 Did you kill your father to get back at him for what you say he did to you when you were a child? Did you plan out what you were going to say to the police before you called them that night? I'm Scott Rouse. I'm a body language expert and analyst and I train law enforcement in the military in interrogation and body language. I created the number one online body language course, Body Language Tactics with Greg Hartley. Mark? I'm Mark Bowden. I'm an expert in human behavior and body language. I help people all over the world to stand out, win trust, and gain credibility every time they communicate, including some of the leaders of the G7. Chase? I'm Chase Hughes. I'm currently in Los Angeles. I'm a body language and persuasion and interrogation expert. I train intelligence agencies and the general public and persuasion influence people reading and lie detection. Greg? I'm Greg Hartley. I'm a former Army interrogator, interrogation instructor, resistance to interrogation instructor. I've written 10 books on body language and behavior, put together this course, BodyLanguageTactics.com, number one course in body language with Scott Rouse. And I spend most of my time on Wall Street or corporate America. All right. Well, today the panelists have spoken again and we're going to talk about the Menendez brothers. It's the two guys that killed their parents, Lyle and Eric, and it was a pretty big deal back in the 90s. So that's what we're going to go over. Greg, have you got something you want to add the back story of this? So guys, we're not going to give you the entire back story. There are dozens of hours of these guys testifying different interviews, all that. What we chose was a handful of clips. And what we're after is looking for what we see in the body language in these clips. We have kept it very clean and they can get very graphic in their testimony. We kept it clean and there's inference, but no graphic detail. That's our intent. We'll go through this. We'll tell you what we see. And Scott usually say, we're, you know, we're Switzerland. We're right down the middle. These guys have admitted to killing their parents with shotguns, with many, many, many shotgun blasts and said that they were in fear for their lives and that they had a history of sexual abuse. And we'll leave it at that and start from there. Does that work? Excellent. Yeah. So keep in mind as we go through this, oh, before we, before we go any further, go ahead and subscribe. If you like what we do, go ahead and subscribe, hit that little red button down there and it'll hook you up and you'll know when we've got another episode coming out. All right. So as we go through this, keep in mind, we know already that these guys are in jail, are in prison for killing their parents. We know that. No question there. What we're looking for here is we're trying to decide whether or not they're being honest about the abuse they took from their parents. What happened there? So that's what we're looking at. We're not looking at the history of stuff. We're not going to say we don't care what happened in the past or whatever. We're looking at these specific videos. That's it. So keep that in mind. And like. Yeah. One last thing we'll look at is if they cover in these videos and I think they do, whether they were in fear for their life from their parents from that weekend, but that's it. We're not talking about whether they killed their parents or any of that. All right. Here we go. You guys ready? Yeah. Isn't it true that you killed your parents because you couldn't stand your father's control anymore and you couldn't figure out any other way to kill him, except to kill your mother too, like Dr. Ozil said. No, that's not true. All right. Mark, what do you got? Yeah. So I'm going to pick up on just one thing, kind of a little 101 in body language just to get us going. You'll see that the character here, I don't know any of these guys' names. Is this another case of me having no idea what I'm looking at here in terms of the case and any backstory? You know, I'm just looking what I'm looking at. You will know way more than I do about this case for sure. But do you see that little eyebrow raised there on? No, that's not true. I just want to go into what the eyebrow raise is about. First of all, why do we have eyebrows? The idea of the eyebrow is that when it rains, the water collects here and goes down the side here so you don't get water in your eyes and you can still see. It would be a terrible thing if every time it rained, you were now defenseless with your eyesight because your eyes were flooded with water. So it's just to move that water away. Now, what's the other benefit of it? Well, the benefit is you can signal to people at long distance. Somebody can be a distance away and you can do stuff with those eyebrows from a safe distance to go, hey, do you recognize me? Do you know I'm part of your group? So this signal here is a social signal of acceptance. So here's what I make out of this. When he says, no, that's not true. He wants the other person to accept that answer on a social level. It's not good enough that it's not true for him. He needs everybody else to feel that it's true as well. So what does that signal to me? It means it's important not only for him, but some way he fits in with the group. It's important that this idea is accepted as not true. Now, I don't know enough at this point about the case to go, why would that be so important? Why would it be socially important? Why does society need to recognize that he's telling the truth or inferring something at the moment? I don't know the answer to that, but just a little 101 there on body language. Scott, what do you got? All right. Here's what I'm seeing. And this is all real simple stuff. A lot of these, there's not a whole lot going on because they're just, as Greg will tell you, they're sort of telling the story as they go along. So when he first begins, we see that his head, when she starts asking the question, his head starts coming down and we see it almost every one of these videos we'll look at. He just has the same little protocol he follows. His head goes down, but at this time his head kind of goes to the side. As it goes to the side, he's exposing his neck and says, you know, hey, I'm okay. But what he's doing is he's exposing the left side of his neck. So he's that right side closed up, which is where the jugular vein is. That's a vein that's where the deoxygenated blood from your brain goes and gets it out pretty quick so it can get some more in there. So it's a pretty big vein. So he's not doing it on purpose, but I think his brain, as an animal, his body is trying to protect that. He doesn't feel, I don't think he feels under attack, but he's ready for anything. I think in the situation he's coming out of, as we go along, he feels, if it is an abuse situation for real, then he's waiting to see what's going to happen next. So no matter what happens, he sort of prepares himself. I believe that's why his head's coming down. He's guarding that jugular vein. Then we see him buy his bottom lip and that's an adapter we're going to see throughout this as well. And his brother does it. When we take a look at his brother Eric, he'll buy his lip as well. And they do it a little bit differently, but it's the same adapter every time. So I don't know if it's when they were young and their father would get after them. One time I was dealing with someone at the Entrepreneur's Center. I was the entrepreneur in residence at the Entrepreneur's Center in Nashville from 2011 to 2017. And I would train the new entrepreneurs how to pitch their new ideas, concepts, whatever they were pitching. I would teach them how to do it and how to use their body language so they would get funded to help people trust them and believe in them and help fund them. And everybody I trained from day one till today, when I'm still working with entrepreneurs, they've all been funded. So there's a guy I worked with and when he was talking, he would use his eyebrows. Instead of using illustrators with his hands, his eyebrows were his illustrations. And actually, when this was going on, this was years ago, I sent Greg a video of it and said, check this cat out. Because every time he was doing something, he'd say, and then we do what, and his eyebrows were going nuts. Come to find out. I talked to him later on it and say, hey, why do you think you do that? But after talking to him and listening to some information from him, I found out he was, his father was super strict with him. And it would make him stand, stand straight as they were telling anything would let him move much. So as he's moving, he starts using his eyebrows became his illustrators. In this case, I think what we're seeing is the same type of thing when they're, that he doesn't do adapters that show big time. He's uncomfortable. Like someone might do this or might start pulling their arm. These things, I think the dad got after him and got rid of those. So that's why he and his brother both bite their lip like that. That's what I'm going back to is when you're taught or trained or just pounded into you to stop doing things that show people what you're really thinking or your body language, which I believe his father did. We'll hear him talk about that in a little while. That's what happens. The adapters are still there. Like Greg always says, you can't hide your body language. It'll tell on you every time. But that's what that is, that little bite thing he's doing. Greg, what do you got? Yeah. So I'm going to take it a little bit different direction, but tie what you're talking about together. That request for approval, that social thing, we use our forehead to signal each other. And Mark, if your brows cause water to run down the sides, mine probably runs down my back with this brow. But if you get, if you look at a person's brow, it's how you signal. There's all kinds of ways you can signal with your brow from brow beating to request for approval, asking for something to just a quick, hey, how are you across the room? He's using it quickly like a recognition like, okay, I think I understand what you're saying. And he's trying to connect with her. And I agree. He's got a little bit of a request for approval. When he bites his lip, yes, it's an adapter and yes, it's comforting, but I also think it's containing. It's a way he's like, Oh, there's something that he, if you watch him, he's pretty pronounced in his body language. There's almost a pregnant pause when she says, is she says something about, is that true? And he says, No, that's not true. He does a little bite. I think he's containing something at the same time. And I think it's the way they learn to control where that might not be acceptable. I think it is a combination, Scott, of biting because we'll see it again and again and again. And it's so it's comforting as an adapter. And when we say an adapter, we mean anything that creates comfort. I would say it makes the unknown known or the unfamiliar familiar. You see it if you put an animal in a cage, they'll pace. That's how they take control of their environment. But that pregnant pause and that bite makes me think he's saying not exactly true, true, but not exactly true. And he's trying