Friday, January 29, 2016

Knowledge and Wisdom in Analysis

Politicians regularly pass laws that are emotionally satisfying, even though they bring damage.  They "feel good" but do not "do good" for the public.  They often know what audience sophistication awaits them, and tailor the message accordingly.  

If knowledge is the accumulation of facts, wisdom is knowing what to do with them. 

This is relevant, in context, for two departments:

1.  Investigatory 
2.  Hiring 

If one submits a personal statement for employment, the well trained analyst will know.  He or she will "know" certain things about the applicant that, perhaps, the applicant did not intend to disclose. 

The interview must be legally sound lest the company be open to suits, depending upon variations in state laws.  

The "anti establishment" trend has embraced strong "anti business" sentiment, further strengthened by media compliance and judicial appointments.   Want to be a pariah in college?  Mention something about "pulling yourself up by your bootstraps" or say something pro business and you will find the call, "we need some muscle here" by the fascist college professors who's offices were built on monies that came, in deed from businesses and those who exerted talent and initiative.  

The HR professional must be well acquainted with not only state and federal nondiscriminatory laws, but trends, as well.  Judges are now emboldened to circumnavigate laws, trump precedent, 

"My name is Sally Sue Smith.  I am 37 years old, and I love to interact with people.  I am a member of green hair free organization as an active member, and love doing good for others.  I am the mother of two children, and am married.  
I am proficient at customer service skills, and am very punctual and reliable and am a very quick learner of new things..."

The applicant has now identified specific membership in something that may be sensitive and if she is not hired, or if she is not offered an interview, she may seek to file a complaint of sorts, in some manner, against the business specifically alleging, "discrimination" even though she was not asked, "Are you a member of...?" but had offered it, on her own, in the application process.  

By offering the information, itself, it is important.  By offering it so early in the statement, it speaks to priority.  

If you hire someone with an agenda, sooner or later (I wager sooner) the person will find an opportunity to exercise her interest in her agenda.  If she is against people with green hair, you can set your watch on someone with green hair coming into conflict with her.  It was important enough for her to not only tell you this in the application process, but it is an identity she gave chronologically before her children and marriage.  (note that order, too).  

In the interview process, you must skillfully avoid certain questions, yet can and must listen to what is offered to you. 

As the interview progresses, you discover that the applicant has an acute need for relevancy, and this organizational connection is precisely what she finds her self worth in, increasing the odds that she will eventually come in conflict with either:

a.  someone with green hair
b.  someone who disagrees with her stance against people with green hair.  

                       Legally Sound Interviewing

What to do with the information you have gleaned from the statement?

You cannot have an employee preaching to customers or bullying co-workers.  

The applicant included the information specifically in a job application packet, not leaving something personal to be...

If you have had an agenda-hire, you already know how difficult it can be, and if you have had a self-appointed martyr, you know it is even worse:  the employee is seeking 'persecution' or 'prejudice' of some form.  

Even hiding behind "PC Language" trouble makers reveal themselves early and if ignored, morale problems are the least of your concerns.  

Those who come to promote their brand of "social justice" at the workplace seek opportunity to bring themselves to 'front and center' and highlight themselves above others.  

This is not good for business.  

Analytical Interviewing and Report Writing is legally sound, non intrusive and uses Statement Analysis to not only discern truth from deception, but to measure content, including priorities.  

By using this method you may, in Human Resources, weed out those who are likely to seek to defraud your business, either through theft, or through exploitation of more sophisticated methods, but you are also able to use the personality matching to get the right person into the right position, as analysis shows reliability as well.

For training for your company or individual, go to Hyatt Analysis for more information. 

We also hold monthly trainings online, and as one class is filling up, another class is forming.  

There is no substitute for formal training and hard work in lie detection.  


John Mc Gowan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
John Mc Gowan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
John Mc Gowan said...

OT Update:


The sheriff of Lemhi County sat down with reporter Nate Eaton this week to discuss the DeOrr Kunz Jr. missing child case.
Lynn Bowerman says he has no idea where DeOrr is but he believes the child is dead, and his parents, DeOrr Kunz, Sr. and Jessica Mitchell, know what happened.
Bowerman also discussed inconsistencies in the case, polygraph tests, and where the investigation goes from here.

Here’s a transcript of our in-depth conversation:

Nate Eaton, reporter: Let’s go back to Monday. You announced that DeOrr Kunz Sr. and Jessica Mitchell are suspects.

