 So what do you got? Today, we're going to talk about Ryan Ferguson and Chuck Erickson. They arrested for murder in 2001, I believe. Greg, tell us about the videos we're going to watch. Yeah, these two videos are simply interviews with the police department in Columbia, Missouri. And these guys have been brought in because one of them, two years after the murder, was reading a newspaper case and remembered being in that area earlier that same morning. It was a Halloween night late and started to think, well, maybe it was me. And so I mentioned it to a friend. There was a sketch that looked a little bit like the friend called the police. And here's what we're going to see. This is my father's name. Sometimes things go horribly wrong. Yeah, I know where you're going. It doesn't matter. The thing about it is, if they're going to nail you with it, if they're going to pin this on you, your mother's will get it. If that's going to happen regardless. And it looks like they got all this stuff and all this evidence. If they're going to pin it on you, your mother's will get it pinned on you for the right reasons. Yeah, that's exactly what I said to you earlier, man. I didn't, oh my God. Trying to get me into a hit or something. I didn't do it. I didn't do it. I mean, sat me down and waiting until trial. I mean, just taking me down to jail because I didn't do anything. I'm not being something. I understand. But do you think that if you go down to jail and by a lot of times when we talk to people, they think, I just maintained that I didn't do it. I didn't do it. That it's all going to go away? You think that would go away? No, I know if I did something, they would know that I did it. Okay. All right? Yeah. I'm innocent. Because you're innocent of killing this guy. I'm innocent of even being that. I'm not involved in this in any way. All right? It was all me that, it's the truth. There's nothing I can do or say about that. It's America's everything. I mean, I mean, my hope is that I don't have any help, man. I'm going to jail for something I didn't do. I'm not doing it, dealing it to get a lesser sentence that I didn't do it. But if it didn't go down just the way this guy's saying, why should you take the rap or something? So you tell him I didn't have a choice. I don't have a choice, man. I'm telling you what happened. I'm telling you what happened. But what if you still had the choice to tell your side of the story? And it wasn't exactly like this, whatever the silly guy was saying was. No, no, no. But, but, I want to be straight up with you, man. I really don't appreciate you coming in here and doing this. All right? I told them the truth. All right? No matter what, that isn't true. That's what happened. All right? I'm not hoping that anything changes. I'm hoping that they realize that I didn't have anything to do with it. I'm hoping that they haven't had some truth that I didn't do with it. Well, though, they don't believe you. Well, I mean, it sucks taking it court. I'm going to have to go to trial, dude. I didn't do anything. And I'm not going to have to do this. I mean, it's a game. Do you understand anything else about it? All right, Greg, what do you got? Yeah, this is a really interesting start to an interrogation or whatever this is. If I'm asking you, who's trying to convince who in this room, who would you say? I would say it's a guy who sounds like Jerry Seinfeld going, you ever notice? Yeah, yeah, yeah. Is it the police officers asking questions with an upward tone or making statements with an upward tone constantly? If we just take tone for a minute, Ryan, the suspect is telling and telling hard, no, I didn't do it. He's emphatic with his body language. He's emphatic with his words. He's emphatic with his voice. He's emphatic with everything he's doing. In fact, the only times we see him not emphatic is when he's hopeless, when he says, well, I'm hopeless. And he shows that with his body language. The other interesting piece, I look for congruency when a person uses choice of words that's diction or that's verbal. They're vocal where their voice is making the same sounds are in a downward telling tone. Their cadence is correct. Their pitch is correct. And then I look for nonverbals and all that body language and those exposed fingers extended out and driving his point when he tries to make it. It's powerful. It shows if I were sitting across the room, this guy going and tell the boss, hey boss, I don't think this guy did it. Just based on that. There's one thing he does that might make this guy jump on him and that's when he rubs his thighs. So we see an adapter. But what do we always tell you? There are no signs of deception, only signs of stress. And you look for clusters. The cluster's simply not there. I could go on, but I'm gonna leave some of this alone. One of the things that I would, oh look, two things I got to cover here. How often have you heard us talk about punishment question? This guy didn't wait for the question. He says, I guess I'm going to jail, but I'm not guilty. You don't hear people say, take me to jail and let me go to court. It is a very American thing, very American thing to say, give me my day in court. We are always, people say, I'll take it to the Supreme Court with no idea even what that means. This is right off to a start of this kid looking innocent to me. Chase, what do you got? I got pretty much the same. So I wake up around 4 30 every day. I'm downstairs watching these in Jamaica where I'm at today. And I had no idea what this was. And just watching this first 30 seconds, within 30 seconds, I was already maybe biased but within that 30 seconds, I'm like, this is probably an innocent person. Here's a list of things that guilty people will do most often. They'll reassert their character and motives. They'll retell the story again. They'll add details to the story. They'll attempt to help the police. They'll ask questions about evidence. They'll ask what other people have said. They'll return to the backstory and details that prove that they are innocent. Truthful people will behave in a very different way. They will ascertain and continue to assert their innocence. There's anger response. There's an immediate denial. There's continued and increasingly firm denials. There's unchanging story without the need to return to it. Unflinching confidence that no proof exists, which you definitely see in this video. And then one thing that you'll see in innocent people is confusion. You don't see a lot of confusion in people who know damn well why they're in that room. So the confusion plays an important part. So here, all of his gestures are so perfectly timed with his words. I know Scott's gonna probably talk about this. And I would say this, with all the other behaviors we're observing is enough to convince me knowing nothing about this case whatsoever. Not that he's really innocent, but that something is definitely off here and he looks innocent to me, just watching this video and knowing nothing about it. Scott, what do you got? All right, yeah, I'm with you in the first 30 seconds. And Greg had called me after that and he's like, well, what do you think? I said, well, I haven't watched yet. After my 30 seconds, I was, I said, I'll have to wash my mouth. I was pretty angry, let's say, because I could see where this was going. This guy never says, tell me what, the detective never says, tell me what happened. He never says, how did you get here? He doesn't say, he doesn't ask him anything like that at all. He goes in to aggressive mode. He's not as aggressive as we're gonna see in a little while, but he gets a little bit more than aggressive there. He's doing this wrong. He's doing it wrong. We get a lot of comments. Show us a bad confession. So it shows us a false confession. You're looking at not this one, but in the next one we'll be seeing plenty of that. Now, for the body language for Ryan, he's not closed off. He's not in any kind of confession mode. Whatsoever, he's not having any kind of inner dialogue. He's not prepping his answers up here, thinking when that question comes in, he's not thinking and then he's just answering in this free flow of information. There's no delay, there's no nothing in there. When you're analyzing an interrogation or an interview, like in this case, when we do that, you always hear me say, well, one of the things that he or she didn't say was, wait a minute, I didn't do it. Hang on just a second, which is what you hear when the person didn't do it. That's all this guy's saying the whole time. I didn't do it. It wasn't me, I'm innocent because this. I'm innocent because that, I didn't do it. He's frustrated. We seem to get frustrated, so I'm getting worked up. So this guy's doing it wrong. He's using, I've got $1,000 that said a long time ago, he took the single course of the read technique and probably went through to the advanced thing, but he's forgotten how to use it. The great thing about the read technique, it's got specific steps you use, but you use those, you mold them to fit you and that situation. You go in with the assumption that the person did it quite often you do. I don't do that every time when I'm using it, but that's one of the, they say to do that. That's the big thing you go in on attack. In this case, this guy's doing it wrong. He's, you can see some of the steps he's following. I'll point him out as we go through this, but he shouldn't be doing it this way. He's not listening. He acts like he knows for sure this kid is guilty. And I didn't, I don't think he was. I mean, apparently he's been let out or something, but I don't think he was. I'm gonna watch that Netflix thing and see what all happens with this. Mark, what do you got? Today's video is sponsored by Aura. I'm excited for this because I've been using this app for over two years. If you didn't know how much private information is out there on the internet about you, when you first see it, it's pretty shocking and maybe a little disturbing. These people that collect all these private things about you are called data brokers, but there's a secret here. They have to take down your information if you ask them to, so they make it incredibly hard to do. So what we do is let Aura handle that for us and you can do the same. You can let Aura do all the work tracking down and removing all the stuff that you don't want online. And you can try Aura for two weeks for free using the link right at the top of the description down there. And Aura does a ton more than just getting your information off the internet. They protect you from threats that you and even your kids can't see coming. And it's super easy to set up. You don't have to go download a million different apps to get all the benefits that Aura has like parental controls, antivirus, VPN, software, password management. They even have identity theft insurance, everything. One of my friends was over here sitting in this office just a week ago and I typed his name in and within just a few minutes we found everything. Even his anonymous accounts were on the dark web and the passwords associated with those. He downloaded Aura that night. So you should look into this. Your private information should be private. You can go to aura.com slash TBP just like the behavior panel, TBP right now to start a free two week trial that I've also linked down in the description. Yeah, so look, if you like and you subscribe, then you'll know that we watch a lot of videos of interrogations. And so between us we've seen a lot, a lot, a lot, a lot and done some as well, obviously. And this one just jumps out completely. Within a few seconds of this, I was thinking, why are we looking at this? What's going on here? What are we looking at here? Because nothing about it says right from moment one that we're liable to have somebody who's done anything. Why? What's happening here? Oh, number one, Greg, you were saying, look, if I was sitting across from this guy, well, this guy isn't sitting across from this guy. This guy's almost sitting on top of him. It's almost like he's been paid for a dance. It's so close already from moment one that I already go, what's going on here? Why are you so close into his territory to the point where you're already intimidating? I would say that proximity is already intimidating, which suggests you don't want information out of this person. You want to intimidate them from moment one. That we've not really seen. I don't think anywhere else in any of the videos that we've looked at that level of very fast, quick intimidation. So it already jumps out just to agree with everybody. The subject here gives many, many, many clear denials that you just don't see very often. Such clarity of denial, such repetition of denial and the alibi of, I just wasn't there. I wasn't there. That's a good alibi. I wasn't there. Now, what's happening with the interviewer here? The interviewer is narrowing down the options already for this person. The interviewer isn't interested in what else were you doing, where else were you? The interviewer is interested in narrowing down the options on being guilty. How would you best like to be guilty in this? Not are you guilty? Are you not? How would you best like to admit your guilt on this? So already narrowing down the options to the point where the subject very quickly gets into a situation of what I would call futility and says, I don't have any hope. If you manage to get somebody that quickly into a point of no hope, there's something quite extreme going on, I would suggest. Where's the lawyer? In this case, I mean, another great case of whether you're guilty or innocent, but especially if you're innocent, don't answer any questions. Get a lawyer before you say anything. Your only conversation should be, I'll be getting a lawyer. Where's my lawyer? Is my lawyer here yet? That's all. That's all you need to be talking about. The other thing I'll say, look, lots of open palm gestures at Naval height, that doesn't necessarily mean that somebody's being honest, but it's very continuous with this person. It doesn't deviate a great deal from that. So that's a good indicator. And who's the most engaged in this situation? Who looks, I mean, I know we have one person who vocally is doing those upward inflections, those Seinfeld inflections of will you join in on this? Will you join in on my story? But still very relaxed and disengaged with it. Whereas the other, the subject is really, is upright in the chair and engaged with telling the truth as they see it, which isn't a big bunch of detail. It's like, I wasn't there. I'm not there. I'm nothing to do with this. This is quite interesting because it's very different from what we would normally say. Let's have another. Well, just so you know, and go ahead, Owen, you're talking about the seating. No, I was going to talk about a couple other things. Number one, this kid got out of jail 10 years later and has had a multimillion dollar loss settlement for being wrongfully imprisoned. And this case is really messy. It's worth going and looking at the details. And you guys who know this thing, we're happy for you to make comments down below. We don't always get all the facts right on this because we're paying attention to the interrogation. And go ahead and see my next one. Yeah. Yeah, what I was going to say is in interrogation, it's okay to get sort of close. That guy is a little bit too close, but he's not real close because he's leaning back a lot and doing all that. Quite often what I'll do is I don't sit across the table. I sit next to him, not right next to him, but it's okay to be that close in case you need to reach out. But when you do, you usually scooch up a little bit. Just to pull the clarity. Well, let's keep the interrogation thing for one second. And each of us make a comment because for me, this is all wrong right off. This guy is going in without any information gathering whatsoever. He doesn't look at the guys going in with an intent. You talk about Reed. Look, I come from the intelligence interrogation world where we also get into confessions because of the nature of what we collect. But our first intent is information. I would say it's much more important to us to find out where the bad guys came from so we can find more bad guys than worrying about the one we have in our hands. And when you're in a war, that