forensic mid #2

forensic psych

what do psychologists do on negotiation teams:

* Profile hostage takers: Determine suspect’s motivations, vulnerabilities, and dangerousness


* Suggest dialogue strategies or psychological tactics to diffuse the situation:  Individualized approach per suspect
* Determine the mental status of the suspect and the extent of their crisis associated with situation: 


* Analyze which hostages could diffuse the situation vs. escalate it

\
The use of psychologists in negotiation situation depends on

* Mutual acceptance of the psychologist by the team and police agency
* Psychologist’s professional credibility, especially around the provision of critical information and behavioral analysis
* ability to function in the field setting

Police officer stress

Policing involves high levels of stress for officers and their families

Causes and consequences of stress vary considerably from officer to officer

causes of police stress

Occupational stress

Organizational stress

Criminal justice stressors

Public stressors

occupational stressors

* Irregular work schedule
*  Unpredictability
* Exposure to suffering
* Officer involved shootings

organizational stressors

* Lack of career development
* Excessive paperwork
*  Lack of support

Criminal justice stressors:

* ineffective criminal justice system


* Unfavourable court decisions

Public stressors

* Distorted media accounts
*  Complaints
*  Ineffective referral agencies

consequences to police stress

* Physical health problems
* Psychological/personal problems
* Job performance problems
* Psychological/job performance may trigger psychological fitness of duty evaluation

Physical health problems caused by police stress

Stomach ulcers, Weight gain, Diabetes (esp type 2), Fatigue

Psychological/personal problems:

* PTSD (more common in police officers or public safety personals  than general public)
* Anger/ Irritability
* Substance abuse (usually to cope),
* Poor concentration hard to focus and think when not emotionally well
* Loss of self-confidence (second guessing self), Burn-out, Depression
* Suicide
* Anger and irritability - Use substances

suicide in police officers

rate of suicide in police officers = higher than general pop 10%

* about 2x as many police officers die by suicide than they do in the line of duty
* the ones nobody noticed were struggling -younger/under 50 - no history of misconduct - single
* 83% are dealing with something personal - most common reasons  problems w partner / internal investigations

PTSD in police work.

* About 19.5% of municipal police officers had probable PTSD general pop = 7.8%


* dispatch operators (take the 911 calls) there rate of PTSD is 18%

Job performance problems caused by police stress

 Low morale, Absenteeism, Errors / carelessness, Problems with authority figures (challenging.), Citizen complaints

Preventing and managing police stress

* Informal peer & other support networks - biggest protective factor - quality is better than quantity
* Physical fitness programs - sleep better, helps mind be psychologically healthy
* Formal peer Support & Professional counselling - people specially trained in peer support
* Family assistance programs - when stress @ home there can be stress on shift and then can also bring more stress home - seeing more use of this in recent years
* Critical incident stress debriefings

Critical incident stress debriefings

CISD or CISM - various forms - viewed as helpful within 24 hours of incident -

* people are brought into a room with the chronic stress facilitator and educates on resources + how to cope
* not everyone wants to go and cant force it (should do one-one check in if possible)
* most consistent conclusion CISD viewed as supportive & helpful for those going through them but it doesn’t prevent the development of PTSD - some case may make things worse bc it disrupts normal coping strategy - neutral at best and harmful at worst

 

Critical incidents causing distress & can be associated w PTSD

* Death/serious injury /suicide of a fellow officer - #1 most stressful = shot on job
* Serious multiple casualty incident/accident - seeing that accident + the family
* Traumatic incidents involving children
* Events that attract excessive media interest and public scrutiny - Creates stress & pressure
* An event involving victims known to the officer
* Exposure to infectious diseases - search people - pricked on needles = stress to get test results
* Being the subject of a lawsuit
* Any event that has an unusually powerful impact on the officer
* Anything else that profoundly effects psychological well being

What events are more likely to cause PTSD

it tends to stick with you personalize the incident  (kid = same age as victim etc.)

* Any event that has an unusually powerful impact on the officer

Preventative coping

stress and occultation training or prevention initiative

* Teach recognize maladaptive strategies in self

preventative coping for police officers

* Teach police officers about maladaptive (e.g., reliance on alcohol) and adaptive (e.g., enhanced communication skills) coping strategies


* Venting can be helpful but can also cause more problems - more anger - venting with people who make it worse is not quality social support


* Training police officers to use adaptive coping strategies can result in general health improvements and enhanced work performance

The psychology of police investigations

Interviews, Interrogation & False Confessions

why police investigations?

