Thursday, October 30, 2014

Statement Analysis: Jian Ghomeshi Victim Speaks Out







One of the alleged victims from Jian  Ghomeshi has spoken out to media.  This is the transcription of the interview. I have added analysis of the answers in bold type, with emphasis added to assist the reader's understanding of Statement Analysis.  

It is difficult interviewing a sexual abuse victim because certain questions can be indelicate and may be misconstrued as lacking empathy for a victim, yet must be asked.  



Q.  Can you describe that first date you had?

A.  Well, he first asked me to come to a taping of his show, and I did, and after the show, you know, he he noticed me at the show and he… and he lit up and it was like you came. And uh, we hung out a little bit with some of his colleagues and then we went off alone to a pub and y-- just chatted and there was absolutely nothing about that, that gave me any indication that there was anything to worry about or you know he was charming, like that would be the word I would give Jhian, is charming. And, then after he drove me back to my car, and we chatted in the car, and we, and he was getting flirty, so in the car he you know, was looking like he wanted to do a little more, and then he asked me if he, if I would undo my buttons, and I said no, because I didn’t know you. And he reached over and grabbed my hair very hard and pulled my head back. And it really took me off guard, but I I don’t know precisely exactly what he was saying, but I, I’m thinking it was something along the lines of do you like this and and I don’t know what I said, but it was a week night and it was late and I had to go.

Notice in her answer the use of the pronoun "we", which shows, to this point, a connection to him.  

Note that when "there was absolutely nothing" about potential aggressive assaultive behavior, that it is sensitive to her.  This sensitivity may be the obvious, given the reason for the interview:  How could you not have known?  

Note also that "he reached over and grabbed my hair very hard" is past tense and strong, but it also has "reached over" which shows that she did, in fact, want physical distance from him. (seating proximity)  In order to grab her hair, in her recollection, she likely had moved away from him.  

What he was saying was not "precisely, exactly" known, which would have prompted me to ask follow up questions, in the least, to learn why the subject did not want to repeat what he said.  This can be very difficult with victims.  She gave "along the lines" of what he said "do you like this?", which may be embarrassing for her.  She also may be uncomfortable with her own answer to him.  

That he was a celebrity and she a fan puts her at a distinct disadvantage looking up to her.  It can cause self doubt: 
Q.  How did you feel about that? When you finally, you got out of the car then you got in your own car, what were you thinking when about that experience?

A.  Well, First I didn’t like it, and that’s not my style, uhm but also did did I miss something not dating for a while or, and also I kind of put to that if a couple gets together there is always a little learning curve and it could be you know, don’t hit me so hard or don’t kiss me like that or whatever, but uh that wasn’t part of my repertoire ever. So I just kind of, I was more shy and I just thought I’d figure it out later.


An honest answer.  She doubted herself, instead of doubting him.  

Q.  Why did you agree to see him again?

A.  Because like I said, I hadn’t dated for a while and I did like him. And and all the time I spent with him up to that point was great, there was nothing about him that I that I didn’t like, and that I though you know maybe he’s just a little too rough and I can sort it out.

"like I said" is a self reference and she is recalling what she just stated.  This indicates that she anticipated the question being asked before it was. 

Q.  What happened on the second date?

A.  Well I went to another taping of the show, but we didn’t hang out after that, but then I went to another one and there was a big snowstorm, and a girlfriend of mine came, and so, on, at the end of the night, we had we had taken the subway, and didn’t drive that night because it was too treacherous, so at the end of the night he asked me to come out with him, and I said, well my, I have my friend here, and he and he agreed to drop her at a subway, and then we went on to his house, and then we, when we were at his house it was fine, it was, he you know, put some music on, I was, you know looking at his living room, and he had some interesting things in there, and uh, you know, again, we were flirty, and but in that flirting he grabbed my hair again, but even harder, threw me in front of him, on the ground and started closed fist pounding me on my head, repeatedly, until my ears were ringing, and I started to cry.

When asked what happened on the second date, the subject begins with her location:

"I went to another taping of the show" indicating her priority.  He was a celebrity and she was at the location in which he gained his status.  This is very important to her.  She then gets to the specifics of the second date:


"I was, you know, looking at his living room" indicates that she may have been impressed.  She began at the taping and now is the celebrity's home.  Note "at his house" caused the pronoun "we" to enter. 

