Nathan J Gordon, William L Fleisher

by Effective Interviewing

  to them.”

  Q: Do you think she’s making this up, or do you think something actually happened?

  A: I . . . I don’t know. (scratches eye) She never talked. Something might have happened to her. Could’ve

  been someone in her own family.

  Score: –1. In this case we’d expect the truthful person to say it definitely didn’t happen.

  Q: If I need to speak to you again, would you be willing to speak to me?

  A: I guess so.

  Score: 0. Weak commitment.

  This suspect was assessed –11 and deceptive. She later was found guilty in a court of law.

  CASE STUDY 3: MULTIPLE SUSPECTS

  In the following case study, someone in a supermarket had stacked several sugar bags under a

  sprinkler head in a stockroom and lit them on fire. The perpetrator left a box of wooden matches

  as well as the match used to light the fire at the scene. Four employees were interviewed.

  Employee 1

  Posture/Demeanor

  Seemed open and relaxed.

  Score: þ1

  MITT

  Irrelevant Card (Violin)

  S: Is the girl smiling in the picture?

  I: It’s your picture, you can say anything you want.

  CASE STUDY 3: MULTIPLE SUSPECTS

  153

  S: Okay, it looks like the girl is home. It looks like her dad or mom may have bought her a violin and now

  she’s staring at it, and then . . . it’s something she always wanted, and then . . . she learns how to play it and plays it beautifully. (smiles)

  Irrelevant Gender Specific Card (male in suit)

  S: Okay, it looks like a man walked out of an elevator out into a hallway. Now he’s looking out in the

  hallway to see if that’s the way he needs to walk and that’s the way he takes.

  Relevant Card (sketch of office with curtains on fire)

  S: Looks like a lady just walked into an office and discovered it was on fire. She’ll grab a fire extinguisher and call the fire department.

  Guilt or Remorse Gender Specific Card (male at table with head in hands)

  S: Looks like a boy is . . . had something on his mind, and he’s sitting at the kitchen table worried about

  something and I guess his parents come in and talk to him about it.

  Apprehension Card (person taking a polygraph test)

  S: Okay, it looks like a lady is taking a lie detector test (looks up for approval/smiling). She’s now in the process of the test. Now . . . afterwards it will tell if she’s lying or telling the truth.

  Score: þ1. Saw “fire” in the relevant card; stories were upbeat, made sense, and had

  endings.

  I: What is this interview about?

  S: It’s about the fire that happened in the back (illustrates with head, “the back”).

  Score: þ1. Verbally tells us what it is about as he demonstrates truthful nonverbal

  behavior.

  I: Why were you selected to be interviewed?

  S: Because I was one of the employees working at the time.

  Score: þ1. Includes himself as a suspect.

  I: How do you feel about being interviewed?

  S: (shrugs) Well, I guess as long as I know I didn’t do it, going to tell the truth (shrugs), there’s nothing wrong about it. I was here. I need to tell what I know.

  Score: 0. Nonverbal shrug negates answer.

  I: The type of person that would do something like this is a vengeful person. Have you ever gone out of

  your way to get even with anyone? (Comparison)

  S: . . . No sir. Not that I know of. Not that I would consider going out of my way. (voice very soft)

  I: Did you start the fire?

  S: No sir.

  154

  10. TRADITIONAL SCORING OF THE FAINT INTERVIEW

  Score: þ1 Response latency to the comparison question plus hedge words, such as, “Not

  that I know of” and “Not that I would consider” demonstrates greater emotional change

  than to the quick response of the relevant question.

  I: Tell me whatever you think about this, whatever you heard.

  S: Well, me . . . me and Mr. Bacon and Gerald, Gerald was there at the time, were in the store, and we

  were standing by the office (points) and I was going to ask Mr. Bacon something, but I couldn’t remember

  what I was going to ask him. Gerald . . . Gerald and I were talking and then Mr. Bacon walked by and (snaps

  fingers) I thought about what I was going to ask him. And I walked back there again, and me and Gerald

  were talking and that’s when a customer stopped us and asked us questions about Similac (illustrates) did

  we have any, and that’s when I heard Mr. Bacon say that George said there was a fire in the back, and

  Mr. Bacon went in the back to help him and me and Gerald went into the back to help them put it out.

  Score: þ1. Increase in illustrative behavior and verbally tells us what he knows about the

  crime.

  I: Did you ever think about doing something like this?

  S: No sir.

  Score: þ1. Quick response.

  I: In your entire life, did you ever act out of anger? (Comparison)

  S: . . . No sir, not that I know of . . . not that I’d say was out of my way or anything.

  I: Regarding that fire, did you start it?

  S: No sir.

  Score: þ1. Response latency to the comparison question plus hedge words, such as, “Not

  that I know of” and “Not that I’d say” demonstrates greater emotional change than to the

  quick response of the relevant question.

  I: Did you ever do anything here that you could be fired for?

  S: . . . No sir. Not that I . . . not that I know of. Not that I know they would fire me for.

  Score: þ1. Response latency to the comparison question plus hedge words, such as, “Not

  that I know of” and “Not that I’d say” demonstrates greater emotional change than to the

  quick response of the relevant question.