to put a finer point out. The reason I say that is because it's like he's holding back body language, you'll see later his hands are tied, but he tightens up like he's not comfortable with confirming exactly what she said. That's what I see. And we're going to see more of that from him. But I see adapters. I see that. I see some containment of emotion. I see no illustrators really. And I see that request for approval. So uncomfortable with exactly finer points of this. And I think you're going to see him negotiate more about points. And I call those small chunkers. They're big chunkers and small chunkers in details. And the small chunkers are guys who are going to talk about nuance. We all know somebody that when you ask them what time it is, they tell you how a watch is made. My guess is when you get this guy down to brass tacks, he's one of those guys. Chase, what do you got? Yeah, great points, everybody. Absolutely agree. And I think he immediately goes down to an emotional recall with his eyes moved down here instantly. So I want you to pay attention when they look down and when they look somewhere else as you're watching, just as some data points. And what is he trying to recall or think of when you see it move in these different directions? Because that's going to come up in a minute. But if you're an attorney, if you're doing a job interview, if you're trying to persuade anyone and they start off with their dominant shoulder backwards, that's not good. So you need to modify the situation. Say, Mr. Menendez, can you reach up and adjust the microphone just forward a little bit and try to get those shoulders pretty even? The dominant shoulder goes back when we want to get into a fighting stance. And that's kind of an unconscious thing that we're seeing here is him preparing for that. So as an opposing counsel, we need to fix that as or do what we can to try to fix that before the conversation starts. So his eyebrow flash here is different than other times. It lasts a shorter duration. This is the shortest of all the durations that you're going to see. And this lip retraction plus blink rate goes up to 54. It goes from around a 14 to a 54 here. And there's also gesture mismatch when he's nodding at the very end of this video. When you see it again, you'll see gesture mismatch. And I think his attorney should object to this question to begin with. It's not a good thing. But the behavioral table of elements score is 21, with 11 being likely deception. He's doubled the likelihood of deception on the behavioral table of elements. And that's all I got. Yeah, one of the things that I would say is if I were asking him a question, I'll try to keep this to a minimum, guys. But if I were going to ask him a question, I would poke on him because he wants to say more. You can see it. Isn't it true that you killed your parents because you couldn't stand your father's control anymore? And you couldn't figure out any other way to kill him, except to kill your mother too, like Dr. Ozil said. No, that's not true. All right. You've indicated in your direct examination that you were sexually abused by your father and your mother. Is that correct? I don't think so. I didn't use those words. Well, but isn't that the gist of what you were saying? That you were the victim of sexual abuse? With my father and with my mother, I just said what happened. And I think it was natural. Okay. All right. Okay. Greg, you want to go first? Sure. I'll take this one. So he is either figuratively or literally sitting on his hands. That's coaching, not to use your hands because you give away information. These guys could afford a good attorney and good preparation. Don't know who they had. I didn't go look into it, but I'm sure they had somebody who would help them. Well, hold on. Not my mother. You know, you can you can hear him saying, well, hold on. Not my mother. I did not use those words or words to that effect. I don't think so. I don't think I use those words. This is his personality coming out. This is him controlling. Now guys, nothing coming out of these guys' mouth is pleasant and anything you want. We intentionally clean this up. Nothing coming out of their mouth is something you'd be going, well, hold on. I want to get the nuance exactly right on unless that's in your DNA. And it is, you can see it. There's this personality. Well, hold on. You can see it. Hold on. And then he goes the small chunk details. He even does a posture shift once he's clarified it. He straightens up in the in the in the place where he says, I don't think I use those words. Well, it was, but it was with my mother mutual. And then he does a nodding and that nodding is not a positive thing. It's just affirming that he's cleaned up this thing. And then he does an eye lock when it's over. You can see his aspirations up. And you can see he's trying to set the record straight. Guys, that's pretty clearly this guy. If I am expecting truth from him, I think that's what you're seeing. He's trying to clarify even a messy, he could have let something pass very casually, but he was trying to take away guilt from his mother in this horrible situation. And if you don't know this and you go look for it, you're going to find it's very graphic. So be cautious. But this is a complex, messy story and nothing good about it. Okay. With that, Scott. All right. People have been abused when they're little children. They become powerful observers. I think that's what we're seeing in this because when something happens, they lock right into it and they start watching the person who's asking a question, the person who's approaching them, and they see things from a childhood to now that it takes forever for people to get used to seeing and paying attention to. That's why I believe he freezes. Well, every time she starts talking, he starts and his head starts going down because he's preparing to protect himself from whatever it might be because he's freezing to observe and watch everything that's going on and listen in case something's coming at him. He's got to figure out how to say something back. I think that's why neither he or Eric look alarmed. They don't look like they're, they don't have that thing of their surprise when somebody's asking them a question that that's a little bit from left field because they're used to it. That's why I think their delivery is calm and the demeanor is just calm. Even though they're talking about horrific things, they just move right along like there's no big thing happening. But again, the subtle teaser there, you see his head tilt back and forth again a little bit as he's thinking. I think this is one of the things that lets you know something's going on with his internal dialogue where he's thinking like Greg was saying, he's thinking he's going through things. How am I going to word this? He's not thinking quote unquote, how am I going to word this? But he's putting things in place, how he's going to deliver at that point. And I think what I think when we see when he's talking about his dad, that's when his shoulder comes forward just a little bit. That left shoulder comes a little bit forward as he moves in and then he moves back some when he starts talking about his dad, because I think he's in fear of his father. He fears his father, but I don't think he's afraid of his mother. I think he's angry that his mother didn't do some things she should have done. She didn't take didn't take up for him when she should, when she should have had the chance, he didn't do that. But we see fear in him when that starts. Not as much on his expression, but these little subtle things that say he's afraid of his father. That's what I'm seeing in there anyway. But with his mother, nothing. He's moving forward when he's talking about his mother and not moving forward aggressively. His head goes up on the bed as he starts talking about her very, very briefly. But that's what I'm seeing there, especially when he says it was mutual. Not that he was trying to protect his mother or anything, but I don't think he feels the fear from his mother the same way he feels the fear from his father, two completely different things. Mark, what do you got? Yeah. So remember in the that first little chat we had, I was talking about there's something interesting that he tries to get this moment of social approval on this negative idea. No, not this time. In this one, he's going against a social norm immediately. He's reframing the idea of sexual relationship with parents as kind of not abuse. Now, my guess would be if my knowledge would be in every society that I come across, the idea of sexual relationships with your immediate family is what we call to do. It's a social norm of going, that isn't something that you do. He's totally reframing that. And so if we put that together with the first video, we're going, okay, I've got somebody here who's going to try and convince me around what I would normally think shouldn't be happening. That's kind of okay for it to be happening. So it's already got fairly odd for me. Now, why is that going on? Is that because something has been happening in this family that is very unusual and we should be convinced that that's kind of okay? Or is there another motive of he's in some kind of corner and has to say that? So as we're going through, I'm just interested in unpacking why immediately straight off the bat is he going against some social norms, pretty odd behavior, and very cool at the moment, generally about going around those, against those social norms, quite calculated at the moment in my view around going against social norms. So interesting. Chase, what do you got? Yep, you guys have hit all the points that I was going to talk about here. But I want you to think about what would the behavior look like? Or what would a response look like to a person who doesn't define that as abuse? And we're seeing it, he's seeing the world through that lens. Like that is a normal thing. He knows that society doesn't think it's normal, but he knows that he grew up this way. So he views the world through a very different lens, much like people who keep tigers. It's a completely different deal. That's a whole different lens to view the world. The only thing I have that you guys didn't mention was there's a flash of anger downward eyebrow movement at the word abuse, specifically at the word abuse. Hearing the question, so that's good to see there. That's all I got. Nice. Hey, one quick note, guys, this was cross examination. Don't know if we mentioned that. This part is, yeah. You've indicated in your direct examination that you were sexually abused by your father and your mother. Is that correct? I don't think so. I didn't use those words. Well, but isn't that the gist of what you were saying? That you were the victim of sexual abuse? With my father and with my mother, I just said what happened. And I think it was mutual. Okay. Okay, good. Yeah. Oh, what's the problem? What's the problem? What's the problem? I'm sorry to kill my parents. Pardon me? You're up? Who? Are they still there? The people? Oh, no. Were they shot? What happened? Let me talk to Eric. Who is the person that was shot? Okay. Hold on a second. All right. That's a long one. I'm going to go first on this one. So I'll just