"We were flirty" is also unity evidenced.  "But" stops the point and leads to "that flirting", with "that"showing immediate distancing language, with the assault.

Note the past tense language commitment. 
Note that which began, "crying" but not completed.  


Q.  Did you struggle?

A.  Uhh, I was, no, I was, it was, I was in shock, and when you get hit in the head everything rings, and you know it’s hard to do anything, but try to, you know there was no conversation, about I like, you know, some..anything, and uh he didn’t ask me if I like to be hit, he didn’t ask me, uh you know I wasn’t expecting it, and he hit me repeatedly. And..


The question is answered with "no" but the question, itself, triggered a reaction of sensitivity in the subject. 

"You know" shows an acute awareness of the interviewer at this question.  

"You" is distancing language as if common to all.  This question, although answered, is very sensitive.  This is expected in assault victims:  why they did not struggle; why they did not run,  why they did not make an immediate report, and so on.  It is common particularly in sexual abuse victims.  
Q.  On the head? Always on the head?

A.  On the head, yeah, on the si..., on one side of my head over and over, and on the, and I’m on the floor and I’m and then I’m in tears and he, he said you need to go.


Note:  "I started crying" with the move into present tense language here:  "I'm on the floor and I'm and then I'm in tears" may be PTSD-like reliving of assault.  Note that she then was able to say what he said, in past tense, "he said you need to go" and not "he says..."

This would indicate an "end" at this point, of re-living the memory. 


Q.  What did you say?

A.   I don’t, I didn’t say much at all after that. I got in a cab and cried all the way to my friend’s place, I didn’t even go home, I was I was, a mess, I went to my friend’s place and stayed at her house and cried all night.

Note that she does not mention him here.  His 'absence' from her statement is consistent with not saying "much" at all after "that."

Note "cried all night" has completion.  
Q.  Your friend is a nurse isn’t she?

A.  Yes.

Q.  We’ve spoken with her and she says this you did arrive in this state.

A.  Yes.

Q.  What did she, what what state where you in when you arrived at your friend’s house?

A.  In tears, I was I was just a mess, and she you know, was  saying typical friend things like you know he’s not worth it, and you can do better and you know, and and at this point it’s like wow why did I even, you know, cause I, as I said I hadn’t been dating, and she was she was comforting in a typical friend way, and but but, you know people have asked my why didn’t you press charges or, that’s that’s a tough one.

Q.  Why didn’t you?

A.  Because it’s too difficult to prove, it’s embarrassing, in the moment you’re, you know myself I was so distraught, all I wanted to do was curl up in a corner, I didn’t you know, I I wasn’t expecting to go out with this man who was seemingly charming and nice, and you know I come from an an educated family and I thought wow my dad would really like you. And then to get physically abused like that it was it was shocking, I re.. I didn’t expect it at all.

Another common response from victims of assault where sexuality is in play (date assault). She was asked "why", so answering "because"is appropriate.  

Embarrassed:  she then gives the reason why she is embarrassed:  family. 

That she mentions "physical" abuse suggests that she may have felt emotional abuse from him:  the insult of it.  I would like to ask about this. 
Q.  Did your friend who is a nurse, did she see the any physical signs of this beating?

A.  Uhm, no, no. She, well not that she mentioned. If any..he hit me on the head, so and I wasn’t bleeding, and I wasn’t, it was just more of a, the trauma of being hit in the head.


This may be the 'emotional abuse' she is considering:  she was on a date, it was romantic, and there was no warning or expectation of an assault. 

We look for more linguistic signals of PTSD-like symptoms in her language: 
Q.  There was no need to seek medical attention then?

A.  No.
Q.  Did you think anytime, as this as you said this happened more than a decade ago, did you think at any time when you rev..review that you should have gone to the police?

