Page 276 - Deception at work all chapters EBook

Conducting Tough Interviews 277

gested approach may sound trite,3 but it works simply because at this stage the guilty subject
is overburdened by anxiety in a world that has closed in around him.

CONSCIOUSLY BECOME A NURTURING PARENT

Push incriminating and other exhibits to one side, implying that the formal interview is over.
Address the suspect by his first name, reduce the tone, speed and volume of your voice and:

• if you have been sitting behind a desk move slowly around to sit alongside him within arm’s
length and to his left;

• address him by his first name;
• as far as possible, mirror his posture and eye movements;
• use slow, positive palms upwards demonstrators;
• talk about his feelings (‘I know how you feel’);
• emphasize the word ‘we’ and how the problem can be resolved;
• drop the tone, volume and speed of your speech;
• avoid being judgemental: ‘No one could say how they would have reacted in your circum-

stances.’

However, under no circumstances make promises you cannot keep, and do not mislead the
suspect. You must genuinely feel for him and try to put yourself in his place.

To move into the role of a nurturing parent imagine you are speaking to a loved child who is
unwell

EMPATHY AND WORDS OF CAUTION

One of the most common failings is that interviewers do not understand that crooks and liars
don’t share the same values as honest folk. Most have seriously distorted values, so don’t go
overboard on suggesting that someone that you know is a right villain is really an angel of
unconditional virtue who has just temporarily strayed from the heavenly path. For what it is
worth, most liars are self-centred and selfish and, at the end of the day, confess because it suits
them. So forget about rationalizations like, ‘you owe it to your boss’ or ‘to the company’, as
these will not work. Very few crooks say they are sorry for what they have done, though many
are sorry that they have been caught.

Suggest highly moralistic or religious rationalizations and the suspect will regard you as a
gerbil and you will fail. You must put yourself in his shoes and try to hit the right empathetic
buttons. Does he seem responsive to the rationalization that he did what he did by accident,
because he had been unfairly treated, wanted better things for his family, or because he was
in serious financial trouble? You can identify the right ‘hot buttons’ through trial and error.
But, again, take care. For example, if the suspect is a serial philanderer, rationalizations about
his wife and family may not go down too well. This is where your background research – and
knowing what makes the suspect tick – should pay dividends.

3 This may be why academics are so reluctant to address the solutions!