If the subject's alibi is general, such as 'I was driving to town,' the investigator should ask if they saw

• A. The time of arrival
• B. An incident that really did not happen
• C. Other witnesses
• D. A real incident that occurred

Answer: (B)

When an alibi is vague, you test credibility by pushing for a detail that could expose fabrication. Asking about seeing an incident that really did not happen is a way to probe for truthfulness: if the person claims to have witnessed something that cannot be true, it reveals a fabrications or a shaky memory rather than a solid, real event. This kind of question forces the interviewee to reveal whether they are inventing details to support the alibi, which is exactly what you want to uncover with a general statement like driving to town.

Other approaches can verify specifics or look for corroboration, but they don’t challenge the veracity of a vague alibi as directly. Asking for the exact time of arrival seeks measurable detail that can be checked, while asking about other witnesses or about a real incident depends on external information and doesn’t as effectively test whether the alibi was fabricated. The non-existent incident probe is the sharper test for credibility in the face of a general alibi.