Thursday, March 31, 2016

Blackouts Quiz: "Statement Analysis Confession"

           What is a Statement Analysis Confession?

Here is a basic analysis and an example of "Statement Analysis Confession"; that is, when a subject who is deceptive gives linguistic evidence of admission of the falsehood.  It is more common than many might realize, with cold cases often containing "statement analysis confessions" via pronouns.  

Memory blackouts from alcohol are the most serious and the least likely to be recoverable.  Blackouts from drugs or trauma are more readily recoverable. 

Here, however, we have the phrase "I don't remember" in an open statement; words freely chosen by the subject, and not part of a question asked.  It is important to note where, in the statement, this is produced.  The closer to the top, the greater the possibility of contamination; that is, the subject is responding to something a police officer or interviewer said.  However, when it comes 'later' in the statement, the odds of contamination are reduced. 

In this case, it was at the end of her entire statement.  Only a portion is given here.  This allows us to consider the difference between "withholding information" and "suppressing information" within analysis, and how it impacts the interview strategy.  

          What is a "statement analysis confession?"  

"All of a sudden, I felt somebody yank and grab my hair and I swung a punch around trying to whoever it was off.  I fell to the ground when I got back up the other person hit me in the head with something and I don't remember much of anything after that, everything went to a blur."

1.  "All of a sudden" is the language of story telling.  By itself, it does not indicate deception, but should cause us to ask:  

"how long has it been since the assault?"  

With months or years of processing, the 'sting' may not exist and it could move into story telling.  This was hours from the assault. 

2.  "I felt somebody"

"felt" is a perception and the language of assault is much stronger.  An assault is personal and intrusive and the language should reflect this. 

"somebody":  at this point in the story, the subject does not know the gender of the attacker.  I mean this sentence literally.  

This is proof of story telling.  

This is because at the time of the statement the subject knows the gender and is not interested in re-creating a story to include her own 'unknown' shock or surprise.  This is a criminal report of an assault and using "somebody" only works if the subject never saw the assailant.  This is a signal of concealing identity and an affirmation of story telling. 

Story telling, years later, can be true.  It simply means that the subject has long processed the trauma of the brain.  

3.  "yank and grab" is Casey Anthony's "dead squirrels climbed up into my engine" statement.  The squirrels had to climb first before they die.  Here, one must "grab" before one can "yank", or pull violently.  Oops.  This indicates that experiential memory is not in play.  

4.  I swung a punch around 

This is the same thing as above.  She should swing around first, and then punch, but she is not working from experiential memory.  

5.  I swung a punch around trying to whoever it was off

Here, she continues to conceal the identity of the assailant, yet here, she uses deliberate gender neutral language.  Most deceptive persons will use "get him off me" knowing that most assailants are male.  

"Off":  she has not told us that the "whoever" was on top of her.  

6.   "I fell to the ground when"

"I fell to the ground" is a very important sentence.  Since we have already seen that the subject is deceptive about what happened, this is a valuable sentence giving us insight into the subject's personality and just how far she will go with deception.  It tells us that we are very likely to be dealing with a habitual liar; one who has lied her entire life, and is unafraid of fabricating reality.  No matter what the intellectual level is, and the educational level, this person is confident in her own abilities to get away with lying.  She is likely one of which we will find:  this is not her first time in exploitation.  

The motive?

Money.  (this came from other statements)

This is a long term, personality driven liar who will put herself above the needs of society, including her own children.  

"I fell to the ground" uses the pronoun "I", and the past tense "fell", increasing its reliability (hence, the chronic liar status) but it is immediately weakened with the word "when", which introduces the element of time into the statement.  The timing should not be part of the trauma of being forced to the ground.  

Yet, this presents another problem:

"I fell" is not, "I was "yanked to the ground" or "I was knocked to the ground..."

"I fell" puts the responsibility of falling, not upon the assailant, but upon the subject herself. 

You may assume that it was the yanking and grabbing but in Statement Analysis, we do not assume, nor interpret.  The deceptive subject wants us to assume and to interpret.  We don't.  We listen.  

She id  not say "He caused me to fall to the ground by yanking my hair" which would have included even more direct lying.  Even liars struggle to directly lie and add in detail. When they do add detail, they slow down the pace by adding in an over-abundance.  

7.  "when" 

Here the element of time is about getting back up.  How long were you on the ground?  What did the assailant do to you when you were on the ground?

"when I got back up..."  speaks to the period of time in the statement, which is utterly unnecessary.  The assault had to take place in time and this too slows down the pace. 