Sheriff Lynn Bowerman, Lemhi County: They were the top persons of interest, but I believe they are suspects. (The decision was reached) after an extensive week of interviewing, re-interviewing and an announcement from the FBI that they were being less than truthful on their polygraphs. Plus there are a lot of irregularities and discrepancies in their interviews (so) I felt it was necessary to come forward and say the parents are being less than truthful.

Eaton: Where have they been inconsistent? Can you go through a few examples?

Bowerman: Our timeline has constantly changed. A lot of small facts – things that should be important to them, important in their memory – have changed. From who made the decision to do what or who cooked that morning or who took a fishing pole down to the creek – just minor changes like that constantly changing.

Eaton: Are Isaac (Reinwand) and Grandpa (Robert Walton) still considered persons of interest?

Bowerman: Their polygraphs were inconclusive, which we figured from the get go was probably going to be the case, so I still can’t rule them out.

Eaton: But the focus of the investigation is steering toward the parents?

Bowerman: I believe so.

Eaton: What has their reaction been since Monday? Are you communicating with them?

Bowerman: I’m not personally. Most of the communication has been from Bonneville County detectives because they’re down in the area where the family and the friends live. They have helped us extensively on the investigation. All along (the parents) have been very cooperative and met with us but when confronted with the irregularities and the being less than truthful, they haven’t changed their story.

Eaton: I would imagine they’ve been questioned separately, together – any variety of ways.

Bowerman: I don’t believe they’ve been questioned together for quite a while. The first time we questioned them they were probably together, I assume they were together, but I think everything after that has been separate.

Eaton: What do you think happened?

Bowerman: I have no clue. Absolutely no clue. There’s a lot of things I could speculate but I really don’t want to go there. I don’t want to have to apologize for making a statement that wasn’t true. I want to get it right.

Eaton: Where do you go from here?

Bowerman: We’ve asked the public to come forward. I had four or five telephone calls this morning from individuals who either know Mom and Dad and the child and have seen them either interact in the past or they’ve overheard something or they think they can provide information. We just ask the public to come forward with any information that might be helpful either on the parents and/or on little DeOrr. Even if they think it’s insignificant, give us a chance to take a look and see if we can solve this.


John Mc Gowan said...


Eaton: Talk about the private investigator (Philip Klein). He says you guys have been the best agency to work with. You and the FBI and Bonneville County – everyone seems to be on the same page. Has he been able to assist much in the investigation or is he doing his own thing?

Bowerman: He’s pretty much doing his own thing. I’ve met with him once just recently otherwise I allowed him to come in cold with no preconceived ideas of what this investigation has been about other than a missing child. He’s working on a timeline that’s even varied from our timeline. We’ve gained some new information. He’s been pretty intensive on his interviews of all people involved, including a lot of the other family members and friends, so we’ll have to wait and see how that all comes together. From what I’m hearing there’s a lot of inconsistencies that he’s found. He doesn’t believe that this isn’t an abduction.

Eaton: Which you’ve said from the beginning?

Bowerman: Yeah, I’ve felt from the beginning. I’ve tried not to be as firm on that just in the outside chance that there was a possibility but I’ve come to the conclusion this is not an abduction.
Eaton: You’re hoping for honesty from the parties involved.
Bowerman: Absolutely. One hundred percent. And the real victim here is little DeOrr. I just want to find him.

Eaton: Do you think he will be found?

Bowerman: I just pray that he will.

Eaton: You’ve been in law enforcement a long time. Have you seen anything like this?

Bowerman: I’ve seen a lot of unusual cases over the years and every one of them is so different. This has been a real challenge.

Eaton: I’m sure you know that not just people in east Idaho but all over the world are following this case.

Bowerman: Absolutely. I get emails from all over the country. A lot of people, of course, they’re curious and there’s been so many rumors and innuendos and so forth. With social media it’s almost impossible to clear all those up without giving away some information that might harm the case, so we’re just being patient and we’re trying to get it right.

Eaton: Do you think an actual crime occurred there at the campsite?

Bowerman: I don’t know.

Eaton: But we do know DeOrr was up there?

Bowerman: I’m fairly confident DeOrr was there. I can’t find anybody that says they’re
100 percent positive he was there, but I feel fairly confident he was there at one time.


John Mc Gowan said...


