Selects: How Police Interrogation Works

But it is pretty mind blowing, So buckle up. I hope you enjoy and as much as anything, I hope it really opens your eyes. Welcome to Stuff you should know, A production of I Heart Radio. Hey, and welcome to the podcast. I'm Josh Clark. There's Charles W. Chuck Bryant, uh and Noel. I guess producer nol is over there, which makes this stuff you should know. Jerry's on the beach. Good for her. Yeah, and I'm Jelly. Yeah. It'd be nice to be on the beach right now. Sure would

podcasting on the beach. Yeah, there's a beach person for sure. In uh is she okay? She was flip pops like in the dead of winter. Yeah, that's true. The beach person which got nice feet up. Can I say that I acquired for saying that. I don't think so. If you said it, like alone in a room or something she didn't feel like she could leave, you'd probably get fired for that. But yeah, saying it on the podcast to everybody's probably in the clear. Okay, we'll find out.

I mean, she edits these so she'll say thanks Juckers. You so Chuck. Have you ever been interrogated by the police. No, that's good. No, it's a good way to be. I was shaking down on the street once, but they didn't ask us any questions. Stopping frisk Yeah, in New York. In Athens, m just walk into the car after being out, threw us all against the wall. Fristus been left. I'm sure it was a real cop. Yeah, there were cops. Man. I was like, what's going on? Huh? I don't even know.

I still don't know what happened. Well, I guess they were just stopping and frisking. A little known fact, Athens, George is the real home of stopping frisk Well, five minutes after it happened, we didn't care. You know, these are college days. Yeah. Now though you must be burning with a sense of injustice over the whole thing. Well, I ask you if you've ever been interrogated by the police, because we're about to talk about police interrogation, so it

seems appropriate. And before we get started, I have some side reading that I think my interest some people. Um there is a New Yorker article called the Interview. Um, there's one called Joe Arity was the Happiest Man on Death Row. It's in Westward. Uh, there's something called Brooklyn's Baddest which was in g Q. And then lastly, looking

left or right doesn't indicate your lying in Smithsonian. So all those articles are awesome, and they all have something to do with this police interrogation, which is it turns out becoming an increasingly controversial subject. Yeah, and I think this probably brings our police suite to a close or close to it, don't you think? I think so every time I know, and I didn't even know this existed, and then I saw it and it turned out to

be one of the more interesting ones, I think. Yeah, and it's kind of falls into this um law enforcement category, into the subcategory of are largely debunked armchair psychological or armchair psychology techniques like polygraph Yeah, we did that, Fingerprints, we did that, truth serum we did that. Yeah. Like, there's all these episodes that we've done out there about just law enforcement techniques. We're doing them. We were like, oh wow, this is this should not be the way

it is. And apparently police interrogations similar. Yeah, it's a bit of a shakedown. So let's talk about this. Like in in the United States, there is um a long and storied history of rather intense interrogation and I think you know this, this comes before the United States too. We did a medieval torture episode as well. There are plenty of interrogations going on. We did the Spanish Inquisition

that was pre United States. Yeah, I would I would say that falls into the banner though, of our police and crime interrogation. Yeah right, So, um, the United States, though, has carried on the torch of basically beating suspects up to get confessions. This is where the term the third degree comes from. Actually, like when somebody's like, hey, why

do you give me the third degree? They may or may not know it, but they're they're speaking about interrogation techniques that cats use to use yeah, those third degree techniques. A lot of were involved deprivation, like or you know the one where they shine the bright light in your face. That's old school. Yeah, that's an old movie trope. But you know, no access to food and water, Um, long periods of isolation. We might beat up a little bit,

we might threaten you. That's the third degree, right, And then uh, starting in about the thirties, the public started to say, I don't know if this is such a good idea because I might end up in a police interrogation one day, and I don't want to get beat up.

And then the I guess the straw that started to break the camel's back came in ninety seven in the case Brown versus Mississippi, where Brown said, Hey, your thug cops tied me up to a tree and with me more than once, not just with me more than once. Strung me up in a tree to whip me more than once has happened repeatedly, and I don't think that the confession they got should stand. The Supreme Court said, we agree with you. Yeah, it was He and his

two buddies were accused of murdering Uh. They were tenant farmers, murdering their ball. Basically. Of course, they were black guys and the boss was a white guy, so they were pretty determined. Then well we'll see over and over. A lot of these cases of coerced false confessions are mainly because someone really wants to tab somebody as the criminal. Well, yeah, for a lot of different reasons. There can be a

sense of injustice. There can be a genuine conviction that this person is guilty um, and then there can be the you know, the case clearance um percentage that a cop needs to keep up. But there's a lot of reasons why a cop might say you need to confess. Yeah.

I think a lot of them too that I've seen documentaries on at least or because of the public, Like, hey man, we really need to finger somebody for this, because people are scared, and who better than this person who might not be too smart or might but might be kind of poor and can't afford and doesn't you know, representation doesn't know what's going on. So let's run them up, run them up, ring them up, sure, run them up a flagpole, right and see if it sticks to the wall. Yeah.

But despite the fact that it is not easy to get someone to confess. Uh, they estimate between fort of suspects do confess and that's the one thing you don't want to do, and up still do it. Yeah, so we should say supposedly up to um eight percent of suspects in in the United States waive their right to silence and counsel. Yeah that's just wait, that's just agreeing

to be interrogated, right, not necessarily confessing. Yeah. So, but you can get around the whole idea of a false confession or of being coerced into confessing or whatever, just by remaining silent, not being like part of that demand your lawyer. I mean, we're gonna give you some tips, um, not how to get away with a crime, but some tips on if you if you are rounded up and put in a room, there are some things you can do. Right. This is a public service announcement with guitars. By the

nineteen fifties, they confessions that were involuntary. Um, they consider it involuntary, not just if you were beaten and threatened, but if you were all the deprivation third degree techniques were no longer allowed, like even if you couldn't use the bathroom, or if you've been promised something in return for confessing, or we'll go easy on you, buddy, or if you'd even just been threatened, that counts as coercion too, And so in about the fifties, UM the United States said, Hey,

this kindler, kinder, gentler interrogation technique thing is is starting to work out. Let's put a bow on the whole thing and say that for a confession to be admissible, the the confess or has to sign it yeah and say yeah, I didn't I didn't do anything under coercion. This is my own, full, free confession and here's my signature, and UM, which helped but certainly didn't stop false confessions. Right.