8.  "the other person" is the Statement Analysis Confession

Where as the sentence, "I fell to the ground" impacts our interview strategy, our most focused tactic will be, later in the interview, to inform her, "I have your confession here" to watch her reaction.  

"person", as you know, continues to conceal not only the identity, but the gender.  This may hint towards her being the assailant, but it is not enough to make a conclusion...that is, until she used the word "other."

The word "other" is her "Statement Analysis Confession" that she is not only deceptive, but she is 'responsible' for the black eye.  

She gave a description of an assailant's actions only.  

In this statement, there is only two people present:  one is the subject; the other is the attacker. 

The word "other" only works when more than one attacker is identified.  It presupposes plurality.  

To use the word "other" in the attack is to align herself as one of the attackers.  

Although we now know that she is not only deceptive, but has identified herself as the 'assailant', we finish this short portion of the statement:

the other person hit me in the head with something and I don't remember much of anything after that, everything went to a blur."

Always listen for "I don't remember" in an open statement.  If you are certain that there is no contamination (here, there was none), where the subject feels necessary to address something that she struggles with, it is a strong signal of "suppressing information."

To "suppress" information is different than concealment.  The difference for us is in emotional effort.  This is a signal not only of deceptive information being withheld, but that the subject actually wants to confess and tells the one trained in both Statement Analysis and Analytical Interviewing:

"She is going to confess."

All that remains to be done is to conduct the interview in this way:

1.  Open Ended Questions. 

"Tell me what happened?" followed by "what happened next?"

2.  As questions based upon her answers. DO NOT introduce new words, but use only hers.  Say little.

3. Ask questions based upon the analysis, in this case, not only motive, but..."when" questions above.  DO NOT yet yield much. 

4.  Ask follow up questions based upon her answers, again, letting her interpret her own words.  

5.  Keep emotionless "dead pan" demeanor, especially with "yank and grab" moments. 

6.  Bring her to the confession and tell her, "I know the identity of the person."

This is where you, the interviewer, will not do some of the speaking and changes from interview to interrogation, yet in this case, you have gone from 'subordinate', allowing the liar to 'control' the interview, to, not so much challenge, but a sudden shift in demeanor:  your confidence will unnerve her. 

She is to be brought to her own words including the "confession" and she is likely to confess rather than lie about her own lie.  

7.  Allow her to excuse her behavior with, "I have to feed the children" or "My boyfriend really is violent and he..."

Yet, keep in mind: 

The analysis suggests that his is not her first time at it.  She has likely done this before and she is willing to allow someone to go to prison and ruin a life, so that a company will cut her a check. 

Update:  The analyst assisting the investigator did research  and learned:  
 the subject did the same thing in the past, also employing poor cosmetological skills which a close up photo was used to confirm the analysis.  The motive then was the same: 

to exploit a business and obtain money her hands did not earn.  


This was a simple statement; easy to analyze, and is offered to not only highlight a few of the principles we follow, but to highlight how people actually 'confess' via statement analysis.  It is exciting and infuses the interviewer with confidence that says "I know what happened and I am going to get the subject to own it!"

If you wish for training in Statement Analysis, we offer a pathway of expertise beginning with:

1.  Statement Analysis Training.  This is not a short, 101 introduction but a course you may take at home. This is a thorough course and quite different from some of the good introductory courses available.  The introductory courses often 'grab our attention' for training, which is fuel for education.  However, basic introductory courses can lead to oversimplification of principles, leading to errors.  

Our investigators and analysts are reporting near, or 100% success rate in determining deception in their cases, including live, unadjudicated cases.  Introductory courses have their place, but the professional who's interest is piqued, must push into disciplined learning.  Without, discredit of our science, and lowered results will take place.  

 Successful completion allows for entry into:

2.  Ongoing monthly training.  This is one day (only!) per month, and you work with professionals where you will grow. 

3.  Advanced Training.  This is also a take home course, consisting of 400 pages and 12 hours of lectures where you learn advanced techniques, including:

*the language of sexual abuse victims
*the language of those sexually abused in childhood
*introduction to Analytical Interviewing
*Profiling by language 
*Anonymous Author Identification
*Vetting for Security

University of Maine CEU credits available for training.  Please note that without formal training, the Advanced Course is not offered. 

See Hyatt Analysis Services  and contact us for training today.  It is traction for your career, as well as strength for your resume and those who commit to long term training will find the move from analyzing statements to audibly analyzing interviews.  

Police, investigators, journalists, therapists, attorneys, human resource professionals and others within communication, including those who wish for justice, become proficient with training. 

Each enrollment's tuition includes 12 months of e-support.  

