Royal Wedding: Prince Albert of Monaco and his Now Wife, Charlene... Where's the Love?

Well it was a wedding, but it seemed very strange to me. They did not seem to be in love, or at all happy during what is supposed to be "the most wonderful day of their life."

Charlene's tears are real, but are they happy or sad tears? Happy tears usually occur when a person is overwhelmed with intense emotion- these are sad tears.

Take a look at this video of their kiss, even this is strained.◦

Royal Wedding: Prince Albert of Monaco and his Now Wife, Charlene... Where's the Love?

How to Win Survivor Samoa

The person I would not want to play poker with is Russell, watch the video and watch Russell's reaction, or lack of reaction, when the bidding for the idol clue is occurring.

Shambo is going home...

I'm running out of things to bring to our attention. Then it hits me the players who do not show emotion and are not expressive in their facial expressions and body language, are the ones who are going the farthest.

The key is when they are having the one-on-one conversations they are very open and expressive but in group settings it is much different.

Shambo is too emotional to go the distance...

Normally when a person gestures less, this usually is a clear sign of deception, but in this case it is a sign of concealment; concealment of strategy- in the same way a person who plays poker to win controls themselves.◦

How to Win Survivor Samoa

Mackenzie Phillips, My Thoughts

Mackenzie Phillips in some ways is easy to get a 'read' on and in others is extremely difficult. She has led a weird and less than ordinary life and this shows through in her body language, gestures, and personality.

First the question everybody is asking: Did she have a incestuous relationship with her father? Yes, she shows no signs of deception when she is speaking about their relationship over the many years. However, she does show concealment when she is talking about how the sexual relationship started. She has repeated the same sentence almost verbatim in each and every interview about how the sexual relationship began; she also changes her speech pattern while stating this sentence; and she gestures less. When she reads it from the book, it is slightly different than how she describes it when being interviewed- the difference is significant in subtle ways- in some ways she further distances herself from the "act" while at the same time is more graphic about the act.

She does not accept any responsibility for the relationship, and in the interviews the focus has only been on the start and the end of the relationship. They way she describes the start would legally be considered rape. At what exact point did it become consensual? These questions are not asked (because of the nature of TV and the subject matter) and therefore we are left with the mystery of how she really felt about the relationship and what emotions she had, for instance was there anger, guilt, satisfaction, etc.



I began this article speaking to her odd body language and gestures. She does some things that are opposite of what we'd expect... When she says shocking things, she turns to the audience- whereas we'd expect some turning away from the words, maybe some embarrassment or even shame... it is like any attention good or bad is well received my Mackenzie. I believe collectively we feel uneasy watching her in interviews and contribute the uneasy feeling to the content of what she is saying, but I feel we sense something deeper in her mannerisms that contribute to the uneasy feeling we all share.◦

Mackenzie Phillips, My Thoughts

Action Words that Convey Communication

Be on the lookout of these type of action verbs that convey that words and dialogue was exchanged:

Spoke

Talked

Discussed

Argued

Had words

Emailed

These are directly admitting communication.

You should also be on the look out for words or phrases that imply conversation such as:

We met

Shot the breeze

Hooked up

These are indirectly admitting communication.

At this point we need to ask ourselves why a person would be vague about communication occurring. It could be they are attempting to distance themselves from the event. It could be because the conversation could be incriminating to themselves.

We need to ask the right questions at this point, "Who initiated the conversation?"

This serves two purposes:

1)It assumes there was a conversation, perhaps there wasn't one? If that is the case the person will immediately correct you.

2) If there is no correction, you know the person you are talking to is sensitive about the conversation and you need to pry further into the details.◦

Action Words that Convey Communication

You Are Suspious... How to ask the questions.

Okay, you suspect something. Something bad. You want to tear apart the telephone book. What should you do?

1) Do not attack with something like, "Are you cheating on me?"

You need to learn the art of gaining information without the other person knowing you are on an intelligence mission.

If you would ask straight out, "Are you cheating on me?" the other person is immediately on the defensive, and you'll get nowhere.

2) Ask a question where you could get either:

- A casual answer which means nothing has occurred,
- Or some sort of defensive answer, or some sort of nonverbal clue that he/she knows what you are getting at.


In the above example, let's say your boyfriend went out with some friends and did not come home until the next day. You tried his phone only a couple of times(hopefully) and now instead of asking "Are you cheating on me?" let's look at some questions you could ask:

- Did you have fun last night?
- Where did you end up sleeping?
- Did everybody crash there?
- Did you get any sleep last night?

