Peterson continuing to stay mum

The Modesto Bee ^ | Posted: January 27, 2003 @ 04:45:12 AM PST | Patick Giblin

[Yeti]

At the risk of being flamed, every time I hear about this Angel chick I think she is a hooker.

No!

[Velveeta]

Interview with Scott Peterson coming up on Good Morning America. In the teaser, Diane Sawyer asks him point blank if he killed Laci.

[wimpycat]

Very good article. This sort of stuff has always been interesting to me. It explains why you almost always hear convicts talk about their crimes in a passive way, such as, "I was high on drugs when the crime occurred." You almost never hear them say, "I was high on drugs when I grabbed the gun and shot my best friend." You hear them talk about when "it happened", but not "what I did", which indicates abdication of personal responsibility. It's little verbal clues that will tip off the layperson and make a suspect seem suspicious, even though laypeople might not be able to tell you exactly why they were tipped off; they just know there's something "not quite right" about what the suspect is saying.

In the Susan Smith case, the very first time I heard about the carjacker, I thought it was bogus. But then they kept talking about the carjacker and I thought, "well...maybe she's not lying," but as soon as I heard her say that the carjacker told her he wouldn't hurt the kids, I knew she was full of crap. A carjacker stealing your car at gunpoint and riding off with your children in the car isn't likely to say as he's leaving, "I won't hurt them!" I think she said it to calm family members who were freaking out, imagining all sorts of terrible things happening to those babies, but since she already knew they were beyond suffering, she was telegraphing to her family and to the public that they weren't presently suffering...which they weren't, because they were already dead.

Yeti, you bring up some good points, but the fact remains that anyone other than a highly skilled sociopath will give himself away in one way or another, in very subtle ways. That's the principle of the whole article. Getting the suspects to write out statements is only a tool that gives investigators clues as to what areas to hone in on. Sooner or later, unless they get an attorney who will shut them up, most of them will crack under questioning. Remembering Susan Smith again, the investigators got her to write out what happened that day several times, like four or five times, because they knew she was lying. And, of course, she eventually confessed.

We had a law enforcement/security expert come and talk to our managers about how to conduct internal investigations, and we've also used his services to conduct internal investigations, and the methods he uses are highly fascinating. Really good interrogation is a fine art, and a good interrogator is mindful of how he says things may influence how the suspect says things and trains to engineer out those influences as much as possible.

[Yeti]

Interview with Scott Peterson coming up on Good Morning America. In the teaser, Diane Sawyer asks him point blank if he killed Laci.

It's at times like these that I wish I had a TV!! Please let me know how it goes!

[Velveeta]

Yeti, there's a new thread, we're discussing it here:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/830989/posts?page=26#26

[Yeti]

... the fact remains that anyone other than a highly skilled sociopath will give himself away in one way or another, in very subtle ways.

I agree completely. As you might have gathered from our previous discussions about psychology, the aspects of psychology that apply to that are precisely those which I find most fascinating, a la late-career Milton Erickson.

Really good interrogation is a fine art, and a good interrogator ....

Well, there you go. You're average municipal employee just doesn't have what it takes to really see what's going on, much less control it. But we all seem to lend a lot of credence to the conclusions of these people.

[PleaseNoMore]

"Now for my own amateur (and probably wrong) attempt to use the article's wisdom to draw a conclusion. When Scott says "I talk to Laci," and when he then proceeds to convey messages to us from her, it makes him sound like he is an oracle, like HE is the only one who has control over communication WITH her, and BY her. HE is the center! Even the omnipresent spirit of Laci must go through HIM to communicate. He has all the power--especially over HER. "

Excellent conclusion!!!

[wimpycat]

Well, yes, but you don't need to be an expert for most criminals, because they are poor liars for the most part. I used to do background checks on applicants for our company and you'd be surprised at how lousy they are at lying. They'll say they lived in one spot their whole life, but then list a highschool in another state. In the box where they are supposed to list any felony convictions, they misunderstand the question and say they were convicted of drunk driving or some traffic violation. Anybody who wrote anything in that box was GUARANTEED to have a lot more on his criminal record. Everyone who admitted to some benign offense had a serious felony conviction...every last one. And don't forget all the drunk drivers you see on those cop shows. How many drinks did they all have? You got it....TWO BEERS! Most liars aren't very crafty; I'd say 95% of them are quite obvious.

[geege]

I just don't know how this man can sleep at night.......

[Scupoli]

No, as in 'that's incredible', or 'No, Scuppie you are full of it?' :-)

[Devil_Anse]

every time I hear about this Angel chick I think she is a hooker.

It's even worse for me. Every time I hear about this Angel, I think maybe Angel's not necessarily a woman.