The Advanced Course is lengthy, and challenging.  Certification is only granted after satisfactory test results and approval of thesis submission.  *It is not offered to those who have not completed "Statement Analysis Training" or have had a suitable formal training from an approved agency.  This limitation is done to protect our science.  As the analyst moves into the realm of profiling, he and she will move into the realm of subjectivity and touch upon psychological profiling to the point where if a solid foundation does not exist, the element of error is likely to be introduced.  

There is no substitute for professional education in analysis.  

Wednesday, March 30, 2016

Analysis Quiz: Blackouts, Recall and Not Remembering in Analysis

Question:   If someone blacks out, can the memory be recovered?

This is a common question and is part of a theme where someone says "I don't remember" in an open statement.

In an open statement, a person should tell us what they remember.  When someone in an open statement, particularly, deep into the statement and free editing process mentions what they do not remember, it can be a signal of suppressing information. 

In a recent assault case, the subject wrote presented with a visible injury to the eye:  

"All of a sudden, I felt somebody yank and grab my hair and I swung a punch around trying to whoever it was off.  I fell to the ground when I got back up the other person hit me in the head with something and I don't remember much of anything after that, everything went to a blur."

We will look at the victim's statement at the conclusion of this article.  

Suppressing information is to conceal information, yet to add more effort.  This is a signal that the person feels tempted to reveal this information, for a variety of reasons, and can be brought to confession.  To suppress information is to not only "will" it concealed, but it is a level that requires more effort, and is often accompanied by emotion. 

Regarding blackouts and memory:

Thus far, all blackouts have been found to be recoverable except alcohol blackouts. 

The alcohol blackouts have to be genuine, so we still analyze, but even heroin seems to have the brain respond better than alcohol.  The stronger the alcohol content, too, seems to have impact.  Those who pass out on beer, for example, have to drink  a great deal of it, which takes time, but high percentage alcohol can be imbibed in a very short time to reach pass out.  This is when rapes occur but the victim doesn't know she was raped, only that she is sore, undressed, or in a place where she could not say how she got there.  

Other blackouts, including injury, have had some degrees of recovery. 

If the victim can sit down, concentrate, turn off other distractions and just try...put pen to paper (more effort used than typing) and just try, sometimes the brain makes the connection and enough words come to put the pieces of the puzzle together.  

Adult victims of childhood sexual abuse often do well with this tactic, but it is especially trying for those who were sexually abused prior to the development of speech and is included in the Advanced Statement Analysis course as part of a chapter on the language of sexual abuse.  It is unique for victims of sexual abuse, even though some elements of post traumatic stress disorder elements are shared with other sufferers.  

To process the trauma remains the key to mitigating suffering.  When someone is sexually assaulted in public, if the context is higher, such as both rape and murder, or it happens in significant numbers, like Cologne, New Year's Eve, 2015, it can be unjustly minimized as to the victim the invasive element can have many years of impact.  

Let's return to the statement.  The victim presented with a black eye and was not interviewed prior to giving the statement.  It is important to know that this was not contaminated. 

I.  The Statement 

This is a portion of the statement where the assault is described, so you are only working from a portion of the statement.  

"All of a sudden, I felt somebody yank and grab my hair and I swung a punch around trying to whoever it was off.  I fell to the ground when I got back up the other person hit me in the head with something and I don't remember much of anything after that, everything went to a blur."

II.  The Analysis 

What can you glean from this subject?  

Post your analysis and the results will be posted in updated entry.  

Tuesday, March 29, 2016

Transcripts: Dr. Michael Welner The Depravity Scale

Forensic Psychiatrist: 'Crazy' Has Nothing to Do With Terrorism

The following is transcripts from clarion  and allows for the reader to not only understand the criminal ideology that is Islam, but actually provide some insight into the criminal and violent outworking of supremacist ideology, itself. 

Anytime one believes to be supreme over others, innately, it must end in violence.  Even in "the religion of peace" the nation that is 100% Islamic still is rife with violence because of the inequalities in nature.  Where one has more than you, for example, and you are his superior, he must have cheated you; hence, the violence.  

Islam teaches that the world is in two parts; those in "peace" of Islam and those in war against Islam, needing to be brought into "peace" or submission; hence the "religion of peace" moniker which sounds like a mockery, is, from their perspective, the way they see the world.  This fits into a very "black and white" world with little gray.  

I've read with interest his work on "the depravity scale."    

From Clarion Project: 

A fascinating interview with renowned forensic psychiatrist Dr. Michael Welner on understanding and countering the mindset of extremists. 

Dr. Michael Welner, a forensic psychiatrist renowned for work both in cutting-edge legal cases and research on criminal evil, explained to the Clarion Project why it is a mistake to describe Islamist extremists as "crazy" and to attribute the conflict to cultural miscommunication, as if their actions are caused by a false impression of the West that can be rectified through talking and passivity.

