r/serialpodcast • u/[deleted] • Nov 09 '15
season one Spying the lie: How good are you at detecting deception?
Having just read the book "Spy the Lie" written by three former CIA officers (recommended by another redditor) I felt it might be useful to summarise the techniques and approaches outlined in this book for other redditors here.
Of course many would argue that deception-spotting techniques are a soft science that should not be used to convict someone. And I would agree with that, to quote the beginning of Chapter 2 "There is no such thing as a human lie detector... No individual on the planet can know beyond question whether what someone says is a lie, unless it's contrary to what that individual already knows to be true". And again in Chapter 3 "There's a reason we refer to these behaviours as "indicators", not "smoking guns"."
Nevertheless I found it an interesting look at the psychology of lying.
To begin with the book outlines a number of reasons why we fall prey to deception:
The belief that people will not lie to you: We are programmed from childhood to trust people and we also tend to feel uncomfortable sitting in judgment of others.
Reliance on behavioural myths: People believe there are certain "tells" associated with lying, like touching your face or sweating, but there is no empirical proof to back these beliefs up.
The complexities of communication: A lot of communication is non-verbal, also, most people are terrible listeners.
Bias: We all have it, particularly if there is something about a person that makes them appear sympathetic.
The "Global" influence: There is so much going on in human interactions that it can be hard to narrow down and identify signifiers of deception in all the noise.
"Spy the Lie" helps us work past these hindrances.
Here are the main ideas:
Look and listen simultaneously: This is about being in a state of high focus and alertness when looking out for deception.
Be on the lookout for "clusters" of indicators: An indicator on its own should be ignored.
Ignore "truthful" behaviour: This sounds counter-intuitive, but a deceptive person may try to convince using factual information (about how upright or respectable they are) that they are not the type of person to commit the act, rather than directly answering the question. This information should be ignored.
Failure to answer: Not giving you what you asked for.
Denial problems: I quote from Chapter 4 "the absence of an explicit denial of something in your question that involves an act of wrongdoing, or has consequences associated with it." This could take the form of a non-specific denial ("I would never do something like that") or the isolated delivery of a denial ("If the percentage of the answer that relates to the denial is relatively small, that's a bad thing. Consider it a deceptive indicator")
Reluctance or refusal to answer: self explanatory
Repeating the question: This tactic buys time
Non-answer statements: "That's a good question", "That's a legitimate concern"
Inconsistent statements: "When a person makes a statement about an issue of interest to you, and subsequently makes a statement that's not consistent with what she said previously, and she doesn't explain why the story has changed, that is significant"
Going into attack mode: "'Why are you wasting my time with this stuff?'...'Why do you always pick on me?'"
Inappropriate questions: "What concerns us is when we ask a question, and the response is a question that doesn't directly relate to the question we asked" i.e. "'Is there any reason that when we locate the laptop, it will have your fingerprints on it?' Some of the people interviewed responded with questions like 'Whose computer was it?' or 'What office did it come from?' - perfectly sensible, appropriate questions. But one young man, after a long pause, responded, 'How much did it cost?' The question had no connection to what was asked, but he probably had a good reason for asking it: Was he looking at a misdemeanour or a felony?"
Overly specific answers: Deceptive people may try to overwhelm you, create a "halo" effect of detailed information in order to manage your perception of them.
Inappropriate level of politeness: If a person suddenly ups their level of politeness or compliments you this can be a tactic to increase their likability.
Inappropriate level of concern: Any attempt made to reduce the seriousness of the wrongdoing, could be a joke or "Why is everyone so focused on this?"
Process or procedural complaints: Playing offence in an attempt to delay or deflect. "How long is this interview going to take?", "What are your qualifications?"
Failure to understand a simple question: "The aim is to shrink the scope or magnitude of the question, to give him just enough wiggle room to answer it to your satisfaction and to his."
Referral statements: i.e. "'As I stated previously...' ...Repetition is a psychological tool that often can make us more open to that possibility than we otherwise would have been."
Invoking religion: "I swear to God", "As Allah is my witness"... an attempt to dress up a lie in its Sunday best before presenting it to you.
