Organization of Bar Investigators October 6, 2016 What Non-Verbal - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Organization of Bar Investigators

October 6, 2016

What Non-Verbal Cues do you look for?

Police officers

• Eye contact
• Acting nervous
• Changing positions
• Hands to head

Surveys of Police Officers

• Gaze Aversion (64%)
• Nervous (25%)
• Incoherent (25%)
• Body Movements (25%)

51/58 countries

Is he lying?

Becoming a Human Lie Detector

Human Lie Detector

Police Interrogation Manuals

The Reid Technique

• Avoiding eye contact
• Frequent posture

changes

• Grooming gestures
• Placing hands over

eyes/mouth Wicklander-Zulawski

• Moving the chair
• Abrupt jerky behavior
• Using hands to cover

mouth

• Failure to maintain eye

contact

Truthful or Deceptive?

The Truth about Non-Verbal Behavior

• In 24 studies, officers had accuracy rates from

40% to 73%, for an average of 55.91%.

• Vrij, Detecting Lies and Deceit, 2008
• Comparable to laypersons 53%.
• Not one single research study shows that

police officers are superior to laypersons in detecting lies.

Police Interrogation Manuals

The Reid Technique

• Avoiding eye contact
• Frequent posture

changes

• Grooming gestures
• Placing hands over

eyes/mouth Wicklander-Zulawski

• Moving the chair
• Abrupt jerky behavior
• Using hands to cover

mouth

• Failure to maintain eye

contact

Who is the liar?

Truthful or Deceptive?

Truthful or Deceptive?

Overemphasizing the importance

• f non-verbal
• “as much as 70% of a message communicated

between persons occurs at the non-verbal level” (Inbau, Reid, Buckley, & Jayne, 2001)

• “90% of communication is at the

Subconscious Level” (Steven Rhoades, 2001)

How can this be?

• Once we have formed an opinion someone is

deceptive, we overestimate amount of gaze aversion

Non-Verbal Cues Theory

• Emotional Reactions
• Cognitive Effort
• Behavioral Control

Assumption #1: Suspects will experience these cues Assumption #2: Officers can detect these cues Assumption #3: Officer can correctly interpret these cues Assumption #4: Officers know what to do next

Guilt Fear Stress

Problem Suspect is good

Problem

We miss the Non-Verbal Cues

Problem We detect, but can’t interpret

Problem

• Officers often have no baseline from which to

make an accurate judgment about non-verbal techniques

Non-custodial Custodial

Personal information

Medical, Education, Alcohol, Drugs, Sleep

Family/Loved Ones Job/Status ID Hurdles Accusatory Statement Suspect’s Version of Event (Free Narrative) Backwards Storytelling Hypothetical question

BREAK

Provable Lies

30

Non-custodial Custodial

Miranda Accusatory Statement Suspect’s Version of Event

Interview

Average: 10 minutes

Deceptive Behavior

Problem: Training vs Research

Interrogation Manuals Avoiding eye contact Frequent posture changes Grooming gestures Placing hands over eyes/mouth Research Studies Gaze .03 Smile .00 Self Adaptors .01 Illustrators

• .14

Hand/finger

• .36

Leg/foot .09 Eye blink .07

DePaulo, Lindsay (2003)

• 1

1

Direct Relationship Indirect Relationship

Research

• Interrogation manuals train officers to identify

the wrong behavior

• “Inbau clue” trainees perform worse at

detecting deception (Mann, Vrij, and Bull, 2004)

• Untrained participants perform better (Kassin and

Fong 1999)

1829 2016

“the third degree” Wickersham Commission judiciary branch 1910-1930

1962

Avoiding eye contact Frequent posture changes Grooming gestures Placing hands over eyes/mouth

Professionalization SCAN CVSA Polygraph

The Research

25-40% more effective than confrontational police Q & A

How Memory Does Not Work

vs

Three Phases of Memory

• The Three Phases of Memory

Encoding Storage Retrieval

Distortion Contamination A B C D E b C D F b C D A b C D

Introduction to the Free Narrative

Rapport Build Teamwork Encourage Completeness Encourage Concentration Context Recreation

Transfer of Control

• “OK, I’d like to talk about the incident. I

appreciate you working together with me on

• this. I want you tell me everything about the

incident, no matter how small the detail. This is going to take some hard work on your part, so please concentrate on every aspect. Now, last night about 6:00 pm, it was about 70 degrees outside, it was loud in the parking lot and smelled like barbeque, tell me slowly, exactly what you were doing…..”

A. B. C. D. E. F. G. H. I. J. K. L. M. N. O. P. Q. R. S. T. U. V. W. X. Y. Z. A. B.

C.

F. G. H. I.

J.

K. L. M.

N

O. P. Q. R. Y. Z.

Some “scenes” will be more important to them They will skip things. It’s OK. They will remember

• differently. It’s OK.