NOTE: It is critical that you maintain control of your voice and ask the questions without an accusatory tone.

So you get a casual answer to one of the questions above, "Really?"

A well placed "Really?" is a great way to get a read on the non verbals and is not a direct confrontation.


It is not always easy, but is made easier if you think carefully how to approach the conversation.◦

You Are Suspious... How to ask the questions.

Countering the Lies of Omission

Guilty people will likely practice deception by omitting information they believe with incriminate themselves.

Leaving out details is a way to mislead, and does not give the liar as much stress because technically they are not lying.

Start by getting a complete statement of the activity in question.


Things to look for are:

- Skipping over facts.

- Is there some sort of fast forwarding through time. Look for words like after, later, then, later on, eventually, finally, when, and a short time later are key words and ask for clear explanations of times that may have been glossed over.

- Fuzzy language such as "I believe" or "I think" or "Basically"? or "That is about it" is not a committed answer.

- "I cannot remember” or “I cannot recall” we have to ask ourselves they simply are describing what they prefer not to do.

- Allow the person to pause while speaking, these are signs of cognitive thinking and the pauses are important.


What to do to illicit more information:

Do not immediately directly confront when you see areas of omission, address them after the person has had a chance to tell you everything.

Do not make the mistake by going directly to the areas of greatest interest. Instead, you should fight this urge and proceed chronologically. Instead beginning with the first area of omission and moving on to the subsequent areas one by one. This avoids alerting people to specific areas of interest and incriminating area of their statement.

Systematically return to each area of missing information and seek out details by using carefully structured questions.

Say things like "Fill in the blanks" and "What did you do next?" and "Tell me everything that happened between X and Y?"

If they used fuzzy language, repeat the fuzzy language statement(s) back to them and ask for more information or clarifications.

Expect and demand micro explanations of the littlest detail.


The most seasoned investigator can get to the point where they "don't sweat the small stuff" but it is these little details that can provide insight.◦

Countering the Lies of Omission

Training Exercise Results and Conclusions

I'm not going to breakdown the entire video second by second, instead I will give generalizations. I also have to be mindful that since we currently have Behavioral Detection Agents within the TSA I do not want to give away "trade secrets" that help them do the best possible job.

Unfortunately, I have seen this video too many times. I'm sure you are aware this is actual footage of 911 hijackers going through security.

Results:
First, gaze aversion was practiced by each and every hijacker; They avoided eye contact with TSA agents.

There was little- if at all- glancing around at others or the surroundings. Which you see many of the other passengers do casually.

Angular distance, where they angled their bodies away from TSA agents, but they did not always angle their bodies towards their bags or destination.

There was backing away shown by at least one of the hijackers when his accomplice's bag was being looked at by a TSA agent- Fight or flight response.

There is a slight stiffness and less gestures by some of the hijackers as compared to others traveling through security.

There is some excess walking, and shifting of weight and walking in place. This is an involuntary action done by the body to burn off adrenaline.

Even though the tape was short and did not show before and after entering security, I would suspect they entered security more slowly then they exited security. This in the biggest suggestion I would make of the TSA: redesign their security layout so there is a space of at least 30 feet where walking pace can be judged prior to entering security and immediately upon exiting security. This combined with a more structured "gathering your items" together area. After metal detectors there should be a place where you immediately put your shoes on again, then you get your belongings from the conveyor belt, then walk the 30 feet out of security. People who intend to do harm will forgo "gathering your items" area to regroup and distribute belongings later, instead they will want to exit the area quickly. Unfortunately most security areas are on the verge of gridlock and gait cannot be judged as normal or abnormal.

A comment was made concerning a hijacker backing off when his accomplish was being checked with the hand held metal detector. It appeared to be the case at first glance, but in fact it was the way the security was set up where there were two metal detectors lined up with space between them; the second hijacker was so nervous he was walking in a straight line instead of breaking off to his right, a TSA agent had to direct him over to the right. Another thing I would do is set up cognitive processing as part security processing. Painted lines controlling flow with areas where TSA could change passenger direction midstream, this would show confusion by the nervous traveler..

Lastly, change TSA security from simply a checkpoint, but to encompass the entire gate areas. Behavioral agents should also be scanning the waiting passengers. The 911 hijackers showed subtle signs going though the security checkpoint and they also had to show signs while they were waiting to board the aircraft- they would not be casually napping, reading, or calling people on the phone like most travelers are- there would be a seriousness and intensity in their demeanor.

The hijackers showed subtle and not so subtle signs of their intentions, however the way they were acting is not all that uncommon among honest travelers. The key is to attempt to find someone not exactly playing the roll of a passenger going through security, and then ask further questions of the traveler to determine the risk.

