Statement AnalysisOnline TrainingTruth ToolsOrder FormServicesForumAbout UsContact Us
 
 

Home

Professional Forensic Statement Analysis

Course Syllabus

Sample Course

Advanced Statement Analysis Course

Clinical Statement Analysis Training

Expert Level Continuing Education Training

Testimonials

Registration Order Form

Introduction to Statement Analysis: Sample Course


Introduction to Forensic Statement Analysis Profiling

Before we begin, it might be important for us to look at the meanings of what, Forensic Statement Analysis Profiling means.

Forensic - Relating to the use of science or technology in an investigation and establishment of facts or evidence by relating/ comparing : as in a forensic laboratory.

Statement - The act of stating or declaring

Analysis - The separation of an intellectual or material whole into its constituent parts for individual study.

Profile - A formal summary of data, representing distinctive features or characteristics: a psychological profile of subject

Simply put, we will be comparing the words used in a subject's declaration/statement to other words used in the same statement, by separating them into individual parts for study, looking for any information or deception with-in those words. In the end we will be able to provide a formal summary of data relating to distinctive features or characteristic of TheirWords.

Statement Analysis, S.C.A.N. (Scientific Content Analysis), Linguistic Polygraph or Linguistic Profiling, this technique has become known by many different names over the years. We originally learned this technique from Mr. Avinoam Sapir of LSI (The Laboratory of Scientific Interrogation) over the years we have studied the technique as well as 1000's of statements. The technique is a cross between a Linguistic Polygraph and Criminal or Crime Scene Profiling in that it can be used to detect deception, but more importantly it can be used to give the investigator insight or information about the case, the suspect and perhaps the reason for the crime. This information can be used during any subsequent interviews/interrogations.

Mr. Avinoam Sapir, a former polygraph examiner, developed the original technique. His background is with the Israeli Police Department in Jerusalem ; he holds a Bachelors Degree in both Psychology and Criminology, and a Masters Degree in Criminology. He developed the S.C.A.N. technique by conducting extensive research into verbal communication, looking into the linguistic behavior used by people during everyday communication.

Our technique involves looking closely at a subject's words in order to analyze/profile them to see what the subject is really saying. There are certain words used that, subconsciously have different meanings. or send off linguistic signals that will tell you what is truly happening in the subject's statement. Some of these words come automatic to the writer/speaker and when it comes time in their editing process to relate a piece of information to us, they have no choice but to use these words.

Because of this, some statements are extremely easy to read and analyze, while others are almost a puzzle. However, with our training, your practice and a little thought, nearly any statement can be analyzed. If you should ever have problems with a statement, as our student you are guaranteed lifetime technical and unlimited access to our online discussion group.

There are several rules to this technique. This sample course will give you a few of the basic rules with examples

The 1st Basic Rule:

Statements should be written in:

First Person Singular, Past Tense.

Why First Person Singular?

We expect a statement to be written in First Person Singular. Because, It's hard to lie using the pronoun "I".

There are four ways to avoid using the "I":

  1. First person plural (We/Us/Our)
  2. Third Person (He/She/They)
  3. Passive Voice (It was done)
  4. Omitting the "I" (Woke up, took shower etc.)

Basically, if the subject doesn't include, himself, or herself in the statement, we can't do it for them. Statements without the pronoun "I" should be considered as lacking commitment.

Why Past Tense?

All reported incidents, are going to be of something that has, "allegedly" already taken place. Therefore, it is only natural for statements to be given in past tense. When a subject runs away from Past Tense, they are running away from committing to their statement and as a result it should lead us to believe, they may not be telling us what really happened.

There are two ways to avoid using past tense .

. Present Tense ( "I can see him coming toward me and he's saying give me you money" )
. Future Tense ( " that would be when he said, give me your money" )

Any deviation from "First Person Singular", and "Past Tense" in a statement shows a lack of commitment and should be taken into consideration when analyzing a statement.

