Tuesday, September 13, 2016

How To Obtain An Admission: The Analytical Interview

This is the single most successful way from which to obtain an admission from a subject:  the Analytical Interview.  

It is legally sound. 
It is non-intrusive and non-threatening.  
To a certain degree, its principles are used  intuitively by top therapists and sales professionals and I sometimes meet with law enforcement investigators who practice its principles naturally, flowing with personality, who then become experts with training. 

It matters not how many lawyers are present. 

Here, a man was accused of having sexual intercourse with a 60 year old female, MR, who had the mind of a 10 year old.   

Subject:  Yeah, but what are you saying?  

Officer: You realize that this is about you having sex with her.  She has mental retardation.

Subject:  I know it.  I know you.  You know, you'd you'd have to be sick in the head to do something like this."

From training, the officer recognized how close this was to an admission and after reviewing the analysis with him, he scheduled a follow up interview and reviewed this question with the subject, who affirmed his own words. 

He then asked the subject  if he had a mental health diagnosis.  The subject's words were seeking a defense and justification of his guilt.  

Question:  Where, in the language of the subject, would  this "sickness" be found?

Answer:  in the 'head.'

  "Yeah, I have a diagnosis.  A couple of them.  Yeah.  Bi polar

This led to an admission of sexual intercourse, which was all that was legally needed.  We did not need the subject to admit that he did it, and then take upon himself the moral responsibility.  In fact, he was allowed to talk and talk and talk and eventually, he blamed the victim.  This is typical and we allow for it.  If one stole, we do not need him to say "it was wrong", but to simply admit what was done.  This is the difference between the "admission" and the "confession."  

When professional investigators look for confessions, they inadvertently use morally charged language too often, sometimes even while trying to allow the subject to blame the victim, yet it sends a distinct signal to the subject:   "Be Defensive; He is bringing guilt!"and the subject closes down.  

                          The Analytical Interview is this:

When a written statement can be obtained, it must be.  

It is obtained by saying very little, other than politely giving the subject pen and paper and some water and reminding them to not scribble out anything they wish to change; simply draw a single line through it and continue.  If we talk during it, our language will contaminate the statement.  

It is analyzed using Statement Analysis.  The truth is now known by the analyst or investigator or it is known precisely where questions are to be aimed.  This fills the interviewer with confidence and resolve; something not lost on the subject. 

The interviewer now uses the words of the subject, himself, asking short, legally sound questions, avoiding, whenever possible, introducing any new words.  This is not only to avoid the need to interpret words, it provides a comfort level, very deep, that goes back to childhood, for the subject, who has a long close emotional association with his own words.  This comfort facilitates the flow of information right down to admitting what was done.  (A "confession" is an admission with the recognition of moral guilt; this is not something needed and many criminals would admit their crimes if the element of morality was kept out of language).  

The Analytical Interview is generally 80% talking by the subject, while we do 20% or less.  If an interrogation is conducted at the end, this number reverses.  

Here is an example of how not to interview.  Note that Herring is the assistant director to the FBI and Jordan is a politician.  

In politically based interviews, just like televised interviews, the focus and goal is not information but attention for the interviewer.  

If we simply look at the number of words each man uses, we see that the politician received very little information, and did most of the talking.  

We do not ask compound questions. 
We do not interrupt the subject. 
We do not introduce new words. 
We use the words of the subject. 
We reflect back his own vocabulary and ask relevant questions in follow up.  
We do not make speeches. 
We do not moralize.
We do not make conclusions in the interview portion.  

When I am under cross examination, I say very little.  When a defense attorney makes a speech and does not ask a question, I remain silent.  This has sometimes provoked anger when I am asked, "Why didn't you answer the question, Mr. Hyatt?" to which I turned to the judge and said,

"Your honor, I was not asked a question."

In one case in which the defense attorney became visibly angry, the judge read by the transcript and confirmed:  there was no question posed.  

How many principles did the politician violate?

Jordan: Mr. Herring, was this case different? You said you’ve been around the FBI 17 years, you’re now the acting director for legislative affairs, was this case different?

Which question does he want answered:  "how was it different?" or "was it different?"  The compound question allows the subject to answer whichever question he wants.  

Herring: I think this case is different in a lot of ways.

Jordan: A lot of ways.

Herring: I do.