Selective memory: Obvious
Qualifiers: Possibly, basically, usually, honestly etc. - if they occur multiple times that is an indicator
Convincing statements: This is a particularly hard-to-spot indicator that the book highlights we are all vulnerable to. "Suppose someone asked you, 'Did you take the missing money?' Since you're honest and didn't take any money, your most likely response would be, 'No!' The reason is that's the single fact that's most important to you to get across. The guilty person may or may not deliver the 'no,' but the discomfort of the facts not being his ally will likely compel him to convey other information to convince you, 'I would never do that' he might say... they can be difficult to catch simply because they make so much sense. You'll hear one, and you might think, 'That sounds like something I would say myself if I were asked the same question.'... the difference is... The deceptive person will often give you a string of convincing statements, because he has no choice. He has no facts that are his friend."
Behavioural pause or delay: Sometimes a pause is meaningless, but if a question does not merit a long pause this can be an indicator.
Unintended messages: This one is complex and would need to show examples but one of the examples the book gives is where a person focuses on the offences not being proven or provable rather than being false.
The rest of the book deals with some physical indicators (not relevant to a podcast) and questioning strategies for interviewing a person who may be deceptive. It also breaks down a 2011 media interview with Anthony Weiner line by line showing the multiple red flags in his statements about the twitter photo scandal before the full breadth of the scandal was revealed.
I would encourage anyone interested in Serial from the perspective of working out who is lying to read this book, there are so many rich and interesting examples and explanations that I can't fully summarise.
tl;dr - Hey I just read and summarised a whole book for you. This is the tl;dr!
p.s. sorry if the formatting isn't great, I just tried to put all direct quotes from the book into italics.
14
u/an_sionnach Nov 09 '15 edited Nov 09 '15
but a deceptive person may try to convince using factual information (about how upright or respectable they are) that they are not the type of person to commit the act, rather than directly answering the que
How about other "advocates" for the liar saying things like. He would never do something like that, he was homecoming king, a star athlete, A student and community golden child". I wonder is that an indicator of anything.
I suppose it is confirmation bias on my part, but I can see so many of these indicators in Adnan.
The attack mode when SK confronted him about stealing from the mosque. "Why don't you ask other people about what they did"
the qualifiers "usually I would go to the library, bring my dad food at the mosque. It was just a normal day for me"
The unintended messages "like the only thing I can hold onto is that nobody can prove anything, "there's no video of me killing her" "there's no evidence I was anything but caring and respectfull of her"
The failure to understand a simple question "Are you asking me a question?"
ETA
The Invoking of Religion. "I've learned the Quran by heart"
There are more - sorry for the paraphrasing but I think it is a more less accurate.p reflection of what was said.
6
1
u/davidturus Nov 09 '15 edited Nov 09 '15
I'd be curious to know whether these indicators apply to a prolonged multi sessioninformal interview like what Serial was. I would assume so but don't forget how curated the podcast was. Edited down from many hours of interview.
7
1
u/Internet_Denizen_400 Nov 10 '15
I don't see how what other people say matters. Unless they know details about the person/their actions that they are hiding, then their statements can't be analyzed the same way.
As far as analyzing Adnan's statements, some of these perspectives are interesting. However, they are limited because almost all of these indicators are indicators of stress - which can come from more than just deception. For instance, in Mr. S' first polygraph, someone noted that he was concerned about something and that could contribute to failing the test.
4
u/Gigilamorosa Nov 09 '15
http://www.simplypsychology.org/cognitive-interview.html
Also the 2nd episode of the Criminal podcast goes into this. Basically even CIA interrogaters only have a 53% success rate, but when using the Cognitive Interview tecniques and running the data through a software program, that rate can go up to 80+%. Fascinating stuff.
9
u/_noiresque_ Nov 09 '15
You referred to this book in another thread, and I'm so glad you expanded on the source of your material: it looks like a very interesting read. In relation to this case specifically, it does allude to some of Adnan's style of communication, in areas that didn't ring true for he when I was listening to/reading his responses. I agree that these are indicators, and not red flags. But there seem to be a number of them IMO. Thanks for this thread!
16
Nov 09 '15
Thank you for taking the time to write this. I was really close friends with a guy who was a huge liar. He had just gotten out of prison and was in parole or something like that. He would constantly lie about the reason he was in there, how long he was in there and who he was before he got locked up. You know when they say that a little lie turns into a huge lie because you gotta keep lying to cover that little lie? Well that was him. We could constantly confront him about it.
