Why Early Evidence Matters: The Importance of Interviewing Witnesses Before Memories Fade

By NATSIC Advocacy Service (NATSIC-AS)

Justice Begins with Listening

Whether the issue concerns workplace bullying, discrimination, sexual harassment, governance disputes, financial misconduct, cultural safety, WorkCover matters, or allegations involving directors of an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander corporation, one principle remains universal:

The quality of any investigation is only as strong as the quality of the evidence collected.

Too often, organisations wait until complaints escalate before beginning an investigation. By then, memories have faded, witnesses have moved on, documents have disappeared, relationships have deteriorated, and confidence in the process has been lost.

At NATSIC Advocacy Service (NATSIC-AS), we believe that timely, thorough, and culturally respectful investigations are fundamental to procedural fairness and good governance. Collecting evidence while it is still available is not merely good practice—it is essential to ensuring decisions are based upon reliable facts rather than assumptions or hindsight.

Evidence Has a Shelf Life

Unlike documents, human memory is not permanent.

Psychological research consistently demonstrates that memories become less accurate over time. People unintentionally reconstruct events based upon later conversations, assumptions, emotions, or external influences. This does not necessarily mean they are dishonest—it simply reflects how human memory works.

Every day that passes increases the possibility that:

• important details will be forgotten;

• dates become confused;

• conversations become mixed together;

• witnesses unintentionally influence one another;

• physical evidence disappears;

• electronic evidence is deleted;

• CCTV footage is overwritten;

• emails are archived or lost;

• text messages are deleted;

• staff resign or retire;

• key witnesses become unavailable.

An investigation delayed is frequently an investigation weakened.

Why Early Evidence Matters: The Importance of Interviewing Witnesses Before Memories Fade

Every Witness Holds a Different Piece of the Puzzle

One of the greatest mistakes made during investigations is interviewing only the complainant and the respondent.

This creates an incomplete picture.

Every workplace or community event is experienced differently by each person present.

One witness may remember:

• who entered the room;

• the tone of a conversation;

• body language;

• whether voices were raised;

• who attempted to intervene;

• what occurred immediately before the incident;

• what occurred afterwards;

• whether similar conduct had occurred previously.

Another witness may possess documentary evidence no one else knew existed.

A third may identify contextual information explaining why a misunderstanding occurred.

No investigator should assume they already know who possesses relevant evidence.

Good Investigations Search for Facts, Not Confirmation

One hallmark of poor investigations is confirmation bias.

Confirmation bias occurs when investigators begin looking only for evidence that supports an existing belief while ignoring information that points in another direction.

Professional investigators do the opposite.

They seek evidence that:

• supports the allegation;

• contradicts the allegation;

• explains the allegation;

• places the allegation into context;

• identifies alternative explanations.

A genuine search for the truth requires curiosity rather than conclusions.

The purpose of interviewing witnesses is not to strengthen one side.

It is to discover what actually happened.

Every Person Deserves to Be Heard

Perhaps the greatest benefit of interviewing witnesses extends beyond evidence itself.

It demonstrates respect.

People who have witnessed events often feel overlooked when they are never asked what they observed.

Even where a witness ultimately has little information to contribute, inviting them to participate communicates something very important:

"Your observations matter."

This simple act strengthens confidence in the integrity of the investigation.

Witnesses who feel heard are generally more willing to cooperate, provide documents, clarify inconsistencies, and participate honestly throughout the process.

Conversely, failing to speak with obvious witnesses often creates suspicion that the investigation was never intended to uncover the truth.

Being Heard Reduces Conflict

Many complaints continue to escalate because people believe no one has genuinely listened.

Being interviewed provides individuals with an opportunity to:

• explain events in their own words;

• correct misunderstandings;

• provide context;

• raise concerns they were previously reluctant to disclose;

• identify additional evidence;

• suggest further witnesses.

Even where the final decision is not what a person hoped for, many participants accept outcomes more readily when they believe the process was fair.

Procedural fairness is not simply about the final outcome.

It is equally about ensuring every relevant person has had an opportunity to participate.

Interviewing Witnesses Early Protects Everyone

Prompt witness interviews protect:

Complainants

Early interviews preserve evidence supporting legitimate complaints before memories fade.

Respondents

Individuals accused of wrongdoing are equally entitled to have evidence collected promptly before exculpatory information disappears.

Witnesses

Witnesses are less likely to experience pressure, intimidation or unconscious influence if interviewed before multiple discussions occur within the workplace or community.

Organisations

Organisations that collect evidence early are better positioned to make defensible decisions and reduce future disputes.

Delayed Interviews Create Risk

Waiting weeks—or months—to interview witnesses creates numerous risks.

These include:

• inconsistent recollections;

• allegations of bias;

• missing documents;

• unavailable witnesses;

• conflicting accounts;

• increased legal exposure;

• reduced confidence in management;

• prolonged workplace conflict;

• psychological harm to participants.

Time rarely improves evidence.