matters. How much of this and that exist? We don't always even know who we're talking to. We have to clarify that up front before we get to that level of detail. So it's a very different mindset. And if you don't know how to use Reed, you can certainly force a bad memory into somebody's head. Hmm. I feel my face getting hot. One of those tapery plays. Sometimes things go horribly wrong. See, I know where you're going, this man. The thing about you is if they're going to nail you with it, if they're going to pin this on you, you know, your mother's will get it. If that's going to happen regardless, and it looks like they got all this stuff and all this evidence, if they're going to pin it on you, your mother's will get it pinned on you for the right reasons. That's exactly what I said to you earlier, man. I didn't, like, yeah, trying to get me to hit something I didn't do. I didn't do it. I mean, sat me down and waiting until trial, maybe just take me down to jail because I didn't do anything. I'm not being something. You didn't do it. I understand. But do you think that if you go down to jail and by, you know, a lot of times when we talk to people, they think, you know, I just maintained my, that I didn't do it. I didn't do it. They just saw me go away. No, I know if I did something, they would know that I did it. Okay. All right? I'm innocent. Because you're innocent of killing this guy. I'm innocent of even being with him. I'm not involved in this in any way. All right? It's all me that, it's the truth. There's nothing I can do or say about that to make it different. I mean, I haven't, I mean, my hope is that I don't have any hope, man. I'm going to jail because something I didn't do. I'm not going to make the billing it to get a lesser sentence, but I didn't do it. But if it didn't go down, just the way this guy's saying, why should you take the rap or something? So because I didn't have a choice. I don't even have a choice, man. I'm telling you what happened. I'm telling you what happened. But what if you still had the choice to tell your side of the story? And it wasn't exactly like what this, whatever this other guy's saying was. I know. But, but I want to be straight up with you, man. I really don't appreciate you coming in here and doing this. All right. I told them the truth. All right. No matter what, that is the truth. That's what happened. All right. I'm not hoping that anything changes. I'm hoping that they realize that I didn't have anything to do with it. I'm hoping that they have some truth that I didn't do in there. Well, though, they don't believe you. Well, I mean, it sucks. They get caught. I'm going to have to go to trial, dude. I didn't do anything. And I'm not going to have to do this. I'm going to do this. Do you understand anything else about it? This is my father's name. You know, it's something that happens that you make, you know, if you make him sick, people understand you don't really want to come out with it. Because we're ashamed. I understand that. And I've done that with things. But this is definitely not one of those cases, man. I've not done anything. I've told them the truth. You know, I can do this in here and away. And I have a million people trying to talk me into saying I did something I did not. It's not fun. I guess I'm just trying to keep, I'd like to see you help yourself. I think you still can help yourself. Because you think that I did it? I don't know what happened. You know? Well, look at this, man. I didn't do it on your side. Oh, yeah. And the only way I can help myself is by leading to something I didn't do. That's what you're saying? No, not really. That's exactly it. Let's say, for instance, it's his own problem. Chuck, let's say this was all something he, it was his idea. Let's say that he's trying to pin this whole thing on you because he paints a pretty bad picture. Maybe that. Maybe he is. But I would go with him. I don't know anything about it. You could make it easier for him if you were able to come clean on what I did. I'd buy it and I'd come clean. All right. But if you didn't, give me a hand. You think it would make it easier for your mom to have it? Your mom in particular? You said, mom in particular? Well, I guess that he is. But I haven't. I don't know how many times I've just said this to you guys. I have not done anything. I was not there. I did not do anything. Wait, you can help yourself. You do it. I mean, I'm doing it. I'm doing it. I'm telling you the truth. So I'm doing what I can. I mean, if you know what this is like, man, let me talk to my dad. Let's talk to my mom. So I'm gonna get one phone call. I gotta call my dad to get the water for you. I gotta call my mom, so she'll... Let me find out more last week. Thank you. Chase, what do you got? There is, there are a few things wrong here from an interrogation perspective. So just looking through this lens, he's ignoring repeated denials. An interrogator shouldn't do that. There's a pressure being applied to help yourself that kind of implies a confession and not an emphasis at all on the truth. When the confession is more important than the truth, you will have a very bad interrogation. So if somebody believes the only way to improve their situation is by agreeing with an interrogator, there's a big problem. So it's also in introducing this alternative scenario, even after these denials, there's a denial of a request to speak with family. And in people this age, you gotta be a little careful because they might be asking for legal help by asking it, can I talk to my mom or my dad? Don't know how old this kid is, but then there's misinterpretation of cooperation. The police are interpreting this person, him telling the truth or making denials is not cooperative. And this sets the stage for agreement being the only way out. And there's a lack of clarity, like if there's a way that you can help yourself, would you do it? So these vague questions, just kind of this is the interrogation version of the foot in the door technique. And there's genuine exasperation there. He is telling instead of selling this, the guy that we're looking at here, the suspect, there's one point in this clip though that he engages in real self-soothing behavior. And it's when he's talking about having to get lawyers' fees from his dad. So way too often, I think interrogators are trained to get confessions instead of truth. I got called to do a concierge interrogation once here in the US for a major crime and the head of the department asked me how fast I could get a confession out of the guy. And I asked him if he was paying me for a confession or the truth and he said all he wants is a confession. So I took my non-refundable deposit and went home. And the alleged suspect of that interview that I was supposed to do is free today. Mark, what do you got? Yeah, so look, I will go back to the space being used here. There's a difference between using space in order to build a connection with somebody and using space to be territorially aggressive. So yeah, absolutely. If you come into within a hands and arms distance of somebody, you're in what we'd call personal space. And of course, you could be in that personal space and trying to create a connection but you could also be in that personal space and taking that space and being intimidating. And just as you say there, Chase, it's kind of a foot in the door technique. I'd say again, we've got this guy lent back. So he doesn't look like he's proximate but his hand is out at the corner of the table and taking up all of that space. That for me is not somebody trying to reach out and connect. That's somebody trying to take territory. And though you might wanna do that towards the end of some kind of interview or some way through it as you've built rapport, I don't think this person is trying to build rapport at this point. I think he's trying to use his status and use his weight and use the space to his advantage not to negotiate with this other person in order to win information. And so the stress is building up in this person being interviewed. And so we get a suppression gesture here. Keeping down the energy. So we've clearly got tension building up which he's keeping down and then he's self soothing on the front of his head with that. Again, that's an extreme gesture to see the moment the hands, most of the time, if you get somebody with their hands on their head at some point, either somebody scored and then you realize, oh, it's been disallowed and it's the clear suppression of that energy or some awful situation has happened and some realization of that. It's extreme to go up here or here we have it in this situation. So extreme territory being taken, extreme suppression going on. Again, not really seen that very much in many of the interviews that we've ever looked at. Scott, what have you got on this one? Yeah, I agree with you. He's not trying to connect with this guy at all. Not even a little bit. He's already decided what's gonna happen and that this guy's already guilty. He thinks this other guy has confessed everything. Apparently he thinks that because he's going in so strong. He's not trying to do anything like that. I think we're seeing frustration. We're seeing his hands through his hair. We'll do that when we're frustrated as well or we're trying to get heat off of us as we heat up. It is self soothing at the same time, it's an adapter and he's repeating the same thing over and over I didn't do it, it wasn't me, I didn't do it. I don't know how he got this information, it wasn't me. This guy never says, then where were you that night? Tell me what led up to that night. Then why are you, he doesn't say any of that. He's doing it wrong. I'm getting worked up, sorry. So he's doing it wrong. So he starts that theoretical stuff. Well, if you did do it and you want it to be end up better for you and wouldn't you wanna do something that's good for yourself? If there's a way you could help yourself when you do it, of course he's gonna say, yeah. But what does he say? Yeah, I'm doing it. I'm doing it right now. I'm telling you I didn't do it. It never does he say, well, tell me what happened today. So you weren't there? No, I wasn't. Well, then where were you? Tell me about that, none of that. Greg, what do you got? Remember, this is two years after the fact, just one key point. But let's list, I might not simply say read wrong. Read wrong is all this is. And that means to both reads with the A and the other way because he's not reading the person sitting in the chair. Not at all. If he were, he would notice defiance, defiance or that chin back and him saying innocent and throwing himself out of the chair almost at one point in this interview. There's a whole lot of things going on here. This is just proof. You can't take a block and do this and run through the block and go check, check, check, check and be a interrogator. It is an art form. It is not an art form for the squeamish because you're gonna fail and look stupid many times. And he's doing it really well right here in front of me in my opinion because what he's done is not heard a word this guy has said. So he's not reading him and he's not reading him. So let's just not say it's the read technique that's causing the problem. It's poor application. There have been many people who've gotten great true confessions. When you're set out to get a confession and you've decided before you go in, which a lot of people who use read are before they go in, you're going to go in with a checklist mindset and a bias mindset and that's what he's doing. This kid is defiant when he says, when he first comes up and he says, I understand that. Pretty damn defiant. And he touches his brow from stress. Well, there's a good indicator. We always say that means something. Yeah, it means something. It means he's stressed. If Mark to your point, I guarantee you that if you didn't know me and you came in and sat down in the room and I came in and started interrogating you, you're gonna feel stressed because I'm gonna make sure you feel some stress to see where it goes. But what he does not pay attention to is where this kid's emphasis is. By that, I mean, does his emphasis with his hands and his vocal tone emphasize the same things his words are doing? Does it align? So when he touches his brow, that's one thing he's doing. Gravity defying, extended finger movements constantly. The cop, on the other hand, tries to avoid the question. When he starts asking, so what you're telling me in a beautiful summary, what you're telling me is the only way to make my condition better is to lie to you and tell you I did it. The cop does his best to avoid that and he doesn't allow him to. And one of the things we know, I tell you all the time, you hear me talking about Sierra because it's the most profound experience in psychology I've ever dealt with because you're under high duress talking to these people. You have to be careful because we're training their brain, their limbic brain, their animal brain, their mammalian brain to respond. And when a person is in that heightened fight or flight and you're injecting information, how that memory got there is not clear to them. I think about last time, any of you were in an automobile accident and how shadowy those memories are. Well, if the memory got there because somebody put it in or the memory got there because it happened, can be difficult to determine. And he starts to inject his first piece of information to this kid under stress. He's talking about them being there together, but the kid continues as one message is congruent and it's innocence. For the life of me, I don't know how a person gets to the point they don't look at the person they're interrogating. And look, we've all made mistakes. Everybody does, not beating the guy, I'm beating the process. Somebody watching this video should have said, hey, did you notice this kid being so defiant? Did you notice? But this kid went to prison for 10 years and only was exonerated through work. I think it was an innocence project, but exonerated and let go from there. You should watch an interview with this kid on the morning news. He's got the most positive attitude of anybody I've ever seen. It's amazing. One of those tape replays. And you know, it's something that you make, you make them sick, people understand. You don't really want to come out with it because we're ashamed. I understand that. And I've done that with things, but this is definitely not one of those cases. I've not done anything. I've told them the truth. You know, I can do this, sit here and wait and have a million people try to talk me into saying I did something I did not. It's not fun. I guess I'm just trying to be, I'd like to see you help yourself. I think you still can help yourself. Because you think that I did it. I don't know what happened. You know? Well, look at this, there's certain things you can do to help yourself. Oh, God. And the only way I can help myself is by reading this something I didn't do. It's what you think. No, not really. That's exactly it. Let's say, for instance, this other fellow, Chuck. Let's say this was all something he, it was his idea. Let's say that he's trying to pin this whole thing on you because he paints a pretty bad picture. Maybe that, maybe he is, but I'm not with him. I don't know anything about it. If you could make it easier for him, if you were able to come clean him or anything. I'd buy that. I'd come clean, all right? But if you hadn't, if you hadn't, you think it would make it easier for your mom and dad, your mom in particular, if you said, mom and dad. Well, I guess that he is. But I haven't. I don't know how many times I just said this to you guys. I have not done anything. I was not there. I did not do anything. So where, you could help yourself, you do it. I mean, I'm, I'm doing it. I'm doing it. I'm telling the truth. So I'm doing what I can. I mean, if you know what this is like, man, let me talk to my dad. Let me talk to my mom. So I'm gonna get on a phone call, man. I gotta call my dad to get water for you. I gotta call my mom, so she'll... Let me find out about all that. Thank you. Okay. This is my father's name. You said, I'd always wanted to kill someone before I was 60 anyway. One night was this, that this happened during the Tribune. Was there a special occasion? Halloween, yeah. Halloween, okay. So