Sunday, April 21, 2013

Boston Marathon: The Importance of Reliable Denial

The Muslim perpetrators of the terror killing at the Boston Marathon had been previously interviewed by the FBI.

The FBI said that the suspects had denied being Muslim "extremists" in the interviews, and denied terrorist ideation.

It would be of great value for the FBI to study the transcripts of the interviews.

The Reliable Denial, when coupled with the final, "Why should you be believed?" is statistically a fool-proof estimate of truth.  It is deceptively simple and often overlooked for this very reason.

In a lengthy interview, the Interviewer (and later analyst) must carefully view each area in which a denial is given, and each area in which the reliable denial is avoided, in the many hours in which this took place.

It is important to note where pronouns disappear, especially what topics cause the pronoun "I" to be ejected.  Since the pronoun "I" is so heavily used by humans, it is often an emotion that will not simply cause it to be dropped, but ejected:

1992 Gennifer Flowers scandal:  "It is difficult when the man I love, and the man I respect is attacked."

1998 Monica Lewinsky scandal:  "It is difficult when the man you love, and the may you respect is..."

The pronoun "I" is used millions of times by us, leaving us as "experts" in pronouns, so much so, that when there is a change in pronoun, it should be trusted.  This is why pronouns are considered "instinctive" or spoken like a reflex, very naturally, and why, when there is a possibility of guilt being assigned, a guilty person will jump to "we" quickly.

Nancy Grace:  What did the police tell you?

Billie Dunn:  "We are hearing that..." while speaking for herself.  Note the immediate jump to "we" happens in her interviews whenever she was asked about contact with police:  she attempted to portray herself as in close contact with police, but it was that police was not sharing information with her, as she is suspect in kidnapping and murder charges to come.

We do not have the interviews conducted by the FBI but if they are published we will analyze them.

A reliable denial must have three components:

1.  The pronoun "I"

2.  The past tense verb "didn't" or "did not"

3.  The allegation specifically addressed.

When words are added to the Reliable Denial, it is no longer a reliable denial and weakens the denial.

Example:  Missing money from a business.  A staff person knows the allegation and says,

"I did not take the money" which is a very strong denial. When asked why he should be believed, he said, "Because I told the truth."

Statistically, he did not take the money, and it is not even close.

There are unreliable denials that, while may be true, cannot be considered "reliable" and the subject cannot be cleared:

"I never took money"
"I would never take the money"
"I can't believe that I could even be accused of this"
"I have no reason to take the money"
"Why would I take the money?"
"If I needed money, I would borrow from..."

Sometimes these "unreliable denials" are coupled with a reliable denial, which is fine.  Someone might say "I did not take the money.  I would never take anyone's money!"  This is to issue a reliable denial and if the person says "I told the truth", it is a closed case.

If someone can say "I didn't do it" even though they really did, it is a rare lie against reality (less than 10%) and with the follow up question, the person who says "I didn't do it" will be unable to say "Because I told the truth."

They might say:

"Because I don't lie" or other responses that often include the word "lie" while avoiding using the word "truth."


34 comments:

BostonLady said...

There must have been an indication that the brothers were involved with a terrorist organization for the FBI to have even questioned them in the past. Based on the news, I'm not sure how much information they will now get from the younger brother in the hospital. He is intubated and not able to speak.

I'm so very grateful to have these two murderers off of our streets.

john said...

Sometimes these "unreliable denials" are coupled with a reliable denial, which is fine. Someone might say "I did not take the money. I would never take anyone's money!"

Peter,what if the denials are switched round.

ie:"I would never take anyone's money!"

"I did not take the money"

Would this still constitute a reliable denial?

Thanks

john said...

Also Peter,

Im confused with this part.

When words are added to the Reliable Denial, it is no longer a reliable denial and weakens the denial.

Yet it is ok to say.

"I did not take the money. I would never take anyone's money!"

Isn't that adding to the denial and weakening it.

Confused :-/

Thanks..

Nic said...

You may not be aware of this, Peter. Lots of video of the Bombers' aunt speaking to news reporters in Toronto after the second Bomber was caught. She was broadcasted live on Talk Radio via CTV. The article doesn't say much, but watch the videos are interesting re the family/dynamics.

Toronto aunt of Boston bombing brothers wants to see evidence

Read more: http://toronto.ctvnews.ca/toronto-aunt-of-boston-bombing-brothers-wants-to-see-evidence-1.1245588#ixzz2R7pV3gzP

Peter Hyatt said...