The Behavioral Detection Agents are doing a great job, evidenced by the many arrests of suspicious travelers- most of which are traveling with false identification. While they are not always catching terrorists, they are effectively finding those that are nervous going through security which is a sign we are safer than we were years before the program.◦

Training Exercise Results and Conclusions

One Way to Spot a Pedophiles or Shoplifter in Real Life with Their Body Language

This is the one area where I was clearly able to spot before any training in body language.

Note: Everybody acts differently depending on the situation. To say it more concretely, if you see a man you see acting in the way I describe below, he could be acting that way because he HATES kids and becomes nervous around them. I only offer this as a guide to be more aware and careful with your own kids.

I first learned to spot shoplifters while working at a grocery store. I then noticed the same behavior with potential pedophiles after I had my own kids.

The spot or tell is clearly seen when you know what to look for. The first time I saw this I was working in the meat department after school. Everybody had to pass by the meat counter to enter the store and almost immediately I could pick out potential shoplifters. I got so good at it all I had to do was give a quick call to the manager up in the office, he had a one way mirrored window and could watch the shoplifter from his lofty perch. I made the call a couple of times a week, and I only worked there for 2-3 hours an evening.

What to look for? 90% Gestures and 10% eyes.

Both the shoplifter and pedophile uses very little gestures.

Their movements are controlled and planned to the point where it always appearedto me as unnatural.

With the shoplifter they will pick up a few things, but it is all for show- and you can tell it is for show by the way they hold items higher and away from their body- then they pick up the thing they are going to pocket and you can tell by how they reach for it and the speed of their arms and hands. They appear to be browsing but the scan of the store is unnatural and their eyes will even pay much more attention to other people in the store than the actual merchandise. If you want to identify the shoplifter simply concentrate on the lack of gestures and controlled movements.

The pedophile is similar in many ways. When they see a object of their affection they also get "tight" and gesture less. They most often quickly look away, for fear someone will see them watching someone else. They will glance around more, and often will focus on adults closest to who they really want to look at, so they can use their peripheral vision to watch the child. It looks slightly unnatural compared to how others there are acting. They glance at many different people so it does not look obvious that they would be looking at a child, but they will hold the gaze a slight beat or two more than the others he is glancing at. Children are fast and move in a nonstop way, this works to the pedophiles advantage and disadvantage. It allows them to scan, but if you are looking for it, it gets them caught because their gaze settles a beat too long. If you want to identify the potential pedophile simply concentrate on the lack of gestures.

What to do with this information? Nothing and Everything.

I rarely get involved with shoplifters, people are crazy and willing to do all kinds of stupid things for drugs, etc. I can spot undercover security as clearly as the shoplifter (they look both too natural and unnatural; and even though they do not interact with others working at the store you can tell by the way hold eye contact a beat too long, or quickly avoid eye contact with clerks; etc.). A couple of times I've done is a quick double take at the shoplifter, show disgust, and simply walk away- this is enough for security to pick up on them and at least notice them. Other times I have starred at them, I've even acted like security browsing items in the same isle. It all depends on the situation.

Potential pedophiles are a different ball game. I can never be sure why they are acting strangely so I am immediately on guard. I study the person and determine the level of threat. I see if they are alone. If they are alone I'll make it a point to be closer to the individual so I can more closely examine the situation. In my 20 years of being able to see this behavior I've seen 10 or so people that put me on high guard. Of course I can do very little other than make my presence known subtly and not so subtly, and take responsibility for each and every child in the area.

Note: This only works with the strangers. It does not work at all with those who have mastered the art of being placed in an authority position with our children (teachers, camp leaders, etc).
There is also another thing I need to mention, not ALL pedophiles act the same way. We obviously need to be careful and always be on the guard, especially with those we place our trust of our children in.◦

One Way to Spot a Pedophiles or Shoplifter in Real Life with Their Body Language

Masking or Suppressing Facial Expressions

What to look for?

- Narrowing of the eye

- Tense forehead

- Tightened jaw muscles

The more slight and subtle you observe the above to more reliable the read. The quicker you see them, the more reliable they are. If they are shown in more than a subtle expression, or in the extreme, and the longer they appear on the face the LESS reliable is the concealment and more likely you are seeing the beginning of intense anger.

Tense forehead is usually shown in horizontal wrinkles appear across your forehead, in the above photograph a vertical line appears between the eyes on the lower part of the forehead, this usually shown in extreme emotion responses, such as anger and stress.

◦

Masking or Suppressing Facial Expressions