0:00

I don't have to like everything we say, they just listen

0:02

to us. Yeah!

0:35

Shall we play engine? Well,

0:50

if you ever wondered how I do it, or

0:52

how I used to do it when I was

0:54

working, how we, since we talked about it with

0:56

Greeting the News and looking at sources, how do

0:58

we do it on the professional side? How

1:01

do we evaluate our sources of information?

1:04

How do we evaluate the information they're giving us?

1:07

What are some techniques and things we use to check

1:09

that information, check that source while we're talking to them,

1:11

and some of the bigger things we might do before,

1:13

during, and after effects that not

1:15

everybody has access to? So from here, we'll get a

1:18

little trivia and a little stuff that we do to

1:20

verify our information and our sources, but we'll

1:22

also take a look at some things you can do, if you

1:26

want to, kind of double check

1:28

your source of information, your

1:30

source, as well as the information. So,

1:33

we're going to use some questioning techniques and look at

1:35

some background check stuff you can do right here. I'm

1:37

Gray Man, hiding in plain sight. Hey

1:59

there! Did you know Kroger always

2:01

gives you savings and rewards on top of

2:03

our lower than low prices? And

2:06

when you download the Kroger app, you'll enjoy

2:08

over $500 in savings every week with digital

2:11

coupons. And don't forget FuelPoints to help you

2:13

save up to $1 per gallon at the

2:15

pump. Want to save even more?

2:17

With a Boost membership, you'll get double FuelPoints

2:19

and free delivery! So shop and save big at

2:22

Kroger today. Kroger. Brash for

2:24

every. Savings may vary by state

2:26

restrictions apply. c. Site details. Hey.

2:29

Their Did you know Kroger always gives

2:31

you savings in rewards on top of

2:33

our lower than low prices. So

2:38

this ought to be fun. In fact, the first part of

2:41

this, you're going to get

2:43

a little look at what it's like to be me reading emails.

2:46

So when I got this, it was a little bit suspect,

2:48

but it started off with, hello, I hope you're doing well.

2:50

I've been a massive fan of your show for a while

2:52

now and so glad that you chose to interact with your

2:54

audience. So the way this

2:56

is phrased is so funny. It's

2:59

long enough. It's like a full written paragraph that I chose

3:01

to read it. That

3:03

alone is like first half. It

3:05

sounds like the first 50% of

3:08

most of the bullshit marketing ones were people

3:10

like randomly send you stuff that's written

3:13

in a way to just target every podcaster

3:15

because they want you to pay them money

3:17

to use their editing tools or something like

3:19

that. Sonic Goes On says,

3:21

some of the episodes you've published have been found practical

3:24

use in my life. It is

3:26

rare that I find myself making time to listen to

3:28

podcasts. However, I find myself always willing to sit down

3:30

and listen to a great main concepts episode. So

3:33

even further, that was clearing it up pretty good. I was

3:35

like, this is real, but then when he actually wrote the

3:37

whole thing in there, it sounded

3:39

like nobody does that except for

3:41

these guys that do these scams. But

3:44

it's not a scam. That's the first half of the email. This is

3:46

legit email from somewhere where it calls Sir Lancelot. It

3:49

says, as time has gone by, I've come

3:51

up with a question that I hope you can answer. So,

3:55

this Is a good question while we're doing the

3:57

show. I'm going to focus on a couple of human intelligence

3:59

techniques, but we're going to talk other stuff too. But

4:01

here's. A ghost. He.

4:04

says. How. Does one

4:06

probably that the information of about

4:08

Terry Humid sources wears a walk

4:10

and source or controlled asset. It

4:13

always seemed incredibly difficult verify both the information

4:15

provided by these individuals and the individuals

4:17

themselves to have any tips, tricks, or guidance

4:20

on how to properly Betty sources were normal.

4:22

Vetting options are always available. Thank you

4:24

so much for that! So.

4:27

How this is written, I'm just gonna make

4:29

some assumptions. It while he's a presumption Las

4:31

Cruces baserunner adding this individual or to the

4:33

field and they either do. Tell.

4:35

Analysis or they are counter tells

4:38

us are human intelligence. Is

4:40

where that questions right to be from

4:42

any three of them, so probably similar

4:45

Cia. So. We're looking

4:47

for these volunteers sources first while the

4:49

way in which we discuss of they

4:51

discuss because because you proud to work

4:53

in this field when other certain words

4:55

at a comedy use but mean things

4:57

have legal applications are like If I

5:00

was to say the way you approach

5:02

this approaches are an actual technique jews

5:04

interrogation and if you're a legit train

5:06

interrogator you know it's illegal to use

5:08

those outside the confines when you doing

5:10

it out with actual law for interrogation.

5:13

If you're doing and a otherwise you're committing

5:15

a crime set for may be like doing

5:17

say and setting I do on the shelf.

5:20

So I don't want to say that. The way

5:22

in which we talk to these people and deal

5:25

with these interactions. Have

5:27

a lot of effect on things that happen

5:29

in the future, but it's important to note

5:31

that. While. Our attitudes

5:33

you are are things that techniques we

5:35

use might differ from person to person,

5:37

which may lean heavily on whether or

5:40

not they're volunteer or. Saved!

5:42

Detained against Er well. There.