Eaton: Mr. Klein mentioned he was originally focused on 17 minutes of time. Now he’s focusing on a four-hour time period. Is that in line with what you guys are looking at?

Bowerman: I don’t think that’s outside the realm. I think our timeline might be a little smaller, but I don’t think that’s outside the realm of possibilities.

Eaton: Any idea how many hours you’ve spent working on this?

Bowerman: No clue. Thousands.

Eaton: How has it been for your guys? Mentally, physically, and emotionally?

Bowerman: Overwhelming. We’re smaller, we’re more rural and we know most everybody in the county. We know all of our volunteers, and they’re really dedicated people up here and I’ve seen the toll. It’s been tough.
Stephan Rockefeller, producer: When we spoke with Isaac, he said DeOrr was up there. Has his communication with you guys been questioned?

Bowerman: He’s probably been more consistent on his story from the very beginning. We haven’t seen any of the big discrepancies with him. Of course he hasn’t talked to us a whole lot either, so that’s been a challenge. He asked for an attorney before anybody else, but I think that kind of stems from some of his background. He’s had a lot of interaction with law enforcement over the years, so he’s probably just being cautious. But his actual statements have been pretty consistent, and they haven’t varied a whole lot.

Eaton: How about Grandpa (Walton). Has his story changed?

Bowerman: He struggles with remembering certain things, and I think he gets frustrated quicker. You ask him something and sometimes he’ll say, “Yeah, maybe that’s what happened,” because he doesn’t truly remember. I can’t say his stories have been inconsistent. He just hasn’t been as knowledgable and forthcoming as the parents. The parents have been very forthcoming. I just don’t think it’s been truthful information.

Eaton: And the story has changed.

Bowerman: Absolutely.

Eaton: It’s important to note these just aren’t tests you guys are doing. These are FBI polygraph tests.

Bowerman: Absolutely.

Eaton: Sheriff, if there anything you want the public to know?

Bowerman: I just want them to know that we’re doing everything that we think is feasible to try and find little DeOrr. That’s maybe the most important thing. We’re just going to take it painstakingly slow and try to make sure we do things right and that we don’t make any huge mistakes. We’re not perfect, but we just want to find out what happened and find DeOrr.

Ode said...

Terri Horman Details What Happened to Her After Stepson's Disappearance

Published on Jan 28, 2016
Terri Horman Details What Happened to Her After Stepson's Disappearance
Kyron Horman went missing from his Oregon school in 2010 and Terri Horman said she became the subject of scrutiny.

Reporter paraphrased asks do you know why you failed (two) polygraphs?
what does being deaf in one ear have to due with failing
Paraphrased TH response

TH: partially my hearing, I am deaf in my left ear, I am reading your lips as were speaking also I hadn't slept in days

Video is 9:33 mins

Nic said...

The parents have been very forthcoming. I just don’t think it’s been truthful information.

The interesting thing about this statement is that I've observed when listening to a couple of acquaintances, the faster they talk, and the more convoluted their chatter, then I know that I'm listening to b.s.

Statement Analysis really saddened me for a while. I've got so much still to learn, but what I have learned I wish I had learned much earlier. If anything, it's changed my expectations of people.

Nic said...

"and am married.
I am proficient at customer service skills, and am very punctual and reliable and am a very quick learner of new things..."

Dropped pronouns on married (oh yeah!/sarc), punctuality, reliability and learning (new things). The words "very" and "quick" in relation to learning new things make learning very sensitive. Maybe she doesn't like change and new things, like technology, are challenging.

"I am proficientat customer service skills"

It strikes me that the word, proficient, (at?) is being used incorrectly. Proficiency is like using something. Such as being proficient in the use of grammar, spelling, and punctuation.

Customer service skills are result oriented. So the successful candidate would possess effective communication skills. Or effective customer service skills.

I don't believe this candidate would be very good at providing good customer service

Nic said...

Lastly, I wouldn't invite her to my St. Paddy's Day party.


Anonymous said...

lynda said...

If Deorrs parents can't even keep their stories straight on who carried fishing poles...everything is suspect.

John Mc Gowan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
John Mc Gowan said...

OT Update:

Amanda Knox co-defendant Rudy Guede Fights Back Part 1- Interview with English Subtitles
By truecrimespodcast on January 28, 2016

Scroll down for subsequent parts.

John Mc Gowan said...