" Commitment ", and " Lack of Commitment "

One of the strongest links a subject has to his or her statement is their commitment. If the subject doesn't commit to their statement then there can be no total belief.

As a Rule: A Lack of Commitment = Lack of Belief

So, how do we get the perfect statement?

We use, "Open Questions".

The best statements to analyze are statements that come from open questions. That is not meant to say, that only statements coming from open questions are eligible for this technique. It's just that when analyzing a statement we are looking for two things.

1st We're looking for Information
2nd We're looking for Deception


By asking the subject an, "Open Question", we'll get more information from their answer.

Examples of open questions :

"We're investigating the report you filed. Please tell us everything that happened?"

"We are investigating the report you filed on MM/DD/YY."

"It is important that you tell us everything that happened on that date?" or "To better investigate your claim, we'll need you to tell us everything that happened?"

Note : For the last question I would suggest heading the form "Claim Form" otherwise the word, "Claim" in the question could be interpreted as offensive as in you don't believe their claim.

Example :

For a police investigator:

ACME Police Department
Criminal Investigations Division


Claim Form

Name: ______________________
Date: _______________________

To better investigate your claim, we'll need you to tell us everything that happened?

(Leave the rest of the form blank. Use unlined paper)

For a hotel investigator:

ACME Inc.
Investigation Division


Claim Form

Name: ______________________
Date: _______________________

To better investigate your claim, we'll need you to tell us everything that happened?

(Leave the rest of the form blank. Use unlined paper)


By using an open question, you leave the answer, up to the subject.

By not labeling the incident, you are forcing the subject, to label it for you.

The form should be the first thing given to anyone wishing to make a claim or report.

If possible it should be given to the subject by someone other than the investigator.

The claim/report form should come before any questioning.

Avoid allowing the subject to explain the incident before they have completed the form. Even if the subject insist on talking about incident, they should be instructed to complete the form, as investigators will contact them as soon as possible after it has been completed and submitted to security.

Why it's hard to lie in an open statement .

While trying to lie a subject has two things going on in his, or her mind. They have, what they know happened, and what they have to say. happened.

This inside information causes a conflict.

As taught by LSI, if I want to conceal a piece of information, we'll call it - ( X ) - I cannot conceal only ( X ). I also have to conceal information ( A ), ( B ), ( C ), etc. that are parts of ( X ). If I do not conceal ( A ), ( B ), ( C ) etc., then the reader / listener will conclude, by logic, that ( X ) exist and from other bits of information usually, provided in ( A ), ( B ), ( C ), etc. Then the interviewer would be able to conclude the substance of ( X ). Therefore, a subject has to also conceal all parts of ( A ), ( B ), ( C ), for example ( A-1 ), ( B-1 ), ( C-1 ), etc. that are connected to ( A ), ( B ), ( C ). Now, the subject is restricted in his or her speech. So, they are not free to talk about everything, and as you can see. Lying "isn't" easy.

This is a very important rule in the detection of deception. Because, the harder a subject tries to hide something from the analyst, the easier it for us to find.

Let's take a look at a Sample Statement. to see some of ways that Deception and Information, can be found in a Statement.

The following is a report of an abduction. Without this technique, this case may have gone unsolved.

The subject wrote :

Approximately 6:15 - 6:20 I was walking from DOC. Like I have always done in the past. There wasn't many cars traveling. I don't know where they came from. Someone put a tow-bag over my head and put me in the car. It all happened so fast. I didn't see who they were, what they looked like or what kind of vehicle they were in. They had my hands, I guess so I wouldn't take the mask off. I wasn't sure what was going to happen so I was very cooperative. They asked me if I was Phillis Diller's sister. I told them no. The last thing I remember is them lifting the mask up to my nose and pinching it so that I would open my mouth. They made me drink a substance that tasted chalky or powdery. I couldn't have been out long. I remember waking up behind Queens Brook Market be-hind the car wash. Who ever it was they were careful. They probably thought they had the wrong person and let me go.