5:44

Isn't a whole lot of difference in

5:47

how we handle the situation just because

5:49

or volunteer. There's. The. way

5:51

in which we will have the conversational course be

5:53

different we want to be very careful about how

5:55

we have these conversations when want to treat them

5:57

like a volunteer not like bad guy or want

6:00

to do that. But the techniques we're

6:02

going to use work

6:04

for everybody. It's no different than in

6:06

an interrogation using approaches or the questioning

6:08

techniques you're going to use. Is

6:11

it working well at that time for that reason, for that

6:13

person on that day, for whatever is going on? So

6:16

we'll take a look at those. And

6:19

we'll talk about, like you said,

6:21

properly vet these sources, so these are the people we're talking

6:23

to. But we're also going

6:25

to look at the information, because part of this

6:27

is vetting the information, whether or not we're vetting

6:29

the source. We have to do both. Some things

6:31

will do both. Some will only do one or

6:33

the other. Now, the way

6:35

the person wrote this, some of the things

6:38

we're looking at here is my guess is,

6:40

this is definitely a presumption. This is a

6:42

strategic guess. But if they

6:44

are, in fact, working in the field, they're low level. Now,

6:46

they very well could be working in law enforcement, too. This

6:48

is very possible to be law enforcement. Most

6:51

95% of the law enforcement in

6:53

the United States or Canada will

6:55

have, or at least the United States, I don't

6:57

know percentage of Canada, but usually 95% of law

7:00

enforcement is going to be no different

7:02

than low level, humid guys in

7:04

the intel field. So lowest

7:07

level guys, you're talking like military. Okay,

7:09

not just them, but mostly of them are going to

7:11

be in military. Worst place

7:13

to be when it comes to vetting, because

7:15

you have the least amount of things available

7:18

to you other than your own skills. And

7:20

even when they are available, the people don't want to do

7:23

it. You're going up to the warrant officer and they're like,

7:25

hey, can you contact the HC? They're not going to do

7:27

it, even if it's justified. It's just

7:29

not going to happen. But

7:31

to higher levels, there's a certain amount

7:33

of ninja magic that goes on. I mean, you got places

7:36

like CIA and NSA, you got 40, 50,000 employees. You

7:39

know, the FBI has got like 30,000 and there's another

7:42

two or 300,000 people working in

7:45

the intel field. Now, while most of them aren't

7:47

collectors or even analysts, they're

7:49

doing other jobs that support assets of

7:51

different types. So there's

7:53

all kinds of things. So things like, I mean,

7:55

just think what computers can do now, whatever you're

7:57

listening to this on probably has some significant capability.

8:00

So imagine what they have. They

8:02

can search anything out there publicly on the internet in any

8:04

country. You know how to mention they

8:06

have connections to spies and agencies in other parts of

8:08

the world. So if they've ever talked to this person

8:10

or if this person worked for them. I mean they

8:12

have people they'll get information from. And

8:14

whatever's out there. Plus any dossier or amount of

8:17

information that already exists on this person. Just

8:20

like the information they provide it might be,

8:23

Okay so you told, I always told the joke,

8:25

guys were like, Yeah, you know, Sama's over in

8:27

Pakistan, pay me money. It was like, we know

8:29

that. So there's all, just

8:32

like there's cataloged information about

8:34

data that we're collecting. There's cataloged information on

8:36

the sources sometimes or we build that. And

8:38

we can find out all kinds of great

8:40

stuff. That's at the profile levels. But when

8:42

you're like, Joe Bob

8:44

Humid guy and an HCT in the military.

8:46

You know, there's some

8:49

extreme limitations. I don't,

8:52

there's a whole bunch of shit that's just

8:54

not available to you. You've got to deal

8:56

with what your capabilities are as an individual.

8:59

Now the upside to this, this is just my opinion

9:01

based on some experiences I've had. If

9:04

you develop your skills, well you might be better off

9:06

in that position. Because there's some guys at the higher

9:08

levels that sometimes are

9:10

kind of lazy about these conversations.

9:13

Because they're like, yeah I got all these electronics and thousands

9:15

of dudes over here. I'm trying to check this stuff for me.

9:17

And it's like, yeah, but if you do

9:20

it at the source, it's a

9:22

little better. It's like, you know,

9:25

filter, not filtered

9:27

water, but bottled water. Like we collected at the source.

9:29

I mean it sounds better. But it actually is better

9:32

when we're dealing with people and information. So

9:35

the biggest thing I'm going to

9:37

focus on is repeat and control questions. I'm going

9:39

to explain to you what they are. And even if you know what they are,

9:41

I'm going to help you do them better. This

9:44

is a money maker right here. Because

9:46

you can't use, or lawfully

9:49

can't use approach techniques when

9:52

you're dealing with walk-in sources, people like this. And

9:54

depending on your situation and where you're at, you may only have

9:57

a limited amount of time with them. You know, military guys,

9:59

they're not going to be able to do that. that are on deployment when

10:01

this was happening for 20 years in the Middle East.

10:03

They could be in some random outpost where a dude

10:06

shows up and talks to them and they got all

10:08

day if they wanted. But there are other

10:10

places where there is like a line at the door. There

10:13

is a line at the base and I want to talk

10:15

to the CIA guy and he ends up being an army

10:17

interrogator or a counter intelligence agent and

10:19

they are like, yeah, I know where bombs are. Or whatever.