So the thing is is, UM law enforcement replaced the physical coercion with what amounts to plainly is psychological manipulation. And it's predicated on the idea that you when you are saying you didn't do something and you're guilty, you are going to become stressed out. And then the that stress is derived from anxiety over knowing you're guilty and having to lie. Because when you're being interrogated and you're denying that you're guilty, the cops don't just say oh, okay,

well thanks, for coming by. If they think you're guilty, they or they want to think you're guilty, they're going to keep pressing you. Like interrogations aren't necessarily brief things, right, So the more they press you, the more stressed you should get. And the more stressed you get under this idea of um interrogation technique, the obvious, the more obvious it is that you're guilty, which means the more they press,

So this feedback loop starts, right Yeah. I mean they're basically relying on a few basic human things inherent to humans, tendencies inherent to humans. Um. One is you're gonna probably open up more to someone who is like you, uh, to their If you start talking, it's gonna be hard to stop. And three, if you're if you're telling the truth, it's gonna be harder to lie. Right, So they kind of prey on that with some age old techniques like

the good cop, bad cop. Right you you uh, if you feel like you're being persecuted, but then you're also being rescued by somebody else, you're going to identify with the rescuer, trust them. That's a classic move. And here's the thing like that, a lot of this stuff, like the Good Cop part um is predicated on this complete and utter deception that that cop understands where you're coming from and sympathizes with you. That cop does not sympathize

with few. That cop may understand where you come from, but he or she probably despises that, and they are not your friend. But the whole one of the whole points of um of interrogation is for the cop to pretend like they're they're right there with you, they understand where you're coming from, they feel for you. This is just you're jammed up and I want to help you

get out of it. Oh yeah, you see. I mean if if all this sounds super familiar from every TV show or movie you've ever seen, is because they it's been written so much that it's almost like they don't need to do their own Like writers don't even need to do their own research into how this is differ because it's just how it is in the movies. When it is in the movies is how it is in real life. When I was reading this, I was like, oh, yeah,

I've seen that before. I've seen that technique before, Like it made me Actually researching this article made me appreciate that there are some TV cop show writers out there who like really do their homework, Like The Wire, like every it was a little more nuance. It's like law and Order. Um, what is it? Uh? I don't watch those the one Vincent didn't offer you. I don't know. Oh, I can't remember what it's called criminal minds something like that.

It's not it, um, like it's a little more overt, right, but it's all the all the factors are there. Yeah. Another one of the tried and true techniques is maximization. That's when they try to scare you. Um, if you've ever heard like, oh you're you're pretty Josh, they're gonna love you in prisoner. I hear that almost every day. That is a classic maximization, or just you know, they're going to throw the book at you for what you've done.

You're unless you you know, start playing along, you're gonna get the max exactly. Um. They may also go the exact opposite route, which is minimization, which is to create the idea that society will will commiserate with you because anybody in your position would have done the same thing. You know, like that that little lady was ask him for her person to be taken. You know, in this

day and age, in this economy, that kind of thing. Um, polygraph was used for a while, and they still use that, but most times, um, if you listen to our show on polygraphs, they're not admissible in court. So a man named John Reid, he was a polygraph analyst, said, you know what, there's a lot of things that happen during a polygraph exam that we can use without the machine,

just to root out the truth or lies. Yeah. Basically, John Reid said, Hey, I've noticed through all of my experience all of these things that a person who is guilty or who confesses at least goes through. And here are some ways to like really make this more efficient, to make them react more strongly, to get them to confess faster, more forcefully. And he came up with the order called the Read Technique nine steps of the Read Technique,

trademark of Johnny Reidon Associates. Yeah, really, because Johnny Reidon Associates is like this business that's still very much around. Yeah. I don't know if I need to say that, but it is their technique. Yeah, And they train the CIA, the FBI, the local law enforcement there, like the in the United States, the red technique is the gold standard for police interrogation. The problem is it is also being increasingly proven to be based on basically armchair psychology and

not science. It's say, it's going through the same thing right now that like a lot of the forensic sciences are going through. There's like based on intuition that doesn't really hold up to scrutiny. And I should say the red technique has not been across the board debunked, and it makes sense in a lot of ways, but there are studies out there that have said, like this doesn't

really this doesn't really hold up. Yeah, he defends it. Uh, he says, it's very sound technique, but false confession comes from improper use in bad police work. Yeah, and it's not it's not necessarily like the read people are treated like they're you know, they're out to get anybody and everybody. The Red technique is criticized because the whole foundation that it's built on is the presumption of guilt, and it has been shown to prove or produce false um confessions.

That's right, all right, If you sit down in a in a room to get interrogated by the cops. One thing that they're probably going to start doing is lying to you and saying we have evidence that they may not have. We have witnesses that put you at the scene that don't exist. Basically, with a few exceptions, cops can lie and say whatever they want in there. And

that is going to make someone nervous. Even though you were you know, surgical gloves when you broke into that house, if they say your fingers are all over the place, you're gonna start second guessing yourself and get nervous. Yeah. And even if like you weren't in that house ever, and you know that you weren't in that house, you're gonna start to wonder if maybe you suffer from blackouts and do horrible things like this cop is saying, Wow, you're blacked out. Um, And yeah, the courts of upheld

the cops right to deceive. Uh. And I've read about a study that found that of six and thirty detectives in the U. S. And Canada that were pulled say they use false evidence ploys where they're saying you have surprised it is not a hundred yeah, you would guess, I mean maybe the other eight percent We're just like they didn't even look at what they were saying, you know, but yeah, they you can and they do say we have your fingerprints, we have a witness, we have d

n A. They can completely lie about what they have and that they have it on you to get you to confess. It doesn't matter. You can't say, well that cops said he had evidence doesn't matter. And the whole legal basis for this idea for the cops to be letting the cops deceive is this uh longstanding notion that no innocent person would ever sign a confession even if they were lied to about physical evidence of their guilt being at the scene of the crime, because there they