Police rely on witnesses, victims, and suspects to fill in details about crimes

* What to know: Who was involved? What happened? Where and when did it happen? How did it happen? Why did it happen?

coercive measures in the mid 1900s

Whipping suspects to get a confession - use of violence was acceptable

coercive measures in the mid 1980s

Stun guns used by the NYPD to extract confessions

coercive measures in recent years

Psychological methods such as trickery and deceit (e.g., lying about evidence)

* saying they have evidence of them being there when they don’t actually - make deals they cant hold up - leverage

psychological methods in Canada

* In Canada you can't outright/overtly lie but you can word things in a way to trick
* In Canada if a person asks for there lawyer during interview - give phone call with lawyer/ try and get lawyer in timely manner - then given option to go back to interview (w/o lawyer) but don’t have to  Must be freely given - if looks coerced it can be thrown out

police officer training for investigations

average police officer has no other training in interviewing besides what they learn in academy + from others - investigative teams have more  special training

two goals of a police interrogation

1.  interrogation =  obtain a confession - 100% driven for a confession - we think u did it and we will get u to say you did - creates bias bc you could be overlooking information - how we get wrong people accused of crime
2. Investigative interviewing = Gain information that will further the investigation (e.g., the location of evidence) -  helps keep open mind before making determinations

investigative interviewing

* Goal = gather information
*  Emphasizes rational arguments and being kind (rather than accusatory) as methods of persuading the interviewee to provide information - showing respect rather than demands


* open confrontational
* Open-ended questions - tend to generate  more information - encourage people to talk - closed questions = better at the end
* Interviewer should do very little talking interview - 80/20 rule = 80% of talking = interviewee talking while 20% is interviewer talking

reid model

Criminal interrogation and confessions

* Intended to seek a confession
* coercive empathy - manipulation to make then confess
* Goal = obtain a confession - coercive pressure - can lead to false confessions

3 general stages of the reid model

1. Gather evidence
2.  Behavioural analysis interview - conduct a non-accusatorial interview to assess deception (guilt) - subjective - look for things that in there experience shows them to be guilty
3.  9 Step accusatorial interrogation to obtain a confession 3-6 - in this stage you have made the assumption that they are guilty and is now time to prove it through accusation

9 steps of Reid

1. confrontation - w evidence
2. Theme development - interrogator makes the story on why you would commit crime
3. Stopping denials - not allow for them to deny it
4. Overcoming objections -  don’t accept there alternate explanations
5. Getting suspect's attention - keep the pressure on
6. The suspect loses resolve - typically where suspects starts to break down
7. Alternatives
8. Bringing the suspect into the conversation - resolve them of the guilt - reducing sense of personal responsibility
9. The confession

Interrogation techniques in the Reid model can be broken down into two categories:

1. Minimization techniques: Soft sell -  tactics that provide a sense of false security - minimizing the severity of what the person has done


1. Maximization techniques: Scare tactics that attempt to intimidate suspects - intimidation tactics - standing over them (non-verbal pressures)  - trying to scare them into confessing -

chance of getting a confession using flattery

57% - strategy you may use if suspect is arrogant/big ego

chance of getting a confession by playing one suspect against the other

43%

maximization technique

chance of getting a confessions by minimizing seriousness of the offence

36%

chance of getting a confessions by sympathizing with the suspect

25%

chance of getting a confessions by suggesting non‐criminal intent for the crime

9% -

ex: "you didn’t mean to do this"

**chances of getting a confession by** exaggerating the seriousness of the crime

0%

why is the reid model used so widely even though is seen to result in false confessions

not many officers are well trained in interviewing - just use techniques they’ve seen others use

the results of snook wt al 2012 study of the content of Canadian police interviews

* 1/3 question styles were probing questions


* 40 of questions were direct questions
* 1% of questions were open ended
* 14% of interviews requested free narrative
* longest in interviewee responses = open ended questions - 91 words other questions = 17 words
* 56% of time in interviewer was talking rather than the interviewee - not following 80/20 rule

problems with the reid model

* Lacks research on its validity and basic underlying assumptions
*  Based on faulty assumption that most investigators can accurately detect deception using cues they identify -
*  Subject to investigator bias
*  Can contribute to false confessions

80/20 rule

interviewee should be talking during 80% of interview while interviewer should be talking 20%

false confessions

Occurs when an individual confesses to a crime they did not commit, or exaggerates their involvement in a crime they did commit (admiting to doing more than they did)

innocence project

founded in 1992 - by 2 lawyers out of law school - cases of wrongful conviction

In about 25% of DNA exoneration cases tracked by the Innocence Project, innocent defendants made incriminating statements, delivered outright confessions or pled guilty

case of Eddie Loyd

persuaded to confess - mentally unwell - he had sent a letter trying to help police with crimes in the area - police told him to confess to it so they can find the real perpetrator - confession held up in court - went to prison until DNA evidence exonerated him