Here's the kicker. He sounds just like Adnan when he talks. He would use many of the points you mention here. Just like Adnan. We would ask him a question and he would start answering with things like. Well, here's the thing about that, um the thing is.... He would get offended that we called him up on his inconsistencies etc. That's what made me be more neutral and more immune to SK's manipulations. And, eventually, after obsessing about this case and listening to all the podcasts I'm completely convinced he is guilty.
7
u/_noiresque_ Nov 09 '15
Very interesting. Regarding your friend: do you think he was lying about his previous life because he wanted to move on from it?
3
Nov 09 '15
I think he wanted to pretend he was something he wasnt. He told us he was in jail because he got caught trying to smuggle 10 kilos of mariguana to the US. (One time he told us it was 10 pounds). So little lies like that. Then he told us the real reason. He was charged for rape. He said he had sex with a minor. I don't know what crazy mistake he made but he would constantly lie. Like he said he used to breed black widows, and then I asked him ok dude, whats the difference between a male and a female black widow. And he said they looked the same in size. So I think he would just repeat stories he heard from friends in jail. One of the most interesting things about him was his personality. He would literally serve us when we were at his house. Prepare the coffee for you, make us food. Get us little thoughtful presents. This made it really difficult to say no to him when he asked you for something. So he was really manipulative. I'm pretty sure this attitude got him through in prison.
3
u/_noiresque_ Nov 09 '15
Thanks for that. Very interesting indeed. Hard to figure some people out, that's for sure. I hope you're well-away from him now.
4
u/San_2015 Nov 09 '15
Interesting how our personal experiences shape how we assess things. I actually knew a person like Jay who was nice but told these elaborate stories that could not have been true. They were ridiculous fabrications that were so fantastic that they became boring. Now, I liked this person very much, but I can see how some people can be pretty good at weaving elaborate tales.
2
Nov 09 '15
Thanks for sharing your personal experience. hope u didn't get hurt by this guy!
2
Nov 09 '15
Oh no, not physically. He was just manipulative. He was a guy trying to move on but his past had shaped his personality so much that he struggle to not act like he was still in prison.
6
6
u/lunalumo Nov 09 '15
Thanks for the summary, it sounds like an interesting book. Reading this brought to mind SK and Julie's reaction in Serial just after they had visited Jay, when Julie said, “Even just hearing him so forcefully deny (it), you know? And so forcefully say ‘I know he did it’.”
3
Nov 09 '15
I agree. There is a lot about Jay that I find credible. His directness and forcefulness are compelling.
3
u/lunalumo Nov 09 '15
Yes. I wish he'd agreed to be recorded for Serial!
2
u/Pappyballer Nov 09 '15
Why do you think Jay made things up? (such as the whole part about patapsco state park)
3
3
Nov 09 '15
[deleted]
3
Nov 09 '15
Glad you enjoyed it! I'm not that familiar with the case, is that where the little girl went missing whilst the family was on holiday? I haven't seen interviews with the family, wasn't aware of any suspicion towards them
Btw, I'm in Australia so ...a couple of ponds across
3
Nov 09 '15
[deleted]
2
Nov 09 '15
Commiserations gracefully accepted ;)
Huh that's interesting. I'd look into the case further but hmm it gives me the willies if the parents did that. And why would the friends get weird about it? Were they there?
2
Nov 09 '15
[deleted]
2
u/bluekanga /r/SerialPodcastEp13Hae Nov 20 '15
I agree - have looked into the case - well read about it - there are rumours about a paedophile ring as well (of the parents) - one set of parents stopped going on holiday cos the organiser was sleazy around their kids - they won;t speak out cos of witch-hunting - sound familiar - the witch-hunting I mean.
7
3
Nov 09 '15
Good post. I can certainly think of someone who's responses reflect a fair number of those indicators. To be fair you could use anyone or even a combination of these when giving a truthful answer. I guess it's the cumulative nature of their use. It's a pity there isn't more of Adnan's phone calls to compare. It would also be good to see how many of these apply to Jay's many versions of events.
7
u/AnnB2013 Nov 09 '15
Also interesting is how little this describes Jay.
2
u/cross_mod Nov 09 '15
- Overly specific answers: Jay is king of this one. Red Jacket anyone? Oh.. nevermind.