Dr. Welner also discussed one of the major obstacles we face in fighting Islamic extremism -- lack of freedom of the press. Islamists control major media outlets in the Muslim world that reflexively demonize the  West. They consistely reject any blame for the human rights abuses and societal failures and refuse to facilitate meaningful retrospection.

If Islamist extremism is to be defeated, there must be enough intellectual freedom in the Muslim world for alternatives to be offered, he posits.
Below is a fascinating interview with Dr. Welner conducted by Clarion Project's Ryan Mauro:
Ryan Mauro: How do you approach these issues as a forensic psychiatrist?

Dr. Michael Welner: My conclusions are based on an appreciation of research and scientific method, as well as facts on the ground. My experience includes examination of Islamist terrorists and a familiarity with literature related to them and all of its scientific shortcomings. It also includes examination of mass killers who acted upon ideological motivations, religious zealots of a range of stripes and training in psychotherapy and how to use humor as a therapeutic device.
Forensic psychiatry embeds research understandings in a fact-based context. This is referred to as ecological validity. Without ecological validity, a claim based on forensic psychiatry has no grounding in the real world. For instance, researchers on crime have demonstrated poverty to be an important predictor of crime, but the conflation of this understanding to mean that poverty causes terrorism has long been debunked. This is because terrorism is more than a crime.
The application of forensic psychiatry to terrorism requires appreciation of the terrorist entities, their aims and where they operate. Ecological validity does not allow broad generalization, but reflects specific adaptation.
Mauro: "Crazy" is the term that is often thrown around by Americans to describe Islamist extremists because that's the closest we can come to rationalizing their behavior. Based on your expertise in mental health and psychiatry, is there a significant correlation between mental instability and Islamist terrorism?

Welner: The infrastructure assembled by large-scale Islamist organizations—Hezbollah, Hamas, Al-Qaeda, ISIS, and others, speaks to the very rational actors, thinkers and planners involved. They have succeeded because of highly-functioning, very organized individuals with exceptional people skills and capable management, administration and military strategy.
Crazy has nothing to do with the terrorism we see. Those who believe it does ignore what we have learned of the Guantanamo detainees and what Israelis have learned from their study of suicide bombers. They confuse actions that shock—actions that create a spectacle—with actions that are irrational.
Islamist terrorism is cold-blooded violence. It is proactive and planned, as opposed to a hot-blooded violence that is reactive and impulsive. The attacks are carefully crafted. The leaders are selected based on how their planning resonates with those who finance them. The supporting elements are chosen by how efficiently and reliably they provide logistical support. The perpetrators are selected based on how disciplined, dedicated, ruthless and in-control they are while carrying out destruction.
Mauro: Are there any signs we can see in a person's psychology or behavior as the radicalization process occurs? Average citizens know they should get worried when someone starts talking about murdering innocents and buying weapons, but what happens in the stages before that?

Welner: Those indoctrinated into terrorism within the United States are following a different vector than those overseas.
In Muslim countries and even in Western Europe and parts of Africa, extremely devout followings of Islam are widespread and intertwined with political and sectarian affiliations. In secular countries like the U.S. and Canada, where Muslims are only a small portion of the population and they have little political standing, enlisting in terrorist groups is out of step with the general environment, even for Muslims.
In America, a high proportion of those implicated in Islamist terror plots are either converts or recently became devout. Part of what drives this psychologically is that the newer conscript feels the need to prove his bona fides, just as do newer conscripts in hate groups like white supremacists.
This is part of what makes the U.S. and Western world's prison population so vulnerable to radicalization. Radical Islam connects with those who are already alienated from the host country that incarcerated them. For those ensnared and leave prison as disenfranchised ex-cons, violence is not as taboo as it would be for less-hardened peers.
All of those who are involved in Islamist terrorism are devout or believe they are devout. However, those who gravitate towards a more devout religious observance include many who do not have political aims and are merely following their faith. Others may be sympathetic to co-religionists who act for the cause of advancing the Caliphate (as ISIS is doing), or otherwise attacking the symbols of apostasy or the "apostates" themselves but would never personally act criminally.
Clearly, there are far more sympathetic followers of terrorist organizations' social media than there are those who actually participate in terror. And so the challenge becomes, who among the devout goes the terrorism route?
The process of radicalization is an intimate one. It reflects one's personal relationship with one's spirituality. In some instances, a cleric may be involved, but many self-radicalize because of their own curiosity and find fellow travelers online. Sometimes it is the company one keeps. Travel itineraries reveal exposure to training, rather than visits to family or sightseeing. Weapons training, when a recreational passion, is common to the devout who later reveal to be terrorists.
Mauro: How do you respond to those that argue that the conflict with Islamist extremists is just a misunderstanding between cultures due to a lack of heart-to-heart communication and self-esteem issues among recruits?