A.  Yes. I I absolutely did, and the thing is, it, I couldn’t just you know forget about it, I was constantly reminded, and I’m remarried now and my husband knows about it, but every time we hear Jian on television, or you know for commercials for CBC or or anything, I I have tur turn it off quickly, cause I, I I can never look at him without thinking of this, I can’t understand why this man who, he’s he’s such a great tv personality and radio personality has this dark dark side to him and, and it’s been hard because I’ve I’ve had to to suppress it and just put it you know, down to some bad experience, but then when this came to light, uhm a few days ago, it almost, it gave me permission to speak and I thought maybe someone will listen to me now, because I don’t think if I had said anything back then that anyone would care.


The reminder is an embarrassment to her.  


Q.  Did you compare notes with anyone, you know of some of his circle of friends, did you ever feel that you should say, hey does, do you know if this happened to anybody else?

A.  No. There’s actually only one person in his circle of friends that I’m speaking to, because it’s a very sensitive subject with the rest, and because, you know it’s hard for some people to understand because they’ve only seen the side that I saw and to see that other side you have to be behind closed doors.

"No" is the response.  She asked a compound question, so the second part of her response is to the second portion of the question. 


Note "closed doors" continues theme of embarrassment.  Embarrassment is not only due to being from an "educated" family; but fear of not being believed.  

Q.  He has written as you know a Facebook post, Jian Ghomeshi says in this that he has adventurous forms of sex that includes dominance and submission, and that, anything, that is, that any implication that this was not consensual is a lie. What do you say to that?

A.  That’s what made me...the… enfuriated me, because there was nothing to to prepare me for this, nothing, there was no talk, other than what I said in the car when he pulled my hair, I think he might have been saying, do you like it rough, but there was no we’re gonna you know engage in this type of play, we were we were fully clothed we weren’t having sex, we weren’t even, we weren’t even at that point, you know of, you know in our in our our time together our relationship, so there was nothing. It came out of nowhere, and and and during that time you’re wondering, or I was wondering, if is he going to keep beating me? What is this? This isn’t something I’m familiar with. I don’t understand why he didn’t say to me, OK I like to do this and this and this, and this, and I’m gonna, you know when you’re not looking I’m gonna start hitting you in the head and throw you on the floor.

Note that being "infuriated" is not simply because of the post, but the subject reveals that she is upset with herself:  "there was no talk, other than what I said in the car..."


She blames herself.  

Q.  And why did he stop?

A.  Probably because of my tears.

Q.  And?

A.  And he realized that Uh I maybe I wasn’t game, or I I really don’t I don’t know it, 




Q.  What do you want to happen with your story, telling your story. What do you, what he’s been fired, what what where do you want this to go, what do you want people to do with what you are saying to them now?

A.  Well now now that it’s not just me against him, I wish that there was some way that I could press charges against him now. It’s been a long time, I don’t know that I can any more.


"it's not just me against him" reveals that she expected not to be believed.  This explains sensitivity.  
Q.  Have you been in touch with other women? Or attempting to get in touch with them.

A.  No No I don’t I don’t know any of the other women.
Analysis Conclusion:  the subject is telling the truth, working from memory.  She speaks strongly, in the past tense, except when she appears to be reliving the event, as confirmed with her beginning to cry, and then moves back to past tense.  This is a pattern we sometimes see with sexual assault victims who have unprocessed trauma to cope with.  

Subject is truthful. 

Statement Analysis Analytical Interviewing Seminar In Maine




             This is an open invitation with limited seating.  

Statement Analysis and Analytical Training one day seminar on December 16, 2014, from 9AM to 4PM at Jeff's Catering, in Brewer Maine.




Jeff's catering in Brewer, Maine is located at 15 Littlefield Rd.  Brewer, ME  04412   

Seminar is from 9AM to 4PM, with lunch provided.  

Each attendee will receive the Training Manual, mp3 copy of the recorded lessons, a copy of "Wise As A Serpent; Gentle As a Dove:  Dealing with Deception" and follow up support.  

