Saturday, October 3, 2015

Missing 2 Year Old Rainn Peterson

Please note that there are some issues here. 
Note that the mother says the 2 year old will go with anyone, including strangers.  This is often the boasting that we hear that suggests neglect.  An appropriate level of stranger anxiety is expected in 2 year olds.  Those of neglect can develop weak and superficial attachments when left in the care of many different people and will go with anyone, without fear.  This is a potential result of neglect on the part of the parents.
There may be generational neglect in this family.  
NEW BLOOMFIELD, OH – Authorities are searching for a missing toddler in Trumbull County after the girl wandered off Friday evening.
Rainn Peterson, two-years-old, was reported missing by her great-grandparents on Friday at 7:30 p.m.
She was last seen at 7759 State Route 45 in New Bloomfield wearing a purple long-sleeved shirt with snowflake sequins, gray pants, and multicolored pink and lime green shoes.
Trumbull County Sheriff Thomas Altiere tells WKYC that Peterson and two other siblings, ages three and four, were playing inside the house earlier Friday night. The siblings told Trumbull County Sheriffs that was the last time they saw Peterson.
The search is still going on as of Saturday afternoon. "We're looking everywhere. We're not putting a limit on the search. We will keep searching until we find her," Sheriff Altiere told WKYC's Alyssa Raymond on the scene.

Police Chief and Mayor call on the community to help to bring an end to the pattern of violenceWKYC
Peterson has brown shoulder length hair, brown eyes, and 3’0” tall.
Brandi Peterson, the mother of missing 2-year-old Rainn Peterson, spoke Saturday afternoon with WKYC and told us that she was out with her boyfriend when her grandparents called and said that the toddler had gone missing.
The grandparents had been watching the three children while the mother was moving into her new apartment
Peterson was not wearing any shoes or a coat when she vanished from the grandparents’ home.
The mother tells us that the grandmother was cooking in the kitchen and the three children were downstairs with the grandfather. The missing toddler went upstairs and went missing a short time after.
Trumbull County Sheriff's Department has been aided by the FBI, Ashtabula County Sheriffs, Howland Township Police, Niles Police, K-9 units from Columbus and the Ohio Bureau of Criminal Identification and Investigation as well as volunteers.
Anyone with information on the missing toddler is asked to please call the Trumbull County Dispatch Center at (330)-675-2730.

Agenda Hiring: Social Justice Warriors

In working to design job applications and training Human Resource professionals in interviewing, lie detection is paramount. If they catch a deceptive person, statistics tell us:  they will save the company money and heartache.

If 4 of every 10 applicants intends theft of some form, it is not likely that this statistic includes the myriad of thievery practiced by professional "victims" today; who seek to game the system by fraudulent claims of injury, harassment, and so on.  For each "victim", there is a cost that will "heal" their woes and the business owner is tagged, even in fraudulent cases, to bear that cost.

We use analysis to train HR professionals to not only "weed out" the deceptive, but in "content analysis."

Content analysis is the jewel of information, born of intense training and hard work.  It is what we glean well beyond the polygraph.

"Why would you like to work for us?" seems like a silly question, but one in which we always seek to learn if the applicant has an agenda other than the norm, for applying for a job.  

There are two basic reasons why someone is seeking employment:

1.  Earning Money for Provision
2.  Satisfaction from task completion and a job well done.

When someone has a motive other than these two (and their close relatives), it is a red flag that warns you that the person is going to bring harm to you.

The most common agendas include political and sexual agendas, which I have covered and will cover in future articles.  Lesser ones include corporate espionage, competition, and so on, but are rare and more limited to certain fields.

Common agendas include those who plan, at the time of the interview, to find a way to separate the company from its money outside of legitimate work. 

There will always be those who are resume building (a close relative of our two basic motives), but what about someone who deliberately plans to...

"fall on the job"?  These are far more numerous than most recognize.

"claim harassment" or "discrimination" of some element ?  These are usually above average intelligence but will reveal this in the interview process.

"claim victimization" of some form?  This is often directed at an individual.

Some have been "counseled" to seek employment and not disclose a substance abuse issue, just long enough to put the company on the hook for rehabilitation costs, which could be $15,000 and upwards.

Some seek employment just long enough to get unemployment.  Some of these have admitted being advised to do this by government workers.

For any of these, the priority can be revealed, as all priorities can be, through the interview process which should include a written statement for both analysis, and the subsequent interview.

Here is a new popular rising star:  The social justice warrior.

