Wednesday, September 24, 2014

Statement Analysis Training: "Fake Hate"

In hoping to provide more on-line training, including audio lessons, the following case is revisited, but in classroom format for you.

We hope to provide more in-depth training, including audio lessons.

For maximum benefit, follow the instructions carefully. This case is rich with principle, and useful for
Statement Analysis training while indicating just how superior language analysis is to body language analysis.



In a well-received training exercise, attendees are instructed in the following manner.  If you would like to take this class online, it is recommended that you only follow the written instructions instead of watching the video alone.



I.  The scenario of the reported assault is verbally given in its basic form.  Attendees are asked to take notes as the verbal presentation is very short. It is:


"A woman reported that three men broke into her home, tied her up, carved hate slogans into her flesh, wrote hate epitaphs on her basement wall, poured gasoline around the house, and set it on fire.  She broke loose, and ran out to a neighbor of which the neighbor called 911.  The three assailants are on the loose.  The FBI is investigating this as a "hate crime" and has not released her name.  The alleged victim made the decision, on her own, to go on television, from which this video shows.  This is an overview of what she reported to have happened to her.  Next:

II.  Each attendee is asked to make a list of words that he or she expects to hear.  This is called "The Expected."

You are to presuppose:

1.  The vicim is your loved one.
2.  The victim is telling the truth.
3.  You are attempting to "enter into" her statement; that is, empathize with her.

Write down the words you expect your 'loved one' will use in this barbaric, vicious attack.


III.  Watch Video without comment nor interruption.


IV.  As the video plays, ignore her body language and face expressions, and write down any word you hear that you did not expect.

This is called the "Unexpected" in Analysis.


V.  Compare the lists.  Note any theme that has arisen, both in your list, and in the subject's own language.

VI.  Do the actual Statement Analysis work on the transcript.

This is not a short exercise, but one in which you should take careful care.  Remember to allow the subject to guide you, knowing that even when one is deceptive, it may be that, sentence by sentence, there is not a single lie in the statement.

The transcript is provided here below, then followed by my own report.


6 comments:

john said...

OT.

Oh dear me!!

Although i am a huge fan of Dr Ekman, i think he has opened up a Panadora's box!.

The FBI Just Finished Its Insane New Facial Recognition System

http://gizmodo.com/the-fbi-just-finished-its-insane-new-facial-recognition-1634851705?utm_campaign=socialflow_gizmodo_facebook&utm_source=gizmodo_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow

john said...

OT Update:

Hunters asked to look for clues in Redwine's death

http://www.kjct8.com/news/headlines/Hunters-asked-to-look-for-clues-in-Redwines-death-276928441.html

Jen Ow said...

Words I would expect:

-Attackers/anger/hate/evil/violent
-broke in/invaded/home/attacked
-Scared/terrified/afraid/begging/crying
-ropes/tied/bound/trapped/escape/hopeless
-knife/blade/sliced/carved/mutilated/blood/pain/skin/flesh/scarred/*various lesbian slurs, matching the words which were carved/painted
-smell/sound/pouring/gasoline/matches/lighter/smoke/flames/burning/crackling/damage/heat/fear/choking/gasping/dying
-gone/alone/escaped/freedom/fresh air/cold/lights/help/saved/kindness/safety/

tania cadogan said...

off topic



ATLANTA – A Georgia man accused of leaving his toddler son to die inside a hot car will not face the death penalty, a prosecutor said Wednesday.

Cobb County District Attorney Vic Reynolds said in an emailed statement that he won't seek the death penalty against Justin Ross Harris after reviewing the state's death penalty statute and other factors. He declined to elaborate.

Police have said the toddler was left in the vehicle for about seven hours on a day when temperatures in the Atlanta area reached at least into the high 80s. The medical examiner's office has said the boy died of hyperthermia -- essentially overheating -- and called his death a homicide.

Harris' attorney Maddox Kilgore did not immediately return a call seeking comment.

Harris faces multiple charges, including malice murder, felony murder and cruelty to children. The malice murder charge indicates prosecutors intend to prove Harris intentionally left his 22-month-old son Cooper to die in the hot car.

The eight-count indictment also includes charges related to sexually explicit exchanges prosecutors say Harris had with an underage girl.