The seminar will include:

Analytical Interviewing 


I.      Introduction
II.    Intuitive Test
III. Principles of Statement Analysis

 Sample Statements for analysis:

a.  group analysis


   IV   Pronouns and Lie Detection  (Pronouns and Confessions)


Lunch Break

V.             Two Lefts---High Sensitivity
    VI.   Self Analysis –write out statement
    VII. Obtaining and Using a Statement in the Interview
VIII.   Principles of Analytical Interviewing
IX    Sample Interview for Critique
X.     Interview Exercises

X1.       Question and Answer Session 

Registration is limited so if you can attend and wish a brochure, please email request to:  Mrs.heatherhyatt@gmail.com 

Spotting a liar helps:   Law Enforcement, Social Services, Law, Human Resources Hiring and Dispute Settling etc.  

Wednesday, October 29, 2014

Marv Albert and Jian Ghomeshi Analysis.




Marv Albert said, regarding allegations he had physically abused a prostitute: 

"I categorically deny these charges and intend to vigorously defend myself against these allegations.  I am confident that I will be completely exonerated when these allegations are addressed in a public courtroom."

This same statement with emphasis and analysis:

"I categorically deny these charges and intend to vigorously defend myself against these allegations.  I am confident that I will be completely exonerated when these allegations are addressed in a public courtroom."

Rather than say, "I didn't assault her" in some form, he "categorically denied", which means to "refuse to accept" the charges.  This is different than saying "I didn't do it."

Note also that he "intends" to defend himself which does not mean one will follow through with one's intentions.  We change our minds frequently.

To state "I am confident" actually weakens the statement.  It is unnecessary language.

He is a professional broadcaster and continues with additional wording that when taken together, sound persuasive.  When broken down into parts (analysis), make the statement weak.

He not only "denied", or refused the allegations, but he "categorically" denied them.  This is a word meant to strengthen the denial.

"Vigorously" defend himself is another attempt to build strength in the statement.

"I am confident" is the third.

"completely" exonerated instead of just being "exonerated" is the fourth.

It amounts to this:  Which one is stronger?

a.  I am happily married.    OR
b.  I am very very very very happily married"?

The first is a strong, confident statement.  The second uses the word "very" in an attempt to strengthen the assertion.  By using it four times, it screams for a divorce attorney to cash in.

In Albert's statement, he avoids telling us "I didn't do it" instead employs a number of words in an attempt to sound strong. He even employs time:  "when" rather than issue a reliable denial.

He did not "vigorously" defend himself, and, in fact, did not "categorically deny" the allegations.

He pled guilty.

With Jian Ghomeshi, we have another man using a lot of words to avoid saying, in a simple form, "I didn't do it" in regard to the allegations.

What sounds strong to some, is weak to Statement Analysis.


This is a follow up on my analysis of Jian Ghomeshi's Facebook post.

My initial analysis of the subject was personally unpleasant.  Having worked for years with victims of not only domestic violence, but of those who have been sexually assaulted, made it more challenging, personally, than it could have been.

I know, too well, perhaps, the pain that families and loved ones of victims go through.  My personal religious views only heighten the difficulty in objectivity in analysis, as the subject has taken that, which I believe has been gifted to us as a means of not only procreation, but expressing intimacy, and is specifically designed as an antithesis to pain in this life, that one who holds that inflicting pain upon another, particularly in the parts of the body designed for gentleness and pleasure, with strong emotional connection, is a deliberate perversion on the part of the subject.

I have written extensively on the life long sufferings of victims of sexual abuse, owning that there does not appear a way to measure the psychological pain inflicted upon them, except to say that it is lifelong, and it impacts both mental and physical health.  It is cancerous and pervasive and I do not think there is a "safe refuge" for the victim, anywhere, in this life. Even holidays, normally filled with joy for most of us, can provoke painful memories.  The gentle touch, with all of its healing remedies, was turned into pain, shame and degradation. I do not know how to quantify the pain for those sexually abused.  Statistics on substance abuse, suicidal ideation and even suppressed immune systems do not do justice.

This was in my mind while doing the analysis.

I am indebted to those of you who's comments were pithy and applicable, and rightfully could be added to the analysis.  Hence, the conclusion of the matter, that is, that the subject is 'misleading' his audience via withholding information, remains the same.  It was difficult keeping my own disdain out of the analysis.

Those who take up the mantle of discerning truth from deception must always be aware of personal limitation.

I must be aware that this topic elicits emotion in me that does not belong in analysis.

Reports are now that another woman, a fourth, has come forward.  I expect more.

