Organization of Bar Investigators October 6, 2016
What Non-Verbal Cues do you look for? Police officers Surveys of Police Officers 51/58 • Eye contact • Gaze Aversion (64%) countries • Acting nervous • Nervous (25%) • Changing positions • Incoherent (25%) • Hands to head • Body Movements (25%)
Is he lying?
Becoming a Human Lie Detector
Human Lie Detector
Police Interrogation Manuals The Reid Technique Wicklander-Zulawski • Avoiding eye contact • Moving the chair • Frequent posture • Abrupt jerky behavior changes • Using hands to cover • Grooming gestures mouth • Placing hands over • Failure to maintain eye eyes/mouth 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 Wicklander-Zulawski • Avoiding eye contact • Moving the chair • Frequent posture • Abrupt jerky behavior changes • Using hands to cover • Grooming gestures mouth • Placing hands over • Failure to maintain eye eyes/mouth contact
Who is the liar?
Truthful or Deceptive?
Truthful or Deceptive?
Overemphasizing the importance of 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 Guilt Fear Stress • 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
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
Accusatory Statement Provable BREAK Lies Hypothetical question Backwards Storytelling Suspect’s Version of Event (Free Narrative) 30 ID Hurdles Job/Status Family/Loved Ones M edical, E ducation, A lcohol, D rugs, S leep Personal information Custodial Non-custodial
Accusatory Statement Average: 10 minutes Deceptive Behavior Interview Suspect’s Version of Event Miranda Custodial Non-custodial
Problem: Training vs Research Interrogation Manuals Research Studies Gaze .03 Avoiding eye contact Smile .00 Frequent posture changes Self Adaptors .01 Grooming gestures Illustrators -.14 Placing hands over eyes/mouth Hand/finger -.36 Leg/foot .09 Eye blink .07 DePaulo, Lindsay (2003) 0 1 -1 Indirect Relationship Direct 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)
1910-1930 Professionalization “the third degree” Polygraph Wickersham CVSA Commission SCAN judiciary branch 1829 2016 1962 Avoiding eye contact Frequent posture changes Grooming gestures Placing hands over eyes/mouth
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 Retrieval Encoding Storage b C D b C D F A b C D Distortion Contamination A B C D E
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. A. B. B. Some “scenes” will be C. C . D. more important to E. F. them F. G. G. H. H. I. They will skip things. I. J. J. It’s OK. K. L. K. M. L. N. M. They will remember O. N P. differently. It’s OK. Q. O. R. P. S. Q. They will OMIT things. T. R. U. V. W. X. Y. Y. Z. Z.
Probe Memory Scenes A. A. B. B. Sharpen these Images C. C . D. E. F. F. G. G. H. H. I. I. Probe other Scenes J. J. K. L. K. M. L. N. M. T ell me O. N recisely P P. E xplain Q. O. R. n detail I P. S. Q. D escribe T. R. xactly E U. S how me V. W. X. Y. Y. Z. Z.
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 Cognitive Load Provable Lie 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 Cognitive Load • Physical Demonstration • Non-Chronological Review • Direct Quotes
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
Accusatory Statement Provable BREAK Lies Hypothetical question External Lie Backwards Storytelling Internal Lie Suspect’s Verbal Cues Version of Event Non-Verbal Cues (Free Narrative) 30 ID Hurdles Job/Status Family/Loved Ones M edical, E ducation, A lcohol, D rugs, S leep Personal information Custodial Non-custodial
Creating the External Lie Crime Witnesses Physical Scene Evidence Unanticipated Request Beginning Sketch Re-enactment Omission Different Perspective Reverse Review End
2:47 5:19 :32 :01 :01 :01 Omitted :32 Omitted Omitted 2:47 Unanticipated Request Sketch • Drawing • Illustration • P. 164/191 Physical Demonstration • 5:19 Reverse Review Evidence Ploy
Creating the Internal Lie
Hypothetical Questions Are you sure? How committed are they to their position?
Cement the position • Fingerprints Hypothetical Set-Up • Blood • Urine Investigative Techniques • Semen Officer Expertise Comprehensiveness • Saliva • Video • Traffic Camera • GPS Would it be possible? • Satellite Radio • Cell Phone Records Is there any reason that? • Computer History • Eye Witness Is there any possibility that?
Creating the Internal Lie Nothing Change narrative Is there any reason why….? Implausible explanation (unanticipated request) Provable Lie Admission 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.
Recommend
More recommend