that night, when you see Ryan's children that, do you think that Ryan was children to make sure he was dead? Yeah. Yeah, did he say that? Or is that just you thinking that? That's what I think. Okay. Was there anything taken from the guy that we will know where it's at or will be able to find him? I think his dad found the wallet. Ryan's dad found the wallet? Yeah, but I don't know. Okay. Not for certain on that? No. Okay. And what did you say earlier about what she thought he choked him with? Or was it possible that he made choking with something? Was that right? Yeah. But you don't know what it was. No. Okay, all right. There was obviously a lot of injuries to this guy, so it's pretty obvious that he was hitting with the lugs, but you're not sure who did that, right? Yeah. So basically, you're feeling that what you're recalling? I think I just blacked out. Okay. After he hit the guy and he went down, you see Ryan choking him. I mean, yeah. I mean, I blacked out in between when I hit the guy and when I see this lady, basically. Okay, but she did see Ryan choking him out. Yeah. Okay. All right. Hang on this for just a second. Let me try to find this Dallas guy. I'll be right back with you. All right, Mark, what do you got? Yeah. So look, interesting one on that. By the way, this is a different subject. It's a different person. I had to have a good look as I was going through these ago. Hang on. We've changed subject here. Chuck Erickson. Chuck Erickson, yeah. So the last guy was Ryan. This is Chuck. Okay, so what do I notice immediately here? The pulling up of the sleeves seems an odd thing to do. It's out of context with what he's talking about at the time. And then his hand goes up to face block there. Something around, I think his dad found a wallet. I think his dad found a wallet. So it seems to me, I'm going to put an element of uncertainty around this whole wallet situation. We'll see as we go on, how much uncertainty there seems to be around a lot of stuff. But that initially jumped out to me. There's some uncertainty about what's being talked about here and quite a big level of uncertainty. Now, the difference here is the interviewer here is giving the subject way more space. Way more space. So that's an interesting difference in the interview here. We'll see him giving him way more space to talk and way more distance from each other. Let's see how, if this interview plays out any differently. But first off, it's a lot of uncertainty with the subject around what he's talking about. Greg, what do you got on this one? Yeah, Mark, he may give him a lot of space, but he also gives him a lot of information. When I interrogate somebody, part of the way I know that they have done a thing is we have a thing called guilty knowledge. It may be what happened at the site and nobody else would know it. Maybe what color shoes the guy was wearing because there's something odd. Any of that kind of weird thing, we would fish for that. We don't tell them that because the minute you tell them that, you have tainted the entire interrogation because now they're feeding you back information you feed them. And remember what I just said, under duress, under duress, when a person is feeling fight or flight and you're telling them things that goes into shadowy memory. So here we have, this guy is feeding information to the perpetrator, to the suspect in this case. And it's really interesting to watch because he's forced him into this situation. Now these guys, I don't know this is a longer interrogation than we have access to video. The videos we're watching is what we're basing it on. And this guy is open to saying, I was there, I did it. Look, he's saying, I was there. This is the guy who said he thought maybe because he blacked out something happened. This is read wrong again, pressure and inject memories. His inserts, the first part's interesting is when the kid is saying something about, his friend had said he was gonna kill somebody before 60, he's illustrating out a frame. Those of you who know me, know that I say when you're illustrating out a frame I'm suspicious of the facts. I wanna ask, how do you know that? Where'd you get the information? He also says, that's what I think, but it's not what he thinks. When he says, I think that Ryan was trying to choke him to death. No, the guy just told you what to think because he asked you with a leading question, a bad question. Chase, was Ryan trying to choke that guy to death with the belt? That's a leading question. Of course you're gonna say yes. What do you think he wants to know? Andy's under stress. There's also a couple of others, but my other favorite one is the cop swivels in the chair just before he goes in for something that seems like it's important. And he backtracks when he said, you said that he choked him with something. And he goes, well, maybe you said it's possibly choked him with something. That's a bold move that he realizes maybe he made a mistake and he steps back. That's a good indicator something's going on. Let me give you just a handful of other things he's feeding him. He was hit more than once. You should never tell somebody that. You should say, you hit him once and it killed him. No, no, I hit him 50 times. Then you'll know the guy's telling the truth. He was choking to kill, choke him and what he choked him with. Ryan was trying to kill him. He's feeding him this information. All of this is all fed directly to this guy. And how now do you have any idea what the guy really knew versus what you fed him under stress? Really tough. Scott, what do you got? All right, yeah. The detective is just telling him what he did and this kid's agreeing with it. That's all that's really happening here. And it doesn't work that way. And this kid must have said to himself, okay, I don't know what happened. Here's what I, or that's what he's actually saying. I had, this is what I think might have happened. I'm not sure because I blacked out. And this guy is just filling in what blacked out and then he's agreeing with it. When it comes to police officers, my best friend, the whole odd world's a detective for 22 years, homicide detective. I'm all for the police and the cops. I'm totally for them. But this is the case where these two or these three are on my last nerve because they're doing this wrong. And they should know better than that. Somebody should have said, hey, man, if anybody looked at it, look, you need to go back and look at this again. That's why it's so important to have somebody watching what you're doing, watching what's happening. It's like, hang on to the second, man. You need to go ask this, this and this because this something's not right about that here. I've talked about that on here before, having someone observe what you're doing. I think that's really important. This has all the hallmarks of a false confession. This kid doesn't know what happened. He's assuming things happened because of some dream he had. And this guy is just pumping him full of answers to give. So he never adds anything to it. He never adds any new information. It's all given to him by this detective. So, Chase, what do you got? Yep. And I agree with everybody here. And this is all happening on Halloween. So why do crimes happen more often on Halloween? We have a stacking of a few things. There's the anonymity of costumes. There's crowd behavior, increased alcohol consumption, increased deviant behavior, large numbers of people wearing costumes, even if a criminal isn't wearing one can influence criminal behavior. At this point, Mark, where you're talking about him finding his dad found a wallet, totally agree. He's rolling his sleeves up, which I would personally classify as ventilation behavior. There's facial blocking, facial touching, there's mouth covering, a lot of crazy stuff going on here. And these are my notes, the bullet notes I wrote this morning before I saw the other videos. I didn't know who he was. I don't know anything about the case. He's bringing up memory loss, no mention of specific names, no mention of innocence or guilt, trouble identifying a firm belief about the alleged perpetrator. The whole video, his posture is locked down. He's rigid. He has trouble with details and can't seem to ruin a certain about a damn thing here. So even his statements about hitting someone start with I think. All of those do that. So when the detective stands to exit, one thing that I thought was interesting that I think you should pay attention to is the kid locks onto the detective's notepad and gets even more rigid and stiff, like staring at that notepad. That's something I look for in people who are worried, not people who are guilty, but people who are worried. I always wanna see if they lock onto the data that I bring into the room. If they're worried about data or potential evidence. That is a similar red flag to me. Let's call it a, let's call it a salmon flag. One of those tape replays. You said, I'd always wanted to kill someone before I was 60 anyway. One night was this, that this happened at the Tribune, it was a very special occasion. It's Halloween. Halloween, okay. So that night when you see Ryan showing up, do you think that Ryan was showing to make sure he was dead? Yeah, did he say that or is that just you thinking that? That's what I think. Okay, all right. Was there anything taken from the guy that we will know where it's at or will be able to find him? I think his dad found the wallet. Ryan's dad found the wallet? Yeah, but I'm not. Okay, you're not first starting on that? No. Okay. And what did you say earlier about what you thought he choked him with? Or was it possible that he made choking with something, is that right? Yeah. But you don't know how to go out. No. Okay, all right. There was obviously a lot of injuries to this guy, it's pretty obvious that he was hitting more than once, but you're not sure who did that, right? Yeah. So basically, your feeling that what you're recalling is? I think I just blacked out. Okay. After he hit the guy and he went down, you see Ryan choking. I mean, yeah. I mean, I blacked out in between when I hit the guy, and when I see this lady, basically. Okay, but you did see Ryan choking him out? Yeah. Okay. All right. I hang on this for just a second. I'm gonna try to find this Dallas guy, I'll be right back with you. Now, you said earlier that after you hit the guy, that you got sick, could you actually throw up? Or did you just feel, you know, you did right? I didn't know. You did throw up? Yeah. Okay. You didn't find any involvement down there, so can you kind of pinpoint where you think you got sick at? I don't know. Was it in the park? Maybe it was on some dirt or was it on concrete? Do you remember here that splicing sound? Yeah, I think. You think? Yeah. Not certain though, right? Yeah. Okay, that's fine. Back to the ranch. Later, just my notes, I really asked. You said it was like kind of like a tire tool style ranch, is that right? Yeah. It wasn't like a Crescent Rancher. I'm gonna go in the panel. Okay. Okay. Going back to when you said that you hit this guy with the tool. Said you kind of got sick after that. How many times did you think you hit him all together? Just once. Just once? Well, the only problem I had with that is I know that you just hit more than once with the tool. I'm saying like I just hit him once. You just hit him once, and you didn't hit him more than that? No. Like two times. I just do think I remember the first time that I hit him. Like I just, I remember hearing this noise and just seeing his face and it just made me sick. And the noise was hitting him screaming? No, it was like a groan. Okay, okay. Okay. You'd said earlier though that it was possible that you may have hit him more than once. Is that different? No, I didn't hit him more than once. Okay. All right. What kind of shoes would you wear that night? I don't know. All right, I'll go first on this one. When the detective asks about the vomit because he didn't find any, there's your red flag. There's your red. Why is there, if you threw up, dude, where is it? You know, let's talk about that. Let's go into deeper. Let's start finding little things and start opening those things up and see what's going on there. He didn't care. One of the two things is happening. He didn't care if Chuck was innocent or number two. He's just uneducated about what he's doing. He's probably done this before and it probably worked great. I mean, he's probably had a lot of success with his approach to this. But when it counts, it's not working. It's not doing what it's supposed to do. When you go into these, you have to go in, thinking this person, let's find out what's happened. I can't assume they did it. You can act like they did it and act like you think they did, but you can't think that. This guy's doing it wrong. Greg, what do you got? Yeah, so my approach and any interrogation is to figure out what the person knows or what the person says and then to figure out whether that implicates them somewhere else. Not to take a list and to figure out how I can get them onto that list of issues. This is almost as if he came in and said, I got all the evidence here it is. I'm gonna poke until I find out how it ties together. And look, I think either way has valued as long as you're keenly aware that you need to disprove yourself along the way. If, for example, I'm talking and I go along and I give you a piece of information and he could be giving false information, we don't know. And the guy confirms it, then I know that he didn't do it. I've used that technique many times. The guy was hit once in the head and the guy goes, no, it was five times. Okay, I got the right guy. Or if I say the guy was hit 50 times, he said, nope, just once. Then he would be confirming or denying real information. What isn't the way you should do it? It's just to run down a checklist of getting the guy covered. Now, I also think when you're under pressure to close a case that's two years old, there's all kinds of things that happen. And if it looks like it is real, then you're probably gonna run down that list. But guys, if you're just running down a checklist and you're going, he did one non pertinent question about two years ago in vomit, well, it's non pertinent because if they didn't find it then they can't go to the place it is now. So it has no value whatsoever in the conversation. He feeds him information about the wrench, hit more than once. The only problem I have with that is, when he says the only problem I have with that is, he's telling him more information than he shouldn't have said. I'm just gonna beat a dead horse. But this is where just knowing read fails. You can't just go learn read and not learn how to question, how to validate information, how to read the room, how to read the person you're talking to. If you just run this pressurized checklist that read does, assuming the person is guilty, you're gonna get a lot of red flags because of the stress you're generating, because of the pressure you're generating, it's gonna feed you to take that next step. You can't understand how to clear someone or to prove someone is guilty, then you're going to do this. I think what they're after here is something else. I don't see him as trying to get this guy to admit that all the details. I think he's also after trying to lock down the other kid at the same time. So he's trying to verify information that this guy is giving him that he'll be able to use against the other kid, because this guy's already pretty compliant. He's answering any questions, just simply saying, I don't know. I was blacked out on cocaine and beer or cocaine and alcohol. So I don't see the pressure. Martin, what do you got? Yeah, I agree with everything said so far. I'm gonna add to all of that and say, I suspect that this, the interviewer here is not at all confident in what they're doing. They don't seem to me to be professionally focused in any way. They don't seem to be professionally concentrated on what's happening. We see the guy swinging his legs on the chairs, leaning back, he's swinging his legs. Now look, it could be he's, maybe he's doing that because he's super confident in his technique. He's super confident that he's backed up with a lot of evidence. And he thinks to himself, I can just sit back here and swing my legs. And that's all I need to