  I: Who would you suspect?

  S: Well, my gut tells me John cause earlier that day he was chewing matches and there were matches on

  the floor.

  Score: þ1. Narrows investigation.

  I: Wooden matches?

  S: Yes sir.

  I: Did you see him with this box?

  S: No sir, not with the box, but I seen him with wooden matches in his mouth.

  I: Who would you say definitely didn’t start it?

  S: Sandra, because she was in the office the whole time, and I know exactly where she was, and she’s not

  the type of person who would do that.

  CASE STUDY 3: MULTIPLE SUSPECTS

  155

  Score: þ1. Narrows investigation.

  I: What should happen to the person who started the fire when we catch them?

  S: They should have to pay for the damages and then be fired.

  Score: þ1. Strong punishment.

  I: Do you think they should get a second chance?

  S: No Sir . . . . If they done it once, they might do it again.

  Score: þ1. Commits to strong punishment.

  I: Would there be any reason evidence would turn up indicating that you did this?

  S: No sir.

  Score: þ1. Fast denial.

  I: What do you think the investigation will tell us about you and your involvement?

  S: It will either tell you that an employee did it, or a customer did it.

  Score: –1. Broadens investigation.

  I: What will it tell us about whether you did it?

  S: . . . Nothing, cause I didn’t do it. (soft voice)

  Score: –1 Response latency and change in voice.

  I: Did you tell anyone at home about this?

  S: Yes sir. I told my father, my brother
and my girlfriend.

  Score: þ1. Shared information with others.

  I: Why do you think someone would do this?

  S: Maybe cause they didn’t get their way about something and they were going to have it their way

  regardless.

  Score: þ1. His suspect was reprimanded earlier on that day, and his answer projects to

  the suspect.

  I: Do you think it was accidental or deliberate?

  S: I think it was started deliberately.

  Score: þ1. Believes a crime took place.

  I: In your entire life, did you ever tell a deliberate lie to get out of trouble? (Comparison)

  S: Yes sir I have. (blushes)

  I: You have?

  S: To my mom. A couple times, but she caught me every time.

  I: Did you lie to me about whether you started that fire?

  S: No sir.

  156

  10. TRADITIONAL SCORING OF THE FAINT INTERVIEW

  Score: þ1. Comparison question caused more emotional change than relevant question.

  I: We did pick up a fingerprint on this box of matches. Any reason it would be yours?

  S: No sir.

  Score: þ1. Fast denial.

  I: Would you have a problem with us taking your fingerprints?

  S: No sir. (holds out hands)

  Score: þ1. Fast answer and illustrative nonverbal behavior.

  This suspect’s FAINT score was a þ19, and he was correctly eliminated as a suspect in

  the arson.

  Employee 2

  Posture/Demeanor

  Hands folded, settled posture, some twisting of ring on finger.

  Score: 0

  MITT

  Irrelevant Card (Violin)

  S: . . . I’m not good at this.

  I: It’s okay, take your time.

  S: . . . To me it just looks like she’s just thinking about music.

  I: How’s it come out? What happens in the future?

  S: To me she looks like somebody who really wants to play an instrument like that. And she’s just think

  ing real hard about it. And that’s her future. She gets . . . if you really want something and think about it you’ll get it in the end.

  Relevant Card (arson)

  S: (Hand to back of neck) . . . A fire. (soft voice) . . . Looks like it got most of the house . . . most of the office.

  Call the fire department and put it out.

  Guilt or Remorse Card (woman with hand on head)

  S: . . . She looks like she walked in and seen something . . . (nods, “No”) . . . she could’ve either walked in and seen something bad, or walked in and something’s burning in front of her face . . . I don’t know. I’m not good at this (nervous laugh).

  Apprehension Card (polygraph)

  S: Polygraph. I’ve had it before. If something happened or somebody don’t believe you they’ll give you a

  polygraph test and it’ll tell if you’re bad or good.

  CASE STUDY 3: MULTIPLE SUSPECTS

  157

  I: So how’s it come out?

  S: I don’t know.

  I: It’s your story.

  S: . . . If she ain’t got nothing to hide, I’ll say good.

  I: Does she have anything to hide?

  S: No!

  Score: –1. Demonstrated high stress gestures when looking at relevant card, reported fire

  in the guilt and remorse card, and had problems with the ending of the apprehension card.

  I: What is this interview about?

  S: I have no idea. (nervous laugh)

  Score: –1. Fails to tell us what it is about.

  I: No idea at all why you are here?

  S: No. Uh ugh. (laughs)

  I: Did anything happen here yesterday that was unusual, that you were aware of?

  S: (rubs neck) All I know is I was running the front and about 5 minutes before I got off somebody said

  something about a fire in the back. That’s all I know. I don’t know where it was at (nodding “No”), I don’t

  know nothing about it. I have no idea.

  Score: –1. Demonstrates same high-stress nonverbal behavior as when she viewed the

  MITT arson card.

  I: How do you feel about being interviewed?

