability or a non-event at trial. Waiting until charges are laid to seek advice means the interview has already happened on police terms.
Electronic recording and the ERISP system
In NSW, serious indictable offences require police to conduct interviews using the Electronic Recording of Interviews with Suspected Persons (ERISP) system. ERISP records the interview on a dedicated device, produces two master copies at the conclusion, and gives one to the suspect. This process is designed to prevent disputes about what was said and to preserve the integrity of the record.
If police fail to use ERISP when required, or the recording is of poor quality, incomplete, or otherwise deficient, defence counsel can use that failure as a basis for challenging the reliability or admissibility of the interview. Ann Valos Criminal Law examines every ROI for procedural compliance as a matter of course.
What to do if you have already participated in an interview
If you have already spoken to police and an ROI exists, the first step is to obtain a copy of it. Your lawyer can request the full brief of evidence from the prosecution, which must include the ROI and any transcription. Reading that document carefully, often alongside someone who was not in the room, reveals the precise points that may need to be addressed, explained, or challenged at trial.
Ann Valos Criminal Law is an accredited criminal law specialist firm with over 15 years of experience reviewing and challenging records of interview across a wide range of offences. Ann Valos Criminal Law analyses each ROI for procedural compliance, evidentiary admissibility, and strategic implications before any advice on plea or defence is given.