do in this situation. And the person will rightfully confess. Well, no, what happens is, is the interviewer is doing all the talking. The subject is just getting to agree with elements of it. While the interviewer swings their legs, keeps a lot of distance, doesn't even look a great deal at the interviewer. It's not the kind of professional, oh, it's not the kind of behaviors that I see with other interviewers who are more better trained or more professional about it. I'm not saying the person hasn't been trained. I'm just suggesting that probably a little bit of knowledge can be a bad thing. A little bit of success can be a bad thing. A stopped clock is usually correct twice a day. If you put that, you put that stop clock in a situation where it's doing world time. I mean, it's gonna be right a lot of the day. But by the context of what it's trying to do. And so that's why, look, if you hang out in a certain part of town and you stop people and ask them to open their, the boot of their car, the back of their car, a lot of the time you'll get some dodgy stuff in the back of there because you've chosen the right place in order to say, I'm gonna take a look in the back. If you're going fishing, the sea is often a very good place to go and the sea full of fish. So it seems to me this person may well have been fishing in a sea full of fish for a lot of the career. And then the problem is now and again, you get somebody who's innocent and then you start applying everything that you've done with this context of, I'm always right more than I'm wrong because of where I go fishing. Chase, what do you got on this one? I agree with y'all and keep in mind, read as an interrogation technique gets a lot of flack because back in the 70s, here's exactly what happened. In the read books, they would say like someone avoiding eye contact might be being deceptive and they had a long list in these old training manuals of the science that was available at that time. For the record, any interrogation system, any one that you can think of can be misused in the right hands. Someone can abuse and misuse any interrogation system to get a false confession. All it takes is a lot of cognitive bias, which we don't have a lot of time to get into, but the interviewer here is helping him to develop his own story with leading questions to support his own narrative. Like you're not certain about that, right? And then he says, I hit him once. And then he says the first time that I hit him, I remember hearing this noise. So there's a distinction here between showing and telling when we're recounting a story, this is very critical. Showing involves detailed sensory descriptions of events that are kind of conveying an experience while telling is more direct recounting that just tends to lack a lot of sensory depth. So when people rehearse a story, they more frequently use words like remember, heard, noticed, saw, which can put some distance between them and the event. So this isn't deceptive on its own, but it needs to be picked up on it, especially if they don't normally speak that way. When we saw this behavior in the Amber Heard case, I even made a video compilation of it on Twitter. So the officer is helping him with the story instead of getting details. He's helping him with the narrative instead of obtaining details and truth. Every detail he wants to include in the narrative, he's not only helping the suspect with, he's rephrasing it for him so that there's a clear story. This is bad. The kids seriously uncomfortable, same behavior in this clip, non-verbally that we saw in the last clip. One of those tape replays. You said earlier that after you hit the guy, that you got sick, did you actually throw up or did you just feel, you know, you did throw up? Yeah. Okay. We didn't find any involvement down there. So can you kind of pinpoint where you think you got sick at? I don't know. Was it in the park maybe or on some dirt or was it on concrete? Do you remember hear that splice and sound? Yeah. You think? Not certain though, right? Yeah. Okay. That's fine. Back to the ranch. Later, just my notes, I really asked. You said it was kind of like a tire jewel style ranch, is that right? Yeah. It wasn't like a crescent ranch or... I'm going to get the pineapple. Okay. Okay. Going back to when you said that you hit this guy with the tool. Said you kind of got sick after that. How many times did you think you hit him all together? Just once. Just once? Well, the only problem I had with this, I know that you just hit more than once with the tool. I was saying, I just hit him once. You just hit him once, you didn't hit him more than? No. Like, 10 times? I think that I remember the first time that I hit him. Like, I remember hearing this noise and just seeing his face and it just made me sick. And the noise was him screaming? No, it was like a groan. Okay. Okay. You said earlier though that it was possible that you may have hit him more than once. Is that different? No, I didn't hit him more than once. Okay. All right. What kind of shoes was you wearing that night? I don't know. This is what bothers me. It's okay. Let's go back to when you were talking about how you saw Ryan screaming this guy. Now, we know what the guy has tried me with. That's kind of a thing I've been holding back for. All right. Is it possible that you know what he was screaming with and just didn't want to tell you? Because I don't know. No, like, I think it was a shirt or something. Well, I know it wasn't a shirt. It's like maybe a bungee cord or something from his car. I don't see why he had a rope in his car. Well, we know for a fact that his belt was ripped off in his pants and he was straining his belt. Really? Yeah. Do you see a belt in Ryan's hand? Something look like a rope maybe or a bungee cord? I don't know. Okay. You didn't put anything in your hand though? No, I mean, I don't remember that at all. Okay. Something else that I didn't need to ask you about? We felt like, you know, I asked you earlier if you had gotten hit by this guy or anything like this, but you said he kicked you in the balls when you guys attacked you. So it's not a matter of flipping out and I don't know what's going on. We know you know what's going on. Maybe you forgot some of it, but you didn't forget all that you're telling me. Number one, I just want to look at this guy's crime scene photographs, hopefully for the last time until I look at them again. Multiple, multiple, multiple contusions hit some strikes in this guy's head. There is no way in hell that you hit this guy who wants to try and get sick. If you only want to turn away and get sick, you had to hand the thing off to Ryan because this guy's got the headrooms all over his head. We're talking minimum 15 strikes. I must have done it, but I mean, I don't know if he did that or I stopped and he did it. I don't know. All right, Greg, what do you got? This is a really, really, really good marriage of a poor read technique and a poorly performing perpetrator. This is not a perpetrator, but it doesn't matter. The point is, if tomorrow Chase was grabbed and brought in for this, Chase didn't do it, we'd be along. Ryan, the first kid responded the right way. This kid's uncertain because of the drug blackout, so he's going to have signs of guilt because he has a guilty conscience, whether he did it or not, he has a guilty conscience. You hear him say, I have a guilty conscience. So what does this guy does? He pressures him and he does that pressure and insert information. Again, he likely has an evidence list. Hey, here's the things that happened and he might not have worked the case two years ago, but he's running down that list and trying to pigeon-hold this guy into that list through a series of tools. And he's using read, and so Chase, you hit it dead on. I, with Sharpian interrogation techniques, can get a false confession in three days easily, easily. Whether I would or not is a different story. There's no value in a false confession. You're after facts, you're after getting things. I love the fact this guy doesn't just not agree with him that it was a bungee cord or shirt. He injects and he says, the only thing I've been holding back, well, yeah, that's the only thing. I'm about holding back a few others, but he says it was a belt. And then he even uses the guy's language to convince him that what he saw might've looked like this, but it was a belt. Wow, that's a step and a stretch. When you're closing and you know the guy has it, and Scott, I think we were talking about it off the thing here. What they have done is go in with closed. No investigation. This is not an investigative interrogation in any way. It's just closed. This guy's guilty and I'm gonna get a confession out of it. Very big mindset, very big difference. Now, did we see 15 hours of interrogation they might have done? No, so I wanna make sure we point that out. We're looking at this video. Still doesn't matter because you're still feeding him information. My notes say, how about letting this guy talk? Yeah. When you're interrogating, it's usually a one to two relationship. I ask a question, you talk twice as long. That's what I want. I don't wanna talk twice as long to hear yes or no. The reason we don't want leading questions can, are, have, will. Anything that results in a yes or no answer means I'm doing all the talking. I'm doing nine words, you're doing one. That doesn't make any sense when you're trying to get faxed. So it's one of the things that we do. Anyway, I think, I'm not even sure it's intentional. I think it just doesn't know how read really works and chase your debt on any system. Scott, I know because you use read, you feel like it's a damning of read. It's a damning of poor interrogation skill. Meeting a guy who doesn't, he has guilty conscience even if he didn't do it. Now, could he have done it and blacked out and sure he could have, but don't know that's it. Chase, what do you got? Yeah, and I also think suggestibility plays a major role here. And suggestibility might be the reason that he walked into the police station. Suggestibility could be why he said to his friends, that might've been me. So suggestibility also plays a huge role in false confessions. There's a long list. There's 17 things that are known to produce false confessions. Suggestibility is a huge one. We have fantasy proneness. Someone even being in a glucose deficit is how they refer to it in the literature can do that. But he says, let's go back to what we're talking about, how you saw Brian strangle this guy. Just based on the behavior I've seen with this interviewer, I'm willing to bet whatever they discussed about the strong wing was not that clear cut. So this interviewer is very skilled at revising people's words and statements. And I'm guessing this is not the first time that he's done this. So this is the most, probably, I think the most manipulative police interview I've seen in a very long time. And I don't want people to get their opinion of police from this video. This is very rare. Maybe there was a training deficit. Maybe he made a mistake and maybe that mistake worked a couple of times and he kept doing it. And he tells him they're withholding the weapon. He asks him what he remembers. He corrects him and helps him to keep guessing. The kid still can't remember and guesses a bungee cord. The detective then tells him what the weapon is. He doesn't withhold it anymore and ask a soft presumptive maybe question about seeing the belt just so he can stick it in this kid's mouth, I think in my opinion. And the detective even adds in what the kid guessed about the crime in the mix asking if it might have been a bungee cord. So the suggestibility is being played on here and I don't honest to God, I don't believe that this detective was acting with malice. I don't think there was malice here. I don't think that he's had this long, probably 50 hours of training on how false confessions can be occurring and how to avoid it. Once the detective hears I must have done it then you can see and hear the relief in his voice. And I don't think there's a pursuit of truth, just a pursuit of confession here, which is a big difference. And there's not a lot of clarification stuff. Tell me a little bit more about that. Well, how did you get there? How did that happen? What did it look like? What were their positions in? Just wants those couple of things in there. It's just not healthy. Scott, what do you got? I agree with you. It's not malice, it's ignorance. He's doing it wrong. So that's why I think that these guys have been trained a long time ago and then they're just not focused on what they're doing. They're not remembering, not going back and you can take the read technique a couple of times if you want to, as many times as you want to. Go back every few years and make sure everything's good. You're dealing with people's lives. So, and not all police officers do that at all. Not all detectives do that. This is rare. So, don't think I'm bad-mouthing police because I'm not at all. I love them. I think they're awesome. But these guys are going to my last nerve. This kid's just listening and agreeing. The detective is literally spoon feeding him things to say and he's just agreeing with it. And then he tells him he must have, what he must have done is hand, he said, you had to hand the thing off to Ryan, that tire tool. And Chuck says, I must have done it then. No, if that happens, you go back and start asking questions about that. There's so many spots this guy can go in and say, and start digging into what happened. These little spots, you can just open wide, just stop everything there and go into those and talk about what happened in that instance. Where was he? Where did he come from? How far away was he? Did he walk to you? Did you walk to him? That even. But he wouldn't be able to do it. And that's why I think it's ignorance on this guy's part. He doesn't understand how to do this right. Chuck is nothing much has changed body language wise. He's still open. He's listening and he's agreeing. There's no pushback at all with this guy, none whatsoever. His voice tone cadence don't change. His volume doesn't change. He's just as ignorant about what happened as this detective is. So they're basically in the same spot there. Neither one of them know what really happened. And the detective, every time he scores or every time he does something that he feels like is good or maybe in a couple of cases where frustrating he takes his hat off or goofs around with his hat. So there's, you know, we get a lot from him. We can tell what this guy's thinking. He's not, I'm not the type to lean back in a chair and start talking to somebody about something they might have done to find out if they did it or not. And that's pretty dang relaxed looking to be talking about what he's talking about. That's, and for me, I think it's a little bit disrespectful for the situation. But that, but that, that's me. So when you interrogate somebody that agrees with you on almost everything you say, that's a huge red flag that can't, you know, he doesn't know what's happened. He's assuming he knows what happened. You can't do that. You can't go forward when somebody just keeps agreeing with everything. I mean, I don't know how long this interrogation or this interview took, but it can't be that long. What do y'all think an hour, two hours? No idea. Cause it's just what we found, you know, we don't know. Unlike you said earlier, it could be dang 15 hours, who knows, but with the way this, this guy's talking, I don't think it could have been too long. There's, there's nothing else to go into since he's not asking these questions. That's, it's, I don't think he knows how to, but when somebody starts agreeing with everything, come back to those things later and approach them from a different direction and ask them the same question in a different way. So it looks like it didn't happen or it looks like something else may have happened and see if they agree with that. How simple is that to do? It's easy. And he's not doing that either or not that we're aware of. Obviously he didn't cause the kid went to prison for however long he went to prison for. Mark, what do you got? Yeah, look, there's a lot that we're not, obviously not seeing here, you know, quite, quite obviously. So we don't have all the information. I