Jordan: Can you tell us? Can you give me some – why? I know it’s different in a lot of ways. How about this difference: You ever have a case in your 17 years where the subject of your investigation’s husband meets with the attorney general just a couple days before you’re going to interview that individual in your investigation. You ever had that happen in your 17 years?

4 questions posed

Herring: No, sir.

The politician made a speech and Herring politely answered with a single "no" and "sir." 

Jordan: That’s certainly different, isn’t it?

Herring: Yes, sir.

Jordan: Yeah. You ever have a case, in your 17 years – and we appreciate your service – you ever have a case where the attorney general announces publically that she’s gonna follow the recommendations of the FBI even though she has no idea what those recommendations are going to be … you ever have that happen in your 17 years?

Note the unnecessary "we appreciate your service" as a strong signal to the subject:  no trouble ahead.  

Herring: Not on one of the cases I was assigned.

Here, the subject references potential knowledge of the same on cases in which he was not assigned.  For the Analytical Interview, this will now be explored.  
Not, however, for the politician: 

Jordan: Yeah. Well I don’t think it’s ever happened because the attorney general told me she’s never done that until this time. You ever have – in your 17 years – you ever have a director of the FBI, you ever have them do a big press conference, walk through all the wrong-doings of the person under investigation – you ever have that happen? A big press conference before you make this big announcement? Or normally the FBI just kind of announces whether they’re gonna prosecute or not, right? You ever seen that before?

Herring: I mean we’ve certainly had press conferences. Not quite like that one.

Jordan: Not quite like that one. That’s exactly right. And then have you ever had this: now maybe this happens, but Mr. Cummings said in his opening statement, “Republicans didn’t like the answers Mr. Comey gave.” Well that maybe true, but based on what Mr. Comey did last week where he sent a memo to you and all your colleagues, looks to me like a lot of former FBI agents, and maybe some even current ones, didn’t like some of the answers they got from this investigation. You ever seen that before? Mr. Comey says in this letter, “I explained to our alums, I’m OK if folks have a different view of this investigation.” So there’s obviously some folks who used to work in the Justice Department [who] didn’t like the outcome either. Now they may be Republicans like Mr. Cummings says, they may not be. So I’ve never seen that before either, have you, Mr. Herring?

Here is one question of 155 words in length with an answer of 12 words. 

Total:   167 words

Interviewer:  93%

Subject:  7%

In our training, we average 80% subject  and 20% Interviewer. 
Political interview:                     7%  subject  and 93% Interviewer 

Herring: Frequently we get messages from the director on a variety of things-

Jordan: Yeah. Two months after he makes the announcements he thinks it’s important to send a memo out, two months later, to all his employees saying, hey I’d better fill you in on some things here, why we did what we did, you ever have that happen two months after the fact?

Herring: I think often times he wants the employees to understand what’s going on in a full level of transparency both outside the Bureau and inside the Bureau – we’re a big agency-

Jordan: So two months later you get a memo-

Herring: 36 thousand or so employees-

Jordan: This case was different. But here’s the problem, Mr. Herring. It’s not supposed to be. It’s not supposed to be different. Everyone is supposed to be treated equally under the law. And I know deep down you know that. Your 17 years serving in our government – you know that, don’t you? Everyone’s supposed to be treated the same. And in this case, this individual was treated different. And everyone in this country knows it. And that’s why we’re having this hearing…

Jordan intended to tell the public that the Clinton investigation was different than other investigations. 

He did so, over and over, and obtained no information from the assistant director.  

He did, however, have the camera and focus upon himself.  This is what televised interviews are often like, including Nancy Grace and other criminal shows.  The priority is not information, but exposure.  

In training, we learn the techniques that are most likely to produce admissions from the suspects.  We do not violate anyone's rights, nor need to.  If the subject agrees to interview, we will get our information.  

For training for individuals, at your home or for seminars for your department or business:  Hyatt Analysis Services.  

The center for all deception detection is within human speech.  The learning begins with the written statement and progresses from there.  Although we specialize in advanced analysis, our basic program will take you from Statement Analysis 101 to a high level of proficiency.  


tania cadogan said...

Off topic

A mother who beat her nine-week old son to death and buried him in remote woods has killed herself in prison.

Kristen Bury, 33, committed suicide behind bars at the Sarasota County Jail in Florida, less than a year into a 25-year-sentence for killing Chance Walsh.