I recognize that it appears that all of his alleged victims are female.

It also appears that they were all younger than him, and that they were fans of his.

This puts them in a vulnerable position while putting him in a position of exploitation.

That he did "nothing wrong" in assaulting women, simply because it was "consensual" only shows how deeply self-deceived he is.  One commentator wrote that he was "trying to persuade" his audience.  True enough, as any post might be an attempt to persuade, but this commentator, I believe, meant it this way:

While reporting "what happened", he went on to persuasion, rather than reporting, and was heavy at that.

I agree.  It is a "red flag" of Statement Analysis because it came in the portion of the statement dedicated to "what happened", and it shows weakness.

Even the mention of the popular books and authors is an attempt to appeal to those who have a positive emotional connection to the books.  I do not.

We also saw his need to disparage his victim.  This is another "red flag" of Statement Analysis.

That he felt the need to tell us that one victim was "in her early 20's" bothers me.  When there is no need, that is, when information is "unnecessary", we recognize it as very important to the subject, himself.

Why did he have a need to tell us that the "woman" (not "person", "child", nor "teen") would need clarification as an adult?  In his mind, he appears to be preparing for another form of "consent", namely, the legal age of consent.

Every day in our country, women call out for help against violence.  Susan Murphy Milano's "Heads Up" was  a practical means of escape.

This meant teaching the victim how to collect her personal belongings, items she might now have previously thought of (birth certificates, social security cards, etc), and make careful plans (often to leave the State) to a safe haven, while not triggering the suspicion of the abuser.

For all the bad rap on lawyers, there are those who donate a portion of their paychecks for this very purpose, as women in these situations are often subjugated financially, and do not have the means to start anew, and need help.

Women who were interviewed by The Star claimed  Jian Ghomeshi physically attacked them on dates without consent. They stated that Ghomeshi hit them with a closed fist or open hand, bit them, choked them until they almost passed out, covered their nose and mouth so that they had difficulty breathing, and that they were verbally abused during and after sex.

Ghomeshi appealed to:

Fans of his program,
Fans of the two authors cited,
Those who feel their company has no right into their private sexual lives.

This likely encompasses a large group of people.  I do know anyone who wants their company to have knowledge of their private sexual life.  

Yet it is a sophisticated way to avoid saying "I didn't do it" as he believes that he didn't "do anything wrong", knowing that people will consider his actions reprehensible, hence the need to not only change the dialog from assaultive behavior to freedom to privacy. 

In Statement Analysis it is similar to avoiding the question, making the issue sensitive. 







Steven Powell Rearrested

Prior statement analysis showed deception in Steven Powell 
regarding child pornography as well as knowledge of his 
son's crime where Josh Powell killed his wife, Susan Cox.