Looking at it, we may or may not be suspicious of it's validity. But, with Statement Analysis , we can clearly see the deception, and or hidden information to better prepare ourselves for a follow-up interview with the subject.

We'll begin by looking at the suspects mentioned in this statement.

Approximately 6:15- 6:20 I was walking from DOC. Like I have always done in the past. There wasn't many cars traveling. I don't know where they came from. Someone put a tow-bag over my head and put me in the car. It all happened so fast. I didn't see who they were, what they looked like or what kind of vehicle they were in. They had my hands, I guess so I wouldn't take the mask off. I wasn't sure what was going to happen so I was very cooperative. They asked me if I was Phillis Diller's sister. I told them no. The last thing I remember is them lifting the mask up to my nose and pinching it so that I would open my mouth. They made me drink a substance that tasted chalky or powdery. I couldn't have been out long. I remember waking up behind Queens Brook Market be-hind the car wash. Who ever it was they were careful. They probably thought they had the wrong person and let me go.

Notice , the writer carefully hides the sexual identity, of the suspects. Never does she say, "He" or "She" this is important, and telling. We'll cover this more during our conclusion.

Next we'll look at " the vehicle " used by the suspects.

Approximately 6:15- 6:20 I was walking from DOC. Like I have always done in the past. There wasn't many cars traveling. I don't know where they came from. Someone put a tow-bag over my head and put me in THE CAR . It all happened so fast. I didn't see who they were, what they looked like or what kind of vehicle they were in. They had my hands, I guess so I wouldn't take the mask off. I wasn't sure what was going to happen so I was very cooperative. They asked me if I was Phillis Diller's sister. I told them no. The last thing I remember is them lifting the mask up to my nose and pinching it so that I would open my mouth. They made me drink a substance that tasted chalky or powdery. I couldn't have been out long. I remember waking up behind Queens Brook Market be-hind the car wash. Who ever it was they were careful. They probably thought they had the wrong person and let me go.

Notice : The writer chose to use the words, THE CAR as apposed to A CAR . This is telling as A CAR is how we would introduce, A CAR that is unfamiliar to us. However, by say, THE CAR we are introducing A CAR that is, known to us. Indicating that the writer of this statement had prior knowledge of THE CAR

Now, we'll look at people mentioned in the statement

Approximately 6:15- 6:20 I was walking from DOC. Like I have always done in the past. There wasn't many cars traveling. I don't know where they came from. Someone put a tow-bag over my head and put me in the car . It all happened so fast. I didn't see who they were, what they looked like or what kind of vehicle they were in. They had my hands, I guess so I wouldn't take the mask off. I wasn't sure what was going to happen so I was very cooperative. They asked me if I was PHILLIS DILLER'S sister. I told them no. The last thing I remember is them lifting the mask up to my nose and pinching it so that I would open my mouth. They made me drink a substance that tasted chalky or powdery. I couldn't have been out long. I remember waking up behind Queens Brook Market be-hind the car wash. Who ever it was they were careful. They probably thought they had the wrong person and let me go.

The only name to come up in this statement is, Phillis Diller . This is important because, Phillis Diller is now a part of this statement.

Anytime a writer includes someone in their statement that person, usually plays some role in the incident. We'll cover this more in our conclusion.

Now we'll take a look at Communication in the statement

Approximately 6:15- 6:20 I was walking from DOC. Like I have always done in the past. There wasn't many cars traveling. I don't know where they came from. Someone put a tow-bag over my head and put me in the car . It all happened so fast. I didn't see who they were, what they looked like or what kind of vehicle they were in. They had my hands, I guess so I wouldn't take the mask off. I wasn't sure what was going to happen so I was very cooperative. They asked me if I was Phillis Diller's sister. I TOLD them no. The last thing I remember is them lifting the mask up to my nose and pinching it so that I would open my mouth. They made me drink a substance that tasted chalky or powdery. I couldn't have been out long. I remember waking up behind Queens Brook Market be-hind the car wash. Who ever it was they were careful. They probably thought they had the wrong person and let me go.