hit the fine points on it. A lot of flags in this. Right out of the gate. He goes from, he says, yes, police. Can you call 911? I've never heard him go, yes, police. That's the first thing he says. Then he says, I don't think he sat down and thought out specifically what he's going to say in this. I know the conversation is fine. Okay. Go ahead and call 911. Let's get fired up and make this look like that happened. I don't think he thought out what to say. I think he thought it would just come to him and it's not really coming to him very well. So when he's pausing like that, he's creating that story, creating what he's going to say next. So that's a flag. That's flag number one for me. Then another flag is where he goes from zero to 100 like that in no time. He's from, and then he starts crying and he gets into this crying like a child thing. Go on. It's really high, really high pitched, which maybe he has to go there to make that happen. I don't know, but it sounds, that just sounds odd to me from an auditory standpoint. It sounds odd. Then he says another flag, which we've all talked about. We talked about in the TrueCom workshop and that in our membership, BodyLanguageMembership.com, which this is from, we have whole things on this. Chase has the whole thing on this. Mark has the whole thing. Greg has the whole thing. We all have our little things we go down that mark these off. One of the big ones is I wasn't here and then I came home. They're telling you what they were doing before this happened. Nobody asked him that. When you call 911, you call up and you go, I need help. Here's where I am. I need help and here's where it is. That's the information you want to get out, but he's doing what we call, he's doing a couple of things. There's a thing called strip that Greg and I have in the TrueCom workshop and it's the abbreviation strip. This S is for stancer. T is for transfer. R is for romance or A or I is for insulator and P is for prancer. Each one of those sort of breaks down how people approach the authorities, the police officers or the dispatcher when they're talking to them. In this case, we're dealing with two things. We're dealing with transfer and we're dealing with an insulator. The transfer is where you'll see somebody talking to you. They'll ask the person about a murder or what happened at the scene and they're just going, oh, my baby, my baby. They're almost like in a trance because they don't want to talk to the police officer. They don't want to give them anything. They don't know what they maybe they haven't made the story up yet. They're not prepared, whatever the reason being, they get into that and they act like they can't talk. They're just too distressed to talk. We're hearing that. Then you had the insulator and that's the person who insulates themself from the police officer or the dispatcher as they're talking to them. They can't talk to them because something else is going on. If it was a romance or what was right after that, then that's when they're talking to them and they're up in their business or right up in their biz when they're saying, oh, yeah, what do you need? I'm here for this. Here's what happened. They give you all these little weird details. In this case, he's insulating himself by all the screaming. She's having to say, what happened? What happened? She has to keep asking him. So that's a combination of those two. Now, the crying in this is childlike. I know I said that before, but at the end, this is another flag that tells me this isn't real. A little while they're going to, this is going to come up again. They're going to ask him about this or ask his brother about this. But I don't think this part is real. I think they discussed it and said, okay, you go do that and he just wasn't ready for it. And that's what sends off flags, bells, and whistles for me. Greg, what do you got? Yeah. So Chase, I know you'll cover some of the elements. You've got the checklist and we can put that checklist up again. But number one, when you call, there's one reason you call 911. Mark, hey, help, I help. It's one of those, right? I got to get help right now. That's what you're doing. You don't tell the story and they're telling a story. They're saying, hey, I went home and I'm also going to say, okay, the crying, I'm going to give him benefit of a doubt and say he is, if he's been abused his whole life, regressions of possibility, he might cry like a child. This is going to hurt him later on the stand. And you'll see him actually cry later in the, or the prosecution goes after him and say, we saw you cry on the stand. We heard you cry in this 911 call. Looks like you can cry on demand. They go after him for that. So it's going to hurt him. But there's a handful of things missing. I don't hear a call for help. I don't hear, hey, might come help my parents. I hear my parents have been killed. It's interesting he uses the word killed knowing he killed them too, which is not distancing, which means they have in their head what they have done. If you want to cry, just go look in the room. They shot their parents like 16 times with a 12 gauge. So there's something pretty grisly. And unless you're really tough minded or have seen it, that's pretty shocking. And you could find a reason to cry pretty easily. There's no address. Didn't hear one address mentioned, of course, they know where the phone is and they're doing that. He's delaying. And we're Scott's talking about this transfer. Transfer for me, the simplest way for you to think of it, is I make myself unavailable through emotions or some other method, whether it's rocking and I'm delusional, I'm crazy, something like that. This long term is going to hurt him. I could say he's in regression, but and maybe maybe he's crying because he just realizes the horrific thing he just did, but it'll come back to haunt him in time. Chase, what do you got? Yeah, you guys hit a lot there. And I just focus on any 911 call it is story versus crime. So if there was a crime, the first thing they operated it is the person who shot who shot them. Are they still in the house and anyone would probably be concerned with that if they didn't do the murder. And so we see starting out story versus crime. And there's three other huge red flags on the checklist. You want to go to our community section, take a look at that 911 call checklist, leave those in the comments. And I'll find one of you and I'll send you a signed book. But there's three other things in there. We have those flags that are adding up. And that's the 911 call operator. It should be checking those things and say, hey, this guy is a red flag or this guy scored a six on the scale here, which is a pretty big deal. That's all I got, Mark. Yeah, so let me give you a little hand about one of the ways that I go about working out where the red flags might be, how to read body language in general. I'm just looking for big changes, like what I would call significant change. Now, who decides what significant is? I do. I just think, well, that's a big difference. And there's a massive difference between, as Scott was saying, that yes, police at the start, which is kind of the way I go, hello, Mark Bowden, expert in human behavior and body language is very cool. And then suddenly it's got said, it ramps up into what the other person on the line says is hysteria, it's hysterical. So it goes from very calm to hysterical. I would suggest that is significant. Now, what do I do when there's this moment of significant change? Because what I'm doing there is consciously trying to do what our instinct does, which our instinct is just trained to look out for significant change. Something happens in your peripheral vision, significant, you'll jump away or your eyes will be drawn towards it. Significant change in volume happens around you, your head will turn, check out what it is. What I'm doing is looking through this recording and going, where is the most significant change? And that's it for me. Going from hello police to hysteria. Now, what does it mean? I never know what it means. I just think, well, something's up there and that's what I need to investigate. That's what we need to talk about. Why are we so calm at the start? What happened during that that got you so hysterical? I want to know why the significant change happens there. That's a way of starting to ask people questions. So when you see body language, when you see non-verbal communication, and you see this moment of significant change, that's the bit you want to go into. You don't know why it's happening. You're going to find out from people by just asking questions. So significant change. That's what I've got for you there. Hey, and Mark Bowden just defined baseline for you. Okay. That's perfect. What happened? What happened? You came home and found two shots. Let me talk to Eric. Who is the person that threw a shot? What you were going to say to the police before you called them that night? Over the course of the, you know, that whole that hour and a half, we talked about it a few times when we decided that we were going to say we're at the movies. And then at some point we decided to say that we had left out the back because we figured somebody would probably saw me running out of the house or the car leaving or something. And then after we started to fall apart and they realized that wasn't going to be Perry. And we said that we would just say we went to get an ID to explain why we didn't meet Perry. All right, Chase, what do you got? It's BTOE score, the behavioral development score is a nine on here. So he's very fruitful in this response for the most part. We see some big gestures with his hands here that we don't see in the other videos. He's more illustrated with his body. So no matter what training or coaching he had, if he did get trained to sit on his hands or just kind of, you know, don't use your hands in the interview, this goes away because I think he's more comfortable talking about it and it's more truthful. So we also see his normal eye home or where his eyes usually go first stuff is around our nine o'clock is where we're looking. So he's looking that way during truthful stuff. Maybe I'm going to take a look later when we ask him different questions. And still his dominant shoulder is still back. It's still back from the interviewer, the opposing counsel. And that's all I got, Greg. Yeah, so Chase, great call out. His eyes for recall are going to what appears to be his right unless this video is flipped. And I think he's sitting to the right side of the judge. So his eyes are going to his right. Interestingly, about 90% of people you run into are going to go the opposite direction about 90%. And they're going to go somewhere in their head. When we talk about auditory memory or digital memory, your eyes stay somewhere between your brow ridge and your cheekbone mostly. And we'll see them go usually to the left in most people, but you got to ask questions to find out in his case and in his brother's case, oddly enough, we're going to see that movement is reversed. It's over this way. So they're like 10% of the population you're running to. Those are not absolutes. Those are you ask enough questions, you figure out where the guys eyes go. But when people are