know they're not guilty. The problem is that long standing idea is coming under more and more scrutiny is being found to be not the case. Like people, it's been shown people will when lied to in situations like that, they will infest the things that they did not do. I know it seems crazy for people like you and me, um, because I know I would never do that, but you know, I'm not mentally challenged or I'm not poor, and I haven't you know, there's a lot of reasons why someone

might falsely confess. Yeah, and I think though also it's not just necessarily like going how you are going into it. Like, Yes, the a lot of the like mentally ill people UM make up a decent amount of UM false confessions. Same with UM, mentally handicapped, cognitively impaired people, UM, people of low socioeconomic status. There are a lot of a lot of factors that set you up to be more likely to have a false or give a false confession. Knowing

your rights. But if you took if we took you and ran you through a long enough UM interrogation with people who knew what they were doing, they who knows what you would sign, I'd be all right, we'll see because I am stand this all. I know my rights. I have a very strong mind. Probably say I want a lawyer. Well yeah, I just ended all. And then I'd be like, m, I don't know any lawyers. Do you know a lawyer? I have an entertainment attorney. Does

that count? Um, they know lawyers? Yeah, exactly. This is the whole network. So UM, once they bring you in the room, the room itself uh. And this is all from Read's manual. He wrote a manual nineteen sixty two with a Northwestern law professor named fred Inboo called Criminal Interrogation and Confessions. I imagine every writer in Hollywood has

a copy of that on their shelf. Um. But the room that you see on TV, that's what there they suggest, you know, nothing on the walls, a very plain desk, a very uncomfortable chair on one side, two chairs on the other for the detectives. UM, that one way mirror that's gonna serve a purpose of letting people spy on you and just to make you nervous even if there's no one on the other side, and put you out of reach from this one. I didn't really uh, I

had never really noticed. But out of reachs from just light switches and maybe the the a c uh, what do you call those thermostatic thermostatic just to make you feel powerless. It's all a mind game to make you

feel helpless. So far seems pretty intuitive, pretty logical, Like if you can't flip the lights on and off, it's not something I would think that I would want to do right then, but maybe knowing seeing that it was that far away, yeah, woid just give me this reinforced the idea that, Like, I couldn't even if I wanted to, because it's all the way over there. That's probably small detective in between me and that, like exactly, but it makes sense. But I point that out because that's that's

the read technique. Stuff like that, keep the light switches away from the criminal because it'll make him feel helpless, right does It sounds a little hinky, but it it makes sense in a way. That is the read technique encapsulating. So let's continue, Chuck, So that was that's just the room. Yeah, yeah, that they suggest there there if you follow the re technique to a t, and this is one of the

saving graces of it. Um, you're supposed to do what's an initial interview, And if you're the detective and you go into in an initial interview of an interrogation, you are the re technique tasks you with going in without a presumption of guilt. Yet that's the point of the initial interview, is you're supposed to be sizing your guy up and determining for yourself as a seasoned investigator, whether

you think initially they're guilty or innocent. I'm sure that happens some Yeah, there's another study that found that it's often skipped as well. Um, and that's they just start like hammering right away. Well, yeah, you're throwing out the the the potential for this, um, this person to be treated as possibly innocent. You're not sizing up. You're going in assuming they're guilty. So but if you if you do go through that initial interview, the other point of

it is that you're supposed to be creating a bay line. Yeah, which I think is that showed up in the polygraph one too, Yeah, which isn't surprising because John Reid was a polygraph expert for a while too. Yeah, and you've been gratiated yourself, you know, in the first few minutes by this point, like, uh, if if you're if you're in Philadelphia and your suspect has on like a Phillies cap, you might talk about the game last night, right exactly. And that that throws back to um, the suspect being

more likely. Can you trust someone that shares their same views that they feel they can identify with, So the detective will do whatever they can to make it seem like, oh, you're a Catholic, I'm a Catholic too, that kind of thing, you know. Yeah, And so once you've got a little bit of rapport going on, is when you're gonna set

your baseline. And I thought this is pretty interesting. You don't, and I'm gonna start looking for this on cop shows to see if they don't overtly talk about it, if they're just how good they are with their you know, uh, with their acting, because if they're looking at the eyes, um, then they're going to be accurate, because that's one of

the way is supposedly you can create a baseline. Um, you're gonna ask some some questions that require memory recall, and you're gonna ask other questions that require more creativity, and you're gonna look at where their eyes go. Supposedly, if your eyes moved to the right, that is just recall, because you're I guess looking in the direction of your memory center of your brain. If it's more creative, you

might look to the left. And then then you're gonna use these later on to see if your suspect is creatively making up a lie, they might look to the left, or if they're just truthfully recalling something, they might look to the right. Is that bunk? Yes, all right, it's very dangerous too, because they that is incredibly widespread. It's a popular misconception. If you ask anybody if you move your eyes a certain way, does it indicate your lying?

Most people are gonna say yes, Yeah, it totally does. I can't remember if it's right or left, but if you look a certain way, it means you're lying. So that's a longstanding thing that's based actually on a self help philosophy from the seventies, has nothing to do with science. And actually Richard Wiseman, who we Um incorrectly said, did some research that proved that ghosts exist in our ghost episode. Yeah,

that guy, he's done someones to debunk this. He did a couple of studies and in one of the studies he found um. He he used footage of people who were holding press conferences searching for lost relatives. But the person pleaing for their relatives return was later convicted of like killing or kidnapping their their relatives, so they were obviously lying. They were committing a huge lie in front of the public. And he found that they were just as likely to look to the left or the right.

There was no correlation whatsoever. Yeah, I'm sure there are facial cues of pantomimes if you're Christopher Walkin. But um, it all depends on the person to write, like, you could be really good at lying or really good at throwing people off with facial cues. Yeah, or the idea that you your eyes move in a certain direction at all because you're coming up with a lie or because you're remembering something might not It doesn't mean anything necessarily. Yeah.