While not the most important observation in this statement it is important to note, that the word, " TOLD " is used in one of several ways, it can be used as a demand ( Strong Tone Communication ) , it can also be used to tell a lie, as in, " I told a lie " like, " I told them no, but. ". Think about it, if, " said " is a softer form of communication and, " Told " a stronger form of communication. Do you think, the "victim/abductee" would be using the stronger, " Told " as apposed to using the softer, " said " as in, " I said " or " I answered no ". This will also be covered more, in the conclusion.

Now we'll look for anything that might seem odd, unimportant or that might help confirm an earlier point.

Approximately 6:15- 6:20 I was walking from DOC. Like I have always done in the past. There wasn't many cars traveling. I don't know where they came from. Someone put a tow-bag over my head and put me in the car . It all happened so fast. I didn't see who they were, what they looked like or what kind of vehicle they were in. They had my hands, I guess so I wouldn't take the mask off. I wasn't sure what was going to happen so I was very cooperative. They asked me if I was Phillis Diller's sister. I told them no. The last thing I remember is them lifting the mask up to my nose and pinching it so that I would open my mouth. They made me drink a substance that tasted chalky or powdery. I couldn't have been out long. I remember waking up behind Queens Brook Market be-hind the car wash. Who ever it was they were careful. They probably THOUGHT they had the wrong person and let me go.

Let's look at this line, " They probably thought they had the wrong person and let me go ." "Probably" is non committal. " Thought " usually indicates a wrong guess. So, if they only thought they had the wrong person. the chances are they had the right person. this would confirm that when she used the word " told " earlier in her statement it was as in "I told them No, But. Phillis really is my sister"

Conclusion : As we first noted the subject is running away from telling us the sexual identity of the suspects. It's obvious, that the suspects could have only been male, or female. Therefore using an imaginary calculator we type in two. Assuming this statement is false. let's say she was out with her boyfriend. if that was the case she would have had no problem revealing the sex of her capturers, and no reason to hide the sexual identity. In other words she could have easily said, "He asked if I was Phillis Diller's sister" So, subtract, the males from our list and it is obvious that she was out with females.

Add this observation to the fact that we believe she was in a known car, and we now have something more to work with as far as where she may have really been during her absence.

As for her mentioning them asking her about her sister, Phillis Diller, This is two fold. first, Phillis is her sister and Phillis, is who she answers to. The fact is Phillis is the reason she needed to make a report in the first place. She was supposed to be home at a certain time, when she wasn't, she needed an excuse. So, she told Phillis she was abducted. and to make Phillis feel somewhat responsible for her abduction, she made it sound like the abductors took her to get even wiith Phillis. This way feeling somewhat responsible, Phillis might go easy on her.

When confronted the writer admitted she was out with her girlfriends and made up the abduction for her sister/guardian (Phillis Diller) to cover her absence

You have reached the end of our Sample Course; I hope you learned something. If you would like to take our online course the price is $175.00. This price includes:

  • All Necessary Training
  • The Complete Online TheirWords Professional Forensic Statement Analysis Course
  • A FREE Subscription to our Online Discussion Board
  • A FREE Licensed Copy of our F.A.S.T. Macro (a $135 value) This macro will help you quickly mark-up your statements for analysis.
  • Lifetime Statement Analysis Support with your current investigations
  • Certificate of Completion of TheirWords Statement Analysis Training

Now that you have been exposed to the rudiments of Statement Analysis, you no doubt can appreciate how powerful and useful the technique will be in your ongoing interviews and investigations. If you want to get started right away with the full Professional Statement Analysis Training just click the following link. You will find several registration options.

Please register me for the TheirWords Training

 


If you have any further questions about our training and consulting services please contact:


Call: (510) 527-5675
Fax: (510) 528-0184






By Mail:

TheirWords Deception Analysis
1164 Euclid Ave
Berkeley, CA 94708