She pleaded no contest to aggravated manslaughter in January after the youngster's remains were found in a shallow grave in October, a month after he was reported missing. He had been buried just wearing his diaper.

Her husband, Joseph Walsh, is yet to face trial in Chance's death. Bury was expected to testify as part of a deal with prosecutors.

The sheriff's office says deputies found Bury unresponsive in her cell on Saturday morning.

They performed CPR, but she was later pronounced dead at a hospital.

In a statement, Lt. Joe Giasone said the initial investigation 'indicates a suicide.' An autopsy is planned.

Walsh and Bury were arrested in South Carolina after getting into a car crash.

Chance wasn't in the car, but his grandmother Sally Susino called police saying she feared for the boy's well-being.

Police say Walsh suffocated the boy by stuffing a baby wipe in his mouth before the pair hid the body in nearby woods.

Fort Myers criminal trial attorney Joe Viacava told NBC2 justice for baby Chance will be more difficult now his mother has died.

'This could turn into a dismissal of the case for all we know,' he said.

'Having the one person that was there with no other real significant evidence, other than some minor forensic evidence, and as well as no eye witnesses testimony - she was critical to the case.

'If she becomes the lynchpin to their case and she's no longer there to testify, that could be the difference between a conviction and an acquittal.'

After her daughter was sentenced, Susino said she wasn't happy with the deal.

She told local media at the time: 'I can't say that I'm pleased with today's outcome.

'Understand I will always love my daughter. She was my flesh and blood, as Chance was to her.

'And fortunately I do have the mother instinct, so this is extremely difficult, but justice needs to be done and we don't feel the sentence was strong enough.

'Mothers are supposed to protect their child at all cost and that wasn't done.'

She wouldn't comment after hearing news of Bury's death.



I am glad she committed suicide since she will now never get a chance to commit any other crimes against children.
I am glad that she will no longer be a burden to the American tax payer.

I am glad she took a self imposed death penalty, something she should have gotten in the first place rather than 25 years.

I am angry that she only did one year before she suicided.
I, and i suspect many others, would have wanted her to suffer misery and fear of retribution by other inmates for many years before killing herself.
I would have wanted her to testify against her husband to make sure he did not escape justice

I hope that her husband does not escape justice and that he gets the death penalty or at least LWOP, which he deserves.

tania cadogan said...

Off topic

Legal authorities are giving a second try in jury selection for the Atlanta man charged with killing his toddler son by leaving him in the back seat of a hot SUV.

It has been complicated to find impartial jurors for the trial of Justin Ross Harris, who prosecutors say was at his desk, sexting with as many as six different women, as his son was dying inside the hot car.

Officials moved the trial to a new courthouse 275 miles from where 22-month-old Cooper died in June 2014.

Yet most potential jurors questioned by the judge said they not only had heard about the case against Harris — who looked fidgety during proceedings — but had also formed opinions about his guilt or innocence.

This comes nearly three weeks of efforts to find an impartial jury in Cobb County fell apart in May, with the judge agreeing to move the case because of pretrial publicity.

The 12 jurors will decide if Cooper died of heatstroke in a closed-up and unbearably hot car because his dad forgot to take him to daycare — or if it was a deliberate and cruel murder by design, carefully researched and planned.

Police believe Harris, 35, intentionally left his son in the car to die in the sweltering summer heat while he worked as his web development job at a Home Depot satellite office.

Investigators said Harris had breakfast with his son at a Chick-fil-A restaurant shortly before placing him into a rear-facing child's car seat in the back of his silver Hyundai Tucson SUV, and then driving short distance to his job — two minutes and less than a mile away.

Police said Harris backed his into a parking space about 9:30 a.m. and then walked into the glass and steel office building, leaving his toddler son strapped in his car seat for nearly seven hours with the car's windows rolled up.

The toddler died of hyperthermia, according to the county medical examiner's report.

Weather experts said the outdoor temperature reached 92 degrees on that day. They believe temperatures could have climbed to 120 degrees or more inside the car.

Harris' attorneys insist Cooper's death was an accident. They maintain their client simply forgot to take his son to a company-operated daycare center a mile away before starting his workday.

Defense attorneys say Harris didn't notice that his toddler son was still strapped in his car seat when he stopped briefly at his vehicle several hours later, and placed some light bulbs he had purchased onto his SUV's front seat.

Harris reportedly left his office about 4:16 p.m., police said.

tania cadogan said...