We also did one of micro expressions. This is a culmination of a lot of shows. I'm realized. Yeah, it really is so um that was another one. You you've got the baseline set. You're watching the eyes even though you really shouldn't be. Um, But for the most part, you're you're seeing what your suspect appears like when they're

stressed or I'm sorry, when they're relaxed. And and the reason you're creating this baseline of what they act like when they relaxed is because if you ask them questions and they answer them and appear relaxed, then supposedly they're telling the truth. Again, this is predicated on some faulty ideas because here's the problem. Anxiety is not necessarily linked to lying. Like, yes, you may appear anxious if you're lying, But that doesn't mean that if you're anxious, you're lying, right,

Do you know what I'm saying? Yeah, I would do that. I would do the chuck chuck technique would be the fast thing, like I would set him up. I'll calm and be like, Hey, did you watch a game last night? Yeah? How cool? Why did you kill it? Old lady? Yeah? You like the Phillies. Yeah, it was a pretty good game. How do you think they're gonna go far? Yeah? Did you kill your wife? And boom? That was pretty good? You almost said yes, yeah, really and you didn't kill

your wife? No? I mean, geez, that was thrilling. The chuck technique. I I like the Colombo. What's that? Oh? Well, you're just like that's that's great. I'm glad you like the Phillies. I just want to thank you for coming by. That's it was good to meet you. Write if we if we need anything, can we call you? And they're like, yeah, they're so relieved that they get to lead, and then you, oh, I'm sorry, but one more thing. Why did you kill your wife? That Colombo did? Yeah, he was a little

better at it than I was. He would say, there's there's just there's one of the things just not making sense to me. If you think of your wife, why were you found standing over with the knife? Yeah, so that's how Colombo would catch him off guard, like really get them to let their guard down. Yeah. I like that. So you said, he I know what Colombo was. I was about to say he went on and killed his wife. But that was Robert Blake. Yeah, that was Barretta. What

was his technique? I don't know. I never watched Barretta check your gun with the matre d and then isn't that what he did? Know? What did you do? I think he left his gun with the matre d soup, that's what he said he did, Like, you know, I'm here table for two, here's my coat and here's my gun. Yeah, well you hang onto that for me, will you be my alibi? Um? I think we're at the read technique now, right,

we are. So the the other stuff was from the book that's based on the read technique criminal interrogation and confessions. But now we are at the actual read technique, the nine point technique that is designed to maximize um, just come, which leads to more frequent confessions. Yeah, and it's actually it's illegal and a lot of European countries for children, um, which which it should be, because that's another risk factor going in. They can produce false confessions as age of course,

and we'll get to some of those later. Those are kind of uh maddening when you read about like a fourteen year old it's interrogated without their parents for like a full day, but it happens. So step number one and the re technique is the confrontation. Uh. And this is after the initial interview you have. You're going to present the facts of the case. You're gonna tell them about the evidence, um, what they're faced with, the all the evidence against them, even if you're making some of

it up. You might want to invade their personal space at this time if you're Matthew McConaughey, uh. And then you start looking for things like fidgety, uh, suspect they look in their lips, are they like mustle with their hair? Um. And then if you're a skater, you might say, all right, I've got this guy just where I want him. That guy ran his fingers through his hair. He's guilty, exactly.

And that's kind of part of the part of The issue that a lot of critics of the re technique bring up um is that basically, if you stripped non verbal stuff out, then you've got some sound stuff there. Right. The biggest problem is when you're trying to read nonverbal cues because there it's not rooted in science, rooted in armchair psychology and pop science totally. So the idea that

somebody's fidgeting meanings they're guilty and they're lying. Not necessarily they could be fidgeting because any human being would be really uncomfortable when placed in that situation and interrogated by cops who are experts at it. Right. Uh So, step number two is theme development, and you're gonna be a little more soothing here with a softer voice. And this is when you come up with some some theories and

a story maybe of why they committed this crime. Like you know, you just couldn't go on any longer now when your best friend at sex with your wife. You just couldn't live with that, could you. And if the suspect latches onto that in some verbal or nonverbal ways

and they'll continue they don't, then they'll just create another theme. Yeah, and the the detective will basically just kind of while they're creating the story for the for the suspect to latch onto there also actively listening to the suspect to see if the suspect will latch onto it in any way, shape or form, and if they don't, they try another one. If they do, then they start to kind of beef that one up and at least alternatives, which actually comes later,

but in the meantime. One of the main techniques of the read technique is stopping denials. But I didn't do it, Josh, listen, I'm telling you I was. But imagine my finger on Chuck's lips right now. That's why you would never do that. Now you stop denials, does it creates a sense of hopelessness, like the like, don't you feel hopeless with my fingers on your lips? So hopeless you have no idea? Uh? It makes you feel hopeless that you don't even have

the opportunity to to reason with this cop. You can't defend yourself, not at all, so you have a sense of hopelessness. Plus, the other upside if you're an interrogator is that you're keeping the person from talking, meaning they also can't ask for counsel. Then I don't see why people don't just do that the first thing, over and over say I need a lawyer, I need a lawyer, I need a lawyer. I read this article in I think this stranger aren't the oddest Seattle. I don't know.

It wasn't a great article. It was kind of um, it was just kind of misleading, like the the author really wanted you to to sympathize with the guy who was guilty and didn't really revealed that he really was pretty guilty towards the end. But it had this this really great exploit nation for why people don't ask for

a lawyer in this article. Yes, and I've seen it before, but this article really got the point across that this guy was, like I mean, he'd done some stuff before, like I think like he um he was he dabbled in drugs and like ran an illegal like poker game and stuff like that like mouthfeasance. Yeah, and he so enough so that he was like he knew he was technically guilty in the eyes of the law, but not

for this thing that they wanted him on. Um, so he was he had that guilt to begin with, and then these cops saying like, you're gonna really look guilty if you if you ask for a lawyer. That's one. And then the other aspect was if you lawyer up, we can't help you. One. If you talk to us, that's the only way we can help you get out of this jam. We want to help get jam like we we know we might we would have done the same thing you did. Yeah, but the cops never want