don't have all the information. So, so, you know, what can I say for sure? Well, I know a clown when I see a clown and this guy is a bit of a clown, quite honestly. I know there are, I know a lot of officers. I've got friends who are in the police force. I think they would be very happy for me to go, this guy is a complete clown. There he is, leaning back, legs are swinging out there. The hat's on, the hat's off. Just as you say, Scott, I mean, it doesn't, it suggests to me, look, there's somebody who's had some training and they feel confident about it and they're applying themselves confidently. Sure, they've got it wrong, but they're applying themselves confidently and if they felt any unconfidence, they might go, you know what, I'm not sure about this. I'm gonna break this interview right now. I'm gonna have a chat to some people. I'm gonna, because I'm not feeling, I don't feel right, they're summing up. This guy, I think he knows this isn't right. And I'm not suggesting there's malice there. I think there is a sense of his, that he understands his own ineptitude because that's what we've got. We've got the child swinging their legs there. He understands his own naivety in this situation, but what he doesn't do is go, I'm gonna break this, I'm gonna go out, I'm gonna have a talk to myself or somebody else about this and then go back in. He keeps on going. So you've got some very strong, confident, not questioning, he's just throwing ideas at this guy, sitting back, swinging his legs, taking his hat off, putting it back on again, throwing ideas at this guy, because why not? Why not throw some mud at a wall and see whether it sticks and it's sticking? Because the guy's going, well, I mean, he's going, I don't know, I don't remember. It's a world of possibility. And we have somebody here, just as you say, Chase, who is very open to that possibility, very open to going, I don't know. And it's, I'm only picking this up now, because I don't know anything about this case, but I'm picking up that he had a dream that he was part of the crime. Well, I mean, how much more suggestible can you get when everybody's woken up out of dreams and gone, wow, that was a bit real. That was a bit odd, that was a bit real. And you can't quite tell the difference for a bit of what's true and what isn't true. And the part of your brain that visualizes during dreams, it's the same part of your brain that visualizes the actual world around you. So you can have a dream where really, the brain doesn't really know the difference. The only difference it can tell is going, well, that was a bit bizarre. I know that didn't happen, but some dreams that you have, you're like, yeah, it's a possibility. It looked very real to me. It's within the scope of something I might do. I mean, that might have happened. Well, so very suggestible state there. If he's dreamt this up, there could be some strong reality to it as well, but this is not a situation that's liable to get to that reality, to get the truth out of it. Yeah, yeah, the only... He reminds me, they just had the Christmas Santa Claus parade, you know, and the police are always involved in the Christmas Santa Claus parade here, so it's always great to see them come out. I would expect him to be part of the parade and he would have one of those wigs on, you know, the multicolored wigs on and the big feet. Complete clown, I don't mind saying it. One of those tape replays. Let's go back to when you were talking about how you saw Ryan Strangler's guy. Now, we know what the guy's got Strangler with. That's kind of a thing I've been hoping back for. All right. Is it possible that you know what he was strung with and just didn't want to tell you? Because I don't know. No, like, I think it was a shirt or something. Yeah, well, I know it wasn't a shirt. Like, maybe a bungee cord or something from his car? I don't see why he had a rope in his car. Well, we know for a fact that his belt was ripped off in his pants and he was strung with his belt. Really? Yeah. Do you see a belt in Ryan's hand? Something look like a rope, maybe, or a bungee cord? I don't know. Okay, you didn't put anything in your hand, though? No, I mean, I don't even remember about it at all. Okay. Something else that any day has to do with? We felt like, you know, I asked you earlier if you had gotten hit by this guy or anything like this, but you said he kicked you in the balls when you guys attacked you. Well, it's not a matter of flipping out and I don't know what's going on. We know you know what's going on. Maybe you forgot some of it, but you didn't forget all that you're telling me. Number one, I just wanna look at this guy's crime scene photographs, but hopefully for the last time until I figure it out again. Multiple, multiple, multiple contusions, hits and strikes on this guy's head. There is no way in hell that you hit this guy who wants to turn around and get sick. If you only even want to turn around and get sick, you had to hand the thing off to Ryan because this guy's got head wounds all over his head. We're talking minimum 15 strikes. I must have done it, but I mean, I don't know if he did that or I stopped and he did it. I don't know. This is what bothers me. Did you ever drop the pipe? Probably wouldn't. Did you hand it off to Ryan? I don't know. I don't think so. Okay. So when you say that you must have flipped out, then maybe you flipped down and hit this guy more than once. Yeah. Cause there's no way that this guy hit with once. And I'm not barking at you. I'm just telling you the truth cause I saw you punch with that. Cause I don't, I don't. If the crime starts up, we're just... I know. I mean, I know. I mean, that's fine. And I know when I told you that. Okay. I understand. But I'm just reminding you where we were at. Yeah. I don't. Cause what's going to happen? Advantage is I'm sure the crime's dropping. We're going to come forward now that they know that all this is coming through our head. That's fine. And I got impressed with this upon you one more time. And it's the last time I'm going to tell you this, Chuck, okay? I know. Ryan's going to talk. Don't let Ryan tell the story for you. I don't know what else to do because I can't, I don't know. I mean, I don't know if he's going to put it on me. I like, I don't know. Probably. I don't care. Okay. I mean, I don't know what to do. You know, you're involved in and you're ready to take that hit, basically. Yes. Okay. All right. You want me to like that for you before I go or? I've got a lighter. In your pocket? Yeah. Well, don't we burn nothing in the wall? No. It's not going to. Yeah, why don't you give me your lighter? I'm not, you're not supposed to hand it up here. Oh, no. Actually, I don't. I didn't. No, Chase, what do you got? So there's not a lot wrong technically here in this video. He's not really directing him how, you know, to answer the questions. He's using a very common statement of don't let XYZ tell the story for you. That's a common thing. But the one thing we aren't seeing here is the search for truth. Questions are closed ended, which when you're asking somebody about an evening two years ago, as I understand this was, it can be very difficult to obtain some kind of truth with a lot of clothes in the question. So it seems like the detective is after a confession of possibility, a confession of possibility. So Mark talks about this all the time, possibility versus probability with that thought experiment there. And is it possible you did this? And then it feels good enough for him to move to the next question. Is it possible you did this? And he kind of just lets that hang. And in this instance, I think it seems there are some parts he might genuinely have trouble remembering. I think that's genuine. And there's something called a behavioral interview that might be beneficial here in a situation like that where they use different techniques and questioning to ascertain a lot more details about stuff like that. Very common and traumatic, more traumatic situations to help somebody recall an event or a detail. They even use hypnosis in some of these cases, which can't be, you can't elicit a confession, but you can elicit details to help you obtain evidence with hypnosis. And there's various by state, that's all I got. Mark, what do you got? Yeah, I think the interviewer here now is getting very insecure about the way that this is going. The hat comes off his head. He goes in what I would call third circle in that he locks all his joints and puts his hat back on. That's extreme for this situation. Why have we got this interviewer who should be professional, calm, engaged? I mean, he could be trying to play the part of somebody insecure and moving towards getting extremely agitated. And we'll see where he goes in a few videos time. But already for me, he's ramping up in his, in not being able to control his own energy here, which suggests if he's in a professional situation, he's probably not following a sense of procedure for himself where he can feel grounded. He can feel like he knows where this is going. It may not be moving where he wants it to go fast enough or he may not feel that he is in control of the procedure and therefore it's going to run away from him just like his hat seems to escape him and then go back on. Also an example, Chase, I think of extreme venting going on there where you're releasing the heat from your head. If he was calm and assertive in this situation, I don't think he'd be doing that. So he's probably at the opposite end of calm and assertive right now, which is not where you want somebody who has potentially 10, 15, 20 years of your life in their hands at this moment. Scott, what do you got on this one? I agree with you. I think he's probably excited right now because he thinks, I got this one. We're going to wrap this up. Look what I've done. Look what's going on. That's what I think is happening. And he says, maybe you flipped out and hit this guy more than once. And then Chuck agrees with him. He's feeding him the scenario piece by piece. He's feeding him the answers he wants to hear. And he never says, and he could have here too. Tell me what happened. Because he already said, I don't remember what happened. But he doesn't go back and, like I said, come from a different angle and say, let's go through what happened the last hour before you were there, the last two hours before you showed up there. Where were you at that point? Never does that. In the last interaction, the detective's cadence goes through the roof. And he does that as he's dropping that idea of Ryan making a deal to screw Chuck over. So it's placed in his mind real solid. So he gets that. And there's nothing wrong with that. Making them think somebody is already talking or is going to talk. Giving that idea to get them talking. Nothing wrong with that. That's something you'll do that's quite common. Nothing wrong with it. But that's what he's doing there. And for the other stuff, it's so obvious that nobody was absorbing what was happening. And if they did, I wouldn't be saying I did at this point because they would have seen that and gone, dude, wait just a minute, hang on a minute. You get, this isn't right. Something's not wrong. Somebody would have said to somebody up higher, they would have left the room and said, he's doing this wrong. This kid, well, I'm going to get too deep into the, I love the police. I just think these guys are doing it wrong. Greg, what do you got? So let's talk for just a minute about interrogation. First of all, let me go back to something you said last time when a guy is always agreeing with you. The approach you take is, okay, I've said enough, why don't we just tell me what you do remember? Just stop, let him talk. And where he says, I don't remember. Okay, then you might poke and prod a little bit, but you let him talk. That way you know you're not feeding them. And most of the time when a person is feeding someone information under duress, this guy didn't wake up in the morning, looking over his cheerios and say, I'm gonna put this kid in jail for the rest of his life. I don't care if he did it. That's not how it works most of the time. It's simply ineptitude at understanding human psyche, how things work and how people get under duress. That's number one. Number two, my world interrogation, I know more about you than you know about you most of the time. Once I get to the point, I'm ready to go to close something because we've got situation maps. Once I determine who you are, let's take a war. A war is a beautiful thing from an interrogation point of view because we have a situation map. I walk in, I look at that assuming I'm in a cage and I know everything that happened around the place you were captured for the past 48 hours. So I know how you ended up where you were when you were captured. When I'm trying to get you to talk, I'm not gonna tell you what I know. I'm gonna talk to you, ask you questions until you do something that tells me where you were exactly on that map. So then I can try to tie you to a situation. Lots of Middle Eastern wars, it's not all above board army against army. There's a lot of other things going on behind the scenes. And often you'll have guys committing IEDs, doing all that kind of supplanting IEDs. So those kind of people are not wearing uniforms and they're not captured that way. What we do is we have to have all that information in our head and we're asking you questions, not to link you to it, but to see where you were and how you were tied in. Chase, I'm sure in your time, if you did a lot of ground operation, I know the Navy did a fair amount of ground operation in Afghanistan, for example, then we sweep and we bring in a lot of people. And then we're trying to find the person. And you have to be careful not to tell them what you know and to feed them. What we're not seeing is that here. If you really wanna know, pay attention to this entire video that's about to come up next. And we're replaying it and watch what happens when the guy has asked any open-ended question. How does he answer? I don't remember, I don't know. I'm not sure. When he's asked any question that's not open-ended, yes or no, leading questions, he goes yes or no. That's it, he doesn't say, I'm not sure. So he's looking for guidance. He's looking, Chase, you talked about it earlier, this guy's 19 years old, probably, maybe 18, don't know, maybe 20, because it was two years after they were in high school, my understanding. There's deference to power in those cases and your in captivity. And we all know that people defer to their captor until they get to be part of that system and they are well-versed in that system. Then they'll flip you off in an interrogation room in a minute. But when they're brand new to the system, first time they've been in any kind of trouble, they're more deferential to power than usual. Listen to those two things. No open-ended answers and yeses and noes every time there's a projected question. One of those tape replays. Did you ever drop the pipe? Proud of me. Did you hand it off to Ryan? I don't know, I don't think so. Okay. So when you say that you must have flipped down, then maybe you flipped down and hit this guy more than once. Yeah. Because there's no way that this guy hit me once. And I'm not barking at you, I'm just telling you the truth because I saw it in the picture. I know, it's just, I don't, I don't. You get the crime stuff released? I know, I mean, I know, I mean, that's fine. And I know and I told you that. Okay, I understand, but I'm just reminding you where we were at. Yeah, I don't. Because what's gonna happen, eventually I'm sure the crime stop will come forward now that they know that all this is coming to a head. That's fine. And I got impressed with this upon you one more time. And it's the last time I'm gonna tell you this, Chuck, okay? I know. Ryan's gonna talk. Don't let Ryan tell a story for you. I don't know what else to do because I can't, I don't know. I mean, I don't know if he's gonna put it on me. Like, I don't know. Probably. I don't care. Okay. I mean, I don't want to. You know, you're involved in your way and you take that hit, basically. Yes. Okay. All right. You want me to like that for you before I go or? I've got a lighter. In your pocket? Yeah. Oh, don't we burn nothing in the wall? We're not. Yeah, why