It usually weakens it.

The Importance of Independent Witnesses

Not every witness is directly involved.

Independent witnesses often provide some of the most valuable evidence because they generally have no personal interest in the outcome.

Independent observations may include:

• who was present;

• whether conduct appeared appropriate;

• environmental conditions;

• timing;

• workplace practices;

• previous interactions.

These witnesses frequently assist investigators in testing competing versions of events objectively.

Documentary Evidence Should Be Collected Immediately

Witness interviews should occur alongside preservation of documentary evidence.

This may include:

• emails;

• text messages;

• Microsoft Teams conversations;

• Slack messages;

• diary notes;

• handwritten notes;

• photographs;

• audio recordings;

• CCTV footage;

• incident reports;

• payroll records;

• access logs;

• phone records;

• meeting minutes;

• policies;

• risk assessments;

• medical certificates;

• WorkCover documentation.

Electronic evidence can disappear surprisingly quickly.

Many organisations automatically delete CCTV footage after only a short retention period.

Waiting can permanently remove important evidence.

Cultural Safety Requires Listening

For Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander organisations, listening has an additional dimension.

Cultural safety requires people to feel respected, heard, and treated with dignity throughout any investigative process.

Investigations conducted within Indigenous organisations should recognise that:

• community relationships may influence willingness to speak;

• Elders may hold important contextual knowledge;

• cultural obligations should be considered when arranging interviews;

• confidentiality is essential within close-knit communities;

• assumptions should never replace careful inquiry.

Taking time to respectfully interview all relevant people strengthens both procedural fairness and cultural integrity.

Governance Investigations Require Thoroughness

Within Indigenous corporations registered under the Corporations (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander) Act 2006 (CATSI Act), investigations may concern:

• conflicts of interest;

• misuse of corporate funds;

• governance failures;

• breaches of director duties;

• workplace grievances;

• bullying;

• discrimination;

• cultural disputes;

• recruitment processes;

• procurement concerns;

• member complaints.

Each of these matters can significantly affect the reputation and future of the organisation.

Decisions should therefore be based upon the best available evidence—not assumptions, politics, or personalities.

Fair Investigations Build Trust

Communities quickly recognise whether an investigation has been conducted properly.

Trust grows where people see that investigators have:

• interviewed everyone reasonably able to assist;

• gathered available documents;

• remained impartial;

• avoided preconceived conclusions;

• documented their reasoning;

• treated every participant respectfully.

Even difficult findings are more likely to be accepted when the process itself has been transparent and thorough.

The Cost of Inadequate Investigations

Poor investigations can have lasting consequences.

They may result in:

• wrongful disciplinary action;

• unfair dismissal disputes;

• human rights complaints;

• workers' compensation claims;

• governance intervention;

• reputational damage;

• fractured workplace relationships;

• loss of community confidence;

• increased legal and financial costs.

Many of these outcomes could have been avoided through timely evidence collection and comprehensive witness interviews.

Best Practice Investigation Principles

A sound investigation should generally:

1. Preserve evidence immediately.

2. Identify every potentially relevant witness.

3. Interview witnesses as soon as reasonably practicable.

4. Record interviews accurately.

5. Collect all available documentary evidence.

6. Test competing versions fairly.

7. Consider cultural factors where relevant.

8. Maintain confidentiality.

9. Avoid confirmation bias.

10. Base findings solely upon the available evidence.

These principles promote fairness, transparency, and accountability regardless of the subject matter being investigated.

How NATSIC-AS Can Assist

NATSIC Advocacy Service (NATSIC-AS) supports Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander corporations, employers, employees, community organisations, and individuals by providing independent advocacy and assistance in matters involving workplace rights, governance, procedural fairness, discrimination, bullying, WorkCover, and internal investigations.

Our approach is founded on three core principles:

• Listen carefully before reaching conclusions.

• Collect evidence promptly while it remains available.

• Ensure every person is treated with dignity and procedural fairness.

When investigations are conducted properly, they do more than establish facts. They strengthen confidence in leadership, improve organisational culture, and demonstrate a genuine commitment to justice.

Final Thoughts

Evidence cannot be recreated once it is lost.

Witnesses cannot remember what time has erased.

Documents cannot be recovered once they have been destroyed.

The most effective investigations are those that begin promptly, preserve all available evidence, and provide every relevant person with an opportunity to be heard.

Listening is not simply an investigative technique—it is a demonstration of respect. Every interview acknowledges that each person's perspective has value, every witness may hold a crucial piece of the truth, and every fair investigation begins by ensuring that no relevant voice is left unheard.

About NATSIC Advocacy Service

NATSIC Advocacy Service (NATSIC-AS) provides professional advocacy and support across Australia in matters involving employment, workplace investigations, human rights, governance disputes, workplace bullying, discrimination, WorkCover, and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander corporation governance. We are committed to promoting procedural fairness, accountability, culturally respectful practices, and evidence-based decision-making for individuals, communities, and organisations.