to get you out of a jam. No, that's not what they're trying to do. And so what they were saying was like if you clam up this, like, who knows what's going to happen to you. They were doing all sorts of really effective psychological manipulation. And the guy they were talking to was a lawyer's son. Yeah, and this guy who like forty years old, a lawyer's son, and so he'd known his whole life to ask for a lawyer. And even this guy didn't immediately ask for

a lawyer because these cops got him. You know, I probably wouldn't either. Actually, if I was if I was arrested today after work and obviously completely innocent of anything, would that be mind blowing if that happened and I was completely innocent. I would I would at first, my first instinct would probably be like, I don't need a lawyer and I didn't do anything, Yeah, like why why occurred that expense? Well, I think that's another aspect of

the initial um, initial consultation. That an initial discussion where it's like, oh, it's all friendly, we're talking about the Phillies. Why would you need a lawyer for that? All right, I retract my statement. I get it now, but you should stick to your original statement no matter what. Like, you have a right to counsel and there's no reason you should not invoke it. Your your punishment is not going to be worse for asking for a lawyer. Yeah, you should open up. You sound like one of those

legal commercials called Josh Clark. That reminds me we should do and we should mention the A C l U episode that was a pretty good in too. Yeah, man, this thing is just so many tangential podcasts. So the stopping denials, that's a big part of the read technique. And then um, there's something that's similar that John Reid noticed,

but it is a little nuance. There's a difference, uh, and that's objections to to to read denials were different than objections, and objections were something to be treated differently as a result. Yeah, an objection. The example they gave here was like, I would never rape somebody because my sister was raped and that it destroyed our family, So of course I wouldn't do something like that, right. So to a cop, that's not a denial. A denial is like I didn't do that. I didn't do that that,

that's not me. You got the wrong guy. Those are denials, and the cops would try to stop you from completing those sentences. That objection you just said is a denial, but it's encapsulated with um, yeah, a justification something to it. Do you remember when you used to take multiple choice tests in high school? They always said that if you don't know the answer, usually the one with the most verbiage, the one with the most words is the right one. I never heard that it's true that works out. It's

not good at taking tests either. Well, no, wonder, we need to get in the way back machine. You can go take some more multiple test tests. Knowing that now, But the the I think that's kind of the same premise for an objection. It's like, it's not just a denial. It's there's more to it, and the fact that somebody put that much more thought into it means that there's

something to that. So a cop will take that and cultivate it and try to turn the at around and they would say, we, I know you love your sister, and you know you you stood by her while she was raped, So of course this wouldn't be like a recurring thing. This is just a one time thing that you did and you were out of your head or whatever, because you care about your sisters, so you would never

do this all the time or something. And so all of a sudden, you're you're kind of like you're giving the suspect like a something to latch onto, something for them to to basically re enter society to an extent, because at this moment, especially if they're guilty, they are totally on the ounce with society, and the sole representative of society, and who's speaking with them right now is

the cop that's interrogating them, and everybody wants to be included. Yeah, and if you don't, then your a sociopath and they're gonna get you anyway. They're well, yeah, but they're gonna have a hard time through interrogation. So number five is getting the spects attention. Is I don't know these the real titles or is this just the liberties of the author of this article. I don't know what We'll call it.

Getting the suspects attention. And uh, this is when you pretend to be the ally of the suspect um, because at this point they're probably looking for a way out. And that's when you might go, hey, man, I get it. If I call it my best friend having sex with my wife, I'd kill him too. Yeah, I understand where you're coming from. And uh, maybe a little pad on the shoulder, a little rub on, a little rub on the back, or maybe a pad on the back and

just some reassurance, like I get to where you're coming from. Man, it could have could happen to any of us, and you're in big trouble at that point. Yeah, and that's probably going on like throughout. Yeah, and the themes run these all overlap quite a bit. But if if there's an objection that you've noticed that you're working, you've turned around and you're working, Yeah that objection with an extra

layer of compassion and commiseration. Yeah. Uh, and I guess really kind of start to ensnare the suspect a lot more. It's weird because I'm I'm repulsed by a lot of this, but I'm also very impressed by like what I've seen on TV. What you can tell is someone who's really good at it. Oh yeah, it's an effective like an

art form. There's UM I believe something like eight percent or seventies six percent of UM suspects who are interrogated in this manner when you take out people who UM invoke their miranda rights, uh confess like it has an enormous confession, right, And there's a lot of people who the vast majority the study I saw or the number I saw, six of those confessions are from guilty people, but something like point zero four percent are false confessions.

The problem is there's still such thing as false confessions. There's no safeguards. It's just it just so happens that, like the false confessions are in that small of an amount. Yeah, and that percentage isn't high. But if you think about how many people are interrogated, that's like several hundred per year in the US, up to several hundred per year. That's a lot of people. Yeah, and it's not like that that those people just it gets found out at

trial or somewhere down the road that they're innocent. Like, those people may spend the rest of their lives in jail. At the worst case, they may be executed, which has probably happened in the history of the US, although it hasn't been um irrefutably proven yet. Yeah, and you can listen to how the Innocence Project works. From June, we interviewed paula Is on, Oh, yeah, that's right. I wish I'd known a lot more about the Innocence Project back when we did that episode, Like I kind of got

it and understood it. But just over the last few years, Um, I've kind of I understand it even more. Yeah, I wish I would have known better than It's still a good episode. We talked to Paul paul Is on Yeah, she's a real pro. Yeah, no, it's not, is it? Okay, that's how rumors get made. Well, I just liked her like more after you said that. Oh yeah, yeah, I love Steve's on. Um, all right, and back to the

red technique. At this point, number six, the suspect might lose resolve and uh, This seemed really obvious to me. If the suspect is has his shoulders hunched, or has got his head in his hands, or is crying, then you've got them just where you want them as an interrogator, right, you were going to get your confession, whether it's a false confession or not. That's not guaranteed by these outward signs. Again, if you strip away the non verbal stuff from the

red technique, it's it's pretty pretty good stuff. And apparently this is where you really want to regain their attention. Like if they start crying, like forced them to look you in the eye. Uh, because I guess that works. That increases the stress level. Um. So remember we talked about that theme development. It's like here, here's what happened, you know, and they object to that, and then you take that objection, you turn it around, and they start

to latch onto that theme couched in that objection. You take that next, and as you're developing it, it becomes one of two or more alternatives. But basically you're taking the theme that the person latched onto and you're making that the minimal um example. It's almost like a good cop, bad cop version of reasons why you did it exactly. So it's it's um you you you shot that lady

in the back because she was a horrible person. Nobody is going to think that you did it because you just wanted the entrance money, exactly, that anybody in your position would have done this. And everyone's gonna understand this is why you not. This horrible reason, this reason, this reason society can live with. Maybe you'll go to jail for a year two, who knows, But when you come out, everybody's gonna say, Hey, that Bernie guy is okay. I would have shot that old lady in the back too.