3 types of false confessions

1. voluntary false confession
2. coerced complaint false confession
3. coerced-internalized false confession

voluntary false confessions

freely confessing to something they didn’t do - self initiated

* motive may be the desire for the recognition of doing it
* mentally ill: may not be able to really know if they did it from mental distortions
* protecting someone else (parent takes blame from kid)
* sometimes people just want to be punished for something out of the guilt for something else
* NO coercion - Lindberg case 1932  - someone kidnaped child - about 200 people confessed to having taken the child

Coerced complaint false confessions

they know they are innocent but feel need to confess - someone confesses out of the desire to escape further investigation - they know they did not do it but the psychological pressure is too much to continue investigation so they confess

* the central park 5 1995 - woman beaten in central part - group of teen interviewed psychological pressure was too much and told them can go home of they confess so they did - 13 years later confession were deemed false when the real perpetrator came forward and DNA evidence was found

Coerced-internalized false confessions:

initially denies the crime - psychological pressures make them think "maybe I did do it"

* more venerable to this if younger, tired, emotionally unwell, lower cognitive functioning, have be subject to questioning for many hours
* may create false memories - key component person has to have some type of false information/evidence presented to them to implant the ideas into there head
* ex: Paul ingram: accused of sexual assault of his daughter + being in a cult - went through 23 investigations till he confessed and though he did everything and just suppressed this

KASSIN & KIETCHAL  1996 lab study: results for slow paced interview with no false evidence presented

35% confessed to comply

0% internalized having done it

0% confabulated

KASSIN & KIETCHAL  1996 lab study : results for fast paced interview with no false evidence presented

65% confessed to comply

12% internalized doing it

0% confabulated

KASSIN & KIETCHAL 1996 lab study : results for slow paced interview with false evidence presented

89% of participants said they did it to comply

44% internalized doing it

6% confabulated

KASSIN & KIETCHAL  1996 lab study: results for fast paced interview with false evidence presented

100% confessed to comply

65% internalized that they did it

35% confabulated

myths about false confessions

* Innocent people cannot be induced to confess through the use of legal and non-coercive interrogation tactics.
* Investigators can distinguish between truth tellers and liars.
* Criminal justice personnel can distinguish between true and false confessions by relying on combination of intuition and corroboration.


* The ability to discriminate a true and false confession is difficult
* People facing interrogation are protected by their constitutional rights to remain silent and access to legal counsel.
* If the confession was coerced and is erroneously admitted at trial, then appeal courts can reasonably determine whether the error was harmless.

rate of false confessions

North America = 5%

European data 12%

about 5-12%

Dr. Saul Kassin about the phenomena of false confessions and research

False confessions are an aspect of social influence - influence is the issue - some people are more vulnerable than others

* Confessions corrupts other evidence - adds certainty that doesn’t exist - alibis drop out, eye witnesses change there identification
*  after confession they build new evidence - but its not real
* "its not a mountain of evidence, it is a house of cards”

The false confession case of Michael Crowe

14 years old just found out his sister died & is grieving loss - they think he did it

* He said he had an overwhelming feeling that he killed her but didn’t know why - start of the internalization
* They said he could not confess and be punished & if he did confess he would get help
* Tried to convince him he was selective remembering since he kept saying he couldn’t remember
* Interviewed 2 of his friends that eventually were convinced to confess there friend did it
* 10 hour interrogation - his parents didn’t know - no legal representation was given to him - they were gaslighting him - child abuse - they psychologically abused him
* Evidence was found that exonerated him

miranda warning/ police cautions

preventive criminal procedure rule that law enforcement are required to administer to protect an individual who is in custody and subject to direct questioning or its functional equivalent from a violation of their Fifth Amendment right against compelled self-incrimination.

