A college student claimed she was kidnapped and driven around to different locations before being released. A classroom of students, mostly law enforcement, were attending an advanced training course on interviewing and interrogations. The experience of the students ranged from entry level to seasoned professionals. The video of the college student’s interview with law enforcement concerning the alleged kidnapping was shown to the class. One of the students, perceived in less than a minute, the college student was deceptive. Not by reading body language as one might think – it’s not that simple. However, the college student uttered one word, a rare word that caused severe doubt on her story.
Forensic statement analysis is the science of examining the written statement given by witnesses, complainant’s, defendant’s etc. It’s often misunderstood as a handwriting sample. In the case of the college student’s interview, the science was applied to verbal speech. While normally not admissible, at times it can show where a person is concealing information. Most often, where to inquire further. Other times, outright deception.
The actor Jussie Smollet was recently convicted in Cook County, IL for staging a high-profile hoax. Providing his quotes were accurately captured by the press; it showed problem after problem. In other words, his linguistic speech did not match up to a person who had been assaulted – to say the very least. It’s true that conventional evidence was certainly overwhelming in discovering the hoax. However, his statements also gave him away. The actor believed he was too smart and convincing. He had repeated the same story over and over again, so he had to testify in his defense. He believed he could finally make people believe him, as he used his dramatic prowess. The witness stand was his stage.
In yet another case, a man is suspected of foul play in the case of his missing loved one. Forensic statement analysis showed otherwise. Later, his missing loved one appeared, unharmed. In reverse, a husband of his missing wife made an unusual statement. The statement was inconsistent with a missing person’s case. The husband was later convicted of murdering his wife. Now imagine a workplace sexual harassment claim. The complaining employee say’s the harassment occurred, while the other denies it. A close look at the written statements shows rich information. In this case, there was a basis for the harassment claim. Yes, very soundly in fact. No made-up hoax in this matter. But upon further review, the claim was embellished. The complaining employee had told a portion of the truth, but magnified the event. “Other” claims or information, were not factual. Now let your legal and human resources department sort that one out.
While not magical or all knowing, forensic statement analysis is still an underused discipline. It requires a modest degree of training, but then, real life application and review. Investigators may drudge through a class on its value but then fail to use it. It’s understandable as the techniques can cause dizziness. The benefits however; are quite useful. A hidden tool, often forgot or just not realized.