10:22

It's like, okay, it sounds good. Let's put him in a line and check

10:24

him. He goes through all his stuff and then

10:26

they bring him in but you've got limited time. This

10:29

dude needs to sell you on his information in a matter of minutes or

10:31

you are about ready to kick him out because you've got people to get

10:33

through. So we need to

10:35

be able to identify very quickly

10:38

whether or not this conversation

10:40

is worth even having. So it depends on who you

10:42

are and what situation you are in and how much

10:44

time you have. So

10:46

we are looking at for repeating control questions. Control

10:49

questions, if

10:52

you ask a law enforcement person, they are going to give you

10:54

a correct definition of it that is also incorrect for us. Correct

10:57

definition, one of them, is

10:59

these questions they will use similar to like on a

11:01

lie detector but they will use another situation where it

11:03

is designed to throw you a little off balance and

11:06

to get an emotional response in order to

11:09

detect deception. The

11:11

ways in which it is used with lie detection systems

11:13

is one of the biggest failures of it. It

11:16

is so poorly executed it can be done a lot better. But

11:18

that is not the technique we are using. We are using the other

11:20

definition in the intel side which is we are

11:24

going to ask them about things we already know. So

11:26

we are not into the lying stage yet. We are

11:28

into the I know this for sure or this is

11:30

the information I have. So I am going

11:33

to use it to challenge this guy. So

11:35

we are using known information to challenge them.

11:40

We will eventually use them to

11:42

verify known or suspected information. So make

11:44

sure it is

11:46

kind of up to you but look at the information you have

11:49

on a subject, whether or not it

11:51

is known or suspected. So how do we do that? So

11:53

look into control questions. So this guy comes in and

11:56

he tells you he knows where something is going to happen,

11:58

whatever you are talking to him about. this bad

12:00

thing. Right? So

12:02

based on your level of knowledge and available information

12:04

at the time, we can approach some control questions

12:06

about things we know to the

12:09

situation. Now maybe you're an expert on the bomb maker

12:11

that he's talking about, and I'm just going

12:13

to use that as an example, but maybe not. Maybe

12:15

you just know a lot about the town he's coming from when

12:17

he's talking about it. You don't know shit about the bomb makers

12:19

yet, but we can use some of

12:21

these control questions about things we know to get this

12:23

conversation going to kind of verify whether

12:25

or not those questions and his answers have

12:28

some consistency and whether or not they look

12:30

good. You can then later, and

12:32

this is an overview before we get more specific, you

12:35

can then later set up time for him to come back and

12:37

then take what you have that you're

12:40

writing your report on and then you can go do some

12:42

more research on your own on that information to get a

12:44

little more knowledgeable on it so you can ask better control

12:46

questions next time. The other thing we're doing is repeat questions.

12:48

Repeat questions we're asking the same question again, okay, but we're

12:51

not like you see in the movie when it's all crappy.

12:53

When they literally say word for word the same thing or

12:56

they're like, well did you

12:58

don't do this today or whatever and they're like

13:00

no and they're like are you sure? Okay, that's

13:02

our repeat questions, but it's a shitty one. We're

13:05

rephrasing these questions. Repeat questions like when

13:07

I example the family tree and you talked

13:09

about you know mom's brother who's also

13:12

your uncle and then whether or not we call him brother

13:14

or uncle in the question and then

13:16

whether or not we work the family tree going from you

13:18

up to your mom over to them or from that person

13:20

your mom down to you. We're asking the same question we're

13:22

just asking a different way. That's one way to do repeat

13:24

question. Another way to do a

13:26

repeat question is based off their answers. So let's say

13:29

we're looking at mom's brother and their uncle we're verifying

13:31

a family tree and then they refer that as Uncle

13:33

Timmy. We can now call him Tim Timothy or Uncle

13:35

Timmy another time in

13:37

a different situation using repeat question where

13:40

we're trying to verify meaning this. I

13:42

could use a repeat question almost the exact same style

13:45

we'll call it where I'm trying to verify that Timmy

13:47

is in fact uncle brother of mom. What

13:50

I can also do is ask a completely unrelated question

13:52

but I can where it had

13:55

to do with say this said uncle and reference

13:57

that as Timmy or

14:00

mom's brother, whatever, to see

14:02

how they respond to that. Whereas it doesn't sound

14:04

like I'm asking them a few questions, I'm asking them about some

14:06

situation over here, but what I'm really, the question I'm really trying

14:08

to ask is, is it in fact

14:10

Uncle Timmy, mom's brother, and then

14:13

based on how they ask to answer that, we

14:15

can gauge some consistency on it. Eventually some people will catch

14:18

on this and see what you're doing and they'll kind of

14:20

laugh it off. But

14:22

it's a good way to get

14:25

around prepared stories and

14:27

it's very helpful, especially when you have an observer

14:29

that can look for deception, but if you're not

14:31

very good at deception, or at least while having

14:33

a conversation, you'll be

14:36

looking for deception based on the answers

14:38

they're giving to the questions you are

14:40

asking, which

14:42

is how these systems of

14:44

repeat and control questions work. So

14:47

to get into a little bit more explanation, so

14:51

while these repeat questions are

14:53

asked multiple times, not just a couple, like a

14:55

lot, and can be done on more than

14:57

one session or conversation you're having

14:59

with them at a different time, their

15:02

primary purpose is to check for consistency

15:05

in the answer of the person responding to them. If

15:09

they're providing that answer

15:12

consistency on a regular

15:14

basis, it adds to the credibility of the information that

15:16

they're providing you, whether or not you want to believe

15:18

it. This is important too because

15:20

if they really believe something, I've talked about people, they

15:22

really believe things to be true and

15:25

they don't show signs of deception, but

15:27

we know it's incorrect so they're not lying. But the

15:29

other thing too to remember in this situation we're looking

15:31

at is, let's

15:34

say you start off with a control

15:36

question or added a control question here at a different time,

15:39

they bring this thing up, we'll say about Uncle Timmy again,

15:42

it challenges what you know because you know this to

15:45

be true and they're telling you, you're wrong. Okay,

15:48

you can ignore it but you shouldn't, you should

15:50

explore that a little bit. Do a little follow

15:52

up, do some repeat questions on it, and

15:55

this can help narrow down the consistency of their answers when

15:57

all of a sudden you find out... Well,

16:00

I have this over here that I need to be

16:02

true, but they're being very genuine,

16:05

lack deception, being consistent in their answers

16:07

that challenges this information. We

16:10

can then further go on and do several things. Not all can

16:12

be done at that time, but they can all be done and

16:14

should all be done, like exploring a little

16:16

more, finding out why they believe this to be true.