Did you see that movie? Yeah, that's good. Uh, it's not. Hey, that Bernie guy needs to burn in hell for the rest of his life because it killed some poor old lady for insurance money. You know. So with the cops sitting there saying, here's what we're saying, you're agreeing to. Here's this horrible interpretation that I can't control. But this

I've created and sculpted with your help. So let's throw this horrible, big thing away and this thing that doesn't seem nearly as bad is what the press will hear. They will start to put it on paper. Yeah. But here's what you're not thinking about what you're doing is it's the same in both cases. If you're confessing to a murderer and you are just at a point to where you're you think, man, that sounds way better in

a NewSpace paper and this other thing. And also it's coming out of the mouth of this detective that is um that is appearing to commiserate with you, that has empathized with you, that maybe told you on the side like hey, I hated that old lady too, and I'm glad you did it. The cop can totally say that, and and to win the trust of the suspect. So all of these factors combine all of a sudden, you have a story, you have a narrative, you're working out

with the cops. You may not even realize that that's what's going on. And then the cops going to say, I have a piece of paper and a pen here, and I want you to write down what we just talked about. I want you to write down your confession. Yeah, well, they're gonna bring someone else in there first. Well, there's probably already someone else in there. They may bring a third a new person in there. Uh, to try and force them to retell their story, which they probably won't

want to do. Uh. And that's when you can introduce like, hey, you don't want to tell the story again to this new detective. I know you're tired here to take the spend exactly, don't stab me with it. By this time, the person will likely want to do just about anything to get out of that room and from writing and signing this this confession. There's salvation on the other end. There's a light at the end of the tunnel, even if it's possibly jail. Yeah, they can get out of

this room. They can get out of this horrible interrogation. Yeah. They may promise like a hot meal, like something as simple as that can can get someone to sign a confession at the end of a long, long day. So you've got the written confession, you haven't signed, Uh. They probably have to sign an additional waiver that says I didn't write this under coercion or else. They'll include that in the confession and then you have basically what amounts to a slam dunk conviction in court. Yep. And that

is the read technique. Uh. And we're gonna talk about some real cases of interrogation right after this break. Alright, Chuck. So that's the red technique. You got your purpose, super effective, um, and it has been used in plenty of cases. Like we said, the number that I saw was like point zero per point zero four of confessions or false confessions, UM, which is extraordinarily small, which means that a lot of

truly bad guys get caught through the red the red technique, right. Um. And there's this one in this article on how stuff works, um, how police interrogation works. And it's with a woman named Nicole Michelle Frederick. It's between her and a detective named Victor Lauria, and it takes place in Detroit in September

of two thousand three. And Um, Nicole Michelle Frederick was the step mom to a two year old daughter, and the two year old daughter had shown up in the hospital, I believe, unresponsive with bruises all over her body had clearly been physically abused. And the step mom was saying, she falls down a lot, like I don't think anybody heard her, Like she just gets bruised like that, And uh, it certainly wasn't me, but not only was it not me, I don't think it was anybody. The little girl just

falls down, she does it to herself. And with that, Detective Lauria took her to be blaming the victim that she was trying to go free. By blaming this little girl for being clumsy, lumsy and difficult, yes, which a detective can then latch onto is reprehensible as that sounds, uh, by trying to get some empathy, going like, hey, I get it, you know, like this is a tough baby, yes, and it's I'm sure it's trying, and it's very difficult.

So all of a sudden, uh, Detective Lauria has has this I guess this theme, this justification that was set up by the suspect, and he starts to play it out. He's saying, like this this girl, she was a difficult baby. She's crying. You lose your head for a minute and you get a little rough and you know it could happen to anybody, and um uh ms. Frederick says, no, that's not right at all. Nobody hurt this kid. I

don't understand why you don't believe me. You seem to be not listening to me, which is from what I understand, that's you're in the danger zone right there, and your derogation. If somebody's saying, if they're pressing back their own reality on the you the detective, you're not in control, right then they are. So uh, Laurias started to look for another theme, and it was along the same lines, but rather than losing your head for a minute, it was

a split second. Something happen been in a flash of a minute or flash of a second, and she perked up a little. Yeah, she started to latch onto that one. Yeah. So then he knew he had her, you know, in a pretty tough spot, and um, she started nodding her head. He sets up the alternative and said, you know what, if you don't explain this thing, every he's gonna everyone's

gonna just assume that you're this awful, abusive person. Um. I think people might understand more though, because everyone's been there. If we paint you know, if if it was just a split second thing and he lost control, people are going to get that. So those are the alternatives. All of a sudden, and then it came, uh, it came out that the her daughter had had had brain damage, it was likely not gonna die. And then all of a sudden, the suspects started saying, oh I I they're

gonna get me for murder. Yeah. Well, he pointed out to her, He's like, by the way, you haven't even asked about the condition of your daughter. And she was like, no, I haven't totally have. He's like, no, you really haven't. And she's like, well, how is she. He's like, she's not gonna make it, and that's when she goes, oh no, yeah, I'm gonna be tried for murder. And she was and found guilty. Um, she she confessed, I believe right. Yeah, she admitted to shaking shaking a baby and then said