TACOMA, Wash. — Steven Powell was re-charged and re-arrested Monday and is headed back to court.
A bench warrant was issued for Powell's arrest Monday by the Pierce County Superior Court. Powell, who was released from prison in March after serving 30 months for his conviction on multiple counts of voyeurism, was arrested at his home in Tacoma, prosecutors say.
The warrant comes on the heels of a decision by a Washington appeals court that a judge erred two years ago in dismissing a charge of child pornography that had been filed against him.
In 2012, the 64-year-old was convicted of 14 counts of voyeurism for surreptitiously taking pictures and videos of two young neighbor girls using a telephoto lens to look into their bathroom. He was sentenced on 12 of those counts.
Just as his trial was starting in May of 2012, Pierce County Superior Court Judge Ronald Culpepper dismissed a charge of possession of child pornography. He noted that prosecutors could not show that Powell directed the girls to pose provocatively or in an explicit nature and said the evidence did not fit the charge. The girls, ages 10 and 8, were innocently getting into a bathtub and were photographed without their knowledge, Culpepper noted.
But prosecutors told reporters after Powell was convicted of voyeurism that they intended to appeal the dismissed child pornography charge. They argued that the judge used an outdated statute for the definition of sexually explicit conduct.
We were always confident the child pornography charges were proper, and we are pleased the higher court agreed. Mr. Powell should be held fully accountable for grossly violating the privacy of his young neighbors.
–Mark Lindquist
The appeals court agreed.
In June of this year, the Washington Court of Appeals ruled that "because of the legislature's 2010 amendment to the definition of sexually explicit conduct expanded the definition to include the conduct depicted within the images in Powell's possession, we reverse the trial court's … dismissal of the charge of second degree possession (of child pornography)."
The appeals court ruled that Powell's purpose for having the pictures was sexual stimulation and that the photos were taken without the girls' knowledge. Both of those elements made it fit into the statute, the court ruled.
Powell attempted to appeal the decision to the Washington State Supreme Court. But the state's high court declined to hear the case, leaving the appellate court's ruling to stand. Prosecutors then re-filed the charge Monday in Pierce County Superior Court and an arrest warrant was issued.
"We were always confident the child pornography charges were proper, and we are pleased the higher court agreed,” prosecutor Mark Lindquist said in a prepared statement Monday. “Mr. Powell should be held fully accountable for grossly violating the privacy of his young neighbors.”
Anne Bremner, the Seatte-based attorney who represents the two young girls who Powell photographed, was also pleased with Monday's charge.
"My clients, the young girl victims of Steven Powell, always believed this more serious charge to be appropriate. They have been seeking justice all along," she said.
Powell is scheduled to be arraigned Tuesday, at which time he will enter a plea. If convicted on this new charge, Powell could be sentenced to up to five years in prison.
Steven Powell is the father of Josh Powell, the husband of Susan Cox Powell. Susan Powell has been missing since 2009 and is presumed dead. Police believe Josh Powell is responsible for her death but he was never arrested. He killed himself and his two young sons in February 2012 in a massive fire during a custody visit at a home he rented in Graham, Washington.

It was during a search of Steven Powell's house as part of the Susan Powell investigation that police found thousands of sexually explicit and voyeuristic pictures taken by Steven Powell. Photos and journals seized from Powell's bedroom also explicitly detailed Powell's obsession with his daughter-in-law.

Tuesday, October 28, 2014

Statement Analysis Services Training Announcement

Statement Analysis Services is currently scheduling 2 Day Trainings for Law Enforcement and Businesses for Winter 2015.  Contact information below. Both open enrollment and private.  


Peter Hyatt 



                                                                              
Statement Analysis Services  Corporate Training


Those who are deceptive in their employment interview are many times more likely  to:

1.     Steal from your company
2.     File frivolous suits against your company
3.     Seek to “game the system” by deceptive means
4.     Put their own needs before the material needs of your business
5.     Bring problems to your business, rather than solve them
6.     Falsely accuse co-workers and superiors
7.     Denigrate your business
8.     Impact morale
9.     Impact Sales

For other companies:  Analytical Interview training is specifically designed for professionals in the social services and healthcare fields, where sensitive information is gleaned in the interview process.

By using Analytical Interviewing, your company will save on Unemployment costs, reduce shrinkage, theft, loss of time, and be able to hire those best suited to help your business prosper.

We have applicants answer questions before an interview is even scheduled!


Your company deserves to know the truth.



Statement Analysis Training

Analytical Interviewing is the most effective, legally sound ingathering of information that anyone can use.  It is non-confrontational, non-interpretive, and allows for truth to be discerned from deception, as well as uncovering what customers really want in sales.  It’s training begins with Statement Analysis, and moves to Discourse, or Verbal Analysis, and will always allow your company to know the truth. 

For law enforcement, knowing when a subject is lying can make the difference between justice and injustice, and learning how to not only analyze a statement, but conduct the interview based upon your analysis, followed by a concisely written report, will give prosecutors the edge they need to fulfill justice. 

Statement Analysis is not just for law enforcement, however, as more and more companies are enrolling in training.  

