Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to determine the role of evidence in the interviewing of suspects. Design/methodology/approach - Analyses were made of 55 interview transcripts about the questioning of suspected sex offenders by officers of an Australian police service. Findings - In 22 per cent of these interviews the suspect actively attempted to discover what the evidence against them was and in 9 per cent the interviewer attempted to learn of the suspect's knowledge of this evidence. Interviewers tended to favour a strategy of first asking the suspect to provide a free account of their role in the alleged crime. If this approach failed to elicit a confession, interviewers would then disclose at least some of the evidence against that suspect. In 93 per cent of the interviews some form of evidence disclosure was made by the interviewer; this was usually achieved by referring to the evidence indirectly rather than explicitly. Originality/value - Although such disclosures of information seemed to have little impact on suspects' decisions to confess, this study illustrates the important role of evidence in the suspect interviewing process.