remembering something they have rehearsed practice thought of, it's going to go there. The reason a cover story doesn't work is because if all you do is remember something. If you remember song lyrics, you'll find your eyes doing that digital drift. You're going back to rote memory, something you put in your head that way. That's the reason we use that. It works very well. You get a baseline. This is recall for him. And he does it consistently. He goes back there. He does a slight request for approval. Not much. But I'm with you, Chase. He bounces up. He starts illustrating because he's thinking of something he's going to tell. But he tries to lock it down is why I think he has been coached. I didn't think in the beginning when I first watched him, I thought, yeah, he's just kind of dead. And then I see his hands rise and drop. Good for him. But you can watch him rifling through what they said and what they thought before he actually called 911. I do believe they probably had a conversation about what should be disclosed. And then he says and then after and his eyes are over here doing something for a while. My guess is there might have been a little bit of back and forth between him and his brother before they call 911, a bunch of screaming and yelling, a bunch of emotional stuff going on. You can see a lot of confusion in his face and a slower answer as he's navigating through what he is remembering. So I agree with you. I think this is truthful. I think this is probably if there's any deception that's that and then after, right in there, what actually happened. I think he's editing the story and he's telling you what he feels is pertinent to the story and what is conducive to what they're going to tell you. And, you know, they have a long range story they're trying to tell. Mark, what do you got? Yeah. So that gives me a lot of confidence, Chase, the number that you gave on that because I looked at that and when it seems to me a low blink rate for what's being talked about, I would expect on this subject matter much higher stress seems super low to me. So then it starts to signal to me that, you know, previously I've heard this hysteria. We will hear all kinds of stuff later on in these videos. And now I'm getting this sense of, have we got somebody here who can move from, yes, police to a hysterical level? We've heard crying like a child. We understand that there may or may not be some abuse that's gone on. So now something in my head is telling me, have we got somebody who might be able to shift personality to a certain extent? Have we got somebody who might be fractured enough that there might be, you know, at least a couple of people showing up here? Now, I don't know the answer to that, but I just want to give, you know, use some idea of how I'm thinking around this because I don't know anything about the case. I don't know what's gone on here, but I'm starting to go, there's something gone on. It needs to fit in with the social norm when really it doesn't fit in with the social norm and we've got such cold, calm, calm more than cold, calculated accounts of this. Is it, we know that, you know, parents have been killed. Is it psychopathy where there is just no feeling at all or has feeling been suppressed and placed in almost a different character, a different personality? Again, I don't know, but I'm just giving you some insight into how I'm thinking about this. Scott, what have you got? All right. I'm all the time talking about illustrators and it's one of the things that fascinate me. Watching Mark is like, if I turn the sound off, I probably know exactly what he's talking about. As you go through these... Hey, Scott, can I ask a question? Yeah. What are illustrators? Oh, yeah. Sorry. Illustrators are the things, again, if you'll watch Mark, that's how the brain, your brain emphasizes specific words and phrases like I just did, specific words and phrases. Like I said earlier with eyebrows and people will say that one over there or that one over there, however they're doing it, that guy I was training, I was telling you about would do it that way. Like I'm doing here, I'm showing you things and it's where your brain just hits those specific words and phrases that it thinks are important, that you think are important. That's what illustrators are and those fascinate me. In this case, we're seeing an incongruity, an incongruent, I guess you'd say incongruent illustrators. That's what I usually call them, the incongruency jumped out. That's when, for example, in the OJ case, when there's a reporter that asked him, did you kill those two people? He says, no, I didn't. I couldn't have. His hands don't hit on the words. His illustrators don't lock up with the words he's saying and we see that here. Now, there's a difference. If you say, this is what I've noticed and this is what I've been, I've said this for a long time, when a person starts illustrating and they haven't spoken yet, that's one thing. That tells me they're thinking. There's inner dialogue because they're getting ready to tell you what's happening. The mark was doing just a couple of minutes ago. They're thinking about it and as they come through it, that's when they start illustrating now. If they do it after the words and they start talking about those things and they're not congruent with the words as they go along and they last, something's up. There's an issue there. They're either just making stuff up and they're not focusing on what they're doing, but they know they're not telling the truth because they're not thinking that. I think it shows the difference in deception and truth. In other words, there are no absolutes. You can't say for sure every time it means that, but every time I've seen someone and their illustrators aren't locking up with what they're saying for years and years and years and years, I've watched this. That's what tells me there's something not right there. As he's going through, we're seeing his come out before he talks and they lock up just like a gap between there. There's perfect timing between when he illustrates and when he speaks. If you were to move those up, then you would see him hit at the same time. The other way, when they're late, they don't do that. They don't lock up like that because there's too much jagged stuff going on in there because they're not being, most of the time, they're being deceptive and they're thinking about what they did, not what they're going to do. In other words, I hope that makes sense. But again, he's calm and relaxed through this. A lot's going on. These are big questions, but he's still calm and relaxed. I think that again, that goes back from him beating a child and observing, watching everything that's happening and trying to discern whether or not he's in trouble or something's going to happen to him in the next couple of minutes. In his inner dialogue, it's all the same throughout all these videos. I think we can look at that and say like Mark and then Greg was pointing out, that's his baseline. He's very calm. He doesn't mind thinking for a couple of minutes and then, not minutes, but a couple of seconds and then delivering. I think he's calm and okay with that because it doesn't bother him. He's used to doing that, taking that time to think. So even though he's under a lot of pressure, I think he's thinking good at this point. So I think he's being honest here. Did you plan out what you were going to say to the police before you called them that night? Over the course of that whole, that hour and a half, we talked about it a few times when we decided that we were going to say we're at the movies. And then at some point, we decided to say that we had left out the back because we figured somebody would probably saw me running out of the house or the car leaving or something. And then after we started to fall apart and I realized I wasn't going to be able to meet Perry, when we said that we would just say we went to get an ID to explain why we didn't meet Perry. All right, here we go. But as to this specific phone call when you first made contact with the police, did you plan out what you were going to say to them? No. And I really don't remember exactly what I said other than reading this. But I know that I wasn't going to say that we were involved. All right, Mark, what do you got? Yeah, just one thing I want to pick up on here, which is just how agreeable he's being noticed. He immediately comes in with, right, before really the sentence has ever been finished. He's being super agreeable throughout this. I think we saw a similar agreeability within a Jody Arias interview that we looked at. So again, as I'm going through this and I see this level of agreeability, I'm starting to think, what might it be about the psychology here that makes him super calm and agreeable in this kind of situation? And you see him agree and then you'll see him kind of sometimes pull back as well. So is he teasing? Is he trying to attract? Is that what's happening there? Again, I don't know the answers to that. I'm just kind of going through going, what are the pieces of information that I can pick up here? But why so agreeable at this point? Interest me. Chase, what do you got? Great stuff. I totally agree. There's a severe lack of emotion here. You see that there's no emotion on the face, which I'm going to talk about in just a couple of videos. I'm going to explain exactly what I think is going on without making a diagnosis. And I think the way that he pauses, when people say he paused, you know, this guy's being deceptive, I think this pause was a display of deference to the opposing counsel for the interruption that had happened there for him saying, right, and then he paused a little bit longer than he normally would. And that's what I think that was. This is mostly truthful scores, a six on the behavioral table of elements. This is the, I think the lowest score. Greg, what do you got? Yeah, I saw truthful too. I mean, he's got a low blink rate. Here's the problem, guys. This guy has just, it's not like they're trying to hide. They premeditatedly murdered their parents with shotguns. So he's casually talking about a 911 call. Of course. I mean, this is a pretty, if you watch this entire thing, it's gritty. There's a lot of horrific stuff going on, not least of which is murdering your parents with a shotgun. I mean, I was talking to somebody earlier, I was talking to Eric and he said, you know, it's not easy to go and call your brother and say, Hey, what are you doing Friday night? You know, this is not a normal thing. And they just admitted among the most horrific things on earth to murdering their parents in premeditated fashion, going out buying shotguns with the intent. So he's not trying to hide the fact he called 911 and he didn't tell the truth. So there's no pressure. That's what we're seeing is low pressure. Even though it's a cross, even there on them, you see pretty good eye contact, not a high blink rate, open. The one thing that I would say is either raise your hands or sit on your hands, but don't do both because you get that false shrug because he's sitting on his hands and his arms would want to move. So his illustrators illustrating his points and thoughts are not there, but he certainly has good eye contact. He