Page 342 - Deception at work all chapters EBook

Dealing with Deception in Writing 291

Our experience, since 1990, of using SCAN type techniques has been very positive, but with
some important provisos. First, like any alternative method, it is very time-consuming and
thus expensive. For example a 30-page statement, which is fairly modest by corporate fraud
standards, may take an expert four or five full days to review effectively. The second point is
that the reviewer must be properly trained and exercise his skills regularly. Finally, statement
analysis is not an end in itself but merely a guide to questions that should be asked or lines of
further investigation.
SAS is not an end in itself

Detractors from SCAN

The Skeptic’s Dictionary (skepdic.com) has been critical of SCAN and its website on Too Good
to be True states:

The { LSI } letters stands for Laboratory for Scientific Interrogation Scientific Content Analysis.
It also stands for gullibility and wishful thinking. Its market is the same as the Quadro Tracker
and the polygraph: law enforcement, including the FBI. L.S.I. claims that a linguistic analysis
of a written statement by a suspect will reveal

– whether the subject is truthful or deceptive
– what information the subject is concealing, and
– whether or not the subject was involved in the crime
L.S.I. boasts that ‘while others are out searching for physical evidence, you have already
solved the case – using only the subject’s own words.’ Furthermore, anyone can learn the
technique in 32 hours for only $600.
The SCAN technique is now being used by the FBI and other federal agencies; by law
enforcement agencies and military agencies throughout the U.S., Canada and Australia; by
bank and insurance investigators; and by private industry.
How does SCAN work? You begin by having the subject write a statement such as the
following:

Can you find the confession in this statement
On February 22, 1989, a bundle of 10’s totalling 5,000.00 dollars was found in locker #3,
where my cash drawer is kept. The date stamped on the straps of the bundle is that of the
31st of January 1989, on this day as on most Tuesdays I am responsible for balancing the
vault. At approximately 2:00 p.m. I balanced the vault. The currency is then placed in vault
locker #5. If #5 is locked then the currency is placed in any open locker and locked, if I am
doing the vault then I will put it in locker #3. I did not have a chance to find someone to tell
them before they went to the vault. If I placed the bundle in locker #3 then it was there from
the 31st of January until it was discovered on the 22nd of February. I had no knowledge of the
missing money. I’ve been with this bank for more than two years and if in that time you are
unaware of my trustworthiness then I suggest we need to come to some sort of agreement so
this does not happen again.

You then solve the case by applying special scientific linguistic techniques to the statement.
For example, you will learn that;

People who work in banks work with ‘currency’, ‘bundles’, etc. They do not work with
‘money’. People cannot spend ‘currency’ or ‘bundles’. They can only spend ‘money’. When
the teller referred to the ‘missing money’, she incriminated herself.