16:18

How are they the person to be true? So if

16:20

all these people in the world told us Uncle Timmy

16:22

is a

16:24

good guy, he's not the bad guy, and then this

16:26

guy is actually his nephew and says,

16:28

no, no, Uncle Timmy is the bad guy. Okay,

16:31

that's a challenge worth looking at. The

16:33

other things is you can go back on all this known information

16:35

and figure out where it came from. When

16:38

was it submitted? How old it is? Who

16:40

gave you that? What are those sources vetted at?

16:42

What are they rated at? What

16:45

is their information consistent with to see

16:48

if maybe your information needs to be updated

16:51

and changed? So

16:53

what we're doing here before we go on

16:55

is this is a

16:57

way that we're evaluating and vetting the source

16:59

and the information at the same time. What

17:01

we're doing is trying to establish patterns of

17:03

consistency over time with these sources that we very

17:05

likely will meet more than once if

17:08

their information is good. A lot of them

17:10

coming in at bullshitter, they just want to get paid for saying

17:12

the obvious, which I'm

17:14

sure if you work in this world, this is something

17:16

you have seen. So while

17:19

we're vetting them, we're also vetting the information. We're

17:21

also vetting information we already have, especially if we

17:23

believe it to be true. We believe it to

17:25

be correct and accurate. Control

17:28

questions are about things we know that we know. If

17:32

you're truly using qualified, vetted

17:34

information, things you know that you know, the

17:36

system knows, the community knows to be true,

17:38

and then they challenge it, you've got probably

17:42

somebody who's full of it but has to be

17:44

explored a little bit to make sure that it's

17:46

not updated new information. But

17:48

control questions should only be the really good stuff you know

17:51

for sure. That's the suspected information, things you think you know

17:53

to be true. We're

17:55

going to use a vetted qualified

17:57

source at a later time. think

18:00

has knowledge or information on that to kind

18:02

of qualify it to determine its value. But

18:05

we're using control questions only on the things we know that

18:07

we know. And

18:09

whether or not we're using those we're constantly challenging with

18:12

these repeat questions so we can evaluate the source and

18:15

the source's information simultaneously. We can

18:17

then individually separately go into the

18:20

information itself as well as the source itself.

18:24

The other thing too is this doesn't have to be

18:26

about the story he's telling you. You can explain to

18:28

them based on the situation you're in that

18:33

the information you give me even if it's a hundred percent

18:35

good is only half the story the other half the story

18:37

is where I'm getting the information from. So if you're working

18:39

and say law enforcement is like look let's

18:42

say we know for sure everything you're saying is good that's great

18:44

but you're not a credible witness and here's why. In the

18:47

Intel world I only need you to be credible for that piece

18:49

of information. I don't give a shit if you're a dirt farmer

18:51

a terrorist or who you are. I need

18:53

to know why you know it to be true to see if

18:56

I can qualify that and then verify the info later. Over

18:59

time I'll evaluate you to see what level of

19:01

information you're worth giving me consistently and what stuff

19:03

I can dismiss works different law enforcement side. It

19:05

doesn't matter what information you're giving me I need

19:07

you to be credible for that information and there's

19:09

going to be things done background checks or whatever.

