The issue of conducting interrogation has already proved to be the arguable concept in the criminal procedure as there is only a set of recommendations and common principles on how to do that; however, there is no universal method to make the person speak or to understand for sure whether he/she is lying or not. The concept of lying is the most worrying one in the process of interrogation, since the facts on which the investigation may be based have to be well-checked and grounded – otherwise they will be useless for the case. For this reason lying and telling the lies from the truth have become the central issues for research and close attention in the world of the criminal law for the last decade. It is still a new field of research, but it may present certain findings that are certain to bring about a significant change in the process of conducting interrogations.
The techniques of distinguishing lies and the truth have been closely examined by Dave Zulawski, the coordinator of Wicklander-Zulawski & Associates – the worldwide famous training center for interrogation. Dave Zulawski makes the major emphasis on the body language, voice peculiarities and other physiological distinctions in order to identify the measure of a person’s sincerity. In his discussion with the Fox News Chicago Dave showed the way lies are identified in the process of investigation on the example of the Rod Blagojevich and Senator Roland Burris issue – both of these political leaders have consistently been trying to prove they are right, but Zulawski explicitly showed the indicators of insincerity in their conduct.
The video starts with the basic principles on which the organization of Zulawski grounds their activity: an erratic movement, a shift of eyes, exaggerated gestures – everything can give a hint to the investigator that the person is withholding something (To Tell the Truth, 2009). When asked by the interviewer what he is looking for in the videos that are studied, Zulawski replied that it is not only the body language and intonation, there are other things to be considered, for example, subtle changes and inaccuracies in the person’s character and conduct (To Tell the Truth, 2009).
The point is illustrated by a fragment from the interview with the Senator Roland Burris saying that he feels terrific because he is in the right and he has nothing to get nervous about. Zulawski notices that Burris consistently shakes his head ‘no’ while saying yes, showing the incongruence between his words and his attitude to them. Zulawski also admits that “sometimes a person will be saying ‘yes’ and shaking their head ‘no’, and there is a contradiction of the physical emblem of ‘no’” (To Tell the Truth, 2009).
One more fragment from the case with Rod Blagojevich and Senator Roland Burris is commented by Zulawski – the piece is about Blagojevich trying to justify himself and saying that he hadn’t done anything bad. “When he says ‘it hadn’t happened’, all he is saying is ‘I hadn’t completed the process’, this means to me that something was going to happen and got interrupted” (To Tell the Truth, 2009).
Finally, an important remark of Zulawski worth everyone’s attention is that it is much harder to distinguish the lie of a political person as they are used to lying and accept a lie as a norm of their speech and behavior. For that reason they become less emotional while saying a lie and represent fewer signs of a lie that would be recognized and detected by the interrogation professionals. “They know they are lying, but they don’t have the emotion about it” (To Tell the Truth, 2009).
It is a new branch of studies that Wicklander-Zulawski & Associates undertake; however, it is surely an important breakthrough in the procedures of interrogation and questioning that has an enormous potential. For this reason the studies should be continued and are likely to yield surprisingly good results.
References
To Tell the Truth (2009). Wicklander-Zulawski & Associates. Web.