Friday, July 14, 2017

Quiz: Speeding Ticket Result


A subject complained about speeding tickets in the state of Georgia. 

Quiz for analysis:

1.  How many speeding tickets does he have? 

2.  What else do you know about the subject?  

3. Is he telling the truth? 


All questions warrant explanation as Statement Analysis is not guess work.  

For hosting a seminar or training in your home contact Hyatt Analysis Services. 


"This is ridiculous.  I was raised and grew up in LA my whole life and went 19 straight years without a speeding ticket.  I moved to Georgia and you know what?  I got 3 tickets in the first 2 years I lived here.  You tell me it is not a speed trap state?  Get real.  I am not a dangerous driver and this is about revenue and not about safety. "

Analysis Results:

1.  The subject is truthful. 
2.   The subject has 4 or more speeding tickets
3.  The subject's anger is within a single topic.  We cannot conclude anger issues.  

When he was 18, he got a speeding ticket in northern California driving overnight and it impacted his insurance and he had a difficult time with his parents.  The impact stayed with him and while living in an area where people routinely go from clogged traffic to 10+ mph over the limit ("the speed of traffic") and not ticketed, he did not get a speeding ticket for the next 19 years.  

During this time he had no moving violations, accidents, nor parking tickets.  

He graduated from college and had steady employment since age 16.  He eventually married and had 2 daughters.  

In his late 30's, his life changed and he moved to a very rural area.  He wanted a more quiet lifestyle for his family and growing up in LA, he read a lot about "country life" and small town America. 

 In short order, he was routinely pulled over with warnings to slow down and received 3 speeding tickets (all in 30 mph zones) in the first 2 or so years living there.  

A close friend (deputy) told him it was not about safety but revenue and coming from the city, he needed to adjust.  He told him that he did not understand how under-budgeted small law enforcement is and that on a deserted road, he still had to slow down.  

He made the above statement while debating revenue issues, years later,  and how in each time he was ticketed, he was not endangering anyone with his driving. This was not disputed. 

 He claimed that when he first moved there, he was known as an outsider and his expensive "city" car stood out. 

After the first 2 years there, he settled into the culture and stopped getting tickets.  

4 tickets in total.

In the analysis, we would have concluded that he had a minimum of four tickets.  

Why?

One additional and unnecessary word:

"...went 19 straight years without a speeding ticket."

The word straight speaks to a specific point of time and is unnecessary to use, unless...

it is necessary.  

He said he deserved the first ticket in Northern California, as he was going 15 mph above the limit and was foolishly rushing because he was tired.  


He was truthful as his sentence structure shows and the anger is directed appropriately.  

Professional Analysts must learn to limit themselves to the language and not "see" in a statement what is not there.  This discipline is critical and cannot come outside of experience where lots and lots of statements are analyzed.  

The interview affirmed that he was as described by his wife and friend, easy going and soft spoken.  His employment record was exemplary.  

We look for emotionally charged language to "spill"; that is to move to other areas of life, which suggests more than just context, but possible personality traits.  This is always explored.  We seek to gauge emotion versus reality; that is, when high emotion is combined with a lack of logic, it can become a signal of danger, erraticism, and even narcissism.  

Interviewing is a wide open activity. 


Atlanta Braves versus Hometown Las Angeles Dodgers 

Discussing his love of sports, no such response was elicited, even when the Dodgers played the Braves in baseball.  For him, the rivalry is fun but not heated.  

In interviewing, we often move the conversation away from the subject, himself, to allow him the freedom to "spill" if need by, by asking him (especially in employment interviewing) about witnessing experience through others rather than self. 

In this case it went from, "Were the deputies that pulled you over polite?"  (he said 2 were but 1 was smirking) which led to:

"Do you know anyone who has been mistreated by police?"

We look to listen to his reaction to the experiences of others.  

In this, he claimed that over the years those who complained to him about police treatment always seemed to be too defensive, as if they were hiding something, and he did not believe them.  

He did not have anti-police sentiment.  

In Employment Analysis, when we want to learn about theft, for example,  we follow the same line:

"Have you ever worked for a company who had been stolen from?"

and similar questions. 

We are looking for linguistic disposition. 

Some view companies as "faceless corporate write-offs" and will automatically side with employee, emotionally. 

Others will have human empathy towards companies as they are viewed as made up of people.  