Welner: One can only achieve understanding, under ideal conditions of conciliation, between two humans of differing perspective. If one party dehumanizes another as a fundamental threat, then conciliation is not possible because the uncompromising goal—as in the case of ISIS—is that the other party is its enemy and submission or extermination is required.
For ISIS, understanding with others is an existential threat to the purity to which they lay claim. It is ISIS' and, more broadly, radical Islam's dehumanization of non-believers that feeds their cause and entitlement to brutalize. Likewise, this mindset demands that the only understanding we reach is submission, just like all fascisms before it and since.
Spectacle crime, such as terrorism, is a choice made by those with high expectations of themselves to do great but who are painfully aware of their underachievement. The ideology they choose is the bromide of their disappointment; the enemy they choose the projection of their shortcomings; and the terrorism they leap into a transcendence they would never otherwise achieve.
What ISIS' recruitment in the U.S. and elsewhere has achieved is the seduction of idealistic young recruits drawn to utopian religion. The recruits feel good about themselves, in some cases pursue the ISIS dream with their spouses and want to be a part of something greater.
These are a whole different group from the hardened, angry, dead-ended ex-cons who have violent histories and, often, previous drug problems that we've seen implicated in terror plots. The San Bernardino massacre was the birth of ISIS in Americana, reflecting the organizational signature of how far a couple would go for their faith—indeed they would die together -- and leave their baby an orphan.
Mauro: Let's talk about solutions. Is there any information from psychology and psychiatry that can help us understand what will de-radicalize someone? What has to happen for an Islamist extremist to change their mind about the cause they've embraced?

Welner: Because the problem is a religious one, its treatment is religious as well. And, just like cult treatment, terrorist treatment is difficult because the patient does not accept treatment willingly. And how can you "treat" a belief that is shared by one's physical or social media peer group? Psychiatric treatment for cult survivors requires isolation from other influencers. Isolation is impossible when you're dealing with a widespread community of believers, as is the case with radical Islam.
The results of deradicalization programs are still actively debated. High-profile failures demonstrate that the programs can be gamed by the terrorist “patients.” There are some success stories, however, but not enough transparency is available to allow us to become fully informed as to whether terrorists have reprogrammed themselves ideologically, become pacifist or simply matured to other passions.
Deradicalization programs aiming to re-educate the violence-oriented with a more peace-oriented Islam are part of a broader psychosocial strategy that integrates family influences and external life priorities like vocational developments. The programs of Asian countries with large Muslim populations and little Islamist influence, Singapore specifically, are particularly informative.
The intellectual freedom in these countries allow for introspection that is not possible, for example, in the Arab world or other Islamic countries. In those countries, discussion about defining Islam in a way that does not threaten the national interest is reflexively regarded as blasphemy. It is a form of political-correctness of the Muslim world that undermines well-meaning deradicalization programs.
Mauro: There's a common claim that the more we kill Islamist terrorists, the more hate will exist and the surrounding population will become terrorists as well. What's your take on the notion that killing terrorists is counter-productive and there must be a better alternative?

Welner: The claim that the "more we kill, the more they hate us" is vacuous, as if the Islamists were Tibetan monks set upon by Chinese occupiers. We are at war because our enemy has acted to murder us and to eliminate a way of life different from its own. And if the enemy uses a religious ideal to justify killing us, if we do not eliminate that enemy, that ideology will use its very survival to claim God's will to protect it in order to continue to kill us.
No matter how we as a nation pursue the Islamist threat, the United States will be portrayed as a devil deserving of destruction. Therefore, the "more we kill, the more they hate us" premise is irrelevant; we are hated not because we kill, but because we exist.
Were we not to kill, the U.S. would be slandered and propagandized against for any number of grievances, including for being a secular and pluralistic society. Those who control mass opinion in the nations where radical Islam is highly represented use the media to propagandize no matter what we do. Those who concern themselves with making the right impression among our enemies overlook the reality that our enemies control the messages to their populations.
Mauro: We've seen the power of political satire through Bassem Youssef in Egypt and now an Arab version of "SNL" is airing in the Middle East. Can you explain the importance of comedy, satire and being able to laugh at one's own identities (sect, religion, nationality, political party, etc.) in relation to Islamism?