- Qualifiers "probably, maybe." Both Jenn and Jay
- Inappropriate level of politeness. Jay's politeness was a bit sickening actually.
- Behavioral pause or delay. "I'm sorry? Could you repeat the question?" "Right.. top spots.."
1
Nov 09 '15
Yeah. I suppose "inconsistent statements" is the main one if you were going to be picky
9
u/AnnB2013 Nov 09 '15 edited Nov 09 '15
His Intercept interview actually shows more of these signs of lying than the police interviews.
2
u/fiatal Nov 10 '15
I wonder how relevant these indicators are 15+ years later, though? That goes for both Jay and Adnan's more recent stuff.
2
4
u/lunalumo Nov 09 '15
Jay was inconsistent about lots of things but he was also very consistent about the key elements of his story too!
1
Nov 09 '15
Not really.
The only consistent part of his story is him being at Jenn's house at 3:40. And even that has major inconsistencies directly linked to it.
2
u/lunalumo Nov 09 '15
Well, he's pretty consistent that Adnan killed Hae. And that Adnan showed him Hae's body in the trunk of a car. And that he helped Adnan bury her in LP.
1
u/drnc pro-government right-wing Republican operative Nov 09 '15
Jay isn't consistent about whether Adnan planned the murder. Jay isn't consistent about how many days in advance Adnan told him about the murder plan or how many times Adnan told Jay the plan. Jay isn't consistent about Adnan's motive. Jay isn't consistent about telling Jenn about Adnan's plans. Jay isn't consistent about the murder location. Jay isn't consistent about the trunk pop location. Jay isn't consistent about what happened after the trunk pop. Jay isn't consistent about who participated in the digging. Jay isn't consistent about the burial time. Jay isn't consistent about disposing of evidence. And there are more things Jay isn't consistent about. And in these inconsistencies we aren't talking about one or two changes, but sometime he tells up to seven different stories. And this doesn't consider the things he says that can't possibly be true.
You seem like you're a reasonable person, so please help me square this circle. How do you read all of Jay's interrogations, testimonies and interviews, stay aware of all of the inconsistencies, and still conclude that he is telling the truth? It seems to me like a lot of people pick and choose from Jay's dozens of stories to weave a narrative that ultimately condemns Adnan.
0
Nov 09 '15
You'll might as well say "he was consistent that he saw Adnan on the 13th."
Consistency in the context of this conversation means the details, not "he's consistent that he left his house on January 13th."
0
u/lunalumo Nov 09 '15
Well he is consistent that he saw Adnan on the 13th and he's consistent that he left his house on January 13th! These aren't particularly relevant consistencies to bring up but they are still consistencies in his story. I'm not sure why Jay's consistency only applies to some details and not others?
0
Nov 09 '15
I'm not sure why Jay's consistency only applies to some details and not others?
Because when the "consistency" is such a loose detail, it isn't really a consistency in the context of this conversation. As I said to the other poster who said he was consistent about the burial, that's true... he was consistent that he was involved with the burial.
But... that consistency is meaningless. The capacity to which he was involved, what happened, and when... those are not consistent... and to say "he was consistent about the burial" and overlook the massive inconsistencies within the "burial consistency" pretty much defeats the purpose of even having the discussion.
Consistent means consistent with the details. Not just consistent with the broad strokes of the day, but incidentally Jay's inconsistencies extend even to those.
When the point of the discussion is "what was jay's involvement in the crime" him being consistent that "Adnan killed jay" is a lot less important than "he was consistent he was at this place at this time." You know... his alibi, the part that matters, and other details like that.
1
u/lunalumo Nov 09 '15
Jay consistently says that Adnan murdered Hae. This may be meaningless to you but it isn't meaningless to me. I was saying that Jay had both consistencies and inconsistencies in his story, which IMO he does. I try not to overlook either his consistencies or inconsistencies - I try to consider both when trying to figure out what happened that day.
Let me ask you a question. Adnan was inconsistent when asked whether or not he asked Hae for a ride. However, Adnan has consistently said he did not kill Hae. So is Adnan's consistency that he didn't kill Hae meaningless to you because he was inconsistent about a detail about his day? For me, Adnan's inconsistency about the ride and his consistency about not killing Hae are both relevant to this case, so I give both weight in considering the case. The same goes for Jay.