Those who see a company made up of people proves to be a substantial lowered risk for filing fraudulent claims.  This is where companies lose money, time and jeopardize their reputation.  Restrictive laws prohibit the asking of many questions (the same restrictions imposed by politicians are not imposed against government agencies).  

Analytical Interviewing is the natural outworking of analysis; knowing the right questions to ask and using the right language and it gets to the truth.  

If this subject had serious anger issues, we would want to know it, just as a company will not want to hire a cocaine addict, even though the applicant cannot be asked,

"Do you like to use cocaine on break?"  

Analytical Interviewing is legally sound and gets the answers employers need.  

This is best taught in seminar form as we employ video techniques to those with basic Statement Analysis training. 

We weed out those who are most likely to bring trouble to a company, including showing the best way to weed out from law enforcement those who should never carry lethal force in authority. 

For training or hosting a seminar, please visit Hyatt Analysis Services.

Our Complete Statement Analysis Course is completed in seminar, or better, at your home. 

Both come with 12 months of e support.  

  

18 comments:

Amyl Nitrite said...

Ugh!!! I royally stink at Statement Analysis. I must provide you with tons of "what not to do" examples. Please don't tell the subject I called him a whiny retired old man, who couldn't survive on his pension in California and had to move to Georgia. I love these exercises because I hope to one day nail it. Thank you, but please...mum's the word!

Anonymous said...

Is it safe to ssume he interviewed for DEA agent being a former sports pro?

Hey Jude said...

Well, I'm glad I deleted mine. I had assumed 'this is ridiculous' was a response to a parking ticket - it wasn't. I also read the 'grew up his whole life' in LA to have encompassed the nineteen years during which he didn't get a ticket, when it did not - it referred to nineteen years as an adult. When I thought about it more with 'guessing not alllowed' - those were guesses, or as I prefer, possibilities, which works out the same - and not even good guesses. I still am seeing in the language what is not there.

Anonymous said...

Nitrate...you definitely have a good attitude! My analysis which I chose to keep to myself (thank god) makes yours look great!

habundia said...

I just posted mine, and when I got back to home page is saw this result.
How had concluded that this ticket wasn't because of over speeding (dangerously) but because of revenue? Did the officer who gave the ticket said it? Or the person (forgot who it was who said it) that it was because of revenue and had to accept it.

Thanks for this exercise! There is a lot to learn from!

Peter Hyatt said...

The tickets were, for example, 42 in a 30 in a deserted road, for example. I think they were less than 15 over, and all in non highway situations. It was not excessive speed which endangered others. another interesting point was the local admission that the revenue is vital to their survival.

Dangerous driving, in context was such as speeding through a school zone, or in traffic. A dangerous driver eventually is going to have moving violations along with speed.

Those who deleted their analysis missed learning opportunities for review, question and answer, etc.

Those who flagged 3 for deception....ugh. I have long regretted posting that research. It is the most misused and misunderstood principle.

The profiling is the most difficult part and cannot be done successfully outside of acute experience and exposure to many statements. Otherwise, a single moment of passion can become viewed in such an extreme manner that false portrayals are the norm.

At any given time, for example, we could talk about ourselves and be seen as a narcissist, or express anger and be seen as a very angry person, and so on.

Team analysis helps blunt this while increasing exposure to more and more statements.

As the great Anglo philosopher Ringo Starr once said, "Time takes time."


Peter

Unknown said...

thanks Peter. I find going into these there is an expectation that there is something going on (i.e. deception) and that there is generally a bias in us. what I am learning is to question all my bias' and let the word prove them.

I would appreciate your analysis on this without the extra knowledge and did you come to the same conclusion as the facts before knowing them.

Anonymous said...

Whiney old men aren't typical speeders. They are most like the columist that thinks he is in an intersection that used be traveling on a road known by the locals by another name and often hit the gas when the brake should be used therefore driving through their own garages and into their home.

Go to Branson, Mo then to Waco Tx and decide where you'd feel safest-around elderly drivers giving everyone the bird or drunken bikers shooting at each other.

habundia said...

I do appreciate your analysis with the extra knowledge......there is so much to learn from!

Peter Hyatt said...

Unknown, I appreciate your honesty.

In training, after a few months of expert deception detection, I throw in a truthful statement. It really brings them to a halt and is critical in development.

Peter

habundia said...

I think it's good to put in truthful statements too....how else could you learn to recognize truth from false if you only study false statements? To be able to detect deception you must detect truth too I would think?