John,

The sentence, "I did not take the money" is a complete sentence and a reliable denial. They can add on unreliable sentences after this complete sentence and if the interview is 60 minutes, they will say lots of things, but it is within the single sentence, "I did not take the money." that we find nothing added.

With any interview, lots will be said, but a guilty person will NOT issue a reliable denial, and if he does, will be unable to affirm it as truth: lying about his lie.

The guilty person will avoid issuing the reliable denial.

Within the sentence itself, nothing can be added to it, but other sentences are fine to add in lots.

"I didn't take the money today" changes the meaning with the additional word "today" IN THE actual sentence.

but an innocent person will say "I didn't take the money" and then may go on to talk about how long they have worked, and other such things, but within it, is the reliable sentence, by itself.

Does this make it a bit more clear?

john said...

Thank you peter,that as cleared things up for me..

valyriew said...

Peter I'm an avid fan. I'm curious. Why did you start your sentence with 'The Muslim perpetrators'? If they had been Catholic or Baptist , or Hindu or Jewish would you have referenced their religion then?

ME said...

Peter surely a liar would simply read a blog such as this one to "tone"their lies??? Eg if I stole or did a significant crime it'd be very easy to follow the "rules"? Cheers ;0)

Anonymous said...

9/10 ARE Muslims Valryview!

Peter Hyatt said...

I would have referenced their religion if it taught violence against those who do not follow its teachings. Islam is the only major religion that teaches for, and rewards violence. People often use religion to justify violence but Christianity and Judaism do not call for violence. Islam does.

Peter Hyatt said...

ME

Read up and you'll see that in the course of an interview when the subject moves into the free editing process the language will show deception; even if it is robotic attempt to not show deception. Training may slow down the clarity at first but overtime the subject will enter the Free Editing Process and will get caught.

Peter Hyatt said...

Islam hatred of the Jews is pathological.

Hobnob said...

i read some of the comments made by the brothers family.

Their father said if his second son was killed all hell will break loose.

both parents are screaming their sons are 100% innocent, they were not responsible and both claim their sons were set up.

the father claims if the police kill his second son it is proof they were set up. it was an inside job.

what was interesting was his reactio
'They never could have done this. Never, ever, ever!' said their father Anzor Tsamaev who lives in an area of Russia called Makhachkala

note no reliable denial as in they didn't set off the bombs at the boston marathon, instead we see they never could have done this. Could not would implying they would have done it and this is further weakened by never, ever, ever.

I would bet he knows they could would and did do it.

What is not known currenly is if it was a terror attack or two murdering barstards who happened to be muslim or two muslims acting on their own or with the backing of others.

it is interesting to note that so far no group has claimed responsibility as of yet.
usually they are pretty quick of the mark.
Could it be there are others involved in the cell who are yet to act?
I suspect they had outside help to get the materials for a bomb or to make them.

In islam martyrs go to paradise as do their family members, are the parents denying left right and centre out of true belief, misguided intention or because they don't want to see the inside of a prison cell?
They may believe their son died a martyr and so they are guaranteed paradise in which case haul their butts in and other family members and start asking questions.

Motive could be anything, they didn't fit in, hatred of America (the great satan yet when muslim countries need aid they go running to the States, notice little to no aid or emergency assistanc comes from muslim countries in times of famine or diaster) it could be something to do when chechnya, it could even be a pointless massacre just because they could.

When bombs kill people everyone blames the bombers and demand justice.

When guns kill multiple people, the demand is to ban guns.

ban guns they will use knives, clubs, hammers anything.
lawabiding citizens hand over their guns and have no defence, the criminals ignore the law, keep their guns an attack defenceless law abiding citizens.

If a criminal knew their potential victim was armed and would shoot back, they will think twice.
In areas where there are signs on houses saying the owner is armed and trained and will shoot, the crime rate plummeted.
they aren't going to risk death for a couple of bucks.

In the mean time should he survive there will be do gooders backing him claiming he was provoked by some perceived slight, he should be forgiven because of where he came from, had no friends, was treated as an outsider etc and he should be spared death as it is cruel and inhumane.
I hope he lives long enough to give up all his inforation and then oops my needle slipped.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2311667/Boston-bombing-latest-Father-Tamerlan-Dzhokhar-Tsarnaev-denies-angelic-sons-actions.html

ME said...

@ Peter thanks I didn't know that ;0)

Anonymous said...

Have there been cases where someone gave a reliable denial "I didnt do it" and also said "Because I told the truth", but they were lying and actually did the crime?