They will OMIT things.

A. B. C. D. E. F. G. H. I. J. K. L. M. N. O. P. Q. R. S. T. U. V. W. X. Y. Z. A. B.

C.

F. G. H. I.

J.

K. L. M.

N

O. P. Q. R. Y. Z.

Sharpen these Images Probe other Scenes

T E D S P I E ell me xplain escribe how me recisely n detail xactly Probe Memory Scenes

Specific Questioning Methods

• Use open-ended questions
• Allow time for detailed descriptions
• Listen without interruptions
• Encourage multiple retrieval attempts
• Recalling specific information
• Periodic review

Periodic Review of Statements

• Following each significant amount of detailed

information, consider stopping to review with what you have heard.

• Instruct them to stop you if he/she notes any

errors or thinks of any new information.

What if They Lie?

Provable Lie Provable Lie Cognitive Load

Cognitive Load

Why do Suspects Agree to be Interviewed?

1) Want to appear innocent 2) Want to know case facts 3) Outsmart police 4) Provide false information

Cognitive Interviewing

Reverse Review Sketch

Physical Demonstration

Unanticipated Requests

• Reverse Review
• Sketch
• Physical Demonstration
• Non-Chronological Review
• Direct Quotes

Cognitive Load

Reviewing the Full Interview

• The purpose of the review is to…

– allow you to check the accuracy of your notes and understanding, and – allow the E/W to search through memory one more time for new information.

• If new information is provided, probe for

details as usual.

Moving into Interrogation

Why volume is good

Non-custodial Custodial

Personal information

Medical, Education, Alcohol, Drugs, Sleep

Family/Loved Ones Job/Status ID Hurdles Accusatory Statement Suspect’s Version of Event (Free Narrative) Backwards Storytelling Hypothetical question

BREAK

Provable Lies

30

Verbal Cues Non-Verbal Cues Internal Lie External Lie

Creating the External Lie

Beginning End

Unanticipated Request Sketch Re-enactment Different Perspective Reverse Review

Crime Scene Witnesses Physical Evidence Omission

5:19 2:47 :32

Omitted

Omitted Omitted

:32 2:47 5:19 :01 :01 :01

Unanticipated Request

• Sketch
• Drawing
• Illustration
• Physical Demonstration

Reverse Review Evidence Ploy

• P. 164/191

Creating the Internal Lie

Hypothetical Questions

Are you sure? How committed are they to their position?

Would it be possible? Is there any reason that? Is there any possibility that?

• Fingerprints
• Blood
• Urine
• Semen
• Saliva
• Video
• Traffic Camera
• GPS
• Satellite Radio
• Cell Phone Records
• Computer History
• Eye Witness

Hypothetical Set-Up

Investigative Techniques Officer Expertise Comprehensiveness

Cement the position

Creating the Internal Lie

Nothing Change narrative Implausible explanation Provable Lie Admission

Is there any reason why….?

(unanticipated request)

Good for us

The impact? Truthful vs Less than truthful

Nothing Change narrative Implausible explanation Provable Lie Admission

Change in Narrative 2009-2011

Jim Tracey Randy

JT: You wake up, the following Friday morning, obviously at Briarwood, at, at about ten o’clock. So you’ve gotten about a solid eleven hours of sleep or something like that. Suspect: Yeah. JT: Is that right? Suspect: Probably. JT:

• Okay. Anything wake you up during the night, JIM?

Suspect: Not that I can recall, no. JT: Okay. Suspect: No. JT:

• Okay. Don’t leave the house?

Suspect: Nope.

JT:

• Yeah. Take a drink, take a breath, is there something that we didn’t talk

about that you think I should, I should know, either that she’s told you or that you know, or that’s happened, I wanna make sure I give you an opportunity so I can get everything from, from your perspective here that’s important on this. Suspect: I can’t, I don’t know. I don’t think there, I think I told you everything she said. JT: Okay. Suspect: But she said, like I said, she said a lot of frickin’ shit. JT:

• Right. And you’re familiar with all the traffic cams around here?

Suspect: That’s not, not a secret to anybody. JT: Obviously as part of the investigation, early on, we go up. Have you been up to third floor, City Hall to Engineering, where they… Suspect: Nope. JT: … where the brains of this operation are?

JD: (UNINTELLIGIBLE). JT:

• Okay. So I go up there early on in this thing, and they’ve

got this list of all the cameras. Plus, a couple of experimental, uh, newbies that they’re, they’re sticking up around different places. So you got cameras all over the place. More than I realized. I hadn’t been up there for a long time. Okay? Quite an operation. They archived this stuff for me, uhm, and, and I (UNINTELLIGIBLE), as you can see there’s, there’s

• bviously gonna be a ton of data to, to slog through.

JD: Mm hmm.