During a three-hour bond and probable cause hearing in July, Cobb County Assistant District Attorney Chuck Boring questioned a police detective at length, outlining evidence he said proved that Harris intentionally left his young boy in the hot SUV. Harris was sitting in his office exchanging nude photos with several women, including a teenager, the day his son died, Cobb County Police Detective Phil Stoddard testified at the hearing.

The indictment also accuses Harris of asking a girl under the age of 18 to send him a nude photo and of sending nude photos of himself and sexually explicit messages to her. It charges him with attempting to sexually exploit a child and with disseminating harmful material to a minor.

Harris' attorney has said the state has introduced several inconsistent theories about a potential motive in the boy's death, which he has said was a terrible accident.

Harris is a native of Tuscaloosa, Alabama, and moved to Georgia in 2012 to work for Home Depot.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/09/24/no-death-penalty-for-ga-dad-charged-in-toddler-death/

Jen Ow said...

Unexpected:

-Throughout she does not refer to the attack, nor even call it an attack.

Instead she refers to it as:

Situation/ event/ 'something like this'/ story/ etc.

-She makes no reference to the fear, pain, devastation, trauma etc, associated with her supposed attack. Instead, her entire interview is focused around the questioning of her 'story', and her feelings about it being questioned.

She uses the words:

Questioning/ integrity/ lie/ victimizing/ saddening/ hurtful/ understandable/ intellectually/ feelings/ concerns/ betrayal/ pawn x4/ game/ intentions/ agendas/ story/ awful/ investigation/ defense/ crime/ respect/ ignites/ fire/ good/ people/ victims/ control/ media/ safety/ justice/ fairness/ fear/ resilience/ forward

------------------

This sample really is a gold mine for SA principle. Several of the major things that stand out:

-She separates herself from other victims.

-She introduces the topic of agenda, pawn, games, intentions, media, and *activism.

*("I know when things like this happen, it ignites a fire".)

-She downgrades what should be her personal trauma, and spreads it to the masses by sermonizing that this kind of thing happens to other people, likely even someone you know, etc.

It seems a bit like an admission, as if she is saying, 'Ok, so even if this didn't really happen to me, it does happen to other people, so don't say it can't happen', lol.

-She repeatedly says what she wants PEOPLE to know. She wants PEOPLE to know she's not afraid, wants PEOPLE to know she isn't hiding anymore, wants PEOPLE to know about the impact of their intentions, wants PEOPLE to understand this does happen, and PEOPLE to know she's not a pawn, etc.

Doesn't she have anything she wants her attackers to know? What about her family, loved ones, other victims, etc? Surely those people are more important, especially after a near death attack, than the general population, (people) who MAY see her media interview. Why is her focus on persuading strangers of the veracity of her story.

-Her avoidance of the topic of the supposed attack is striking. She never calls it an attack, and can't even place herself close enough to call it 'this'... instead, it is always "something LIKE this".

-She self edits a lot, and in doing so she ends up piecing together thoughts that are likely truthful (in her mind), yet they are deceptive, as she seeks for us to interpret them in a way that supports her story.

Examples:

"What matters is the story."

(The truth doesn't matter to her, the story does...the story is what will 'ignite fires'.)

"It doesn't become about the situation, instead it becomes about something entirely different, and the whole thing turns into a defense".

(Her story was taken at face value. She is the one who turned it into a defense. In her own words, she wanted to control what was being said in the media.)

-"I feel like a pawn in a game, but it isn't my game".

(She started this expecting everyone one ELSE to act as a pawn in her attempt at activism, and infamy. Now she finds herself defending her story.)

-"it feels like a betrayal".

(It is a betrayal, one that she is perpetrating.)

Anonymous said...

'having YOUR integrity question, I guess' <--- distancing?

She never refers to the 'event' that's happened to her as an ['attack' to 'me'] and instead calls it vaguely as 'these events', 'these sorts of things' or 'the event'.

There is distancing in her language that raises some red flag.

I know you said to forget about the body/facial language but I just have to mention that towards the end of the video, she SMILES while she says:

'Maybe you don't know me, but you probably know somebody that something like this has happened..'

I find that unnerving but based on language analysis alone, there is valid reasons to be suspicious of her 'attack story'

Looking forward to more Statement Analysis Training posts from you. Thanks for doing this.

Wally