OT Update:

Amanda Knox co-defendant Rudy Guede Fights Back Part 1- Interview with English Subtitles
By truecrimespodcast on January 28, 2016

Scroll down for subsequent parts.

Tania Cadogan said...

Off Topic

Making a Murderer's Steven Avery has penned another letter to his supporters from behind bars.

The convicted murderer insists he is innocent and the Netflix series about his trial has led to thousands to call for his release from prison.

His letter, posted on Twitter by his lawyer, said: 'To my supporters: I want every forensic test possible done b/c I am innocent. Steven Avery.'

Attorney Kathleen Zellner added: 'SA (Steven Avery) thrilled about chance of new forensic testing - like innocent men always are.'

The scrawled message follows another letter sent last week in which Avery again maintained his innocence.

'The real killer is still out there. Who is he stalking now? I am really innocent of this case and that is the truth!!! The truth will set me free!!!!!!!,' Avery wrote.

The mail, to WISN reporter Colleen Henry, was his first communication since the release of the Netflix series Making a Murderer.

Avery also wrote a similar letter saying that he is innocent to Ted Perry of Fox News.

Avery, 53, a Wisconsin native, spent 18 years behind bars for a sexual assault he did not commit.

He was released in 2003 after DNA evidence proved his innocence but he was convicted in 2007 of killing photographer Teresa Halbach.

Avery pleaded not guilty and he and his attorneys are fighting for his freedom following the release of the documentary.
The convicted murderer insists he is innocent and called for further forensic tests in his latest letter
The storyline has captivated viewers around the world since it began streaming on Netflix on December 18 last year.

It details the prosecution of Avery after Ms Halbach, a 25-year-old photographer, was murdered in 2005.

Her last known whereabouts were at the Avery family’s auto salvage yard in Manitowoc County, Wisconsin, where she had gone to photograph a minivan for Auto Trader magazine.

Shortly before he was arrested for Ms Halbach’s murder, he had filed a $36million federal lawsuit against the county, its former sheriff and district attorney for the wrongful conviction in his sexual assault case.

The case was settled for $400,000 after Avery was charged with first-degree intentional homicide for the murder of Ms Halbach.

Avery’s defense attorneys Dean Strang and Jerry Buting argued that Manitowoc County officers, who were in the middle of being deposed in the lawsuit, were also involved in the gathering of evidence in the Ms Halbach case and may have planted evidence to frame him.

But Avery’s nephew Brendan Dassey, who was 16 at the time, then confessed to sexually assaulting Ms Halbach and cutting her throat on his uncle’s orders - but later said the confession had been coerced by investigators.

Avery's lawyers think he deserves a new trial because it was revealed that his property was illegally searched and that a juror was pressured into voting guilty.

Avery, 53, and Dassey, now 26, were both convicted in March 2007 and remain in prison.

Avery was sentenced to life in prison without parole but Dassey, who is also serving a life sentence, has a chance for early release in 2048.

The documentary on Avery questioned the handling of his case and the motivation of Manitowoc County law enforcement officials.

It suggests authorities planted evidence against the men, a claim that has been rejected by Robert Hermann, the current sheriff of Manitowoc County.

Both men continue to protest their innocence but despite the Netflix series casting doubt on their convictions, Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker has ruled out any chance of a pardon.

Meanwhile, authorities involved in the case insist the series is biased and omits crucial facts that led to Avery and Dassey being found guilty of Ms Halbach’s murder in 2007.

Read more:

Tania Cadogan said...


Oh Dear, still no strong reliable denial.

'To my supporters: I want every forensic test possible done b/c I am innocent. Steven Avery.


I am really innocent of this case and that is the truth!!!

Plus Avery's lawyers think he deserves a new trial because it was revealed that his property was illegally searched and that a juror was pressured into voting guilty.

Not because he didn't do it then :)

rjb said...

OT -- An interesting interview with Dean Strang, one of Steven Avery's attorneys.

John Mc Gowan said...


Did Susanne Hinte know she didn't have the winning ticket.

Lotto washing machine gran 'almost wishes she hasn't won £33m jackpot' as life has been taken away

25 JAN 2016


Susanne Hinte, 48, staked her claim on Friday after saying she had put what she believes is the winning ticket through the washing machine by mistake.

Lotto gran Susanne Hinte today spoke out about her jackpot nightmare, saying: "I almost wish I haven"t won because it"s taken my life away."