don't you give me your lighter? You're not supposed to hand it up here. Oh, no, actually, no. I didn't think so. All right, peace, man. This is what bothers me. I wanted to start off by just telling you a little bit about what I've learned. And that is that, you know, the officer says they've gone to Kansas City and they got in touch with Ryan. And to make a long story short, Ryan is saying, I don't know anything, wasn't there. I don't know what Chuck's talking about. He's crazy. If he, you know, if it happened, if it went down the way he said it, he obviously did it himself. And pretty much, that's what's happened. Now, I mean, I don't know. I think, to take it short, I'll probably explain to you earlier when you visited with him that, you know, pretty much Ryan's story could come out in any form or fashion. I don't know specifically what he told you. But, you know, Ryan could say anything from, that was his entire idea to, I wasn't there, I had no idea what he was talking about. Man, the guy must be flipped out, you know. To, well, hey, I was there, but you know, I didn't know we were gonna do anything like that. And first thing I know, Chuck's over there being up on some guy. So you never know what kind of, what form their story's gonna take. And certainly from what you explained to us, it's bottom line, not true. Now, with that, here comes the importance of our conversation. And that is to go back from the very beginning to the point that it was even nearly suggested that you guys leave. I don't know. I mean, like, I don't even, it's just so foggy, like I could just be sitting here advocating all of it and not know. Like, I don't know. I don't. All right, Chase, what do you got? You often went to the end of this clip to see this, but here's what I want you to pay attention to. The interviewer here sets the stage to build anxiety. This is very common in the situations where a plea deal's about to go on the table or somebody's not being straightforward. So as he sets the stage, he does some textbook maneuvers. He levels down with the suspects. He puts his papers aside, so it's not a barrier in between him and the suspect. He does the leaning in. He lowers his tone, placing an elbow on the table, place the other hand downward. So he's perfectly imperfectly mirroring the suspect. So he's changed his body language to mirror the suspect, which is kind of a textbook way to kind of set up this buildup for what's gonna come next in the next video. Scott? All right. Chuck's body language hasn't changed in a bit. He rubs his head a couple of times. As we do when we're frustrated, confused or stressed, his chest and legs and arms are fairly open. I mean, they're wide open, really. This isn't that fake I'm open and listening body language that we saw with Grant Harden a couple of episodes ago where the guy sitting there with his hands on his legs that he's sitting there, wide open like that and just answered questions and say, you know, all he's doing, it's not that fake kind. This is what it looks like for real when somebody's being open and they're completely listening. I mean, you can't look any more like you're engaged than this kid's looking like right now. So, and then this guy detective or whatever he is, we were discussing earlier, he may be something else because he talks like an attorney. But he says the detective was visiting with him. He said, the guy you were visiting with him fairly, which is fine to do that. That's actually pretty good. So you don't say the guy was interrogating you earlier, the guy you were talking to, it sounds like visiting with you. So it keeps it, you know, keeps it calm and smooth-sounding. Then Chuck says he doesn't know about all this and he could just be fabricating it all. That's when everything should come to a stop and you go, do what now, dude? What'd you just say? Yeah, I could just be making all this up. And there you go, wide open, right there you go down that road and you get into all that, doesn't do it. Not interested, doesn't even try to do that. And I don't think it went past him. I don't think the other guys were doing this with Malice, but this guy, it may not be Malice, maybe ignorance on this guy's part as well, but he's doing it wrong. Greg, what do you got? Well, if he in fact is the district attorney and not a police investigator, he wouldn't probably go to read. He's probably not part of what he would do. What he's doing is quite simply the logical approach. Hey, you're in trouble, here's what we know and. Now, what we know could be stuff that we have fed you and you fed us back. Here's the interesting piece. He treats him as if the guy is resistant. Like, I don't want to hear this, do that, do this. Let me show you the best indicator in the world. He's not resistant. His knees are about that far apart and they're facing right at him. Nobody does that. I mean, maybe a hardened criminal will sit there and throw him out at you and just be sitting back throwing his legs out like that. But most people under duress and especially a guy resisting is not going to be that wide open. His groin, the thing that people instinctively protect first, he's sitting there with it wide open. So he's not resisting. And when he says, I don't know, this could be fabricated. I'm with you, I'd say, what, hold on. He's not resisting. Andy says those words. I probably would say, let's go back and talk to the investigators. Let's get somebody else in here. Let's look at everything we got and see what's going wrong. That's all I got on this. Mark, what do you got? Yeah, look, it's simple for me. Who's most assured or physically in this situation? Who's most assured verbally? For me, it's the person being interviewed, not the interviewer. The interviewer doesn't seem assured at all. Greg, you said, look, we'll get to, this is a fact and therefore and therefore, it seems like the potential attorney here is trying to do some logic, but there is no logic to it. I tried to follow his pattern of thought there. I couldn't follow it. It falls down pretty quickly in a statement of logic. You need a point of fact, which should be able to be corroborated by more than two people to go, look, this is an actual fact. And therefore, logically, because of this fact, therefore A and because of A, therefore B, and this is the situation you're in right now because of fact, which is undeniable. He has no facts. There's nothing that he states as fact at all and therefore his logic is going nowhere. And that's why the interviewee interrupts with, I don't know. And that is the most assured thing that we hear in this, the attorney, the interviewer, whoever he might be, the DA, whoever this person might be, is unassured in what they're saying. The person being interviewed is very assured in what they're saying. One of those tape replays. I wanted to start off by just telling you a little bit about what I've learned. And that is that, you know, the officers says, they've gone to Kansas City and they got in touch with Ryan. And to make a long story short, Ryan is saying, I don't know anything. Wasn't there. I don't know what Chuck's talking about. He's crazy. If it happened, if it went down the way he said it, he obviously did it himself. And pretty much that's what's happened. Now, I mean, I don't know. I think Detective Short probably explained to you earlier when you visited with him that, you know, pretty much Ryan's story could come out in any form or fashion. I don't know specifically what he told you. But, you know, Ryan could say anything from, that was his entire idea to, I wasn't there, I had no idea what he was talking about. And the guy must be flipped out, you know, to, well, hey, I was there, but you know, I didn't know we were gonna do anything like that. And first thing I know, Chuck's over there beating up on some guy. So you never know what kind of, what form their story's gonna take. And certainly from what you explained to us, it's bottom line, not true. Now, with that, here comes the importance of our conversation. And that is to go back from the very beginning to the point that it was even merely suggested that you guys leave. I don't know. I mean, like, I don't even, it's just so foggy. Like, I could just be sitting here patricating all of it and not know. Like, I don't know. I don't. This is my father's name. Let me go back one step further. You don't know exactly who brought it up initially. Yeah, I mean, I got it, it's, it's, it's, because now, now like Detective Short told you, Ryan, and I don't think you and I have even gone there. There's specifics about this whole thing that you provided that there was no way for anyone, including yourself, to even know. Bottom line, there would be no way if you hadn't been involved and been there. So my angle to you is I need to know as much information about what Ryan said to you and what Ryan did. That's the best I can tell you. Like, I don't. Okay, well, let's start. You started, you were at the club, right? And my understanding is, and I'm just gonna try to briefly explain to you what my understanding is, is that you guys needed money. This is, this is, all right, this is after reading the newspaper article in October. And this is kind of what I put together with, I mean, I don't know if I'm just flipping out or whatever, but I mean, this is kind of what I put together with what could have happened. I remember we were at the club. We ran out of money, like he'd been asking his sister to go online. And then from there on, I'm just kind of presuming what happened. I'm making presumptions based on what I read in the newspaper. Well, you're making accurate presumptions that like I said, that you would only know if you were there. Well, what, what, the lady, the cleaning lady? That's fine. That was in the newspaper. Well, no, about what was specifically said to that play. She went to get help? I mean, no, you explained, I'm not going to say like I wouldn't be here if I didn't feel guilty about it, but it's just, I don't, I can't recollect. And it's just a trip for me to have to sit here and try to look at something that happened that I've read about and try to base what I remember. Greg, what do you got? Yeah, this is an interesting one because he starts walking through and he actually leaks a little information. He says, you get my angle, angle. You don't say that in an interrogation room typically, which makes me think he chased right, right? He's praying not an interrogator. We know to protect those words. We know to protect things. There's actually early in these videos, a good example of the guy trying to avoid using the word innocent stumbles over his own words because we don't use those words. When we say those words, then the person automatically grips them. What he's starting to try to do is write the logical approach, that backstory. Tell me about your backstory. And then when he runs into gaps, then you micro interview. I'm saying, hey, Chase, tell me about the evening of this. You go bam, bam, bam. And then I go, hold on, let's talk about it in then because I don't know exactly what's going on in your world. Let's talk through the mechanics of that. And then I would just open up and go after the pieces where there's vagueness or that kind of thing. That's a really easy way to do. But what you as an interrogator should not do is tell the person what you understand. What you should do is have them tell you what happened, ask, ask, ask. This kid's doing more declaration of I don't know. He hasn't yet said I didn't do it, not once. He's not said I didn't do it. He's cooperative. He's compliant. He's trying to help. And he's saying, I think I did it. This is what we're hearing from this kid. That's pretty much an admission of guilt. So why are they beating this horse and running him down the path? I think it's because they think there are two people who did it. They saw two people, the eyewitnesses saw two people. So they wanna capture both of them. There's pressure to close on who that other person is and to get him. So if you can get all the information dragged in from this one person and make the other person complicit in what happened or the trigger man, so to speak, then you can go back and drive that other person and make them give in quicker. It's back to something you said last time, Scott, really normal for us to use your friends against you. When you're in an interrogation room, you should expect that because using evidence provided by another is often one of the approaches we use to get it. Mark, what do you got? Yeah, well, you know, why are they running him down this road? I think because they're probably still unassured themselves because he's unassured. The subject is unassured. He's able to go, look, I think I was there and I probably hit the guy once, but probably, probably he's not there going definitely. It's definitely me. And also as this, let's just say attorney, let's suspect that it's an attorney, starts doing his attorney's logic, which isn't logic because there are no facts. He doesn't state one fact. So you can't have the logic without that opening fact. The subject here calls up the presumptions. He says, you know, that's a presumption. So not only can he say, hey, I think I hit the guy once, but also he's going at the same time, I think your idea, your stories are full of presumptions and it's not logical. So he's able to do the two things at the same time, which the attorney here or whoever it is, isn't able to do. He's running down this road of you did it and the subject there is going yes and no at the same time. And that's tricky for him. And again, I think he's going to get frustrated. I think he's going to get frustrated and we'll see what happens around that. Scott, where you going on this one? The kid tries to talk, but he shuts him down. He does the classic thing with his hands and that's a read technique, you know, when they start talking, you try to shut them down, but there's no reason for him to do that because the kid is trying to give him information. He's not being combative with his information. He's not going, well, you did this, this, this and none of that, that's when you use it. That's when you start using that style of shutting somebody down and it works like a charm most of the time. But there's no reason to be doing that because like you were saying, there's no, he's not being combative with him. He's agreeing. He's like, yeah, yeah, here's what happened. Here's what happened. He's not trying to deflect or do anything else. So yeah, I agree that I think this is the district attorney as well. Then Chuck lays it all out and he tells him why and how he came up with this line of reasoning and thought that he might have been part of it. He says that he saw it in the paper and he may have dreamed it or something. Like he said before, I could be fabricating this and this guy doesn't stop him. And if he was aware at all of anything body language wise, if he watched two of our episodes, he'd go, oh, okay, I get it. This guy's not, something's not right here. Let me get, I'll be back. Let me go do something, I'll be back and then go find out what he needs to do next because obviously he wouldn't know. Greg, what do you got? Did you go? That's how Piotta, okay, Chase, you go. So this is a common tactic of police, especially when somebody's having difficulty with memory. And for this whole video, just keep in mind one theme and that is suggestibility is fluid. Suggestibility is fluid. It's not a set factor that's like I'm this level of suggestible and police confirmation bias can play into all kinds of interrogations and they're human, they're human beings just like we are. So we're not sitting here casting a lot of judgment here. We've made mistakes like this, especially early in our days. I'll just speak for myself, but if somebody's literally offering themselves up like this kid is and I do think he's genuinely struggling with memory, it's common for police to weaponize this in some places, this memory issue to their advantage. And you can do this in an ethical way sometimes. I don't know how the, I don't know the case very well but I'm willing to bet that he actually didn't say anything that no one else would be able to know. Just based on the other detective's behavior and potential deception, I don't think there's a way he said anything without it being covertly fed to