19:11

So if you get a guy

19:14

with a background that's criminal and bad and all

19:16

these certain things that are just layered upon layered

19:19

upon layered that don't apply meaning oh

19:22

he's just really bad guy with these ten years of criminal

19:24

history and he's telling us where all the bad stuffs happen

19:26

good that's qualified that makes sense but

19:28

if there's other situations where he becomes uncredible

19:31

because of the things he's done in his

19:33

past and so that's what you

19:35

have to compare depending on the situation you're in to

19:38

evaluate their credibility for this information. But

19:41

that being said these techniques will work on either side it's

19:43

just using them to the advantage you

19:46

need to but the point I'm also making is

19:48

that we

19:50

can skip or gloss over or put on standby

19:52

the story they want to call us we can

19:54

talk about them as an individual because

19:57

if you're working in the Intel side you have to

19:59

anyway part of getting to know them because

20:02

we don't, I'm making this vague so if you

20:04

don't understand I'm sorry, there's sources of method stuff we don't want

20:06

to talk about. But on the

20:08

intel side when you're talking to this

20:11

person there's information we're getting about them

20:13

that we use and you know what I'm saying that

20:16

helps build up a background on them that

20:19

is probably going along the ideas of what you're talking

20:21

about your normal stuff. But

20:23

in there you can use the repeating quote control

20:25

questions to to validate the information about them. Personally

20:27

this aside from the story they're trying to tell

20:29

you that's the good stuff you're trying

20:31

to collect. And here's the thing, nobody

20:34

says you can only do it once you can do that as many times

20:36

as you want. You can set meetings with

20:38

them just to do that. You can do

20:41

that information later on you can do that every

20:43

meeting and verify something. You

20:45

can start a conversation or as you're building

20:47

rapport bring up something from that personal data

20:49

you have on them and just

20:52

innocuously use it incorrectly to see if

20:54

they catch it and correct you because

20:57

they know you got a lot of people and you say the name wrong or

21:00

you say something wrong discussing about whatever

21:02

like how was your weekend you know you're building rapport that

21:04

way and they tell you what they did with your kids

21:06

and you mention one of the kids names wrong or you

21:08

get their ages wrong or you get their gender wrong. Things

21:11

like that will likely be corrected and

21:14

if they're not then you can start to bring in a question

21:16

some of this personal information which

21:19

we are now then vetting our source

21:21

and determining how much of that stuff

21:23

is true or not. That being said

21:25

do not fall into the bias mistakes of

21:28

going oh he's lying to me

21:30

about his family therefore his information must not be any good.

21:32

No he might be a very private person these are separate

21:34

issues. Oh he's definitely on

21:36

point and being solid about stuff about his family

21:38

so whatever he tells me today I'm just gonna

21:40

subconsciously take it's the gospel. No don't do that

21:42

either that makes it easier to lie to you.

21:46

Now since we got off on a

21:49

slight tangent there let's go back to

21:51

finishing discussing repeat questions. I hope

21:54

this isn't boring for you by the way maybe you learned

21:56

something that's useful you can have fun with your friends with

21:58

this. So

22:00

looking at the key aspects of the repeat

22:03

question, looking for consistency. The

22:05

consistency, of course, is going to verify reliability

22:07

of the information, but

22:09

also verifies credibility of

22:12

that source. And

22:14

we're looking for consistency and responses over

22:17

time, although some things can

22:19

be observed and determined at, say, one

22:21

said meeting or one long multi-hour session.

22:24

It's usually over time. And in those times,

22:27

actually help having days or weeks in between

22:29

to meet people and discuss things, to see so

22:32

many other things happen in their life, that

22:35

what inconsistencies are there. And are those

22:38

inconsistencies generally

22:40

accepted, realistic? Or

22:42

are they things in their storytelling or whatever that

22:44

are going to indicate lying? So there

22:48

are always little nuances things that change the stories over

22:50

time. That is natural. When stories are exactly the same,

22:53

exactly the same for

22:56

even years, decades,

22:58

they're almost always told

23:01

that way because the best way they can tell them.

23:05

And they're very deceptive and lying. And when challenged, they get

23:07

angry and upset and try to go back to the original

23:09

story they tell. I'll give you an example. I

23:11

don't say the names because no one piss anybody off.

23:13

I don't want to start a conversation. But

23:16

one of the most popular things in this world

23:19

anymore is the UFO discussions. The

23:22

funny thing about it is if you were to

23:24

ask me who the two top names

23:26

were associated with this, you

23:28

may not get the same names as me. But if I told you

23:31

the two names I'd pick, you'd

23:33

go, oh yeah, they're definitely right there. And

23:35

they are the most deceptive people, the

23:37

most entertaining, but the most deceptive when it comes to

23:40

these stories because their stories do not fluctuate or change

23:42

for decades. And on top

23:44

of that clear sign of,

23:46

hey, we need to check this out.

23:48

They just

23:51

exude deception verbally,

23:54

non-verbally, in all of their discussions. So

23:57

this is part of the reason why we want the time thing. There's going

23:59

to be some changes. but we're looking for the

24:01

important things that matter. Are those

24:03

things changing? This is also a

24:05

memory test. Part of the repeat questions now,

24:07

today, and then in the future are a memory

24:09

test based on the stuff they're telling us,

24:12

which checks the credibility and to determine whether

24:14

or not the differences

24:16

in memory are normal or

24:19

are they screw-ups because of a

24:21

plan prepared story. So

24:23

the repetition of these questions, especially when

24:26

they're unexpected, they do apply

24:28

psychological pressure on this individual and

24:30

that can reveal more information or

24:32

consistencies. We don't want, you

24:35

typically do not want to use them to

24:37

apply pressure. That's a mistake. You

24:40

want to allow people to screw up when

24:42

you're discussing this. You don't want to apply

24:44

pressure to prove that they're

24:47

wrong or to verify because you think

24:49

they're wrong. Be nice, flies with honey.

24:51

Even if that flies a liar, let

24:53

it happen. Laugh about

24:55

it later with your buddies. And

24:57

then if they come in again, you

24:59

can tell them why you knew they were lying. But you don't want to challenge

25:02

them that at that moment if you don't have to,

25:04

especially when they're volunteer. That's something you might do with

25:06

a detainee, but you don't want to do that as

25:08

a volunteer. You don't want

25:10

to piss them off. You don't want to cause confrontation.