As Statement Analysis gets to the truth, the attendee will learn how to conduct the interview in the most sensitive portions of the statement, where the essential element exists. Knowing the truth of what happened, allows for the Interviewer to reach critical points in the interview where the subject recognizes that the Interviewer knows the truth. This leads to the highest percentage of admissions within internal investigations into corporate theft, shrinkage, lost time, fraudulent claims of accidents, discrimination, and so on.
It is this same method used in Employment Interviews to reveal which applicants are truthful, and which ones are deceptive.
Statement Analysis Services will reduce Unemployment costs, but better still, using Statement Analysis and the subsequent Analytical Interviewing process, you will screen out those who seek employment who are not suitable for your business.  You will learn how to place the right person for the right position.
The Statement Analysis Training is two days, and Statement Analysis Services support continues for 12 months from the time of the training.  This allows attendees to submit statements, have analysis checked, and properly plan the interview.  It allows for follow up question and answer, and sample interview questions to learn more about the applicant.

Testimonials: 

“I had the pleasure of working with Peter Hyatt on several criminal and administrative investigations since 2010. Peter’s in-depth analysis of statements has provided our department with insight into a writer’s intention and mindset when they wrote their statements or letters. 

Peter’s analyses has given us valuable information and provided us with additional investigative avenues in obtaining a more truthful account of an incident in some instances.  Using Peters insight and analysis into a subject’s writing we’ve been able to construction questions beneficial in getting to the truth in a more expeditious and direct manner. Statement Analysis has also been especially helpful in internal affairs investigations within our department.

I would like to recommend Peter as an examiner and instructor in Statement Analysis.  He provides a valuable investigative tool that would be beneficial to your organization.

Sincerely,

Lt. David W. Nabors
Commander
Criminal Investigative Divisions
Office:  972-412-6215



“Peter Hyatt came to HLA twice to train on interviewing techniques and how to detect deception. Both sessions were extremely informative.  We have changed the way we interview…these techniques helped us recover $600,000 from a driver who was involve in an inside job.  I would highly recommend Peter…and look forward to future sessions with him.”

Michael Berro, Vice President Corporate Development
Harold Levinson Associates


Peter’s analysis was invaluable to formulating a litigation strategy.  Peter’s conclusions about the personalities and motivations derived from the written word proved to be always right on the mark.  In future litigation, I plan on saving many hours by seeking Peter’s analysis immediately.”

Thomas J. Budd Mucci, Esq.”


Statement Analysis gets to the truth.  In our two day corporate training, attendees are equipped with the time saving skills that are immediately effective in discerning truth from deception.  Peter Hyatt, nationally known Statement Analyst, authored the training manual “Agency Investigator Training” for the Department of Health and Human Services, State of Maine, trained agencies, social workers, investigators, attorneys, and has assisted law enforcement on missing persons cases around the nation.  His analysis has been on CNN, as well as on radio programs throughout the country.  He volunteers for the Center for Missing Persons, and Domestic Violence advocate service, “Time’s Up.”  His book, “Wise as Serpents; Gentle as Doves:  Dealing With Deception in a Fallen World” is scheduled to be released late 2014. 

Analytical Interviewing is a legally sound, non-intrusive interview process which allows the person’s s own words to guide us to the truth.  This form of interviewing, based upon carefully trained listening, is more accurate than the polygraph, and has a strong likelihood of obtaining an admission in cases of which the person is seeking to harm the company.  Those that employ Statement Analysis and the subsequent interview will find more cases solved with more confessions, while saving time, and clearing the innocent.

In harassment claims, the company will know the truth, including in sexual harassment, bullying, hostile work environment claims, as well as in time theft, intellectual theft, and various forms of shrinkage.


The Two Day Training Schedule:

Day One

1.     Statement Analysis principles:  Sensitivity in language
2.     How to spot deception in speech and in written statements.
3.     Taking the statement:  when to take a written statement and when to just listen
4.     Statement Analysis exercises
5.     Self Analysis:  Proving the truth
6.     Measuring a Statement for Deception



Day Two

1.     Measuring the Time of a Statement
2.     More Sample Cases:  Corporate Theft  and spotting the trouble-maker
3.     Analytical Interviewing, step by step
4.     Interviewing for Employment:  The Right Person for the Right Job
5.     Practice Interviewing:  Just the facts.
6.     Anonymous Threats:  Anonymous no more!
7.     Writing the Analytical Report:  or, how to write a business report. 
8.     Document, document, document and win.


The two day training includes the training manual, as well as 12 months of support in which attendees may submit statements, analysis, and strategy for the interview, including the follow up interview, where most confessions are realized.