He told cops he was on his way to a movie theater when he realized his son was still in the car.

Witnesses said he screeched to a halt just inside the entrance to an outdoor shopping center, hysterically screaming, 'Oh my God, my son is dead! What have I done?'

Harris hurriedly removed his motionless child from the car and tried to revive him, witnesses told police. The child's lifeless body was rigid and in a sitting position, they said.

Harris, formerly of Tuscaloosa, Alabama, has remained in the Cobb County Jail since his son's death in June 2014. His charges include malice murder, felony murder and first-degree cruelty to children.

Despite the grim nature of the alleged murder, it is not a death-penalty case, court officials said.

Superior Court Judge Mary Staley Clark reconvened the trial Monday in coastal Glynn County, where about 250 people were summoned to jury duty. Two weeks have been set aside to seat a jury.

'It's not a case where you can pick a jury in one day or two,' Clark said before adjourning for the evening Monday.

The judge began questioning the first group of 36 potential jurors Monday afternoon.

Of those, 27 said they had previously seen news stories or other information about Harris' case.

And 19 panelists, just over half, said they had expressed or formed an opinion about Harris' guilt or innocence.

However, when asked by the judge to stand if they were biased against Harris or did not feel 'perfectly impartial' between prosecutors and defense attorneys in the case, all of the 36 possible jurors remained seated.

Meanwhile, the judge agreed to dismiss 13 people who claimed jury duty would cause them undue hardship — mostly panelists who complained of painful medical conditions or who had booked vacations that conflict with the trial. There were 34 who asked to be excused.

Those who will remain in the pool for possible inclusion on the final jury include a father-to-be who said he expects his child to be born this week, a man whose daughter is getting married this weekend in Virginia, and a doctor who works in the emergency room of a rural hospital that typically has just one physician working every 12-hour shift.

The judge granted each of those possible jurors time to attend to affairs away from the courthouse. But they were all ordered to return before a final jury gets seated.


Anonymous said...

Another copy and paste book length comment?

Hey Jude said...

OT - Resonate Church, Indianapolis has uploaded:

Amanda Blackburn's Family Q & A - What Happens To You When You Die? Week 6 Part 1


Anonymous said...

Is the Q&A another layering attempt at persuasion of legitimacy? To broadcast his acceptance with her family that says to everyone if her family accepts him then how could those suspicious outside their close group be valid

Anonymous said...

WADA hack reveals tennis superstars Williams sisters & gymnast Simone Biles allowed to use banned substances. Legit or performance enhancing?

lynda said...

Hey Jude said...
OT - Resonate Church, Indianapolis has uploaded:

Amanda Blackburn's Family Q & A - What Happens To You When You Die? Week 6 Part 1


September 13, 2016 at 1:03 PM


Hey Jude..if you go to Peter's conclusion analysis blog recently posted on Amanda, I have started to transcribe. I have about 25 minutes of it completed.

Anonymous said...

Thanks Tan

Hey Jude said...

Bravo, Lynda. :). Upsetting listening.

Anonymous said...

It seems non-judgmental listening is always the best way of listening. I've heard the idea that when you judge you're always wrong, and I agree. It's a relief I don't have to judge others, positive or negative. I can like or dislike their actions, and I can speak up about wrongs/injustices, but I don't ever have to judge anyone. Because I am in no position to! Who am I to judge? Not my job!

Anonymous said...

How do other nations leaders view Pres O? And is his approval here as high as reported? How? He's become deplorable compared to the campaigner O.

Anonymous said...

Cub scouts are taught knot tying at 8 years old.

Anonymous said...

The ransom letter was an after thought. Just chance her mom found it?

Anonymous said...

Knot tying and pocket knife. Was the brother a scout?

Anonymous said...

Is d blackburn related to Tennessee state rep marsha blackburn and husband chuck?

trustmeigetit said...

Hoping Peter will analyze Burke Ramsey interviews.

Also saw that Teri Horman (missing Kryon) will be speaking to Dr Phil in the fall.

That too is am much see

Anonymous said...

Dr Phil, Burke Ramsey interview.

"We do not ask compound questions.
We do not interrupt the subject.
We do not introduce new words.
We use the words of the subject.
We reflect back his own vocabulary and ask relevant questions in follow up.
We do not make speeches."

I will add one more.
"We do not feed them the answers"

Take note "Dr" Phil

Nic said...