Welner: Comedy is so powerful because humor’s ability to disarm penetrates defensiveness, and thus is one of the most effective ways to cultivate introspection.
The Islamic world is unusually defensive about the inhuman shame of Islamist violence, responding with rage and pride that blames non-Muslims. Undermining such self-deception is extremely difficult. The West makes it worse by accepting ingrained bigotry, be it the whitewashing of widespread rape by Muslim immigrants in Europe or silence in the face of Islamic misogyny or overlooking homicidality towards non-believers.
I am not convinced that there is enough freedom of the press in Muslim countries to allow for satire to confront the entrenched pathologies of radical Islamism. In other words, is the satire that currently exists truly humbling? Or is it simply another medium in which a comedian can make fun of Donald Trump and the Zionists like everyone else? Our own American satirists, sadly, incise in one political direction only and never take on Islamism. Even the rare outspoken humorists like Bill Maher only go so far as to offer criticism and political commentary, but not actual humor.
The U.S., the acknowledged beacon of free speech, touts "The Book of Mormon" for its comedic merit, but allows its creative types to be intimidated from satirizing Islam with equal treatment. Charlie Hebdo was decimated with no rejoinder to protect the capacity to satirize.
Since we do not set an example of protecting and promoting the full potential of comedy, because of our own self-censorship, what can be expected of the Muslim world? Until comedy is truly protected as free speech—without neither violence nor professional ostracism—we will reap the consequences of censoring free speech by failing to give example to peoples we should be inspiring.
Forensic psychiatrist Michael Welner, M.D., is chairman of The Forensic Panel. He has examined terrorists in cases in Guantanamo and elsewhere, perpetrators of mass killing, and religious extremist offenders spanning the criminal and civil case spectrum.

Dr. Welner's landmark Depravity Standard research, standardizing the distinction of criminal evil, is applicable to such contexts as war crimes. It is the first sentencing research to involve survey input of the general public to refine sentencing standards, and you can likewise participate, at
Ryan Mauro is’s national security analyst, a fellow with Clarion Project and an adjunct professor of homeland security. Mauro is frequently interviewed on top-tier television and radio. Read more, contact or arrange a speaking engagement.

Monday, March 28, 2016

"So...Tell Me About Yourself..." In Employment

"Tell me about yourself" is an interesting opening for information. 

People love to talk about themselves.  However, people have a physiological need to communicate, in specifics, something they did, or accomplished. It is the easiest for an interviewer to use to gain information in all settings.  

It is the ultimate talking point in life.  It is near impossible to resist, "What did you do today?" in any form.  Even those who shut down in police interviewing, will eventually, tell someone.  This is behind the patience that some district attorneys practice. 

Humans were created to both communicate and to accomplish, which is why idleness leads to inappropriate and often illegal behavior in mankind.  The body, itself, flourishes in movement while it falters and struggles against itself when immobile.  

"Tell me about yourself" and "I'm listening" allows a person to:

a.  Choose his own words
b.  Begin his answer according to his own priority
c.  Choose which information to include; which information to exclude

Now, take this same principle to Statement Analysis applied in Employment.  

Companies with either HR professionals trained in analysis or those who hire analysts are able to glean a great deal of information from this simple question (in the imperative) for applicants.  

Consider the context, as an analyst, of this question. 

Example:  A rapidly growing computer software company is hiring and places ads in online newspapers and other employment sites and when an application is received, the company recognizes that even old Dept. of Justice statistics say "4 of the 10 applicants..." (40%) who were caught stealing, voiced intention to steal in the interview process.  

In other words, they planned it upon hiring.  

To that math add in a new form of theft:  institutionalized theft via fraudulent claims of victim status and you have an entirely new dimension of larceny and destruction to deal with. 

These are those who intend on stealing from the company with fraudulent complaints of injury, harassment, and a myriad of other 'victim status' complaints that have grown both numerically and in creativity and have become popular and accepted in courts today.  

This question, posed differently by different companies, allows the applicant to tell the company why to hire them, in a way that is:

Without the pressure of an interviewer's presence;
From the comfort of their own home;
Choosing their own words...

Most companies use an encouragement to write at length, including leaving a full blank page or writing, "Use Full Page for your answer", or something similar.  

What would you write about yourself, in a job application to the above growing software company?

They are looking for:

1.  Software sales professionals.  These are professionals who can sell a product they believe in to a public that can benefit from the product. 

2.  Software developers.  These are technological types, who do not need to be very outgoing or social but have a strong background in computer technology and software, including, perhaps, writing code.  

3.  Secretarial type work.  These are those who are organized, entry level, but looking to gain experience often right out of college or tech school.  This is a "foot in the door" position.  