Possible embedded admission #1

Susanne, 48, staked her claim for the £33 Lotto million prize on Friday after Camelot announced the winning ticket was sold in her home city of Worcester.

The mum-of-two - who suffers from a heart condition - did not sleep for three days after discovering the crumpled slip in her jeans pocket.

Friends say German-born Susanne - known to pals as Sanne - is currently "going through hell".

Lottery rules on damaged tickets mean she will have to wait six months to find out if she is a multimillionaire.

Today she told a friend: "I can"t go to work and I"m petrified that the ticket"s not right because then I don"t have a job and I don"t have any money.

Possible embedded admission #2

"I"m still waiting to hear back but it could take 180 days. I haven"t been out for four days.

"I"m waiting for Camelot to get back to me... I haven"t heard anything.

"I"m definitely sure it"s that ticket though, I remember going in and buying it.

"I said to [my son] Brandon don"t get your hopes up in case it"s not the ticket though."

Possible embedded admission #3

Divorcee Susanne, who lives in Warndon, Worcester, has sent her ticket to Camelot for verification.

Her family say the winning numbers, 26, 27, 46, 47, 52 and 58 are visible but the date and barcode are not.

Susanne broke her silence when she spoke to a friend of her son through the letterbox of her home.

Family friend Travis Attwood, 19, revealed her comments, adding: "She seemed calm and okay when I spoke to her.

"I think if they have won it they"ll be straight out of here.



John Mc Gowan said...


Lotto loser Susanne Hinte could face fraud probe as real winner of £33m jackpot comes forward


Lotto loser Susanne Hinte may face a fraud probe after the true owner of the second £33million ticket was today revealed to have come forward to claim the prize.

She is currently awaiting trial on two charges of theft after a handbag was stolen during a “distraction” crime in Birmingham last July.


Lotto washing machine gran Susanne Hinte claims "not once have I said I have the winning ticket"


She said: "Not once have I said I have the winning ticket.

Always note when a number enters a statement.

Her daughter Natasha Douglas, 28, had previously said: "She has never said she “I’ve won the lottery”, she’s said she has the winning numbers and I’ve seen them.


Lotto gran Susanne Hinte 'owes loan shark £6,000 after borrowing money for win party'


A grandmother who falsely claimed the £33 million lotto jackpot belonged to her owes a loan shark £6,000, it has been reported.

Susanne Hinte, who was born in Germany but lives in Worcester, said that the fortune - which had not been legitimately claimed until this week - was headed her way.

According to The Sun, a friend claims she took out a £2,000 loan at 300 per cent interest to pay for a victory celebration.

"She has told mates she is convinced police will question her over allegations she tried to defraud the lottery," the friend told the newspaper.

"The other big problem is with a loan shark she borrowed £2,000 off.

“The interest was 300 per cent but she told him she’d soon be a stinking rich multi-millionaire.”

Tania Cadogan said...

Yep John don't forget she also said "did not sleep for three days"

Also "I"m definitely sure it's that ticket though, I remember going in and buying it.
THIS is close, THAT is distancing.
Note the qualifiersdefinitely and sure which weaken her statement

She also remembers going in and buying the ticket which is true, she did buy that ticket, what she doesn't say is that she bought it AFTER the winning numbers were drawn.

According to The Sun, a friend claims she took out a £2,000 loan at 300 per cent interest to pay for a victory celebration.
She obviously believed her claim would be successful, which contradicts her claim of not saying she had the winning ticket.

She may not have said outright that she had the winning ticket, she however implied it to everyone in her interviews and, it would seem, the loan shark.

She would be well advised to tell LE about said loan shark and then i would suggest, moving.

I had a play in PSP to see what the bar code revealed.
I noticed that where she had damaged it there was sufficient of the barcode above the missing bit at the bottom to see what was missing and what was missing from the top part of the bar code was visible at the bottom.

I changed the image to a negative and then adjusted the contrast to bring out anything faded.
The bar code would have shown when it was bought and where.
The damage was obviously done to conceal anything that could show it to be bought after the winning draw, perhaps she thought it would be seen by the assistant and confirmed a winner and if sent to Camelot they would take her word and pay out.

Clearly she didn't know,understand or think that Camelot have records for every ticket bought and it would be easy to see when that combination of numbers was bought after said draw and before said draw and where.

She also tried to falsely claim a £200 scratch card win by claiming the third £200 number was smudged because it fell in a puddle (do you see a pattern here?)