certainly looks like he's being honest. And like you chase, I don't have your BTOE in front of me, but I would say the same thing low, low, low deception. Scott, what do you got? Yeah, everything is looks the way it should. I think he's sitting and he and his brother both are sitting in a swivel chair. That's the problem there because he's moving around constantly. Now in interrogation, you really want that. But if you've got a witness up there, the last thing you want is to have a swivel chair on wheels because it goes backwards and forwards and he's goofing around and doing all that. You see him going up. There's a thing called anti-antigravity movements. Joe Navarro always talks about it. When you go up and you pop up, that denotes it indicates you're in a good mood. You're seeing something you really agree with. Like when the bride comes out, if you'll keep an eye the next time you're at a wedding, keep an eye on the groom. You'll see him pop up on his toes because he's like, yeah, there she is. So keep an eye out for things like that. If someone's on the phone, they get good news and they're talking on the phone and they'll pop up. You'll see that. But he gives a short, tight delivery. All his inflections are where they should be vocally. His head's up and just really the big thing bothers me and this is that swivel chair. But as to this specific phone call when you first made contact with the police, did you plan out what you were going to say to them? No. And I really don't remember exactly what I said other than reading this. But I know that I wasn't going to say that we were involved. Would this be on the weekends, the showers together? Yes. Well, it would be after tennis, after sports, of course. Okay. So it's after sports, of course? Yes. Okay. Well, we took, every time we finished playing on the tennis court, we always, him and I, and sometimes Lyle, depends how old he was at the time, would go and take a shower together. Now you mean every time, meaning on the weekends? Yes. He really wasn't around too often during the day in the week. All right. Greg, what do you got? Yeah, we'll make this pretty quick. There's one little request for approval, but it's part of his baseline. All we're going to see here is a baseline for this guy. And by the way, this is his counsel, and she is an agent of the story here is all that's happening. She's helping him tell the story, asking questions, he's responding and telling a story. So I think we see good baseline. We're seeing him tilting his head when he listens, engaging with his eyes. Just basic stuff. Scott, what do you got? I'm not seeing a whole lot here either. It's like his illustrators are good. He's loping as he's telling, as he's giving the answer. It's a little bit rushed. That's okay. I'm not seeing any adapters, anything worth a hoot. So that's, that's me. Greg or Chase, what do you got? I thought it was just interesting here that he said we would go shower together, not just we would go shower. I think that just, that's more illustrative of the deviant family structure that he grew up in and lived in throughout his life. It's not we would go shower, it's we would go shower together. And that's it. He's loping along, truthful, and very deference, very showing a lot of deference. Mark, what do you got? Yeah. If there's one thing here, it is that look of approval. He then pulls back as well. I mean, this person, I think is the person questioning him is on his side. Am I, am I right? Yeah. So they're kind of playing with each other, offering, offering, accepting, pulling back. But I think that there is an idea here of trying to get the acceptance of behavior here that many of us out there would go, okay, I'm not quite sure about whether this was the correct behavior to have. I'm not quite sure whether this is on the borderline of something wrong going on. There's a lot of ideas of getting acceptance around some of these borders being crossed over. There, that's all I got for you. Would this be on the weekends, the showers together? Yes. Well, it would be after tennis, after sports, of course. Okay. So it's after sports, of course. Yes. Okay. Well, we took, every time we finished playing on the tennis court, we always, him and I, and sometimes Lyle, depends how old he was at the time, would go and take a shower together. Now, you mean every time, meaning on the weekends? Yes. He really wasn't around too often during the day in the week. Okay, we good? Do you remember your earliest recollection of being frightened by one of your parents? In which parent? Your father. Yes. And what were the circumstances of this earliest memory of being frightened by your father? I was swimming. Do you remember where you were swimming? I was swimming at the, I believe it was called Ramapo, I'm not quite sure of the name, it was a lap pool. And what happened? Well, when I was in Muncie, I couldn't quite swim the 25-yard pool without breathing. And he wanted me to do it straight without breathing, because that way you swim faster. And I couldn't do it. So he would train me to do it without breathing. And how would you do that? By grabbing my hair and dunking me under the water. And then lifting me up and dunking me under the water again. Okay, Chase, what do you got? I think this is truthful. We have emotional recall, write it to question. There's body narration, he's moving his hands, he's illustrating, as Scott will put it. There's eyebrow flash, which I think is, I think both of them showing this eyebrow flash is trained submission or conditioned submission, especially to someone who is in a position of authority like an attorney, a doctor, those types of people. So they, I'll talk about it in a second, but the suggestibility of an adult who was abused as a child is way increased. And it's his memory of the event, this brings the behaviors to the present moment. And this technique, what asking about these events brings the memories into the present. So the chemicals that were there, the feelings that were there are still very palpable and they're easier to bring in. And this is a technique a lot of times that attorneys can use on the stand to get someone in a vulnerable state by asking questions about something completely different and then asking something challenging because I've accessed that vulnerable state first. And so this brings that up. And he used the word trained instead of abused. He never said abused. He used the word trained, which I think speaks to his dysfunctional upbringing and how he was taught to view the world as this is natural. This is normal. And this is something that everybody else endures. Mostly truthful behavior. Scott. Yeah, I'm going to agree with you. I'm seeing all this. We're seeing the same stuff. His ill stairs are good. He's loping along. Just telling that like he's, you know, like that could happen this morning. However, we do see an adapter when he says, when he talks about, I couldn't do it. We see him go like that. And when he says he couldn't do it, I think he's reliving that moment when his dad held him underwater and he saw it coming. He's like, I can't do it. And he's going to get, I think he was worried about all the way up to that point where he grabbed and stick him under. This is a violent thing that's going on here. This isn't just something where he would hold me underwater. The kids flailing around, probably screaming, making noise. Apparently nobody else is around. It's just he and his father or his brother and his mother to do that and let that happen without running over there. How are you guys going to be able to let that happen out over there? And you know what? That's going to be tough, man. So I think he's reliving that. That's what we're seeing that little grimaces got as he again, biting down on his mouth on his bottom lip. And then when he's illustrating those moves of his father doing it, all these things are very smooth. Everything he's going along is very smooth. Nothing is, he's not stopping and it's all jerky and short, little words and separated. Everything's just flowing right along there is cadence. In other words, as Greg always relates to it as or talks about it as, everything's just fine. Go along there. He's telling like it's like it was no big thing. I think this guy got so far in their heads from since they were little, he's ruined them up to this point. You know, they don't know what's normal behavior, I think. So for him, that could have been happening to everybody. It wouldn't have bothered him if you said it happens. My dad did the same thing of saying, yeah, it's terrible, isn't it? He wouldn't go, what are you kidding me? Because to him, that's normal. And to us, you know, most people that that kind of behavior isn't normal. So yeah, we're seeing the same kind of stuff there. Mark, what do you got? Yeah. So I agree with you that Chase. The abuse has been reframed as training. It's been softened. Essentially. And we'll hear more of that later on. Does that mean that it's soft in his head? No, not at all. To Scott's point, as that lip retracts and pulls back, what you're seeing there is a signal of extreme stress, severe pain and severe psychological damage, essentially. That's what I would say that is an indicator of and is synonymous with. You know, there's small lip retract retractions that aren't going to mean that. That's a big lip retraction that, again, is a significant change. Notice the difference, how he is before that moment and after that moment. It's a big move. And because it's a big move, I'd say it indicates a very big feeling comes that. And then you see the move. I couldn't do that. Now, we could suggest that maybe an element of it could be the pain of not being able to swim underwater and achieve the result that his father was trying to get from him. But I think because it's so big and there's no shame attached to it, it really is just the reliving of the pain. I think it's most likely about abuse. And therefore, I would go down the route of because it was so fast, so quick that something did happen here that was abusive, almost, you know, torture for him. That's what I got around that. Is that all of this? Greg, what do you got? Yeah. So I'm going to go an entirely different direction on a couple of these things. But yes, everything you said, everyone of you said, I saw the same thing. So I'm not going to beat those up. If you're raised in a hostile environment, if you've been through trauma many times in your life, you become hyper guarded as human nature. All of us who have been to war, all of that, we all recognize PTSD. People become hyper guarded, hyper protective and that kind of thing. I think this is my opinion. I think it's a reason he is clarifying who she's talking about. Very specifically framing the question. We heard it earlier in Lyle. Very specifically framing what they're going to answer and respond to. It could be a family trait. Maybe it's just what they do. But if you've been in a hostile environment for a long time, you're going to be very careful which question you answer. Because if you answer the wrong question, things can go rough. The biting, I think it's a combination again of an adapter, that ability to control, but also protecting saying something else. I knew that I could not