4.  Shipping department.  This is HS diploma only, or college kids with part time hours offered to offset college costs and to help build experience and a resume.  

We now come to:

"The Expected V The Unexpected" as each application is analyzed.  

We know that those who are deceptive are very likely to cause problems for the company.  
We know that each position has different needs, so the 'social butterfly' or "people person" is more important in sales than in tech work.  We know that criteria for one is not for another, and we allow the subject's personality to emerge, naturally, in the analytical profiling. 

Guess what?

Those who have ill intentions towards the company often, not sometimes, but often reveal this in the analysis of the full page answer.  

I have a data base of shocking results that show this very thing and use it effectively.  In fact, Employment Analytical Profiling is a major part of profiling, covered in the Statement Analysis Advanced Course.  

The thief will show himself, the agenda seeker will show himself, just as the honest, hard working and ambitious will show himself.  

What do we need to hear?

This, too, is covered in depth, but we need to hear someone specifically tie themselves to truth (commitment) and in context (the job). 

You might "expect" to read something like this:

"My name is Susan Jones.  I am a recent graduate from the University of Montana, where I majored in English and minored in communications. 
I have worked part time since I was 16 years old, beginning at McDonald's for minimum wage, and am now looking to begin my career in software sales. 

I learned early while working for McDonald's how to move quickly, and how to not get ruffled by the pace at lunch time or dinner time.  I started in food preparation, but eventually was put upon the register where it was I first learned how much I enjoyed interacting with the public. 

In the last several summers, I have worked full time in retail sales at Bluetooth Communications where I was promoted to temporary floor manager and was in charge of handling customer complaints.  During this time, I learned what it was to listen to customers and how to respond with empathy.  I am hard working, conscientious and feel that I would be an asset to your company.  I am already familiar with several of your products, including "Digi-wear" and its color matching code for the professional woman.  Besides using this myself, I love fashion, so much so that I have convinced several of my girlfriends to buy it and they love it.  I believe that I will be able to..." and on she goes. 

You will notice that in talking about herself, she has a single focus: being hired because her background has prepared her for it.  Weak assertions such as "believe" and "feel" are "appropriately weak" in the context of persuasion. 

In job applications, the need to persuade is expected, whereas in criminal statements, its weakness is viewed as sensitive.  Yet even in job applications, with the shift in context, the analyst must be aware of NTP in extreme, including hyperbolic language.  Some will say "I give 110% effort each and every shift..." which is a stretch, in the least.  

The Unexpected. 

The analysis I have done and databased is something that if I had been told by another, I would wonder if it was someone being humorous with me.  

In fact, there may be several types of people who will believe me in what follows:

1.  Long term readers of the blog.  
2.  Human Resource professionals. 

What I am analyzing of recent times is stunning.  Here is an example submitted by an analyst who thought I would have a good laugh over it.  I had to stop myself, several times, to remind myself that this was written as part of a job application to an actual tech company in a part of the country where there is acute competition for tech jobs: 

"I am not really all that comfortable talking about myself!  YOU WANT ME TO TALK ABOUT MYSELF?  Well, if that is what you want, that is what you will get, but I submit this under protest.  :)

I am above all things, creative.  I love people I love animals and I know from having studyed the great philosophers of our time what people think of me and you know what?  I don't care.  I am me. 

You want to know me.  Can anyone really know someone else?  Poetry volumes wrote about me long before I lived beasuse no-one really knows anyone I feel that we as a planet must get past our judgey views superficial existential and look really at what a person is   I share knowledge freely with those who will listen such as customers co workers in school and with my family.  

My degree isn't me.  It isn't.  As vast as the colors of the rainbow so is personhood which is called by the sheep "manhood" which leaves our sisters wondering if they even matter anymore.  Sad, isn't it?
More about me.  Hmmm.  
I live alone and my education has been completed with what should be considered an advanced degree in the technological area. 
I have cats and they remake themselves and even act like me!  People don't believe that but it is true.  They are truth. They do not judge me and I do not judge them.  Poole said that I think.
People judge me but I know they do this for my knowledge that I open myself up to ridicule when I share.  Thus, the price to be paid in humanity's darkest hour..."

It went on and on, revealing not only deception about his degree, but a dark, narcissistic personality of whom anti-social behavior has left him alone, the pariah of those around him, with "family" listed last and distant.  Family may not even last much longer.  

Years ago, I recounted the job interview I did with a "struggling actor" who excused himself, midway through the interview to "have a good cry" because he had been in Hollywood and had just returned to Maine and had "missed my mother."  Upon returning to the interview, he moved close to me and asked if his crying would be held against him. 