Isn't Statement Analysis meant to learn from you mistakes? Not to hide them and think you are a failure? Only for the pro it would be failure.....it could ruin people's lives or put people in danger. But in practice I think it's a great lesson to see ow you were wrong at something......it learns you to do better next time, or it learns to see how rules are to be applied........lucky for me I love to learn :-)

Hey Jude said...

Peter, I am still able to know from your analysis that mine was wrong - still, next time I will not delete.

tania cadogan said...

Off topic.
A one-year-old boy died Saturday after he was trapped for two hours inside a BMW that was parked outside his family's home in Florida.

Police in Delray Beach identified the boy on Sunday as Khayden Saint Saveur.

Khayden died one month shy of his second birthday, according to the Sun-Sentinel.

'It's tragic,' said the boy's uncle, Carly Saint Saveur.

'He was such an active kid. I don't know why this happened.'

Police arrived at the scene in the Rainberry Woods section of Delray Beach, a community that lies 50 miles north of Miami, at approximately 3:20pm on Saturday.

A police spokesperson said that when officers arrived, they noticed Khayden was unconscious inside the car.

Because the front doors were unlocked, officers were able to open the door and pull him out of the vehicle.

They immediately began to administer CPR until Delray Beach Fire Rescue arrived.

Khayden was rushed to Bethesda Memorial Hospital, where he was pronounced dead a short time later.

Khayden was playing with other family members and may have been in the car for up to two hours when his family realized he was missing, according to police

Carly Saint Saveur told the Sun-Sentinel that the BMW belongs to his brother, Action Saint Saveur, who is the boy's father.

'[He] is not feeling well at all,' Carly Saint Saveur said of his brother. 'I'm scared for him.'

Police said that one adult was home at the time Khayden is believed to have wandered outside to the driveway and opened the car door on his own.

Investigators said they are still examining evidence and have yet to reach a definitive conclusion.

The temperature in Delray Beach on Saturday reached a daytime high of 90 degrees.

Police said that the inside of a car parked outside in those conditions could climb to 150 degrees within a few minutes.

Hours after the boy's death, friends and family members visited the home. Several cars were seen lining the street as groups of people stood outside.

Neighbors of the family were still trying to make sense of the loss.

'He was always a jumpy little boy,' Anderson Exantus, 19, said.

'He had lots of energy. And his parents treated him really well.'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4702158/Boy-1-dies-trapped-inside-hot-BMW-Florida.html


Is it me or is something off here?
Why were the police there?
Was he reported as missing?
Did the family (adult) search the house, garden and car before calling police?
If so how come he didn't spot Khayden in the car when the police on arrival saw him lying unconscious in it straight away?
The suspicious part of me is wondering if there were signs of injury to him?
How come he didn't try and open the unlocked door to get out?
Was he conscious when he entered the car?
What was going on in the house in the hours prior to him be noticed as missing?

Randi said...

Off Topic:

Peter, could you analyze this from John Ramsey?

"Speaking about the old claims against his son, John Ramsey said: 'The accusation that Burke is some violent 90-pound, 9-year-old-child … is laughable. I’m sorry — I can’t think of a better word. It’s absurd."

Peter Hyatt said...

Randi, it is too short and too many years away, but I still consider "I'm sorry" within it.

John lied about his role in JBR's death. He has been living this lie for many years.


Tania,

thoughts on Baby Charlie?

Peter

Lisa Mooren said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
habundia said...

Tania I am glad to read that I am not the only one who when reading an article about a child ending up death in car immediately is thinking about the circumstances the child was in to start with. Two hours of no supervising for a two year old.......that's not okay and would be in category neglect, failure in providing safety,
It is stated the boy went not the car on his own (I have a two year old and knows how to enter en exit our car on his own and can climb all over the car if he is let his way), the doors were unlocked when they opened the car. So was he maybe been told to sit in the car?

http://wjno.iheart.com/content/2017-07-19-fundraising-page-created-for-khaydens-funeral/?cmd=managed_social
The grandfather and Aunt were babysitting while father was working, the grandfather had fallen to sleep and the aunt left the home, leaving the 1 year old and two other children behind the TV.
They left the house and played in the car and couldn't get out.
But if the front doors were open why wouldn't he have climbed out again? He did climb in on his own...this to me seems weird.....that he went in on his own but didn't seem to have tried to get out either, if he was on the backseat while front doors were unlocked.

elf said...

a 1 year old can't open a car door by himself. No way. Not even possinle.