  S: I ain’t got nothing to hide. If I don’t know anything, I can’t say anything. (opens palms) Nobody’s asked me nothing about it.

  Score: þ1. Verbal statement of innocence and truthful nonverbal behavior.

  I: During the first 20 years of your life, did you ever do anything in anger? (Comparison)

  A: Mmm . . . not really.

  I: Did you start the fire?

  S: No!

  Score: þ1. Comparison question caused more emotional change than relevant question.

  I: Tell me whatever you think about this, whatever you heard. What happened?

  S: All I . . . all I know is somebody said there was a fire in the back. (open palms) I don’t where the fire was. I don’t know what happened. I don’t know what it got. I don’t know where . . . they said in the back

  room, and I never been back there. The farthest I ever been was to the meat rack and that’s it (illustrates) and I had come in this cooler door right here (points) and put some bad merchandise up and that’s it. I’ve been in the grocery area and that’s it. I never been in the back of the store to know anything about it.

  Score: þ1. Increase in illustrative behavior and tells about fire.

  I: Did you ever think about doing something like this?

  S: No . . . I’ve . . . we’ve had our house burn down before and I don’t like that idea. We don’t even have

  nothing like that in my house, because of my kid, matches.

  158

  10. TRADITIONAL SCORING OF THE FAINT INTERVIEW

  Score: 0. Reports earlier in life experience with a fire, which may account for previous

  behavior viewed as negative concerning the MITT sketches.

  I: You say you had your house burn down, tell me about that.

  S: I just don’t like the idea of leaving things like that around because it don’t take but a second to lose

  everything you have.

  I: You say it happened to you?

  S: It was when I was little. My grandparents owned a country kitchen (scratches arm) and before we got

  there the fire department called and said we lost our house and we lost every single thing we had.

  I: In your entire life, did you ever go out of your way to get even with somebody?

  S: . . . (scratches arm) . . . No. Nothing but an old boyfriend when I wouldn’t give them their stuff back.

  I: Regarding that fire, did you start it?

  S: No, I sure didn’t.

  Score: þ1. Comparison question caused more emotional change than relevant question.

  I: Did you ever do anything here that you could be fired for?

  S: . . . (nods, “No”) . . . Not unless you mean having it out with a manager.

  Score þ1: Comparison question caused more emotional change than relevant question.

  I: Who would you suspect?

  S: Well, I was up front checking out customers and there was nobody up front to bag and Dale said call

  somebody and I called . . . Jo . . . John and when he came up front he had a match in his mouth and when he

  walked outside and came back in he didn’t have the match.

  Score: þ1. Narrows investigation.

  I: What kind of match was it?

  S: It was hard and he had it in between his teeth.

  I: Who would you say definitely didn’t start it?

  S: That was here yesterday? . . . I can say it wasn’t Dale cause Dale was up there with me running reg

  isters all day. The only time I wasn’t there was when I was fronting my cookie racks and my soda racks.

  (illustrates)

  Score: þ1. Narrows investigation.

  I: What should happen t
o the person who started the fire when we catch them?

  S: I think they should be fired and I think they should have to pay for what they damaged.

  Score: þ1. Strong punishment.

  I: Do you think they should get a second chance?

  S: No because they didn’t come up front and say it first.

  Score: þ1. Commitment to punishment.

  I: Would there be any reason evidence would turn up indicating that you did this?

  S: (slight nod, “Yes”) . . . No.

  CASE STUDY 3: MULTIPLE SUSPECTS

  159

  Score: –1. Deceptive nonverbal behavior and response latency.

  I: What do you think the investigation will tell us about you and your involvement?

  S: Uh . . . I didn’t do it so I know I shouldn’t . . . (nods, “No”) I don’t . . . I hope you find out who did it, I really do, and I wouldn’t give them a second chance because they didn’t come forward, they lied about it.

  Score: þ1. Denial of act and commitment to punishment.

  I: Did you tell anyone at home about this?

  S: (nods, “No”) The only person that knows about it is my sister that was it.

  Score: þ1. Told her sister.

  I: Why do you think someone would do this?

  S: I don’t know. It don’t make no sense. It don’t make no sense. You know, this is a job for people to

  make money. Like a regular job. I don’t think . . . whoever did it they were careless and it was stupid.

  Score: 0. She cannot comprehend why someone would do it, which would be consistent

  with a truthful person; however, she uses mild language (“careless”) at the end of her

  answer, indicating it could have been an accident.

  I: Do you think it was accidental or deliberate?

  S: . . . Probably an accident . . . but, you know, I have no idea.

  Score: –1. Does not think it was deliberate.

  I: Did you start the fire?

  S: No, I sure didn’t.

  I: During the first 20 years of your life did you ever tell a deliberate lie to get out of trouble?

  (Comparison)

  S: (nods, “No”) . . . No I always . . . if something went wrong I’m gonna tell you I did it cause it ain’t

  gonna come back and haunt me. . . . Not no major one, things like that. I lied to my mom . . . nothing to

  do with my job or anything like that, no.

  Score: þ1. Comparison question causes a greater emotional change than the relevant

  question.