WEBVTT 00:15.940 --> 00:22.810 Part three, the three most effective interrogation methods to gain a confession, interrogation sequence, 00:22.810 --> 00:24.880 number one, timeline distortion. 00:25.330 --> 00:31.390 This sequence combined several psychological principles and produces truly remarkable results. 00:32.170 --> 00:34.540 To explain, we use the following example. 00:34.960 --> 00:41.290 Let's say that your wife calls you up at work one day and informs you that you're 15 year old son took 00:41.290 --> 00:45.250 the family car out for a joyride and was just brought back by the police. 00:45.880 --> 00:48.220 You might be understandably upset. 00:49.160 --> 00:54.590 However, let's take the same set of circumstances except for one thing. 00:55.540 --> 01:03.490 In that conversation, your wife casually mentions that this mischievous deed was done by your now 25 01:03.490 --> 01:05.470 year old son 10 years earlier. 01:05.740 --> 01:08.560 Your reaction is likely to be considerably more mild. 01:08.920 --> 01:09.390 Why? 01:09.910 --> 01:11.410 Because time has passed. 01:12.220 --> 01:13.990 Let's look at the flip side of this example. 01:13.990 --> 01:15.850 You get a better sense of what we want to do here. 01:16.270 --> 01:22.210 If the couple's son borrowed their car without permission 10 years earlier, he would probably feel 01:22.240 --> 01:27.520 that he could mention it with full impunity and might even be amusing at this point. 01:27.730 --> 01:31.510 And he certainly doesn't have to worry about getting in trouble, of being punished. 01:32.740 --> 01:39.040 It's doubtful, though, that he would feel so comfortable telling his parents he had taken the car 01:39.040 --> 01:40.090 the night before. 01:40.750 --> 01:46.750 You see, time is a powerful psychological tool that dramatically shifts our perspective. 01:47.410 --> 01:54.280 And the two factors affecting time are when the event occurred and when you became aware of it. 01:54.430 --> 02:00.520 If either of both of these factors are moved into the past, the event is no longer timely and this 02:00.520 --> 02:03.490 greatly reduces its perceived significance. 02:04.600 --> 02:06.140 And here's where it comes into play. 02:06.670 --> 02:07.780 Let's take an example. 02:07.790 --> 02:13.720 We suspect several employees in your store are stealing money with one of the employees. 02:13.720 --> 02:18.850 You let the conversation casually turn to the subject of stealing and you'd say something such as, 02:18.850 --> 02:20.980 you know, I knew right from the start what was going on. 02:21.700 --> 02:22.720 You had to know. 02:22.720 --> 02:23.170 I knew. 02:23.500 --> 02:26.470 How else do you think you could have gotten away for it for so long? 02:27.520 --> 02:31.030 I hope you don't think I was a complete idiot about this. 02:32.920 --> 02:37.390 That's a great phrase, by the way, because he doesn't want to risk offending you on top of everything 02:37.390 --> 02:37.810 else. 02:38.320 --> 02:40.490 Next, you reassure him that it's OK. 02:41.170 --> 02:47.500 I know that you were just going along with it because you were scared of what the other people would 02:47.500 --> 02:47.830 do. 02:48.160 --> 02:49.690 I know you're not that kind of person. 02:50.680 --> 02:56.590 The CEO and I said, this works now you simply move the conversation past this point. 02:57.610 --> 03:02.830 With something such as I just want to make sure that it's limited to merchandise that is being used 03:02.830 --> 03:07.110 there, returned or refurbished, or we just need to tamper down for the next couple of weeks because 03:07.120 --> 03:09.570 they're going to be doing an inventory check and that's it. 03:09.880 --> 03:15.790 If he doesn't pursue the conversation and question the allegations, then it is most likely that he 03:15.790 --> 03:16.390 is guilty. 03:17.340 --> 03:23.850 Strategy to pass them perfect again, the psychological principles can be applied in a number of different 03:23.850 --> 03:31.320 ways, and the key to this interrogation sequence is to let your subject believe that you already know 03:31.320 --> 03:34.710 the truth and that you've known about it for some time. 03:36.200 --> 03:43.400 Let's take another scenario where parents suspects that her 12 year old son has been smoking cigarettes, 03:43.820 --> 03:48.950 the following approaches are listed in order from worst to best one. 03:49.370 --> 03:50.770 Have you been smoking cigarettes? 03:51.050 --> 03:55.610 I'm going to kill you if I find out that you have this approach is awful. 03:55.640 --> 03:56.300 The worst. 03:56.480 --> 03:59.720 And unfortunately, it's the most common. 03:59.810 --> 04:05.240 Because in her anger, the boy's mother links confessing the truth to a punishment. 04:05.570 --> 04:09.390 And this destroys any incentive that the person has to confess. 04:09.850 --> 04:12.230 Next, you've been smoking, have you? 04:12.440 --> 04:18.890 Now, this approach is a little better because the mother indicates that she is some type of proof or 04:18.890 --> 04:19.520 evidence. 04:19.790 --> 04:23.370 And such an approach will work sometimes, but not always. 04:23.900 --> 04:26.860 Next, she could say, I want to speak to you about your smoking. 04:27.260 --> 04:33.140 Now the child feels the parent already knows that is smoking and the focus of the request is on discussing 04:33.140 --> 04:33.320 it. 04:33.590 --> 04:37.090 The parent may get a response such as, I don't want to talk about this. 04:37.700 --> 04:40.190 However, the truth then is revealed in that statement. 04:40.670 --> 04:44.570 But the best is I know all about the smoking and the sneaking around. 04:44.990 --> 04:46.640 You know, I'm not happy about that. 04:46.970 --> 04:52.830 But I just want you to promise me that you're not going to drink alcohol until you're 21. 04:53.720 --> 04:58.140 This is by far the finest approach because it works on so many levels. 04:58.500 --> 05:04.220 First, it takes a forward assumptive stands, meaning the parent knows all about the smoking. 05:04.490 --> 05:06.800 Second, it uses two truisms. 05:06.920 --> 05:13.910 The phrase is sneaking around and you know that I'm not happy about it sets the tone for honesty because 05:13.910 --> 05:17.180 the child hears two things that he knows to be true. 05:18.090 --> 05:22.320 He was, in fact, sneaking around and his mother, of course, is unhappy about the smoking. 05:23.130 --> 05:27.720 He is therefore willing to accept at face value what follows next. 05:28.650 --> 05:31.210 Finally, the mother gives the son an easy out. 05:31.440 --> 05:34.420 All he has to do is promise not to drink in his home free. 05:35.100 --> 05:42.090 There's no threat, there's no punishment, just honest statements followed by a deal that makes sense 05:42.090 --> 05:43.570 for him to accept now. 05:44.100 --> 05:49.560 So just to review the guidelines, to keep in mind in this procedure are No. 05:49.560 --> 05:55.410 One, assume your suspicion is a fact to state at least two truisms, facts that you both know to be 05:55.410 --> 06:02.850 true, then switch the focus from a threat to request the request should be easy for him to accept, 06:03.060 --> 06:06.930 and it should sound reasonable if you don't get the answer you're looking for. 06:07.140 --> 06:08.670 Continue on to phase two.