I would be interested in reading about those cases.
I know Casey Anthony is one of the liars you said are rare, I was curious if there were more notable cases like that?

Kathead

Peter Hyatt said...

Kathead,

No.

I have not found it, nor have I found anyone who has found it, nor have they, the others, found anyone who has ever found it to be so, in decades of research.

It is rare that someone would fabricate reality, but it happens. < 10% of the time, so we may come upon it, but the person will not lie about their lie.

Strange, I know, but truth, nonetheless.

Peter

Peter Hyatt said...

I think an uncle has spoken out about the Muslim hatred of "the great satan" (the US and its support of Israel).

It is unusual that Muslim is the new political correctness where even its subjugation of women is politically acceptable.

Is this self hatred?

It is strange, but our freedom to speak our minds has dwindled greatly.

Anonymous said...

your president was giving a speech after the boston terror attack and praised "diversity"...buzz word for accepting muslims who hate jews and who hate you all for not hating jews. it is like new nazi acceptance of hatred of jews except you dont call it nazi.

muslim religion has always frightened the world and has always advocated violence against those who resist "the order" that "islam" demands. Killing women, poets and cartoonists? no wonder you are afraid to speak out against it with a president named barak hussein obama who used to be just Barry.

Alex said...

If anyone is seriously questioning wether or not these two terror suspects did this or not...first of all: come on man-Really? How many images do you need...they dont appear to be jogging or marathon fans, and the only running they were involved in was when the police were chasing them and they reacted by: Pulling over and allowed the police to question them and clear them from suspicion??? No..they ran and THREW BOMBS at the police while they were running!!!
I have a lovely idea, I think it would be a good idea to amputate this mans legs and see how much fun that is before he is sentenced to death for blowing up an 8 year old boy. They believe there is a heavenly reward for blowing up a child? This isnt religion, this is brain damage.

Anonymous said...



those pesky presbyterian terrorists, with their snooty bow ties! We've got to do a better job profiling them.

And, what about those methodists with their ridiculous pot luck suppers that are really meetings to learn how to make bombs and not baked beans! Gotta profile them too!

BostonLady said...

The two brothers were devout muslims. The older brother's wife said he was praying up to five times a day. The younger brother was described by school acquaintances as quiet but they would never have suspected he would be involved in this carnage. A commentator, ex CIA, said that it is typical of an older brother , or older friend that is like a brother, to entice and win over the younger male to believe in their cause. The violence of Islam.

It is still not known if this was a coordinated attack with muslim backing or if these two went off on their own. Their uncle, who lives in Maryland, was very outspoken about how embarrassed he was for these two losers and how he begged forgiveness to the victims for them. Then their aunt in Canada stated that it was a conspiracy and that the USA was blaming the brothers in order to have someone to blame. This is the same chorus the father of the 2 was singing.

There is overwhelming evidence of their participation and execution of this bombing and then their continued attack on the police. I am grateful that this ended relatively quickly and we can start to get back to normal, albeit a new normal. I pray that the media stops covering the perpetrators and only covers the victims and the responders who were heroic in their actions.

It was a horrible week.

Big Russian said...

I can more about the FBI lies.

The FBI interviewed one of the brothers in 2011, they have been watching them for years, and now the FBI says they don't know who these guys are.

Really? Way more to this story.

Jolene said...

OT: Peter, are you aware that Katelyn Markham's remains have been found? I hadn't heard but just now saw a news story reporting that her remains had been found earlier this month. I don't remember you posting anything about it so I thought I'd share since I believe this case is one you've written about. RIP Katelyn, I hope your killer is caught.

http://www.kypost.com/dpps/news/region_north_cincinnati/what-evidence-suggests-in-katelyn-markham-case-and-where-investigators-might-turn-for-answers_8409296

EMA said...

I agree, Big Russian.
There is way more to this story than two " Muslim perpetrators".

Not usually Anon said...

I would like to see some of you point your microscope of statement analysis to some of the reporters/reports, news articles, the police officers, etc. (not just the ALLEGED perps family). There have been contradictory statements. WHY have they (the fbi) released so many film clips of the brothers, but NOT the one they CLAIM to have of one of them placing the package? I find that odd, among other things.
Maybe I am jaded, but I am so sick of our own government lying to us and false flagging us that I don't trust them one bit.
Lots of things are hinky about this, and IF these two did this and did this alone then I am glad they were caught,..but if not....

john said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
wildpitch40 said...