* “ you have the right to remain silent”

The vulnerability of Miranda warnings

* Failure to understand the meaning or significance of Miranda warnings and the consequences of waiving them
* Cognitive functioning, developmental level, mental illness, language/cultural barriers

PEACE model of interviewing

technique that aims to gather information to further the investigation but avoid false confessions

Preparation & Planning

Engage and Explain

Account

Closure

Evaluation

PEACE: Preparation & Planning

before going into interview you should know all info available to you

* plan to gather the needed information - make road map for what they want to achieve and key open ended questions for the interview
* make plan for different situations (if they wont talk etc)

PEACE: Engage and Explain

__**engage**__ person in conversation - in professional & respectful way + gain rapport (gets them to say more) - create atmosphere that person will want to talk

__**explain**__ - make sure interviewee understands why they are there - give police caution - make sure they understand rights - you may ask about legit evidence - ask for clarification - setting an explanation for how interview will unfold

PEACE: account

getting that persons story - what they know about relevant issue

* Free narrative - where person is asked to say everything they remember from set of certain boundaries - let them tell you what they want you to know - use open ended questions as much as possible
* Cognitive interview - approach that understands memory - enhance capacity to tap into memory and provide reliable information
* Conversation management interview - effort to try and share some information and details to make them talk - trying to engage still just not as warm and fuzzy as before - generalized approached

PEACE: closure

tell interviewee all the information you’ve gathered - allow for corrections - tell them what comes next - make sure you’ve asked all questions you need to ask and that you are able to

PEACE: evaluation

self reflect on own performance - ask collogues for feedback (peer review)

PEACE Model =

* Non-coercive & Non-accusatory


* Open ended question style
* Only ask for clarification about discrepancies at end of interview
* Cognitive interview is well supported as capable of producing useful evidence-related information with less bias & greater accuracy
* Approached generates more info than Reid - you get less error/distortion/false confessions (esp in cog interview)
* Moving away from trying to get confessions - its about gathering information so we can further find a conclusion - evidence based

what interviewing style does RCMP use

phase approach which is based on the PEACE model but has elements of the Reid model as well

what is the purpose of credibility assessments

evaluation of a whether a person has lied either:

A) Deliberately reported information known to be untrue - person has to intentionally trying to mislead by giving info they know is not true

B) Deliberately omitted information - purposely withholding information

lying is…

* Mistaken, unintentional
* Everyday occurrence
* Lying is part of our social dynamic

study that made people keep a journal of times they lied in day to day results

we tend to lie an average of 1-2 times a day (willing to admit)

* almost everyone lied in 1/4 social interactions
* 67% of lies were outright lies
* 50% of lies were self serving (benefit self)
* about 25% were lies for the benefit of other people

why do people lie

self oriented, materialistic/psychological reasons (lying to hurt someone on purpose/ cause a problem)

3 basic lies

1. Outright lies - completely made up
2. Exaggerated lies - truth to what saying but we blow it up - add more/dramatized it
3. Subtle lies - omit things as a way of misleading someone of the truth - see this a lot in business - only say the pros and not cons

lying in different mediums

* 37% of people lie more commonly in phone calls
* 27% of face to face interactions contain lies
* 14% of emails will contain lies

Study of 10 min conversation in lab w total stranger

* Deception occurred in conversation at least 2 times
* 75-78% admitted to lying in conversation

vagueness in lying

When people lie they tend to be more vague then when telling the truth

what settings are credibility assessments relevant in

* Law enforcement – witnesses, complainants, and suspects
* Judges, Juries & lawyers – evaluating statements & testimony
* Custom’s officials/Border security/immigration officers
* Mental health professionals involved in forensic work - assessing and treating someone in the system -

Credibility assessment case example : Michael White & Liana White

* Michael was convicted of killing wife Liana
* Liana went missing and car was found in parking lot not far from home
* He made videos asking for his wife's return - he got wide spread support for him and his family - Everyone believed his sincerity - he organized the search party that found Her body


* Then it turned to him - he was in possession of her blood clothes and a video of him running away from where she was found - charged with second degree murder -
* At first he didn’t admit to seeing the bag of clothes - then in court he tried to explain the blood from a bloody nose
* He still says he did not do it but he was  charged with second degree murder

historical methods used to assess a person’s credibility

King Solomon

Rice Test/Bread & Cheese test

Hot iron test

Trial by ordeal

King Solomon

biblical story - 2 woman claim to be mother of infant - king Solomon decides  who gets the baby - he says he will cut it in half and give them both half - one woman said no she can have the baby to protect the baby - since she reacted that way he then gave her the baby because he believed she would not have reacted that way if she wasn’t the real mother

Rice Test/Bread & Cheese test

ancient China & India - suspect is instructed to hold dry rice or bread in mouth and if they remain dry the person is believed to be lying but if they are wet then your telling the truth

* dry mouth = lying - wet mouth = truth

Hot iron test

ancient Arabians - suspect tongue is burned with an iron

* if it burns then they are lying if it doesn’t burn/unburned  they are telling the truth