out loud, I killed the little girl. I killed her right. So, Um, she was convicted of killing her two year old stepdaughter. And last I saw, I found an appeal in two thousand five that was denied. That was the last I saw of her after her conviction. So it does work, and Detective Lauria followed all of these steps, um, and got a bad guy in this case. Yeah, and so a lot of times it goes down just like it should. But it is super controversial, which we've talked about some

and you mentioned at the beginning. One of the biggest problems is it's guilt presumptive. Is they go in there thinking, all right, this person's the goal of the of the interrogation is to get a confession, not to find out whether or not someone did something. In most in many cases,

they go in there thinking this person is guilty. And if you're going in there thinking you're guilty, even if you don't mean to, you're gonna start to filter out any reasons why they might be innocent, even if they're good reasons and valid reasons. And that ain't no good, No, it's not. That's um. That's well, it's pretty huge flaw really, even if it does result in only point zero four

percent of false confessions. Yeah, and you also mentioned that, Um, the whole purpose of the interrogation is to make someone stressed and uncomfortable. And then when you notice people behaving stressed and uncomfortable, that's the presumption an indicator of guilt. Supposedly, when it's like you said, would you call a feedback loop, So you know, I want to make you stressed and uncomfortable, you're being stressed and uncomfortable, that means you're guilty. Yeah,

it's an odd way to approach things. It's coercion UM. And then there's also been a lot of people to point out that a lot of these techniques are the same thing that are used in brainwashing, which we did a show on July two thousand nine, did a brainwashing show invading a personal space, not allowing the person to speak, UM, using contrasting alternatives to have them come to uh, make them feel like they're making a decision or that they

have a choice or some sort of power. I think you brainwashed me in that episode two right, Yeah, we did a little role play. Yeah, it was awesome. Man, um I turned you into a prep that was five years ago. Yeah, and then UM position and confession as a means of escape. Oh yeah, that was like the last step I think before resolution was to say like just like denounce your family or whatever and you will

be saved or something. Right in this case, it signed this thing and man, you're gonna get that hot meal and that cigarette I promised you. The thing is is like we said, it's uh, it does produce false confessions. And I saw somewhere that of people who have been exonerated with DNA evidence, UM gave a false confession. So people go to jail for years for this kind of thing. Well, here's a few of the more famous cases. Peter Riley in nineteen seventy three, it's an eighteen year old who

is whose mother was murdered. Um, I think no siblings and no father, so like the only parent he'd ever known. And after eight hours of interrogation by Connecticut police, he confessed to brutally murdering her. Murdering her and uh, I was convicted on manslaughter based on the confessional loan. There was no evidence, no motive. Medical findings suggested that there were at least two attackers, and uh, the town really got behind him apparently, and like, so this kid didn't

do this, He's not that kind of guy. And let's have bake sales and raise money. And Arthur Miller, the famous playwright, lived in the town, and he championed it because he did a lot of work with a c l U and Um. Eventually new evidence came out that exonerated him, and he was set free after three years in prison. Three years not too bad. That's better than Earl Washington Jr. Who in nineteen eighty two he was described as in please everybody, I'm using scare quotes here

He was described by psychologists as mildly retarded. He had an i Q of sixty nine, which is a whole other kettle of fish that mean anything anyway, But um, he confessed to raping and murdering a nineteen year old woman under interrogation. He was convicted on the confession alone, right, Yeah, just on the confession. Well, a lot of these are and spent eighteen years in prison, some of them on death row and was apparently rescued from the executioner with

like nine days to go. Yeah. But at the same time, like, as a jury, what are you to do when someone says I did this, you know, I mean hopefully don't know, maybe maybe add some other evidence to no, I agree. The thing is is Earl Washington's um thing. He he was somebody else was caught doing it using DNA. That's that's been a huge change to this kind of thing. It's at least exonerated people like free and clear. But

that's that brings up another problem with false confessions. Not only do innocent people go to jail, guilty people stay free, and they accumulate more victims over time, you know, like, um, how how how many more children would that that lady in Detroit have abused if like she'd gotten off or something, you know. I mean, like the and the guy who created UM the read technique actually had a false confession

and wrongful conviction under his belt, a guy. If you read the article UM the uh the interview in The New Yorker, the first thing he talks about is this guy in the fifties who was in jail for twenty years from ordering his wife even though he didn't do it,

who was um interrogated by John Reid himself. Wow. Yeah, So the guy who actually did do it went on to rape pregnant women and um commit all these other horrible crimes that he wouldn't have He wouldn't have done had he been caught the first time, or had the cups still been looking for him. Wow. So yeah, it's a huge point. I mean, like, it's not just innocent

people in prison, it's guilty people out still. Yeah, if you really want to see uh this all firsthand, I highly recommend the documentary from Ken burn Sarah Burns, and David McMahon, The Central Park Five. And this is the famous story in of five young African American men who were set up the River for a rape in Central

Park and they did not do it. And uh. It's a great documentary and it's just summarizes how you can get a false confession very nicely and it all plays out and you see these inner abuse and get really angry and uh, but that was definitely a case of UM sort of like with the Atlanta child murders, Like people are scared to go into Central Park now and we've got these five use who aren't so smart and they're poor, and we can we think they did it

and I don't care what the evidence says. We need to finger them for the crime and put them all over the news so people will feel safe again. But they were eventually exonerated thanks to DNA again um, and they spent depending on which guy, between six years and twelve years in prison. And really great documentary and I think it's on Netflix. It is it is. Have you seen it? Yeah? Yeah, that's a good one. UM, so chuck this. We've basically been talking mostly about the red technique,

that there are alternatives. There's some law enforcement agencies have lost faith in um, the red technique. Uh and in Britain, apparently in there's a bunch of false confessions that came to light and the British government said, we need to figure something else out. So they created a Blue Ribbon task force and said, come up with an alternative to the red technique, which ironically is a technique in the

re technique. But what they came up with was called peace, which this is the worst acronym of all time, but preparation and planning, engage and explain, account closure, evaluate clearly spells peace. Yes, um. So they came up with it after a couple of years and by two thousand and one it was pretty widespread. But the Peace technique is predicated on the idea that you're not going after a confession.