him. So I'm really quick. I'm gonna run down this list. I'm gonna give you seven ways that police can manipulate memory impairment and I've studied memory impairment for 25 years. Let's see if you can recognize any of these seven here. Number one, feeding information, suggesting that they have mentioned something that maybe they didn't. Two, exploiting confusion, exploiting this to mix up details, creating false memories. This is a thousand times easier to do than you think it is. So suggestive questioning, you can kind of implant false memories very easy, super risky in people with memory impairments like this to misinterpreting forgetfulness. So the inability to remember stuff can be wrongly interpreted as evasiveness and guilt. Then there's a pressure to fill gaps, hardcore pressure to fill up those gaps and interrogators are on the line to try to get a confession. And a lot of these departments put excess pressure on the interrogators, on the detectives to close the case down, which drives a lot of their behavior. Then there's manipulating trust or authority where they might just rely on their level of authority in the room, which can also increase suggestibility and cause somebody to question themselves more. And finally, just overstating evidence. Is there, they might just falsely claim some solid evidence linking there. Maybe you saw some of those. One of those tape replays. Let me go back one step further. You don't know exactly who brought it up initially. Yeah, I mean, I got, it's, it's, it's, it's. Because now, now like Detective Short told you, Ryan, and I don't think you and I have even gone there. There's specifics about this whole thing that you provided that there was no way for anyone, including yourself, to even know bottom line, there would be no way if you hadn't been involved and been there. So my angle to you is I need to know as much information about what Ryan said to you and what Ryan did. That's the best I can tell you. Like, I don't. Okay, well, let's start. You started, you were at the club, right? Yeah. And my understanding is, and I'm just going to try to briefly explain to you what my understanding is, is that you guys needed money. This is, this is, all right, this is after reading the newspaper article in October. And this is kind of what I put together with, I mean, I don't know if I'm just flipping out or whatever, but I mean, this is kind of what I put together with what could have happened. I remember we were at the club, we ran out of money, like he'd been asking his sister to borrow money. And then from there on, I'm just kind of presuming what happened. I'm making presumptions based on what I read in the newspaper. Well, you're making accurate presumptions that like I said, that you would only know if you were there. Like what? What, the lady, the cleaning lady? That's fine. That was in the newspaper. Well, no, about what was specifically said to that way. She went to get help? I mean. No, you explained. I'm not going to say, I wouldn't be here if I didn't feel guilty about it. But it's just, I don't, I can't recollect. And it's just a trip for me to have to sit here and try to look at something that happened that I've read about and try to base what I remember. This is what bothers me. Try to base what I remember off of that. You know, it's like, it's a lot of luck. Let's just stop right here. Okay. Now, one thing I'm not going to do is I'm not going to sit here and listen to this kind of jurors, okay? That's not, I don't know what's my time doing. No, no, no, no, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. Now listen, it's my, I'm going to start talking and you're going to start listening, okay? All right. I'm going to be point blank with you, pal. Right now, your hind end is the one that's hanging over the edge and Ryan could care less about it. Okay. Okay? Do you understand me? Yes. Okay. Now, you better start thinking very clearly. Okay. Because it's you that is on this chopping block. Okay. Am I clear to you? Yes. Now, do we need to go by, or go back and go through this step by step? No. Well, I think we do and that's what we're going to do. And I want to hear, oh, all of a sudden I just think I'm even fabricated all this and, huh. No, what I want to hear is exactly what Ryan told you because that's what's going to keep you in a position to where you're not going to be the sole individual out here responsible for what happened to Kent. Okay. Okay? Yeah. I can't be any more clear to you than that. I understand. Mark, what do you got? Yeah. Look, now, I love this. So he gets in close. He gets into intimate space. His hand comes into intimate distance to the face. That's a pretty big move. So, I mean, again, he looks like he's going to give him a dance. I don't know whether money exchanged hands on this one, but that's a little bit close, I would say. So somebody is getting a little bit too out of hand and a bit upset here. Why do I think that? Well, he's doing whatever he's doing. I don't know what he thinks he's doing there, but he doesn't get the answer he was looking for. He says, do we need to go back step by step? No, says the interviewee. And he says, well, I think we do. What he was hoping for is he's going to go, do we need to go back step by step? And he was hoping the interviewer would say, yes, yes, yes. Look, let's go back to the beginning. Here's what he was hoping for. Yes, he doesn't get a yes. Whatever he's trying to do here is not getting him the answers that he's looking for. Shouldn't have to be getting that close to anybody to be getting this kind of bad reaction. If it was working, if what he was doing was working, he'd be getting the answers that he's looking for. He'd be getting the results he's looking for. He's not. He's getting agitated. He's getting upset. There's that lovely bit of acting that he does. I don't want to hear anymore. So it's like if Ricky Gervais did a take on a bad interrogation now because he's got just bad mocking acting going on in this. Scott, what do you got on this one? All right, this is where his hands are up. And he's trying to get Chuck to stop talking, but he's not being combative like I was saying earlier. There's no reason to do that. And he says, I don't want to hear you say, oh, I may have fabricated all this. You got to be kidding me. You've got to be kidding me that he said that out loud. I don't know, man. I think this guy, he took the read technique and he's remembering parts of it and how to do it, the stuff that he thinks will help him, but he's not remembering the intricacies of it or how to use it. The reason I liked, like Greg was talking about earlier, the reason I like read techniques is because you can use it like a muscle car. You can put the kind of, you can use that little line of questioning and you can do it in your own style to fit any situation or most any situation, not when you deal with terrorists and stuff, when you deal with normal criminals. But you can, like if it was a car, I was like, say you put flame, paint flames on the front of it and big old tires or small tires with those steering wheels, that's a chain, whatever you want to put in it. You can make your car, your technique, your read technique, do whatever you need to do. You just build it for that specific situation and you can change it as it goes along. That's why I like it. But this guy's just using the stock stuff, bringing it right out, going, oh, I'm going to start talking here and there's no reason for him to do that because the kid's trying to explain what happened unless and the reason I thought he was turning to the DA was because he doesn't want him to say anything. He's being too aggressive with him for no reason. There's no reason for him to be acting this way and doing that with him, unless he wants to make sure he gets a confession out of him and makes him say, yeah, which he said he did it, but gets him to be on the shadow of a doubt that he did it on paper, not in real life, but so it looks that way. Mark, or Chase, what do you got? So this hands up, Jesher is taught in several interrogation schools and depending on which one you go to, they're going to teach you to hold them up and wait or hold them up and talk at the same time. But if you want classic read, what is it supposed to look like and sound like? It's not supposed to be confrontational like this, but here's precisely what the read technique should be looking like. It should be, Scott, hold on a second. I know that's important to you and I promise you that we're gonna get to that, but here's what we need to address right now. That's exactly what it should look like and sound like. So there's seven ways that this is leading down the road to a false confession. He's dismissing the suspect's perspective completely intimidation and threat, freshering to agree, creating a binary scenario, which is to a confession leading towards a desired confession, ignoring possible recantations, what they call it, so not allowing them to do or say anything and then forcing a specific narrative. The aggressive move of the interviewer here is a hallmark of something I can't say on YouTube. I'll just say beta mail. This is a sign of insecurity. It's posturing and it's artificial toughness and he waits until Chuck is vulnerable, making him feel a little more powerful. And I think he takes advantage of this. This is my opinion here, out of his own insecurity and fear that he has no control over the situation. Greg? Yeah, let me point to how you know that this is not his personality. When if I were to explode and be the bad guy, so you come in to be the good guy, then in fact me, I've got a great example when I was doing a show for British TV called Torture the Guantanamo Guidebook. I grabbed this kid and jacked him up because it was what we're supposed to do, one of the approaches. Scream, yell, I didn't bang my elbows against the wall, all this kind of stuff. And I walked out and one was like, you look really upset. I was like, no, just for like a soda. Swuck out, it's acting. And Mark, to your point, some cannot act. Some people cannot act. So they are like, I know you are a terrorist. You know, you can hear him talking that way. And they just, you can't teach people to do that. You have people who want to be an actor who can't. They don't have the ability to change the way they think, to look at it from another's perspective, to project information. But this guy is not, the reason I'm saying that just what you just said about the kind of personality he has is clear because his fight or flight gets up when he tries to jack this guy up even a little bit. If you don't believe that, he loses verbal fluency. He starts to go, do we need to do this step by? And he starts stammering and has to correct himself. That tells you something has changed in his head and we'll see it again. So there's that in him, the interrogation is working on him as well as the other guy. When he's saying, I'm going to talk now, why that's all you guys have done. Why don't you shut up and let this kid talk? The kid has talked plenty and will tell you anything you want to know. But that's not what they want to hear. They want to get the information in a package that fits their driver. And to your point, Chase, if all I want is a confession, I always said this, I can get a confession from you. Like I'm a Seer guy, I can get a confession from you in three days to anything I want, anything. I mean, you may have never been in that place and I could get it because absolute pressure, control of all the person's resources, reward where you want it is the answer to that. This can all be over. This can all be over. Usually when you know a person is pushing to get you that point, torture is the same thing. Torture is an uneducated person's shortcut to getting a person to feel like they have to comply. This is all about getting both of these guys instead of one, handful of other things. This cop is stumbling over his own words because he's feeling a duress. You guys have covered everything else. I'll just leave it at that. But you can see that it's even impacting him. These guys are, they may be senior guys who've interrogated a ton of people. Mark, I think you said it best. Maybe this has always happened into guilty people. Maybe. And maybe they happen to people who roll over pretty easily and become guilty people, don't know. But I don't think anybody wakes up in the morning and goes to set out to send people to jail for something they didn't do. There may be a handful of people in the world, but I do think if you don't know what you're doing and you can't see the things we're talking about here, you probably need some training. Okay. Yeah, finally, Greg, to your point, man, about the beta male thing. I'm not saying that I'm not trying to insult this guy, but his default to that being the solution, being that he might view that in other ways. So he's kind of approaching this in a way that he's making himself look subordinate to this other person. Whoever loses composure first in the interrogation room loses the game. Yeah, and you know, Chase, I've had the brits would always say, you can never go from fear up back to any, you can. You just have to be fluid in your approaches. And when we talk about these approaches or these tools, all of these things, Scott, you talk about read being a thing that you bought, all of these interrogation things have to be that fluid or they're not effective. I've forever, I had students in the 90s over in Georgia, I would go down and talk to them and they had a Gumby as their mascot. And their little motto was simper Gumby, forever flexible. Because when you walk in the interrogation room, every plane that you've had falls to shit. It's just the way it is. Yeah, and I always like to say interrogation is theater for one because that's really what you're doing. Yeah, I may have read that one of your books, Greg. You probably did, it was my first book, yeah. Okay, I probably did years ago, but that's one of the things I always open up with. It's theater for one because you have to go in and you have to mold yourself to whatever's happening. You know, you have to be the nice guy or hey, what's happening? Or you have to be the more aggressive person or you can slide from one to the other. It's theater for one. One of those tape replays. Part of the base, I remember off of that, you know, it's like, let's just stop right here, okay? Now, one thing I'm not gonna do is I'm not gonna sit here and listen to this kind of gibberish, okay? That's not, I don't know what's my time doing. No, no, no, no, no, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. Wait, now listen, I'm gonna start talking and you're gonna start listening, okay? All right, I'm gonna be point blank with you, pal. Right now, your hind end is the one that's hanging over the edge and Ryan could care less about it, okay? Do you understand me? Yes. Okay, now, you better start thinking very clearly Okay. Because it's you that is on this chopping block. Okay. Am I clear to you? Yes. Now, do we need to go by, or go back and go through this step by step? No. Well, I think we do and that's what we're gonna do. And I wanna hear, all of a sudden I just think I'm gonna refabricate it all this and kinda, well, I don't know. What I wanna hear is exactly what Ryan told you because that's what's gonna keep you in a position to where you're not gonna be the sole individual out here responsible for what happened to Kent. Okay. Okay? Yeah. I can't be any more clear to you than that. I understand. And you need to understand it. This is my father's name. And you need to understand it. Okay. We're gonna start back at the club. Whose idea was it to go get money because you wanted drinks, you wanted dope, whatever you wanted. I wanted to go to your home, that was Ryan's idea. Ryan's idea. And best of my knowledge, yes. I don't wanna even hear whose idea, or best of my knowledge, whose idea was it? That was Ryan's idea. Ryan's idea. And what did he tell you? That we need some more money for drinks and a sister wouldn't give us any more money. Okay. And he said, we're gonna do what about it? We're gonna rob somebody. You're gonna rob somebody. And so that led up to you and him leaving together? Yeah. And you went to where? We went to the Fairview building. Well, before that you went where? We went to his