The number of applicants with college degrees who believe that "Tell us About Yourself" means self-analysis is striking.  The volume of grammatical errors, abbreviations and smiley faces often cause me to consider the context:  this is a job application of someone who wishes to be considered a professional!  

There are those who signal:  'If you don't give me lots of affirmation, you can expect trouble!' quite readily. This is the new "delicate snowflake"; the recent college grad (or college student) who believes his feelings are more important than the material needs of the company.  They have been coddled and told that they are "special" and "more important than anyone else", who see challenges as threats. They are an embarrassment as a generation, and hard working, ambitious young people hate to be classified with them.  

I don't blame them. 

I once told one couple, who had "stood up for our rights" (they refused to work) when they were terminated that they were going to have a very difficult time surviving in this world if they think that their feelings are more important than everyone else's, including the clients they were to serve, and the company who gave them a paycheck.  

They eventually disclosed the anger of their parents, as they go from job to job, and always have a complaint about "the man."

Although they did not verbalize this, they referenced their friends who were all on "disability" because they had "adult attention deficit disorder", and slept till noon, and played video games all day.  

Given the choice between this endless circle of low paying jobs, I predict that they will go to an attorney who specializes in disability, receive a referral to a 'friendly' psychologist, who will refer them to a friendly psychiatrist, get rx for ADHD, and eventually, they will be approved for disability. 

Once disability is their "paycheck", they now qualify for...

"Case management", that is, a professional who books appointments and often drives them to the therapist, psychologist and monthly 2 minute check in with psychiatrist assistant to keep the rx going. 

They will get food stamps. 

The case manager will then work to get them fuel assistance, a donated car, free internet, donated lap tops, smart phones and government subsidized rental assistance. 

At that time, they were 24 years old and their parents were deeply worried that the two of them (boyfriend-girlfriend) would struggle to survive in this world. 

Wanna venture a guess about the "homework war" when the kids were 7 or 8 years old? Some work really hard at avoiding work which has a deeply negative impact on the health of the body and the health of the soul, in spite of 'growing video game scores' which are indulged in all night.  Think this is just a rare exception?  

Agenda Driven. 

 In the last several years, the few that I flagged, specifically for Agenda, have all either filed suit or threatened to file suit.  The larger number are those that were so clear, the companies did not offer interviews.  This includes those who actually address their agenda very early in the statement.  

This comes as a surprise to analysts at first, including Human Resource professionals, but this is usually do (in the HR world) to only audible interviews where if a transcript existed they would see it.  

The agenda driven personality is one in which, in particular, an agenda exists due to a significant void in the personality.  The void is usually something so significant that the person is drawn to a cause to fill feelings of personal value.  

This is both sad and frightening. 

It is sad to think that any person might consider himself or herself inconsequential in this world, yet it is frightening when we see how far some will go to feel of consequence; as if they are the center of the universe and the material interests of a company are subordinated to their 'god', which in reality, is not the agenda or cause, it is the person, himself. 

This person's "feelings" trump rules of etiquette, politeness, and social mores, which is why they end up often being alone, but also people sadly learn, they trump moral, ethical and legal laws, just as readily. 

This is why I often warn others in saying, "The agenda driven will find an event..."

The agenda-driven, or "narrative driven" is why I covered PC language and how it impacts analysis.  The techniques often include tangents to move away from negative or contradictory, as well as to change the topic in hand. 

The agenda driven will use deception. 

The agenda driven will operate in illogical manner and will take the "self destructive" or "suicidal" stance to the business world:

What the person does is not good for your business. 

Like the applicant for investigator position who said that she was "a person of high principle" in attempting to persuade two interviewers to hire her. 

I asked, "Give me an example of high principle at work" to which she was eager to talk about. 

She worked at Walmart and took down all the hunter magazines from the display and boxed them in storage.  

She is against guns. 

This was in Maine where everyone hunts. 

Did she possess the self awareness to consider that I may have been a hunter?

Did she grasp that she could have been terminated by Walmart for doing so?

Her belief that guns kill people, aside, it was what she was willing to do with this belief that revealed insight into her personality. 

Now, as an investigator, what if the subject of the investigation was someone who held a position contrary to her agenda?

Would you trust her to investigate?

If you hold to her agenda, does this impact your decision making?

What would you, as analyst, or HR professional, make of her lack of self awareness?  

She did not mind being a 'martyr' for her cause:  if she did not get hired because of her stance against guns, it may even further fill her with resolve.  

No matter the agenda, this type person will bring trouble to your business or agency. 

Someone this driven is not going to be tolerant to co workers who do not share her 'passion'  and her personality is not one that suggests good, healthy social interaction.  

She may even mention "coffee" in her statement.