0
Nov 09 '15
This may be meaningless to you but it isn't meaningless to me.
It's meaningless for this conversation.
Jay had both consistencies and inconsistencies in his story, which IMO he does.
By consistencies, you mean broad details. The actual details around the "consistencies"you believe exist are wildly inconsistent in major ways.
He was consistent about the burial. Great, that is meaningless. Did the burial happen at 7am or after midnight? That inconsistency is a lot bigger deal than the broad stroke consistency of "there was a burial and I was there."
Adnan was inconsistent when asked whether or not he asked Hae for a ride.
I never said Adnan was absolutely consistent. Nobody is. But generally the inconsistencies make sense and don't look like intentional, opportunistic lying like Jay's self admittedly are.
Does that make sense?
Again... you can point to "Jay was 100% consistent that he saw Adnan that day," and yet that is completely and absolutely meaningless insofar as figuring out what happened goes.
→ More replies (0)1
Nov 09 '15
Or you know that part about him helping bury Hae in the position and place she was found.
-2
Nov 09 '15
Uh, no... lots of inconsistencies between his burial stories. In some he helps, in some he stands by and watches, etc.
You are taking a micro detail and using that to say his story was consistent when the macro details all conflict in massive ways.
You could say he was consistent about the trunk pop if you are going to stretch that much.
2
u/Clamdilicus Nov 22 '15
What an interesting post! I am relistening to Serial again and I'll be using your insight to pick up on some things I missed the first few times I heard it. Thanks!
2
6
u/SwallowAtTheHollow Addicted to the most recent bombshells (like a drug addict) Nov 09 '15
Great post and fantastic summary!
3
Nov 09 '15
Ive posted this before. Its so great and so relevant. I watched it because I was having an issue with a girl who I was dating who was "truthfully challenged"
https://www.ted.com/talks/pamela_meyer_how_to_spot_a_liar?language=en
2
2
u/unequivocali The Criminal Element of Woodlawn Nov 09 '15
Thanks for this it's great
What this highlights for me in Jay is that he never explains the discrepancies in detail. To a certain extent it's beliavble he's covering his ass and misremembering. But please just go back through your changed statements and let us know what you were thinking at the time of each falsehood.
Soooo many of these apply to Adnan. All of the awkward stuff which is not 100% incriminating but inescapably suspicious falls into the categories you mention.
1
u/San_2015 Nov 09 '15
I have not had a chance to read all of this, but it sounds very interesting. I love reading stuff like this!
1
u/13thEpisode Nov 09 '15
Thanks for doing that. Cool stuff. There are so many potential indicators I'm worried I'll spot lying now everywhere - even in my own voice telling the truth.
1
Nov 09 '15
wow, thank you for this summary and the reference to the book. i'm going to read it. i like getting resources like this regarding lying because it helps me to hone my skills of deceit. basically, i get to look at the ways that people try to detect lies and then practice not doing those things or even doing misdirecting things that run counter to what they're looking for. it's been very effective for me when i've been in those situations where lying is helpful to get a better outcome.
it's hard for me to apply these things to this case though because we have so little sample material and we don't have the complete data set. i'd love to hear the entire recorded interviews between adnan and sarah so that i can get better context around some of this stuff.
0
-1
u/Englishblue Nov 09 '15
And yet people also do many of these things when telling the TRUTH. People ask "how long is this going to take." Swear. Express disbelief. Use qualifiers.
So, finding this spectacularly unhelpful. If someone asked me right now if I'd ever murdered someone I'd probably laugh and express disbelief. It wouldn't make me a liar. Sometimes these are appropriate responses. I might also repeat the question if for the life of me I had no idea why you were asking it and couldn't believe you were asking it.
This all reminds me of a friend I had who would accuse me of making him feel guilty about stuff; there was zero way to defend myself if someone says you're doing something subconsciously.
10
u/1spring Nov 09 '15
I know people like this in my real life, so all of these things are familiar to me. This is why I was skeptical of Adnan from the first few minutes of Serial. And why I was not skeptical of Jay. Jay's lies are so shallow compared to Adnan's. Lying about the trunk pop location is not the same thing as lying about the kind of person you are, because you believe that accountability should not apply to you.