Below is a sample from a case of theft.  The company’s client had an expensive iPad stolen. The local police investigated and concluded  “too many employees had access to it” and closed the case as “unsolved.”  The company turned to Statement Analysis Services for help.  They were concerned not only for the client, but that they had a thief among them that was not identified.  This left them not only worrying about future theft, but was impacting morale as they now had 7 employees who all felt “suspected” by others.

The company was instructed to have each employee write out what they did, from the time they arrived to work, until the time they left.  They were told: “Statement Analysis will tell you which one of them did it, when they did it, and perhaps even, how they did it.”
The 7 employees submitted statements about their day.
The following is the statement that showed deception:

To Whom It May Concern:

     Arrived at Anson House
app 7AM  Entered building stated
my name and sat at the table.
Kinda waited for someone to
at least speak to me.  When they
didn’t I asked where the green
books were.  I read the green
books.  Did dishes sat back
down with a client while he
ate.  Went out to my truck
to smoke.  Took my bag with me
because it was not locked up
and my wallet with cash was
in my bag so I felt better
leaving with it or putting
it in my locked truck.
The clients had lunch sat
and watched how they did it
after lunch I did dishes
Went for a cigarete.  Sat
at the table with client
and staff.  Fix a clients
Pipe so he could go smoke.  on
the porch.  Went out with him
a min. Came back in sat
at table and read my book.
At 1:30 nothing was happening
so I left to go home.
Libby gave me hell for leaving
didn’t know I couldn’t said I
was sorry and wouldn’t happen
again. 

Analysis of this statement is taught in the seminar, as well as how the Interview should be constructed.  In this case, we note change of language. 

Language does not change on its own; it is changed when there is a change in reality.  For example, “my car sputtered and I pulled over and left the vehicle for the tow truck.  A week later, it was repaired and I picked up my car at the station.”

Here, it was “my car” as long as it was working, but when it no longer ran, it became “the vehicle.”  Once repaired and running, it returned to being “my car.” 

In the above statement, the subject went to her “truck”, which later became her “locked truck.”  What caused the change of language?  It was the presence of the iPad.  We conducted the interview for the company and obtained a written confession.  The police had cleared this employee stating “she doesn’t even know what an ipad is!”  When she confessed, she also gave her motive, which is found in the beginning of the statement.  She said, “It was my first day there and all the young girls were excluding me with their talk of men.  I took it knowing one of them would be blamed!”

The same officer that had cleared her delivered the summons from the District Attorney’s office. 

Given the nature of revenge, one can imagine how she would have impacted company morale had she not been caught.

In another case, a chain store had been a victim of an armed robbery.  They, too, had yearly theft and hadn’t been able to recoup their losses through law enforcement investigations.  It reached a point where it became too expensive to submit to insurance, for rates continued to rise.

In this case, the hold up man made off with about $2,000 in cash.  The owner was fed up and frustrated with the mounting year by year losses.

The owner, working with Statement Analysis Services, had his employee write out a statement about what happened.  Statement Analysis Services concluded:  there was no hold up; it was the employee, himself.

The owner asked that the analysis be shared with local police, who then arrested the subject.  He pled not-guilty and decided to go to trial.  Just before going to trial, his lawyer asked if someone from Statement Analysis Services was going to testify and was informed that the analyst would be present.  His client pled guilty, paid restitution, and spent several weeks in jail.  This company now screens all potential employees for deception using the techniques from Statement Analysis Services. 

In fields where there is a 50% turnover rate, one company won every unemployment hearing over the course of two years, implementing Statement Analysis Services.  This same company had every human rights commission complaint dropped, as the truth, well documented, prevailed. 

We provide not only lengthy lists of employment questions to ask, but analysis of the answers, especially useful in employment screening. We do this before you invest your time in the interview process.  

Statement Analysis Services saves your company money, time, and the needless energy wasted upon those who seek to prey upon your business. 



MP3 recordings of all sessions are available free of charge to each attendee.  Certification awarded upon successful completion of seminar.  Discounts available for law enforcement, small businesses and non-profits, Domestic Violence advocates, and charity organizations.  Seminar includes 1 year of follow up support by Statement Analysis Services.