car. To his car, which was parked where? Down whatever street that is that I ordered on. Where we drove through earlier, you and I and the other two detectives on First Street. It was parked alongside the street. And you went there for what reason? To get something out of his car. Get something out of his car? To get a weapon out of his car. To get a weapon out of his car? In case, what we tried to do, tried to get a weapon out of his car. Whose idea was it to go to the car to get a weapon out of a car? It was his. His idea? Yes. And how did he articulate that to you? Basically that we're young, we're in high school, avoid, we're just gonna try to rob someone just regularly without anything. So you're young, you're afraid to get f***ed because you're not a big stature and you wanted to go to the car to get something out of the car, a weapon. Yes. In order to do what with it? If it came down to it. If it came down to it? To beat someone. To beat someone with it? To possibly beat him? To death. To death? Hopefully. Hopefully not. No, I mean, hopefully it wouldn't come to that. But you went there with an idea of getting a weapon and it could come to that. And it did. And it did come to that. And who took the weapon out of the car? Greg, what do you got? Yeah, if you wanna implant memory in somebody, this is a hell of a way to do that. You put them under pressure, you get right in their face, even when they're friendly, his legs are still spread, you're right in there, you're driving, driving, driving, raising those stress hormones. Brain is turning off. Remember the brain turns off in the order it came online. So it turns off the last thing that developed first, meaning our prefrontal cortex and all of our thinking fancy brain starts to turn off and the animal brain takes over to look out for us and protect us. But if you could see this kid's eyes, pupils are probably dilated. Yeah, I can't see him well enough to tell all those pieces that I would like from fight or flight. But once you're in that fight or flight in that limbic brain, everything I'm saying to you is registering in a different way. And he is very specific in his language. Could all be innocuous, could not be trying to inject. Doesn't matter, you're still injecting. And when the guy says the right words, he even goes back at him and reconfirms those words. That's a recipe for disaster. He makes me think of my cousin Vinny, the attorney on my cousin Vinny, when he goes identical, when he's making back the same point the person said, you listen to those things and listen to this cadence, the pitch, everything he does, he's downward telling as he goes in, this is locking stuff down in that guy's brain. He even tells him which street by name, instead of that street we went down today, which street by name. Look, if I were trying to set a false confession up, I couldn't do a better job. Now, did they do it intentionally? That's for the jury to figure out somewhere else. Scott would again. All right, yeah, the detective, he's telling Chuck what he wants to hear, what the detective wants to hear. Like you just said, tell him what he wants him to say, or what he wants to hear from him. That's not the way you do it. Then he scoots up real close and starts in with this TV show thing he's doing. I don't know what he's doing in there. There's no reason to be doing that at all, not even a little bit. And he's being, oh, here's what we're gonna do. And the kid, look at his body language. He's wide open, he's still in that open, I'm listening, I'm not doing, I'm not being deceptive, I'm just listening. There's, this is so, these things just butt up against each other so hard to anybody that would have watched this, I think from a perspective that we have and saw that, or just another detective from, you know, an older guy would've seen that and gone, oh dude, this is not right. And he would've said, you're doing this wrong. And he would've gone upstairs. He would've gone above the guy, said, you need to get this guy retrained. This is ridiculous. This is out of hand. I get to watch what I say. Chase, what do you got? I trained an entire police department of detectives in Alabama. And one of those detectives was, I don't know, 28, 29, younger, on the younger side. And I said, we were on a lunch break. And I said, where did you get your interrogation training before all of this? And she said, well, just watching law and order. Oh, it sounds like it. And what I thought was that was uncommon. It's far more common now that I've been around than you might imagine. So that might be what we're seeing in some of these clips. And what we're seeing here in this video is not subtle in any way. And it was upsetting to watch. It made me upset. When he's saying, I don't wanna hear any of this to the best of my knowledge stuff. I cannot imagine a jury admitting this or this contributing to any kind of conviction. I can't imagine. It's the worst I've ever heard. He's instructing a person on how to answer questions and not at all after the truth. This is desperation for confession. So he's walking him into these narratives. I was checking to see if I was frozen there with each leading question and only allowing agreement with him. I cannot believe this is allowed in court. In my interrogation training, I have an entire section that's literally titled how to create false confessions. I have that in my training so that anyone who's ever gone through my course will never be able to say they got a false confession on accident. If they do what I showed them on that slide or on those several slides, then I instantly proved beyond a doubt that they knew that it leads to a false confession. There's a lot of training out there that has a couple lists of what people shouldn't do but I like to really throw it in people's face so there's no escape from being able to say they were well informed that their behavior might lead to a false confession which is really what we're seeing here. We're seeing a recipe for false confession. We're seeing high authority, over usage of authority, overusing or abusing trust. And on the other side, we're seeing a person who's fantasy prone, highly suggestible, young, impressionable and already coming in there talking about memory problems. And a lot of these I've seen interrogations where they manufacture memory deficits. Where they manufacture deficits in memory and awareness of deficits in memory just to get someone to start questioning their own. And this is kind of down that line. And I don't think these people meant to harm anybody. I think that they thought this was the job that they were doing. Maybe this was even, and I've seen it before, I promise you, this was maybe part of the training they received. I don't know, for sure. Greg? Mark? Correct. Mark? Scott? That's right. Yes. It's been, it's been. Okay. All right. Listen, nobody means to end up like this. Nobody means to go into the circus, but sometimes you wake up the next day and you find you've got a shovel in your hand and you're around the back of an elephant and there you are. You've joined the circus. To your point, Scott, you know, this car analogy, he has got a car. It's one of those clown circus cars. The wheels fall off, you know, the engine steams, three of them get out. I mean, it's now a complete clown show. He is the boss clown. He's what we call the Auguste clown. He's the person who thinks they're somebody of status, but really they have nothing. He's a pound shop cop in this situation. And in front of him is this little clown that we call the Zany, the Zany, who's wide-eyed and innocent and has no idea what's going on. And it's now impronite because what's happening is, is we've got the interrogator here putting out an option, an idea. The subject finishes the sentence. The next, the interrogator then picks up on that and builds again. It's just they're finishing each other's sentences. They're evolving now together. This improvised idea of what might have gone on. It's, yeah, it's a complete circus for me. At this point, I like a circus, but it has to be in the right place, out in a field somewhere, you know, away from everything. You can go, you buy a ticket, you can go and visit. It's all a lot of fun. And then you go home. You know, that circus shouldn't be in your public institutions, especially ones that are designed to protect you and not harm you in any way. So it's tough that you see this kind of behavior, clownish behavior inside this situation. So I got that one. Yeah, I agree with you. I think they should be hanging wallpaper in the bathroom at a gas station out near the airport. One of those tapere plays. And you need to understand it. Okay. We're going to start back at the club. Whose idea was it to go get money because you wanted drinks, you wanted dope, whatever you wanted. I wanted to go home. That was Ryan's idea. Ryan's idea and- Best of my knowledge, yes. I don't want to even hear whose idea, or best of my knowledge, whose idea was it? That was Ryan's idea. Ryan's idea. And what did he tell you? That we need some more money for drinks than a sister wouldn't give us any more money. Okay. And he said, we're going to do what about it? We're going to rob something. You're going to rob somebody. And so that led up to you and him leaving together. Yeah. And you went to where? We went to the 3D building. Well, before that, you went where? We went to his car. To his car, which was parked where? Down whatever street that is that our door is on. Where we drove through earlier, you and I and the other two detectives. Yeah. On 1st Street. It was parked alongside the street. And you went there for what reason? To get something out of his car. Get something out of his car? To get a weapon out of his car. To get a weapon out of his car? In case what we tried to do. Whose idea was it to go to the car to get a weapon out of a car? It was his. His idea? Yes. And how did he articulate that to you? Basically that we're young, we're in high school. We're just going to try to rob someone just regularly without anything. So you're young, you're afraid to get f***ed because you're not a big stature and you wanted to go to the car to get something out of the car a weapon. Yes. In order to do what with it? If it came down to it. If it came down to it. To beat someone. To beat someone with it. To possibly beat him. To death. To death? Hopefully. Hopefully not. No, I mean hopefully it wouldn't come to that. But you went there with the knowledge of getting a weapon and it could come to that. And it did. And it did come to that. And who took the weapon out of the car? Just one more thing. Alright Mark, how's it looking to you so far at this point? What do you think you've seen? Well, we've never seen anything like this. I mean, you know, on the show, so it's good to get through this one and see it. You know, do go back, watch some of those breakdowns we've done on interrogations where, you know, they're brilliant interrogations. You see some people who maybe don't have so much training, but they're very, very self-aware, very aware of the situation, watching the person all the time, engaged. Although they might not be super trained, they're engaged and they know they're in a difficult situation. They're trying to be professional within that situation. I unfortunately think we don't see as much of that as we should in this situation here. So we have had people on this show who have not been well trained, but they are well, I was going to say, well-intentioned. These people might be well-intentioned, but they're not... Well, you know, I think they're checking in with themselves more as to how well this might be going and monitoring the situation as it goes along. Chase, what do you say? If you're doing an interview, you need to seek the truth and you need to do it with empathy. One teaspoon of empathy would have helped a tremendous amount here and would have gotten up probably a lot more information out of these people. So doing it with empathy does not mean that I don't care. It doesn't mean I'm not trying to be Mr. Tough Guy or anything like that. I have a theory that's different than a lot of people. I personally believe if you know or feel like you're being interrogated, then I am doing an extremely poor job. I'm acting kind of like an amateur. You shouldn't know that it's happening. We definitely know it in these clips here, Greg. Yeah, let me tell you who the best interrogators on earth are, they're a three-year-old. You know why? Because they want to know. They're asking you why because they want to know. This guy didn't want to know. They want to close this case. They don't want to know what's happening. If they did care, in my opinion, what would have happened is Chase comes in and he says, hey, I think I killed this guy. You know what my first question is? What do you mean you think you killed this guy? I would have gone from there. You mean you don't know? Okay, let's unpack this as we go. And then I would not have automatically said since this guy thinks he may have killed someone, the other guy is automatically guilty. I think we see a lot of that. And I think that's a human mistake. It's a human mistake because you need closure. But that child would look at the other person, try to figure out what they're trying to tell them. And this is not going on here. When I teach people all the time to interrogate, I give them a very simple checklist of ways to know you're getting into a false confession. It's a simple one. The first thing you got to do when you go in is to protect all guilty knowledge. You cannot lead any of it. And then you look for guilty knowledge in the person. And if they give you anything, you try to validate incorrect guilty knowledge at the same time. If I try to validate incorrect and you validate it, I know that we don't have the right guy. And then the third one is very simple. We know what confession looks like. But Mark, you were talking about people who innately have the ability. The reason that they do is because it's human nature to want to know more about the other person, try to get the information and get the facts. We've created a lot of process around how to interrogate to be more effective and to be more rapid. But we've been doing this since Cain killed Abel. What happened? This is the way things go. So I think as we walk through this, if you can remember to look out for that body language and that deviation that you heard us talk in the past about chin dropping, closing body language and then opening up, that's pre-confession body language. This guy came in and said, I think I did it. So we're going to beat him up, feed him some information and then use him against his friend. I'm not a fan of this interrogation. I want to say it was training, poor training, poor knowledge and reading wrong on both kinds of read, reading the read method or read technique and reading body language. Scott, what do you got? Yeah, these guys make everybody look bad. They make everyone that's in law enforcement look bad. Everyone's into interrogation look bad. When you don't do it right, it doesn't go well. And especially for these guys that didn't because they ended up in prison and they shouldn't have been. They shouldn't have been in prison. And if these guys had done just a little bit of real interrogation as far as looking for the truth goes, then they wouldn't have had that problem because it takes one of them to go, hey man, what about this? How did it tell me about what happened then? Like you were saying, Greg, you just go there and start or you start over there. And they didn't do that. And it makes everybody look bad. But like I said before, I love the cops. I think they're awesome. You know, it's one of those things where if anything goes wrong, those are the people that show up and they'll make it right. They'll fix it for you. So they get a lot of bad rap from people who aren't good cops. And there are a few of those as well. But in this case, these guys didn't do it right. And their ignorance in how to do something correctly has cost these guys years and years of their lives. These young guys go into prison for years because these guys think they know everything. I've just squatted all over these guys, but that's the way I feel about it. All right, I think there's another good fills and we'll see you next time. What do you got?