do it. And then I was going to get my whipped, you know, that kind of thing. Stopping short of what you would usually say. Again, I don't see any lying. I don't see a reason to lie here. He's just telling a story. And we also see the right eye accessing as he's doing recall. Family trait, maybe he goes to his right as he's recalling what happened. You can see the details and it's wrote memory for him and that kind of thing. Now, here's the problem. Could it also be a rehearsal story? Sure it could be. He's telling a story, but there's no reason to lie about this. There's plenty of other things he could lie about to make it a lot worse. This is part of the why did why did I believe my parents would kill me solution? They've already admitted they've killed their parents. They've said a whole lot more horrific things that were going on between them and the entire family. So I don't see deception and I do see legalistic hyper guarded. And then even when he responds to a question and finishes, he does that little count the sniff. I finished that one and moves on to the next. That's what I got. Do you remember your earliest recollection of being frightened by one of your parents? Which parent? Your father. Yes. And what were the circumstances of this earliest memory of being frightened by your father? I was swimming. Do you remember where you were swimming? I was swimming at the, I believe it was called Ramapo. I'm not quite sure of the name. It was a lap pool. And what happened? Well, when I was in Muncie, I couldn't quite swim the 25 yard pool without breathing. And he wanted me to do it straight without breathing because that way you swim faster. And I couldn't do it. So he would train me to do it without breathing. And how would you do that? By grabbing my hair and dunking me under the water and then lifting me up and dunking me under the water again. Would your mother ever be around when your father was doing this kind of training? Yeah. Would she ever intervene? No, my mom didn't intervene when my dad was doing things. Over the years were there occasions when your father was being physically violent with you? Yes. Did your mother ever intervene? No. Were there times when you were young, when your father was ridiculing or berating you, when your mother would say a word or two? When I was young. Would she do that? Yes. And would even that intervention, did that end before you were a teenager? Adjection, lady. Sustain. For how long would that type of intervention, how long did that type of intervention by your mother continue? It continued when I was young, not all the time. Usually at the dinner table when he, he didn't get on me very much. Usually just lie out. But I guess a lot of times I wanted to jump in, not when dad was angry, but when dad was in a good mood to sort of be a part of the conversation. And dad would jump on top of me when I tried. Physically or verbally? Verbally. And my mom would say, Jose, and he would just look at her. And he wouldn't stop. That ended, I guess, before PDS. So it was before I was 11. Mark, what do you got? Yeah, I think the one thing I want to bring up on this is, is the softening that's going on around this. Training. So there's no talk of abuse. It's now called training and then it's called things. Now I think in my mind, I think, okay, things, training. No, we're talking about abuse here. But it's being softened by everybody, it seems, in this, in this conversation. And so I start to think, you know, because I don't know this case. I don't know what's happening here. But I just start to think, why is everybody softening this idea of abuse? Why doesn't it seem to count for very much or want to be really, you know, talked about in the words that I think, you know, most of us watching this might use. And I start to go, what's really going on here in the court? Why isn't this important right now? Why is it okay to soften this? So, you know, interesting and notable vast difference in how I would frame it and how everybody in the court is framing it now. What do they know that I don't know at this point? Why am I going, that's wrong, that's not the right word to use. Why are they using training and things when I would use the word abuse? They all know something that I don't know right now. So that interests me. What don't I know about this? Greg, what do you got? Yeah, so I'll give you a little heads up what they do know. What they know is they're trying not to be accused of killing for revenge. So if it sounds like abuse, then it will be revenge. That's his counsel. Now, the prosecutor actually comes in and says, the reason you killed him is because and we'll see that later. So yeah, Mark, I mean, you're dead into what's going on there. Here I see that same right eye accessing for recall. There's not a whole lot of reason to lie here. I don't see anything. Again, he's legalistic. And again, his attorney is an agent of the story. She's narrating the story and asking yes and no questions, even to the point she gets called on the carpet for leading at some point. So yeah, I mean, there's no reason to lie. He's rehearsed the story. I can guarantee you they know what they're going to talk about next and next and next and next. They've had a lot of preparation time and it shows. But he also looks honest. His face is softened. You can see there's nothing really crazy going on. Not a lot of blink rate, not a lot of eye accessing. Avoid no blocking. Remember, guys, we talk about things like eye blocking to avoid contact. We talk about eye avoidance to break contact. We talk about burying, putting our hands between us, putting something between us, fidgeting, adapting. Those are all things that we look for as clusters of nervous behavior, not deception. We don't see a lot of that here. We see pretty smooth. The messaging, while it might be odd for me, is his. It's consistent. He's recalling. It's congruent with the message he's delivering. So it's a good baseline. Chase, what do you got? I totally agree with you guys on all of this. And to speak to Mark's point and Greg's, this language also presents them in many different opportunities to use more inflammatory language where most lawyers want inflammatory language in there. And we see a lack of inflammatory language throughout, no matter what crime is being discussed, what abuse, what sexual relationship was developed within the family. There's no language there that the attorney says, you have to use the word abuse. You have to say it hurt. You have to say, I hated it. You need to show some emotion that you didn't enjoy it. None of that's there. What suggests to me that there's not a narrative, there's not a sharp narrative to show anything in a certain light. One thing that was in this is he said, my mom, but he said, dad. He used the word dad, not my dad, but dad. So in this statement, there's distancing language to mom. And there's a very personal language when speaking about dad. I think that's pretty interesting here. Not sure what it means, but I think it shows us a little bit of a potential regression, which I'm going to talk about in a second here. And I think just the overall lack of emotion is the result of a lifetime of what I would call horrifyingly dysfunctional behavior throughout the family. And that's all I got. It's a quick summary, Scott. All right. We're seeing his behavior is really similar to his brother's behavior. I guess I was talking about earlier. I think we've all might have brought that up because his arms are together. They're really close to his torso, trying to protect himself. His hands are down their nears, crotch. They may be folded or maybe out of, obviously we can't see how he's holding them. But we're pretty much seeing the same thing that his brother's doing. When he says mom didn't intervene when dad was doing things, and we see his head go down as his mouth goes open and he takes in a deep breath, I think he's ashamed of that. I think he's ashamed of saying that his mom didn't take up for him. That's pretty hardcore. Yeah. So that's pretty much what I'm seeing. He's just trying these things. It sounds like he's trying to get all this stuff off his chest, as he's saying it maybe for the first time. I don't know. I'm sure he's talked about it with his brother, but I think we're seeing a lot of shame here. And not as much embarrassment, but he's sure he's closing off. He's turtling a little bit and he's getting down and putting that head toward him. I think it's shame and embarrassment we're seeing there a lot of. Would your mother ever be around when your father was doing this kind of training? Yeah. Would she ever intervene? No, my mom didn't intervene when my dad was doing things. Over the years, were there occasions when your father was being physically violent with you? Yes. Did your mother ever intervene? No. Were there times when you were young, when your father was ridiculing or berating you, when your mother would say a word or two? When I was young. Would she do that? Yes. And would even that intervention, did that end before you were a teenager? Adjection, lady. Sustain. For how long with that type of intervention, how long did that type of intervention about your mother continue? It continued when I was young, not all the time, usually at the dinner table when he didn't get on me very much, usually just lie out. But I guess a lot of times I wanted to jump in, not when dad was angry, but when dad was in a good mood to sort of be a part of the conversation. And dad would jump on top of me when I tried. Basically or verbally? Verbally. And my mom would say, Jose, and he would just look at her. And he wouldn't stop. That ended I guess before PDS, so it was before I was 11. All right, we're good? Yep. Yeah. Did you tell your mom? Yes. What did you say to your mom? I told this to tell dad to leave me alone. And he keeps touching me. All right, Chase, what do you got? There it is. The use of dad again. So we see I told him to tell dad is interesting. And the opposing counsel, we can see some empathy here where her voice softens. If you go back to video one and take a listen to how she's asking questions and now how her voice is triggered into this motherly tone. And I don't think that was deliberate at all for her to do that. And so this is a truthful response. This is scores an eight on the BTOE, the table of elements. This softening language is used as a habit, I think here. Even when stronger language would be more effective to persuade a jury, they tend not to do that. And they tend not to use that type of language. And if any trial consultants is just starting out in their career, I would say step one is to have a thesaurus in your briefcase 24 hours a day. When you get on these conference calls to restructure, reword the way that people are saying their testimony and reword the way that you're asking questions about someone's experience. So thesaurus is a big deal because words matter. And we're not seeing inflammatory or change responses. So I think softening is a way of life for a lot of this, not just words, but going to soften events. That may also be why killing was not a far leap from everything else that's been going on. If so much is normal, the line to reach abnormal is further away. Great. Yeah, so a couple of