She obviously didn't realise that all the shop assistant had to do was scan the bar code on the back and it would show if it was a winner or not.
They don't pay out just because they see a winning combination or on the word of the claimant.(Homer Simpson and his non winning lottery card anyone?)

I also noticed the shopkeeper they thought had sold the ticket and whom she went to described her as "nervous and frightened".

I can understand nervous given the amount that was possibly won £33m, but frightened?
Frightened would apply if she knew she was committing the crime of fraud and feared being caught out.
As it stands she may well face charges by Camelot especially given the sum she was trying to steal.
A few hundred would be perhaps a slap on the wrist, £33m is a whole different ball game.

Anonymous said...

Please do SA on the statements by Saeed Abedini and his wife Naghmeh following his recent release from prison.

Unknown said...


This case is going on about 30 min from where I live. It was just announced that this young girl, (13 yo) Nicole Lovell's body has been found about 100 mi away from where she went missing.

She had been missing about a week, and urgently needed her anti-rejection meds as a liver transplant recipient. Her parents awoke to find her gone, and the door to her room barricaded from the inside with a dresser. They initially believed she had snuck out. A few days into the search, a male student at VA Tech, who lived in their community, was arrested as a suspect in her disappearance and held without bond. After the announcement that she had been found, LE held a press conference to announce upgraded charges against him to include first degree murder, and abduction.

There have been no statements from the suspect that I'm aware of, but I'll keep looking.

Such a heartbreaking outcome. The case has moved fast, and LE has been tight lipped about the details of how the suspect was identified, and how they identified the out of state search area.

Tania Cadogan said...

off topic BBM

A concealed motor has been discovered during the examination of a bike used by a Belgian cyclist at the world cyclo-cross championships.

The bike was seized by cycling authorities after Femke Van den Driessche was forced to pull out of the women's under-23 race due to a mechanical problem.

"It's absolutely clear that there was technological fraud. There was a concealed motor. I don't think there are any secrets about that," International Cycling Union (UCI) president Brian Cookson said.

"Technological fraud is unacceptable.

"We want the minority who may consider cheating to know that, increasingly there is no place to hide, and sooner or later they will pay for the damage they’re causing to our sport."

The UCI has scanned bikes at major competitions, including the Tour de France, in recent years amid rumours about cyclists using motors hidden in frames.

However, this is the first time such a device is believed to have been found.

Maarten Vangramberen, a journalist for Belgium's Sporza, said: "After one lap of the world championships, UCI took Femke’s bike in the pit area and tested it with some sort of tablet.

"When the saddle was removed, there were electrical cables in the seat tube. When they wanted to remove the bottom bracket, which is normally not difficult, they could not because the crank was stuck. Inside there was a motor."

Van den Driessche had been among the favourites for the title before she was forced to withdraw.

She told Sporza she bought the bike from a friend and did not know about the hidden motor.

"It's not fun when you are accused of something. But I would never cheat. I really like cycling and I love my sport, but I realise that I now have a very big problem," she said.

Technological fraud carries a minimum six-month suspension and a fine of between 20,000 (£13,700) to 200,000 Swiss francs.

The race at Heusden-Zolder in Belgium was won by Britain's Evie Richards.

John Mc Gowan said...

Yes, Tania

I was reading numerous articles, RE, lottery win, Lol. To many to post here.

The amount of red flags are bigger than Liverpool fans at Anfield singing, "Walk On."

Tania Cadogan said...

John mcgowan said...

Yes, Tania

I was reading numerous articles, RE, lottery win, Lol. To many to post here.

The amount of red flags are bigger than Liverpool fans at Anfield singing, "Walk On."

January 31, 2016 at 1:14 PM

You swine, you made me snort :)

ima.grandma said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
ima.grandma said...


brain teaser ~

Peter's three cats are sitting side by side inside the House of Logic. Their names are Truth, Lie and Wisdom.

Truth always speaks the truth.
Lie always lies.
Wisdom can either lie or tell the truth.

Peter's friend comes to visit the House of Logic. 
Friend asks the cat on the right "Who is sitting next to you?"
"Truth" the cat replies.
Friend then asks the cat in the middle "Who are you?" 
"I am Wisdom" replies the middle cat."
Friend then proceeds by asking the cat on the left "Who sits besides you?"
"Lie" the cat answers.
It then became clear who is who...

How did the friend know each cat's name?

There is a logical answer.