25:12

None of that benefits you in any way. So

25:16

think flies with honey. Now control questions, on

25:19

the other hand, are designed to establish a baseline

25:21

of behavior and responses. They

25:23

can be done for that. They're also done using questions

25:26

I know to be true. So for example, if

25:28

I know this information to be correct and I

25:30

have some gauge of consistency, credibility on your, maybe

25:32

I don't have any yet, I've just met you,

25:35

I can use control

25:37

questions to establish baseline behavior in things

25:39

like I-axis queuing, which as a reminder, there's

25:42

only one of many nonverbal techniques and is not

25:46

used to detect deception or lying unless it's used

25:48

in conjunction with many other things that may or

25:50

may not indicate that. Our primary purpose in that

25:53

is to understand thought process and patterns, how

25:55

we're processing information. When

25:58

you're using repeat and even control, questions and

26:00

let's say you understand iXS Q and they're

26:03

using visual construction and they're using visual construction

26:05

and visual remembering a lot. We know basically

26:07

they use a lot of memory stuff. Just

26:10

because you're using construction doesn't make it a lie. People

26:12

put that on like little tick-tock reels on YouTube all

26:14

the time. These are people you shouldn't be listening to

26:16

or know what they're talking about. All

26:18

kinds of things are going to be popping

26:21

in and out of visual construction just because of things

26:23

with memory that are normal over time. They have no

26:26

indication or support of deception.

26:29

But we can use those if we

26:31

understand but you don't need to. These

26:34

questions that we're using for control questions

26:37

too can be similar especially when you're

26:39

looking for baseline behavior but even when

26:41

you're just trying to establish credibility of

26:43

the individual. Maybe if it's especially

26:45

when it's not something you have direct

26:47

knowledge of the data they're trying to provide you about

26:49

the bomb you don't have information on this. The

26:52

control questions you can use are going to be things

26:54

that you know that can be unrelated. They

26:57

don't necessarily have to be related. Depends on what you're

26:59

doing in the process at the time because

27:01

your entire questioning process to them

27:03

is always about you getting information. They should always be

27:05

leaving thinking you're trying to get information especially if they

27:08

think you're trying to get information or not because you're

27:10

really good at elicitation. We

27:12

have that but it's

27:14

elicitation too is part of this because they're voluntarily.

27:16

But also part of your questioning might be why

27:18

they're thinking you're trying to get information about you

27:20

know bad things. They don't realize you're trying to

27:22

get information on them through a virtue of repeat

27:25

and control questions and to

27:28

establish baseline behavior and to figure out their

27:30

credibility. So

27:32

we're gaining what we're doing

27:34

is gaining knowledge on their normal response

27:37

patterns and compare them

27:39

against more critical or sensitive questions. That's

27:41

part of what control questions can do.

27:43

Control questions can also be a lot

27:45

softer. Review questions are about validating

27:48

and verifying information they provided. Control

27:51

questions can be soft questions. They don't have to

27:53

be hard information. These

27:56

can just be normal rapport building stuff. It's a great

27:58

time to use that to gauge. stuff

28:01

we've already been told. You can work repeat

28:03

questions in there in a soft form using

28:06

control questions to figure

28:08

out where we're at with this information. These

28:11

are very effective in report building and remember the

28:13

report building especially if you're on this job you

28:15

know report building isn't like it is in training

28:18

where it's like okay you've done five minutes buzzer

28:20

they're broken. You're always building a

28:22

report. You always have to go back to it. You can

28:24

screw up with one question not even know why and report

28:26

is dead and you've got to stop everything you're doing to

28:28

reestablish it and repeating control questions can be a part

28:30

of that. They don't need to be every

28:32

time doesn't need to be both but they can work

28:35

very well. The key

28:37

aspects of control question

28:39

is a baseline establishment so

28:41

we're looking for those normal patterns including verbals

28:43

and non-verbals. This can be used

28:46

as a truthfulness gauge or accuracy

28:48

gauge we'll say so

28:50

objective truthfulness but accuracy based

28:54

on questions they're likely to

28:56

answer truthfully so let's say there's things

28:58

you know right things we know we

29:00

know. We're

29:03

asking them things we know we know

29:05

because we have a reasonable expectation that they

29:07

should know the answer because some

29:09

guy comes into their farm or not going to ask

29:11

him about nuclear fission. Obviously those things don't click so

29:13

we make sure that these questions these things we know

29:15

we know are things they

29:18

would reasonably know or understand about or have comprehension

29:20

of this is why I say

29:22

control questions quite often don't have to be on topic

29:26

they can be completely off topic and

29:29

be used in rapport building so you

29:31

can go back they're getting a little frustrated maybe they don't

29:33

want to talk about that guy anymore but

29:36

you can go back to talking about their job as

29:38

a welder and you're building

29:40

rapport right and

29:42

that might be secondary. You may not have a need for

29:44

rapport but maybe that's

29:46

secondary to the fact that while that's the

29:49

biggest benefit you're getting you're using control questions

29:51

to get them more comfortable again and you're

29:54

using it to gauge physical

29:56

responses you're seeing and you're realizing that yes

29:59

they were really set before. So now this time I'm

30:01

going to go back into again and maybe I'm going to

30:03

purposely kind of make them upset again go down this path

30:05

but I'm going to watch for things I wasn't looking for

30:07

before. I'm going to watch for eye movements or I'm going

30:09

to watch for their physical posture. I'm going to watch are

30:12

they showing open displays of body language?

30:14

Are they starting closed displays? Are they

30:16

anchoring somewhere? Are they doing

30:19

self-soothing things? You know

30:21

where what are they really focused on? What

30:23

gets them excited? Are they leaning forward? All

30:25

the basic stuff. You're going to maybe repeat

30:28

the situation that caused the problem as long

30:30

as it wasn't an explosive problem. Do

30:32

it kind of mildly while observing a

30:34

little more to see what they're

30:37

going into and then determine

30:39

what is it really? Is this a thing they don't know

30:41

anything about or is it just an uncomfortable conversation? Is there

30:43

something they're hiding? We always think it's something they're hiding but

30:46

actually a lot of times it's not the case at all.