things here. One thing is remember that his counsel has advised them, the last thing you want people to feel is that you wanted revenge. I think that's part of the reason we're hearing all this softening language where there's part of their normal life or not. Could be too, because he used the word kill when he's talking about, I killed my parents. You don't hear that very often in people who murder people. You hear, I heard, I did, whatever. This is real crying. Now I'm also going to tell you, we can tell you whether crying is real or not, but not what someone used to generate it. A good actor wells up real emotion inside and then all the chemicals work and everything happens. But I'll give you a short list of things I look for. Blood red eyes, snotty nose, trying to control the leaking from the nose, yelping, breathing, you'll hear it. And as we go through this, you'll hear the body does one thing really well. I always teach people when they're trying to learn to run. Don't worry about your breathing. Your body's been doing it since you're born. It has a rhythm. It does its own thing. And when you cry, you interrupt that and then you'll hear that as your body tries to regulate and go back to normal. You're going to hear that in this guy. So it's real. He's touching his nose. He goes, you see the request for approval at one point and then that distaste and sorrow. This is all real. He's got everything showing. No deception here. I mean, this is a kid talking about something horrible to happen. So immediately, and guys, this is the cleanest thing we could find. This is perfect. This keeps it to euphemisms. This is a horrible testimony. This guy's crying for real. Yep, perfect. Mark, what do you got? Yeah. So you're dead on about that rhythm piece there and of crying. Now, of course, you can reproduce that rhythm. So what do I look out for? The big thing, which is so hard to reproduce is the blood coming here and here and underneath here. And in fact, if you look at Japanese animations, anime, that's what they will show you as somebody's getting emotionally hot. They'll they'll redden these areas here. It's very important in the Japanese anime culture, strangely not so important in our general kind of North American European artistic culture. But it shows up a great deal and it's tough to reproduce that. I've never seen anybody managed to reproduce that reddening without there being an emotion behind it. Yes, of course, an actor can reproduce the emotion and the emotion will start all the right chemicals going. This is real crying. There's a real feeling there and it's that redness that certainly kind of nails that one down for me. Scott, what have you got there? Oh, by the way, one last thing. Yeah, we get grief in the forehead here. We get it in the chin as well. There's another couple of indicators. And he moves into present tense. So I think we talked about this before, but the story is starting to move from past tense into present tense. So now the person is in the moment, in the emotion, and that can be quite a powerful place to get a witness to if it's useful. If it's not going to be useful, you wouldn't want to get them into that present tense situation. Sorry, Scott, go for it. See, I thought I was going to get out of there with some stuff left to talk about. Mark, you just clobbered. I was going to open up with what you just ended with. You were like, ah, I was like, don't do it, don't do it. So I'll go on to this. He's talking like a child. I think he's been busted back down to where he's, that little kid is coming through. Because I think once that abuse starts at a young age, a part of you stays that age, stays there. We see a little bit of the grief, I was surprised at how much we didn't see, though. I was almost shocked when I kept going, because everything else is real. You can't fake, like you guys were saying, you cannot fake this. All those things we're seeing, you can't fake. However, that grief muscle isn't huge. I kept thinking it would pop out and be really big, but it really wasn't. You know, even his chin boss, that wasn't a big deal either. We do see it in the mouth. But one thing I thought was interesting is we're seeing about four different expressions fighting themselves in here. We're seeing him run through these things, and they're bouncing back and forth from anger to shame to fear to all these different things. Because I'm seeing sadness, shame, and anger and fear, all in these things. And they're bouncing not just in the same, in a row, the same time, every time. They're bouncing around. There's a whole lot going on here, a whole lot going on. So I think he's been trained, quote, unquote, not to show emotion. And he and his brother both. But as he's going through this, I think that shows how it's bouncing around in his head so much. It's so locked up in there and trying to get out. It's just like banging around on the inside of his head trying to get out. And that's how it's showing. Because like Greg always says, you cannot hide your body language. And then this guy can't hide any of this stuff. And he does the biting adapter. Again, it's the same as his brother's. So again, very similar. But this was this really gave, I really felt sorry for this guy here, because I think everything they're saying about that so far, pretty much most of it is true about the abuse that they suffered. So just seeing that, man, it's heartbreaking to see somebody's brain going through all that. So that's what I got. You made it, Greg. Can I point out two things? When Scott says grief muscle, he means this. Do Shane's grief muscle? It shows up. And when we're talking about Shin Boss, it's that, right? If you can see, most people don't control those muscles. It takes a hell of a lot of practice to control those muscles, especially that one. I just can't believe you can still do that. I try and try. I can barely, Albert died. My dog died a few months ago. I can still get a little bit of it in there. I sent you guys a picture of it. But guys, the thing, when Scott's pointing that out, those are grief muscles that engage. And I can do them individually, but all of that together, that takes control that I got nothing. Scooch up and do that grief muscle, man. Cheese. Did you tell your mom? Yes. What did you say to your mom? I told her to tell dad to leave me alone. And he keeps touching me. Did you kill your father to get back at him for what you say he did to you when you were a child, sexually? No. I killed him because we were afraid and because what was going on that weekend. So the things that you told us that happened between yourself and your father when you were eight to six to eight have nothing to do with your motivation for killing. Is that correct? That's right. And what you say happened between you and your mother, what you've described now as being mutual, that had nothing to do with your motivation for killing her. Is that correct? That's right. All right, Greg, what do you got? Yeah, so this one I'll go very quickly. He does one shoulder shrug when she asks the question. He eye blocks, he breaks away. He becomes a shrinking target. He oddly uses two pronouns. He uses a first person and a plural pronoun at the same time. I killed him. I killed him because we were afraid. That's an interesting twist of words. He's not changed eye one time in this entire story talking about this. And then she says that's right. He does that lip bite or lip compression a little bit. His body shrinks and there's a shift here. Then he does a deep swallow and an eye block. This is the first time we're hearing the approach to say you killed him because of past sexual abuse. And that's the case the prosecution was trying to make. So this is the crux of the matter that could get him the death penalty and by the gas chamber at the time, by the way. And that's the reason for suddenly you're starting to see blink rate increase and all of these things is he knows he's on the griddle. First time I see any kind of possible deception in this guy and the entire thing throughout this whole mess of a story. Scott, what do you got? Yeah, man, that was again my opening line. I see deception here. First time at all this stuff. Dang, gummit. We see an adapter twice in his mouth. But I'm seeing deception here. That's what I'm getting to. And it's because they've got to watch what they're saying during all this. Okay, Chase, what do you got? I think in both of these guys, what we're starting to see is a trauma genetic arrested development. So a lot of people we're going through, but before the age of 12, we tend to evolve a little bit and start becoming into adults. And some people, especially in cases where there's trauma, two things are very common there is arrested development where they fail to grow up and mature into adulthood. It doesn't matter whether or not you're wearing a Brooks Brothers shirt and with a nice sweater on it. And the second thing that happens here is that the person becomes very familiar and very good at going into a dissociative state which speaks to Mark's comment earlier about maybe there's something else there, maybe there's another person there answering this question. In any regard, I think that's what it is. And this is, I think this is triggering a paternal state a lot in the opposing council or in the person doing this interview here. The deception score was 19 on the behavioral table and blink rate went from 10 to 77 during the answer. Watch the other ones during his truthful responses. The blink rate is even and steady throughout the entire time. That's a massive shift. There was lip retraction with, that looks different than his other ones to me. I'll leave it up to you guys watching the video. It looked like there could be a potential for doopers to light inside of their lip retraction. That's all I got. Mark. Yeah, so I guess, you know, one person's deception is another lawyer's argument. And so that's kind of what's happening here, I think, because I was very confused right from the start going, why are they, why is there so much dissociation from the abuse? And to your point, Chase, yeah, you're absolutely right. This dissociation from the abuse is classic in this situation. But then when everybody's joining in with the dissociation, I start to go, well, this is, this is organized in some way. This is the argument. It's appearing to me, and tell me if I'm wrong, it's appearing to me that they are having to say that it was nothing to do with the abuse because if they say it was to do with the abuse, as you're saying, Greg, it's a death penalty. If it's to do with fearing for your life right now, if it's revenge, death penalty, if it's I feared for my life right now, I get a better deal out of this. And so who's lying in this situation? Well, I guess most everybody, aren't they? In the court, most everybody. But I think that's called an argument. So let's not go down that particular route. But yeah, this is the biggest moment of deception for me. And but I still, I still think there's an opportunity here that there is disassociative states as well because it's it's so calm. It's it's so collected around something that for most of us watching would be, you know, a horror. There, that's all I got on that one. Did you kill your