Trial by ordeal

witches - by fire or water (burn or drown) - used to identity the guilty witch or unholy person

* if you survive the drowning or burning that means god has protected you because you are not a witch - if you burn or drown you are a witch

contemporary methods used to assess a person’s credibility

* Polygraph
* Behavioural /Non-verbal cue analysis
* Verbal cues & statement analysis 
*  Assessment of malingering

Accuracy of human deception detection

* Most people are generally poor lie detectors (chance accuracy)
*  Professional lie detectors (e.g., law enforcement) are usually no different in accuracy than laypersons
* Average accuracy rates with adults

laypersons accuracy in detecting whether someone is lying or telling the truth

Truths = 63% // Lies 48% 

as humans we are inclined to believe people to be telling the truth so we are more likely to believe people when they are lying

professionals accuracy in detecting whether someone is lying or telling the truth

Truths = 56% // Lies = 56%

officers have a lie bias bc they are trained to assume you are lying to them

what few groups have shown an advantage to deception

* "wizards" - something unique about them that average person doesn’t
* Criminal offenders are more accurate at detecting lies then anyone else - maybe because survival depends on reading those around you and knowing if someone's lying to them
* Parents are better at detecting lies in their own children better than others can or than other kids

Constraints on accurate lie detection

* Detector Factors
* Sender factors 
* Contextual factors

Detector Factors that constrain human lie detection

* Truth/Lie bias
* Misplaced confidence - many people think there good at it and don’t question their accuracy
* Use of cognitive heuristics - mental shortcuts - what a person looks like when lying vs telling the truth
* False beliefs about “deceptive behaviour” -
*  Limited feedback (especially when we guess wrong)
* Familiarity with communication style of the sender - the more familiar you are with the person the more you can identify behaviour that is different for them

sender factors that constrain human lie detection

* Stakes or consequences of the situation - when there is a lot riding on situation the more effort is put into being believable
* Motivated liar - when a lot is riding on people believing the lie we are motivated to try harder to lie well
* Personality Sender Factors - public self confidence -  aware of how they appearing good at adjusting  and know how to present self

Contextual factors that constrain human lie detection

* Cognitive load (complexity) - how mentally heavy a test is - the more cognitive resources is needed for this lie when cognitive load is heavy/high they can sometimes end up making mistakes
* Time to plan - time to construct/rehearse the story/lie before it is told makes lies stronger
* Gender of sender and detector - females are better at detecting lies in males - we evolved more ability to detect overtime - no difference in detection in other females

common beliefs about non-verbal behaviour characteristics of deception

* Blinking - blinking more than usual
* Facial expressions - smiling when shouldn't be smiling -
* Nervousness - think if lying your nervous - blushing, sweating, fidgeting
* Body movements: Fidgeting, shifting positions,  Shrugs, Hand/finger movements , Leg/foot movements,  Illustrators,  Head movement

Actual non-verbal behaviour characteristics of deception

* Blinking - more than usual - or if trying to hide there lies they may try to blink less - during polygraph less blinking = lying
* Pupil dilation - pupils dilate when stressed/heightened arousal (lying)
* Chin raises - if lying raise chin more when speaking
* Pressed lips - if lying we push lips together
* Facial pleasantness - we look less pleasant when lying - usually because we are trying to mask our true expression
* Cooperativeness - if lying they are less cooperative - more caution of what they are being asked to do
* Illustrators - we make less illustrators (use of hands) bc all our energy is going to the story so there's less energy left to use hands/arms too
* Nervous – fidgeting (sometimes)

Dr. Maureen O’sullivan on facial expressions

Masked emotions

Neutralize

Simulated

what is masking emotions

inhibit and replacing facial true expression

* mask one emotion with another- mask happiness with sadness but happiness might leak through
* when faking a facial expression you don’t use all muscle groups regularly used in making a genuine facial expression - a way of identifying deception

what is neutralizing emotion mean

when people inhibit an emotion and keep there expression neutral

what does simulating emotions mean

trying to express an emotion when they have a neutral expression in order to convey the emotion they want

Dr. Paul Ekman - micro expressions

when trying to disguise emotion we make micro expressions - a combination of 2 emotions

* Nose scrunch micro expression - showing a combination of guilt and disgust
* Lip purse/movement  micro expression - showing disbelief
* Consistent micro expression may raise red flags for interviewer

Assessment of Pleader videos

* Language was more tentative in guilty/fake pleaders than in non-guilty/real pleader + more emotion in real
* People in deceptive group - they weren't affectivly conveying sadness - leaked signals of disgust and/or happiness