30:49

So it might be a deceptive indicator when

30:51

we use control questions where

30:53

they have deviations from their baseline.

30:55

So control questions is one

30:58

way but not the only way to

31:00

identify some baseline behaviors and

31:02

however we've done that we can still

31:04

use them to look for deviations. But

31:06

then when we see deviations from the baseline, remember deviation

31:08

from baseline doesn't mean it's deception it just means it's

31:10

different. We have to determine why it's different. So that's

31:12

why I said when we talked

31:15

about baselines a couple years ago I used

31:17

Thanksgiving where I was like we

31:19

go to the market every Wednesday at 10 a.m. and

31:23

we do that because that's our pattern that's our habit when

31:25

we have expectations the baseline about it's going to be and

31:27

that's how it always but then

31:29

one day a year you have to go Wednesday at

31:32

10 a.m. because you forgot something you forgot the rub

31:34

sage and then

31:36

this day before Thanksgiving is what

31:38

baseline's changed it's the baseline though

31:40

for that day that day just

31:42

happens once a year right

31:45

so it's it's to say that even

31:47

if you see a deviation baseline

31:51

that doesn't necessarily challenge credibility truthfulness

31:53

and accuracy what that challenges is

31:55

you to determine why is the

31:58

deviation there sometimes just uncomfortable.

32:01

It doesn't always mean they're hiding things. So

32:04

repeat questions, that's how we check consistency

32:06

and reliability in memory, control questions. We

32:09

can establish baselines, we can check baselines

32:11

with them, we can

32:13

check truthfulness or accuracy, and

32:15

we can use them as deception indicators. This

32:19

helps us discern reliability

32:21

of the information. These

32:23

are techniques that I, the reason I think these

32:25

are important is because back when I

32:28

was training guys here in Fort Wachuca, I

32:30

was astonished at how downhill that school had

32:32

gone. They are not, they are

32:34

terribly trained now. I

32:38

wanted to punch people in the face when I went to

32:40

that school, right? I

32:43

switched over to that job. I

32:46

was a senior in jail when I went through the

32:48

training. Like I was, well I was

32:50

promoted, I was got selected and promoted

32:52

while I was there. So I went from a staff

32:54

sergeant to a sergeant first class while I was there.

32:56

I was very patient, I was very smart, I was

32:59

like one of the senior guys. I

33:01

was really good at this, some of this stuff, some

33:03

of it I had time with, but I understand how

33:05

military schools work. I knew the game. I was accepting

33:07

of many, many things and a very patient man and

33:09

I wanted to punch fuckers in the face because

33:12

they wouldn't shut up about follow-up

33:15

questioning, as important as it is.

33:17

And they would teach us techniques and stuff, but I'm

33:19

like, bro I get it. It

33:21

was only a few years later, I'm training

33:24

these guys for the program shutdown, they come up, they're like,

33:26

yeah they talk about it a little bit. Like they didn't,

33:29

I was just, like it's like they just said fuck it,

33:31

we're not gonna teach this. We're not gonna teach a necessary

33:33

skill anymore, right? They

33:37

took so much of that out, it's like saying,

33:39

oh you're an infantryman? Yeah, so oh

33:41

you qualified on the range of basic training? Good, we're

33:44

not gonna shoot boats again unless there's a war. So

33:46

you'll never see a rifle or clean it for the

33:48

next 10 years. Like that's, that's about

33:50

the equivalent of what they're doing. I think

33:52

that's a fair thing to say. So

33:55

it's, it's a

33:57

perishable skill but it's so horrible. So if you

33:59

are one of these guys, you're one of these humans

34:01

guys, very likely that depending on where you're at that

34:04

the training is changing, you're not getting what was

34:06

available 10-15 years ago. So that's

34:09

why these are so important and

34:11

this comes into the plan, the questioning plan

34:14

of how we're going to get this information.

34:17

At the lower levels on the Intel

34:19

side, the questioning plan is really focused,

34:21

heavily entrained when it comes into the

34:23

interrogation, which are not discussing, you're just

34:25

talking about lock-ins, right? The

34:28

thing is if you went through that, yeah, I

34:30

knew you did it in the army, didn't have much training on that either. The

34:33

questioning plan can be used, you can have

34:35

generic basic questioning plans as an outline to

34:38

follow to make sure you don't lose track just

34:41

for anybody that comes in. But

34:43

you've talked to this guy, he's a walk-in and

34:45

let's say he's giving you said information, so you've

34:47

gone back and checked it and you're

34:49

going to come back, you're going to do some repeating

34:51

questions, you're trying to get some more information about whatever.

34:54

You could have a built questioning plan for this guy,

34:57

it's not an interrogation for you to have a question plan,

34:59

it's not illegal, you don't have to run approaches. You can

35:01

have a plan to follow and the best thing about it

35:03

is you don't have to do it if you did do

35:05

it in training, you don't have to do it in training

35:07

where you go step by step, step by step. You can

35:09

bounce around and flow with the conversation just

35:12

like you might go one through ten

35:14

on questions but you may not do them immediately.

35:16

You might go one and two and then you build rapport

35:18

or to discuss ice cream or whatever and you come back

35:20

and you do three and then you bounce over here and

35:22

you do this. The other thing is you can do one

35:25

and two and then go talk about building rapport

35:27

and then you come back and do seven B,

35:30

seven B12 or something and

35:32

bounce around like that. If you have the question plan to

35:34

contract the information, it's like a timeline, right?