father to get back at him for what you say he did to you when you were a child sexually? No, I killed him because we were afraid and because what was going on that weekend. So the things that you told us that happened between yourself and your father when you were eight, six to eight have nothing to do with your motivation for killing. Is that correct? That's right. And what you say happened between you and your mother what you've described now as being mutual that had nothing to do with your motivation for killing her. Is that correct? That's right. Why is it that you lied to the police? Why did you tell them that you, why did you decide not to tell them that you were involved? Well, when they didn't show up my brother and I decided then that if it was possible we didn't want to have to explain what happened. I didn't think, you know, I just, we had just shot our parents and we didn't want to go to jail. You wanted to get away with it, right? We really weren't thinking in those terms and we weren't thinking in terms of, we were just basically thinking that we'd shot our parents and that this was horrible and that if, you know, I just couldn't tell the police that and that I did not want to then have to tell them why and explain everything about my family. And neither of us did and we were pretty firm about that and we knew that they would, they could easily figure it out and, you know, we didn't know anything about how they investigate things and they might figure it out right away but until they did, they didn't want to volunteer. All right, I'll go first on this one. This is the first time we see him use a barrier. That's his shoulder. He's moving his shoulder forward. That's what barriers are for. There's anything you can put between you and the other person, be it a pen, be it a piece of paper, be it a coffee cup, whatever it is, just a barrier to put anything you can put between you and the other person to give you a little bit of space. Now, we don't see him do that freeze thing and put his head down like we did before. So this is something he's been told to say and I don't think he was told to say what's the say word for word. He was told to talk about it or he was told to him in generalities and that's what he's given us. He's not being specific. He's being specific but his wording is not like it's been. It's not easy. It's just in these blocks of information he's giving. He closes his eyes a little bit there at the top and just takes a little bit of time to think. That's when I think he's got the inner dialogue and he's recalling what he's been told before and this behavior is completely different than a lot of the behaviors we've been seeing before with a barrier he's thinking and he's talking odd. He's speaking oddly in this situation about the things that happened up to that point. So this stuff here, I think like to Greg's point earlier, he's protecting himself at this point. I think deception in this goes through the roof for me anyway. So that's what I'm seeing here. Greg, what do you got? So I see his blink rate increase. Guys, when we say blink rate increase, it means that fight or flight is hit, your eyes are drying out, your eyelids are designed to do one thing and that's wet and protect your eye and your eyelids are dry because mucus membranes are dry as a result of adrenaline so your blink rate goes through the roof and Chase, I'm sure you'll know the number, he does do recall accessing. He goes back to what I call where he's going for digital memory to recall something he's supposed to say to his left. That's internal conversation. If you sit and try to calculate 15% of 980, you'll find your eyes drifting down into your left too as you try to have that internal conversation. He does a pronoun shift I, we at one point there when he's talking about killing, I kill, we kill. And then finally, I'll leave it at this and keep it pretty short. Once he's said everything he has to say, he kind of goes, and that's that. He kind of raises his shoulders like, Chase, I'll drop it to you next, and what do you got? Thanks, Matt. So the blink rate you were asking about is 64. And that increase in blink rate is one of the rare things here that we see that I think is deceptive. And as far as the behavioral table of elements goes, there are several little exchanges here. So for each exchange, that's how we measure deception. For each exchange, he did not score over an 11. The single shrugs are at times where it would be expected if the statements were truthful. He said 11 we's and 2 eyes in the conversation. And the eyes were about, I didn't want to explain and I didn't want to explain this to the police. But this is the first time we hear him say we had just killed our parents. So I think this is a truthful towards the end. It becomes more truthful because we tend to talk about all humans when we talk about negative things like the boss at your office like there's some bad thing that happened. Hey, we totally messed up guys. We tend not to own that. We'll say something away from ourselves. We use more team focused pronouns with negative information. And that's what's happening here as well. And I think the single shrugs occur pretty well, but the blink rate is steady up until a point. Look when it starts going up. What is going on right when that blink rate goes up? I'll leave that to you and you guys can put that in the comments. Mark, what do you got? So I think there is deception around the motive that why they did. I think that's the deception that's going on here. And I think there is compartmentalization or disassociation or distancing, but I think it's putting things into compartments around the shooting very separate from revealing the family secrets very separate from revealing the abuse because that has been pushed down and normalized so that the horror of that is not present every day in their lives in their conscious mind, I expect. So yeah. So I think some of the deception we might be picking up on is deception around we've organized this story so we get a better deal. Let's stick with the story. Some of the deception that we're seeing is I got to keep this in one compartment. We can't let these things muddy into each other or I'm going to go back into one of those emotional states that you've maybe seen me in and I'm going to start having to relive that and I don't want to go there. And in fact, we were told to keep this up. We've been told to suppress this all our lives. The worst thing we can do is let this story out and here it is for everybody to see. So yeah, this association compartmentalization and plain old deception going on there as well. It's quite a mess, isn't it? There's a lot going on. It's pretty complex. Exciting to watch lots going on there and I'm certainly not going to go and watch the rest of the interview, but do it if you want to. Why is it that you lied to the police? Why did you tell them that you why did you decide not to tell them that you were involved? Well, when they didn't show up my brother and I decided then that if it was possible we didn't want to have to explain what happened. I didn't think we just shot our parents and we didn't want to go to jail. You wanted to get away with it, right? We really weren't thinking in those terms and we weren't thinking in terms of we were just basically thinking that we'd shot our parents and that this was horrible and that if, you know, I just couldn't tell the police that and that I did not want to then have to tell them why and explain everything about my family and neither of us did and we were pretty pretty firm about that and we knew that they could easily figure it out and, you know, we didn't know anything about how they investigate things and they might figure it out right away but until they did they didn't want to volunteer it. Alright, let's roll it around the room one time and let's talk about what our thoughts are on whether we're seeing truth or deception with each one of these guys. Okay, Greg, you want to go first? Yeah, so let's talk about two things. Number one, truth or deception about the abuse. I think it's truth. And all the emotion you saw hard to fake cry, could he pull it up? Sure. They were factual, there were very few indicators and few clusters of deception from any of us. So, yes, I do believe that abuse happened. On the second question, do I believe there was another motive for example, were they fearful for their life that day? I don't think that's true. I think we see deception when they start probing that and we didn't see as many videos but clearly we start to see blink rate increases, we see clusters of deception, we see changes in comfort, we see changes in posturing, we see barriers putting something between me and you, we see adapting, making myself comfortable. So, I think on count one I think they're telling the truth. On the second one I don't believe them. Chase, what do you got? I'm with you. I think the physical and sexual abuse allegations, they are being truthful and the motive question. I do not think that that was the motive. I think they had a lifetime of abuse and they were finished with it and I think maybe they were fearful. I'm not saying they were not fearful but I'm saying the weight of the motive is mostly in premeditation. Mark. Yes, so as to the abuse and the emotions around that, yes, absolutely true and real. I've watched some other video as well that we didn't look at of those emotional states and they are, they produce a high level of empathy and therefore that's really hard to do. You can do it. You have to be a really good actor. I saw it the other day with Anthony Hopkins in his new film Genius. Genius acting. If this guy was acting in this he's as good as Hopkins. Okay, so I'm not saying he can't be as good as Hopkins but it's unlikely. So, Occam's razor says that's true feelings going on there. Was there another motive involved? I haven't seen enough detail of them talking about other stuff so I can't really judge on that one so I don't know where to fall on that one. Maybe, maybe not haven't seen them talking enough about being in fear of their lives and any of the detail around that of the videos. Maybe we need to do another one later. Scott, what's your take? Alright, and I'm with you guys 100%. I think they're truthful about what happened to them about the abuse and I think they're hiding the parts and not being honest about the part about what the motive is. I think they were mad and they would get back at them for what happened to them when they were younger, when they were kids being treated that way. I think that's what happened just as a flinch. They said, okay, I've had enough of this. Let's just go do that and they did it. You can go out and buy guns. It takes a little bit to go do that. You just can't go pop out and get some and come back to the house and that's thought out so they thought about that a little bit. I personally think it was revenge. I don't think it was and they were probably in fear for their lives but I think it was from the revenge point of view. Alright, well if you like what we're doing, please subscribe. Just hit that little red thing down there at the bottom and you'll be hooked up. Alright you guys, this was a good one and I'll see you next time. Thank you.