Obama on how “tough” Hillary Clinton “was”:

Now, look, look! I-I, lo- c-can I just say, I-I am really into electing Hillary Clinton. Like I-I-I-I this is not me going through the motions here. I really, really, really wanna elect Hillary Clinton. And sometimes, sometimes folks you know, they’re kinda surprised about that cause they remember, ‘Man you guys had a tough fight eight years ago”. And it was tough! Cause Hillary’s tough! Every time I thought I had that race won, I-I was like going up the Rocky steps you know, I was like, (raises arms in victory). I was about to celebrate and then I look and she’s, she’s right there! And I got whooped here in Pennsylvania, she whooped me. Now you didn’t make it up to me in November when I won. But, but I had seen what she could accomplish. I had seen how smart and savvy and tough she was. So I asked her, I said, “Join my team". And she wasn’t sure about it at first. But she ultimately knew that what was at stake was bigger than either of us.


So tough he’s campaigning on her behalf. Is this usual for a sitting president to campaign for a candidate?

Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...

Is d blackburn related to Tennessee state Rep Marsha Blackburn & Chuck Blackburn?

Anonymous said...

I'm thinking this (link below) is where Burke Ramsey reveals that the ransom note was his mother's handwriting:

Dr. Phil holds up ransom note asking "Is this your mother's handwriting?"

Burke says "I've never really looked at it closely."

Burke says "It's not something I really want to look at."

Doc Phil, holding up letter: "Does that handwriting look like her handwriting?"

Burke: "Honestly, looking at that, she would always bug me about having good handwriting, and she would, like, make me rewrite stuff to try to get me to have good handwriting and it seems too sloppy [laughs]."


Anonymous said...

SHE WROTE THE RANSOM NOTE. Sorry for yelling, but I am now CONVINCED of that detail of the JonBenet murder: HER MOTHER WROTE THE NOTE. BURKE KNOWS SOME SHIT, and he's not good at hiding it. He seems like a person who wants to tell the truth, like every other human being.

trustmeigetit said...

Really hope Peter does a post on this! This was the most bizarre interview I have ever seen! The non stop smirky smile is just too much!

Shiloh said...

Please do an analysis on Cara Beckerle, mother of missing disabled 19 yr old Aleah Beckerle. Mother was lying near dtr. when she disappeared from their home. Videos and statements are online. She has really frustrated many that are trying to help with her lack of cooperating with searchers and police.
Thank you.

Anonymous said...

"she would, like, make me rewrite stuff to try to get me to have good handwriting and it seems too sloppy"

Wasn't there two practice notes found.

Misha said...

Thanks Shiloh, I hadn't read about this case before.

Link to a video of interview with mother and grandmother. Crying without tears and no straight denial of culpability.


Misha said...

Wow - this interview is a lot longer and a real opportunity to study the mother.


Anonymous said...

Looking at those two clips (Cara Beckerle) she shows no linguistic indicators that she is directly involved in her daughters disappearance.

Anonymous said...


Wade Robson Claims Michael Jackson Ran the 'Most Sophisticated Child Sexual Abuse' Operation in History in New Complaint

The Sheep said...

Agreed. I'm hearing loving statements that we often find absent in statements. I also think her not explaining her suspicions except to LE makes sense.

Misha said...

Anonymous at 5.43 and The Sheep, thanks for the feedback. The grandmother seems genuine to me but the mother doesn't give me the same impression. As well as the lack of tears is the look of fear she gets at certain points not related to thoughts of what her daughter may be going through but more at points where the subject is about discovery.

Anonymous said...

Would really like to see analysis of entire Burke interview on Phil.

Anonymous said...

Pirated youtube video of Dr Phil interview of Burke Ramsey.


Anonymous said...


"A living nightmare": Family speaks out about still-missing Aleah Beckerle


Anonymous said...

“I was pretty confident about where I was born..." — President Barack Obama

Why the qualifier?

Anonymous said...

it was said in jest. Nothing suspicious.

Anonymous said...

They tell me where I was born, but I cannot say first-hand that I know it to be true.

Matt Whan said...

Thank you for this article Peter5. It has been a while since I have visited this site and I was pleased with this. On many occasions I have been able to provoke a response or admission by asking my question, and sitting quietly. I have noticed, given the stress of the interview, that the accused will often speak to fill the "dead air". Which gets the subject to dig a verbal hole for themselves. I have been using this tactic for some time and it works very well.