35:37

We hope we ask the timeline between 07 and 1900

35:39

that they give it to us

35:41

minute by minute in correct order but they're going to bounce around

35:43

in their memory which is somewhat normal. I'd

35:45

almost be concerned of a lengthy timeline knowing in order

35:48

unless it was like you

35:50

know like a big history thing well Columbus

35:52

discovered America then and then here's Plymouth Rock

35:54

and then here's when we become a country

35:56

like something big space like that that that

35:58

makes sense but The timelines that

36:00

you typically used to seeing following those events, if

36:02

it's real tight what happened on this night when

36:04

you left the party, maybe they nailed that down,

36:07

but a lot of the stuff that we're looking

36:09

at in this field, assuming you're doing the same

36:11

job I did, is

36:13

going to be over a period of days

36:15

sometimes or weeks and hours. A lot

36:17

of things happen, especially if there's a lot of things in their life

36:20

and they live in a city and they went to school and they

36:22

do all this. We want more details. A lot

36:24

of times they bounce around and they go, oh, you know what? This

36:26

person was there too when I talked to him because they don't remember

36:28

that at the time. That's very

36:30

realistic and not a sign of deception. Because

36:33

that's normal to conversation with

36:36

practice, it's going to feel

36:38

awkward when you haven't done it

36:40

and then even then it takes a while to be smooth,

36:42

with practice you can just force that through

36:44

questioning to be completely erratic in

36:46

your questioning plan which would piss people off. But

36:48

if you can pull it off, which initially

36:51

you're pulling it off until you smooth it out, it's

36:54

a more natural conversation. So you have to think

36:56

about what's a natural conversation to Bob

36:59

over here that I'm talking about. Is

37:01

he a logical linear person or is he a more

37:03

emotional erratic person? How are they presenting information

37:05

to me? You

37:08

can mirror their behaviors and attitudes but you can match their

37:10

conversation and say, this is how they come, this is how

37:12

they talk, man. So this is how I'm going to do

37:14

it. You can practice it and have your questioning

37:16

plan like that and bounce all over and here's the thing. Let's

37:19

say you got a questioning plan. You got five main groups

37:21

you want to follow. In each main group you have 10

37:23

questions. Each 10 questions. You have five logical

37:25

follow ups. Each one of them you have five logical

37:27

follow ups. That's like hundreds of questions. You're

37:30

not going to get through them all. And

37:33

there's no reason to say he's necessarily going to know them

37:35

all or be able to recall them accurately and then things

37:37

won't change. But it's a way to get more information more

37:39

efficiently in that short amount of time because a lot of

37:41

time in these walk-ins, like I said, we

37:43

have time constraints. And even when we

37:45

don't have time constraints, sometimes guys just want, it's like they want

37:47

a friend. Like they just want to frickin' talk

37:49

and you're like, bro, I got shit to do. So

37:52

we make it more efficient but you

37:54

don't ever want to make them feel rushed. You don't ever

37:56

want to make them feel unimportant. You

37:59

don't ever want to make them feel good. and think that you

38:01

don't care. You want

38:03

them to believe you're their best friend. Yeah,

38:06

that's gonna bring them back. But

38:09

it helps with the rapport side.

38:11

And then all you have to do is manage that asset

38:13

and determine when you need to cut them off. Basically when

38:15

you need to cut ties and say,

38:18

no more, we are ending

38:20

this relationship. You know, that

38:23

might happen. Or giving them

38:25

guidelines or boundaries and saying, you

38:27

only come here when you have this. Don't come here

38:30

with this stuff anymore. I've got it. You

38:32

have to control that asset on your own. But

38:35

the vetting process of the information and the person, because you

38:37

probably don't have a lot of these other things, still, even

38:39

if you had it, you have to do it at the

38:41

source. And a big portion of it

38:43

is planning the conversation out through repeat

38:45

and control questions and being able to do it

38:47

on the fly to check the

38:50

information, check the source, and hear

38:52

what they're saying and determine whether or not

38:54

it's got enough value for you. And then

38:56

having the patience to send them away.

38:58

And then when they come back later, you've done a little bit of

39:00

your own research where you can. You've had

39:02

a plan built. You do

39:04

some more repeat and control questions. And you're basically

39:07

in the questioning side of it, because we're not

39:09

doing approaches. In the questioning side of it, you

39:12

might treat it like a long interrogation. Like if you're in there

39:14

for six or eight hours, it just might be a period of

39:16

one hour a week for six weeks until you get there,

39:19

depending on what your situation is, which you have to determine

39:21

on your own. So hopefully this helps

39:23

you. If you have any more questions, let me know if

39:27

you don't understand that. Let me know if you're looking

39:29

for other techniques. Let me know. Thanks for the email. Glad

39:31

you love the show. Sounds like you're actually doing this

39:33

job. Please get back to me if you are and

39:35

tell me what you can about what you're

39:37

doing and if you have any more questions

39:39

that I can help you with. And for anybody

39:41

else, I hope you enjoyed the show. Learn about repeat

39:43

and control questions. And I know what many

39:45

of you are thinking. I'm

39:48

gonna fuck with my kids next time they're in trouble. I

39:50

absolutely encourage you to do that. Because

39:52

it's fun. Separate them in

39:55

different rooms. Treat it like an interrogation. Repeat

39:57

and control questions. Oh,

39:59

it'll get to the... You want to do it when

40:01

they're young to the point where they almost do

40:03

it for fun so that by the time they

40:05

get into the past pre-teen and the teen years

40:07

they're like I just don't lie anymore because they're

40:09

always going to know. That's the dream of every

40:11

parent isn't it?