Thursday, September 13, 2012
Revisiting Analysis: After the Conclusion Part One
If enough time has passed, the revisitation is said to be done "dispassionately" by the analyst.
LSI teaches that up to 40% more material may be gained.
Here is why: as the analyst makes his way through a statement, especially if it is a large statement, as the "unexpected" is confronted, the analyst cannot help but be emotionally and intellectually impacted by the "unexpected" that yields "deception indicated" for the analyst.
In other words, he began thinking "this person is innocent and telling the truth" but as he was confronted with the lies, he could not help but think, "This person killed...this person stole...this person raped..." and so on.
It is inescapable.
Once this settles into the mindset of the analyst, he must struggle to see the "unexpected" as the norm becomes deception. This is why it is so important to withhold a conclusion until the end.
Accusation / Question for Analyst: Did the subject kill the child?
Expectation: The analyst waits to see "I didn't kill the child" in the statement, expecting to see it.
By the time an analyst has reached the halfway point of the statement he knows the subject cannot bring himself to make a reliable denial. How can he proceed, fairly, in the last part of the statement? It is difficult, and having another analyst check his work is of great value, but also, if possible, putting the statement away to work on others, attempting to forget about the statement, child, and everything else.
Without the same emotional and intellectual (I list "emotional" here, first, because not only is the topic lying but child murder will impact the analyst emotionally, perhaps even more than intellectually) impact, the analyst's eyes are clearer and he may make it further in the statement because he can see 'this has been covered' and 'that has been covered' but land upon words he previously did not cover (it is exhausting covering every single word in a statement) as he was on the "big picture" of deception versus truth.
As he progresses, with less emotional and intellectual impact, he is free to look at the words "in between" the words analyzed which increases the yield of information plus another element enters into the equation.
This element is something that we will examine in specific detail next...and...
we will apply it to well known cases.