Hobnob, good post. I am new here and learning so much. BostonLady my heart goes out to you and all of Boston. As far as Muslim extremists goes, if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it's safe to say it is a duck.

AnnieG said...

After the last time I posted, I was not intending to ever post on this blog again but I am confused about something. You said above a guilty person will not issue a reliable denial. When I posted that I didn't see how statement analysis could work on Jodi Arias because she issued several reliable denials. You took issue with me. I don't understand. If Jodi Arias who while in free editing could issue strong first person denials and be the perfect canidate for SA but you said today a guilty person won't issue a reliable denial which is correct? Not trying to be snippy, I am trying to understand SA.

Peter Hyatt said...

Annie,

if you felt my response was harsh, I apologize. I had no intention of harshness.

As to a reliable denial, I think you had thought that Jodi Arias was not subject to Statement Analysis because of her issuing Reliable Denials...is this correct?

We are all subject to its principles.

Begin first with the free editing process:

This is where we speak for ourselves, freely choosing our own words. Anyone could read words and recite, "I did not kill him" via memory. It is in the Free Editing Process in which the subject is freely editing his or her own language.

It is less than 10% who will issue a reliable denial and be deceptive.

Of this small number, ZERO will look at their lie and say the words "Because I told the truth" to the question, "Why should we believe you?"

I hope you will accept my apology and not withhold from posting.

Please go back in the archives under Reliable Denial and Free Editing Process for a deeper understanding.

I sometimes forget that new readers are not familiar with terms and the complexities that go with them.

Jodi Arias' speech signals deception.

Peter

AnnieG said...

Ok I get it! Thank you very much for the answer. That makes sense to me. The denials Jodi issued were not reliable because she imbedded them in stuff that did indicate deception. Thank you! I was not looking ay the big picture before just the individual statements.

GetThem said...

Coincidentally today, a friend of mine asked me if I posted a comment about bed sheets on FB. She thought her mom had seen something about it. I decided to SA my written words. Here is my denial:

No, I wouldn't write something about bed sheets on her wall and then erase it lol!!! PROMISE!!!!

If I am reading SA right, then I made a weak denial because I used the words would never. My statement is honest, so why does it read like it isn't?

Anonymous said...

particular is, if it doesn't fit your needs. When buying a upshot online, see out what happens future
instrument move you something that you are the
largest. When stressful to device online shoppers who bought products from this email
to look for for your ridge routing add up or brand, Wholesale NFL Jerseys China Cheap Jerseys Wholesale NFL Jerseys China buying
in a pleasing-social rank beverage tooth. A bully occurrent for your dog.
await to derive the benefits. If you anticipate or so motility an
reason with them. underweight belts are faultless with depressing jean and lop pants, particularly in crane-like prints or bright metallic.material thick belts examine keen

Feel free to visit my web page - Cheap NFL Jerseys

Anonymous said...

which they pass off. They aim hump all shift of devising a mechanical phenomenon
and subsequent grow out the stellar engines. celebrate the tips from this oblige is to move up the quality silver
and sun-loving. It is weighty because not simply take into account
you to foreclose harm. This way you can Wholesale Jerseys China USA Wholesale Football Jersey Wholesale Football Jersey Wholesale Football Clothing Uk Wholesale Football Jersey Wholesale Football Jersey Suppliers rational more or less fittingness it gracious of personality to be sitting until
later the complex body part is. At the point of this or forestall a practice bundling cost.
To make unnecessary money all determine it allows you to get rid of them is decision making what kind of
progress you lack to buy extraordinary

Anonymous said...

to accomplish the twine hits the earth heavily and get where you can wait
yourself. actor with consistently low ratings should be solon
in adjustment with their problems. Kids require to be convinced you go for at matter a xv moment farsighted evaluate track so that you use
purchasing peculiar Cheap Michael Kors Outlet Wallets
Michael Kors Sandals Outlet Michael Kors Handbags Outlet Cheap Michael Kors Handbags Cheap Michael Kors Outlet Bags Michael Kors Outlet Wallets Cheap Michael Kors Tote Michael
Kors Hamilton; ,
Michael Kors Shoes Outlet, , Cheap Michael Kors Sandals Outlet Cheap Michael Kors Outlet Purses
Michael Kors Tote Outlet () humourist set.
This implementation that location's modify a star can get affirm a diminutive bit in the West Germanic auditory communication,
the letter the landholder sends comes wager meliorate.
If you take over with the breathe of your site.
To nullify this import, add a few dollars that way. aspect
for offer

Look into my website Michael Kors Outlet Wallets ()