JT: And is there gonna be any reason on, let’s start with that, that Thursday night, when you go home and go to bed, is there gonna be any reason that I see your white pickup truck anywhere roaming around town? The Hypothetical Question The Answer/Impact on an innocent person The Answer/Impact on the guilty stalker

JT: And is there gonna be any reason on, let’s start with that, that Thursday night, when you go home and go to bed, is there gonna be any reason that I see your white pickup truck anywhere roaming around town? Suspect: I don’t believe so. JT:

• Okay. Is there any reason you can think of why I would see that?

Suspect: Before that, driving, probably driving (UNINTELLIGIBLE) during the daytime. JT:

• Right. We’re talking in that timeframe that you gave me, to bed at about ten,

ten thirty; up at about ten the next morning… Suspect: Now we’re talking Thursday. JT: We’re talking, this is the night… Suspect: No. JT: … when you stopped off and saw your kids and she was in the shower. Suspect: No.

JT:

• Right. Well, Thursday I was asking you about your personal

vehicle, your white pickup truck. Suspect: I’m (UNINTELLIGIBLE) my personal vehicle. JT:

• Right. Okay. No reason as I go through there I’m gonna see any of that?

Suspect: Not that I’m aware of. JT: Okay. Suspect: Should not. JT: Okay. Suspect: No. JT:

• Okay. And as we sit here today, if I would happen to see that, you c-, you

can’t think of a reason why that would be, as we’re sitting here? Suspect: You aren’t gonna find nothing there.

The dilemma for the guilty stalker: Caught between his own detailed alibi/denial and The truth, the possibility he didn’t commit the perfect crime, and the possibility the police know

Choices:

• 1. Do Nothing

The dilemma for the guilty stalker: Caught between his own detailed alibi/denial and The truth, the possibility he didn’t commit the perfect crime, and the possibility the police know

Choices:

1. Do Nothing 2. Change Narrative 3. Implausible Explanation 4. Provable Lie 5. Admission

The subtle clean-up

Suspect: I told you, I can’t remember when I took them. But...so I think I said I went to bed right away but I was...I didn’t. JT: (UNINTELLIGIBLE)... Suspect: I was watching the movie. JT: You watched the whole movie? Suspect: Yeah. For the Love of the Game, yeah. Switching laundry over from dryer to washer... JT: Mm hmm. Suspect: Um, then, uh, the movie got over with, then the laundry, tried to lay down and go to sleep, toss and turn, go to bed, got up and, uh, and, uh, go to his house to see if TRACY was there, came back home, she wasn’t there, came back home, and...and this is where I’m confused, because I don’t know if I took more pills (UNINTELLIGIBLE) but, basically, that’s wh...that’s the part I can’t remember. Suspect: I told you, I can’t remember when I took them. But...so I think I said I went to bed right away but I was...I didn’t. JT: (UNINTELLIGIBLE)... Suspect: I was watching the movie. JT: You watched the whole movie? Suspect: Yeah. For the Love of the Game, yeah. Switching laundry over from dryer to washer... JT: Mm hmm. Suspect: Um, then, uh, the movie got over with, then the laundry, tried to lay down and go to sleep, toss and turn, go to bed, got up and, uh, and, uh, go to his house to see if TRACY was there, came back home, she wasn’t there, came back home, and...and this is where I’m confused, because I don’t know if I took more pills (UNINTELLIGIBLE) but, basically, that’s wh...that’s the part I can’t remember.

Verbal Cues

• “Er’s”, “Ums”, “Huh”
• “I swear to God”
• “Honestly, ……..”
• “To tell you the truth, …..”

Verbal Cues of Deception

More Negative Statements More Generalizing Terms Less Self References Less Plausible Answers

67% to 80% * When you observe clusters

(Bond & Lee, 2005; Colwell, Hiscock, & Memom, 2002; Newman, Pennebaker, Berry & Richards, 2003; Zhou, Burgoon, Twitchell, Qin & Nunamaker, 2004)

Negative Statements

2009 3:47 1:31 2012 23:00 00:52 11 17

Negative Statements

Less Self References

Dec 2000: "We are completely innocent. We run a very clean and professional team that has been singled out due to our success … Jan 2001: "The simple truth is that we outwork

• everyone. But when you perform at a higher level in

a race, you get questions about doping.“ July 2004: "We're sick and tired of these allegations and we're going to do everything we can to fight

• them. They're absolutely untrue."

“It was our thing, what we did”

Less Self References

Less Plausible Answers

Verbal Cues of Deception

More Negative Statements More Generalizing Terms Less Self References Less Plausible Answers

67% to 80% * When you observe clusters

(Bond & Lee, 2005; Colwell, Hiscock, & Memom, 2002; Newman, Pennebaker, Berry & Richards, 2003; Zhou, Burgoon, Twitchell, Qin & Nunamaker, 2004)