This technique, like you as a an investigator an interrogator, you're going in to just get the whole story out and as much detail as possible, and you're not going after a confession. You're not accusing the person of the crime, you're being polite and you're here's another thing, and a lot of people think that this will cure false confessions almost in and of itself, videotaping the confession from beginning to end. And so what the cops do is they

interview the the suspect. They say, well, what about this, here's a discrepancy, what about this? And they're not being accusatory, they're just putting everything out there and letting this person explain it in front of the video tape or in front of the video camera, and then the tape is shown to a jury and the jury apparently decides whether

the person is lying or not. Yeah, And this is all built on the what I think is a pretty rock solid theory that it is really hard to lie and lie and lie and keep it all straight and keep it all and that that congruous line that's believable at some point, if you keep talking and you're lying

a bunch, you're gonna mess up. And that's what they prey on, especially if you've just spent the last day, hours like drinking cruddy coffee and eating a few ho hoes and being asked questions by interrogators, even if they're being polite like yeah, you're you're gonna have a really hard time keeping up with what you've already said. Yeah, Like you've got to be a real skilled sociopath to

lie for hours and hours and hours. Uh. And then they'll bring him again and again a week later, let's say, you know, let's have some more tea and let's sit down and talk. And uh, a week later, you might forget some of the things you said. And um, and the cops have the video and they're writing down all the details. Seems pretty solid to me. Yeah, so good

on you Britain. And um, there are some people here in the US trying to teach it to cops here, but apparently it's just like word of mouth and the particular jurisdiction has to be down with it and support it, and it's just not super widespread here. Yeah. Well, I mean, the read technique isn't the force of law. It's just the gold standard. It's the one that everybody uses and there, like, I want to be like the cops on the shows. Well, yeah, exactly,

I want to do the piece technique. Um, the in Canada, I found a completely different technique too. It's called the Mr.

Big technique. Have you heard of it. It's it's extremely involved. Basically, you the suspect, will meet an undercover cop who's posing as a criminal while you're out and about and free and easy or whatever, or maybe while you're being booked whatever, and you guys are gonna become friends and over the course of the next several months, this undercover cop is going to gain your trust and get you to ultimately confess.

That shows how little crime there is. They're like, so, would you cut down your neighbor's street right exactly where like they can spend like three months on a single confession. You know. Yeah, But it's called the Mr. Big technique and it actually the reason it's called Mr biggess Uh in its ideal form, you, um, the suspect are become like kind of criminal compatriots with this this undercover cop who then introduces you to Mr Big, this crime boss who wants you to step up to the next crime

lab bowl. But it's gonna get you to talk about this murder that you did or whatever, and then you confess it and you're being secretly taped and you don't know it and you've just entrapped yourself. Man. I love Canada, Mr I might have to move there, man, Yeah, you're gonna stick around after a Toronto or Vancouver might just one country. So we said earlier we were gonna give some tips. I think we'd be remiss if we didn't. Um. They seem a little silly, but they recommend you just

don't talk. You don't talk, they said, imagine the words I invoke my rights to remain silent painted on the wall and stare at them. Uh, ask for counsel, ask for a lawyer. And then the number five thing they say to do is cultivate hatred for your interrogator. Who who's that from Peace Help Beagle or something weird like that. It's yeah, it's for recommendations for animal rights activists who get arrested. So yeah, he seems kind of basic to me.

It is, but I think it's one of those things where they can easily go out the window when you're in that situation, you know. Yeah, and again, if you're in the United States and you invoke your right to council, that's that like the cops are they have to stop, and if they don't, that's a that's a big problem. I kind of perversely want to know how I would hold up. I know it's no laughing matter and I shouldn't joke around about it, but I would like to

be interrogated just to see. Uh so, Uh, I guess that's if you want to learn some more about UM police interrogation, check out this article police interrogation on how stuff works dot com. It's a good one, um, and you can find that by using the search bar, of course. And since I said that it's time for listener mail, I'm gonna call this Jittery Joe's. Oh Yeah Coffee. Hey guys, Hope, Paul as well my wife Cassie now are big fancy yalls and uh we've been listening for years. This summer

we took a two month honeymoon to Southeast Asia. It was a blast. Your podcasts kept the sane. Thanks for that. You sent you a postcard from uh angkor Wat in Cambodia. Uh. It was bought there, written in Borneo, and mailed from Malaysia. Remember so it was well traveled. Um. Anyway, we live in Athens and love to hear your stories about Athens. We actually live in five Points on the Shortcut Road where Chuck told about his mystery creepy old Lady ghost story.

I drive by there every day and I always keep an eye out for her. But my day jobs with Jittery Joe's Coffee Roasters, a local Athens institution, and um, he brought a huge box of coffee and shirts and hats and hand delivered it to the office. And Uh, I think he was surprised to know that. I remember when Jittery Joe's first opened, because he was like, oh, well, that was before my time. I think he I didn't think I was as old as I was, But I

remember Jittery Joe's opening up. It was a big deals, like the first kind of good indie coffee house in Athens. I didn't know they were the first, but I'm not surprised the first one I remember at least. But he suggests the Sumatra Wahana. He said, it's unlike any coffee I've ever had. People either love it or hate it. So um, that is from Mike Lord and you can just look up Jittery Joe's online. I'm sure you can order this stuff. Yeah, you definitely can. Thanks for the coffee, Mike,

it's good. Yes, and thank you to your wife Cassidy for all the support. Uh. If you want to give Chuck and Eye free stuff, we are happy to accept it. You can get in touch with us to ask for our physical mailing address and we'll give it to you. Okay, Yeah, I have to say showing up at the office and announced was a little weird, but since he had a huge box of coffee, it was all forgetting. Oh yeah, so your combaring gifts, It's like, yeah, yeah, it's social lubricant.

Yeah gifts, sorry, especially good on It's like jittery Joe's coffee. You can get in touch with us via Twitter at s Y s K podcast. You can join us on Facebook dot com, so I Stuff you Should Know. You can send us an email at stuff podcast at how Stuff Works dot com, and as always, joined us at at Home on the web. Stuff you Should Know dot com. Stuff you Should Know is a production of I Heart Radio.

For more podcasts my heart Radio, visit the I heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows. H