Hire a social justice warrior and simply count the days until the "event" takes place.


What event?

Question:  What is the one thing a social justice warrior needs more than anything else?

Answer:   An event involving their social angle.

If someone is very public about discrimination based upon race, how long will it be until this person is either "discriminated against" or happens to "witness" a discriminatory event?

This is where we often find the one, a champion against prejudices, suddenly and "surprisingly" finding himself or herself in, can you guess,

a situation in which the very issue they champion, has happened to them!

It is an example of "fake hate" and about the worst thing imaginable is now likely to happen to you if you hire the "social justice warrior":

They will create an accusation that suits their own agenda.

I have had HR professionals tell me that in the interview process, they have had some people raise the issue of sex only to be told,

"We are a non-discriminatory company and do not discriminate on the basis of race, creed, sexual..." which is not a sufficient answer to the "social justice warrior."

HR's have told me, "He is waiting for me to say something so he can run to his lawyer!"

I once interviewed a man who kept bringing up sexuality, of which I gave a response similar to the one above.

During the interview, he asked to be excused as he said, "I am unable to compose myself" and left the interview room crying.

He came back in a few minutes later and the interview continued.  He said things like, "I'm sure you won't hold this against me" and "I'm sure you understand what it means to be discriminated against..."

None of which I would answer.  It was a compelling performance and I knew not to be without a witness in this interview.

I asked a manager from the company to come in, saying that the manager may have some questions, too, asking, "Would you mind?" to which he said, "Oh, not at all!"

 I returned to questions:

"You said you just moved here from southern California.  What did you do there?"

He said, "I was a waiter."

Bingo.  There was my answer.  No male, 18-30 is a waiter in southern California.

"What else did you do besides waiting tables?"

I knew.

He was an actor.  Hence, the performance during the interview.  I knew that when he was not offered a job, he would demand to know the reason why not and may claim discrimination.  I used our "scoring system" which is quite useful and eventually, the company offered the position to one who had scored significantly higher.

 I carefully documented his answers for the company, often reading back to him his own quotes.  I offered him water, or, if needed, another break.  I asked him if he was comfortable.  I knew why he was there and what he was up to.   He was looking for an easy mark.

Someone with an agenda, or one who views himself or herself as a "victim" in life, is going to import trouble:

They will claim to be a victim when it is you, the business owner, or you, the Human Resources professional, who is actually the victim.

Another modern twist is the social services agenda in which someone in social services has advised the applicant, "if you want to keep your benefits, you have to apply for a job but if you get hired you are going to lose..." and they enter in with the intent on sabotaging the interview.  This is fine, as you do not want someone who does not want to work but beware:  those who game the system can be clever and may seek to file a complaint against you for not hiring them.  Care to go up against a "poor, single mom who just wants to work while you, the wealthy, cold hearted capitalist just wants to keep her down" scenario?  It is not pleasant.

There are two very strong motivations for employment:

1.  Money
2.  Emotional satisfaction for completion

"Tell me about yourself" is a great way to get to motive.

As humans, we need to survive. This means provision.  It is, therefore, a rudimentary element of satisfaction when we have provided for ourselves, and an even intensified emotion when we provide for loved ones.  Applicants seeking real employment often begin with their families.  They need money.  This is good.

I once had an applicant boast how she worked for Walmart where she, an anti-gun advocate, removed all of the hunting magazines, herself, from their shelves, and carefully put them in the stock room.

I asked, "Were you concerned about getting in trouble?"

She said, "No.  It takes courage today to stand up for what you believe in."

Me:  "What would you say if I told you I was an avid hunter?"

I'm not. Eventually, I told her that I was not.  She was initially stunned into silence, but then went into her martyr speak, which is a rebel looking for a cause.

Emotional Intelligence, as seen in self awareness:  very low.
Agenda driven:  very high
Risk:    very high
Reward:  very low

It is likely that this applicant would find someway to get herself the  attention she craves and it will be at the cost of some company's well being.  The stance she must take will find something to protest.  It depends on the job, but she must be noticed and she must be the center of attention and has a desperate need for relevancy so much so that it drives her.  Her motive is self driven, and not provision for her family, for example.

Most agenda driven applicants are not this easy to spot.  Analysis guides the questions.

Some business owners feel a deep seated emotional satisfaction for the provision of their employees and their dependents, in a special, unique way. 

In interviewing business owners, I have found that some of them feel the weight of decision making upon their shoulders because they know:  the decision I make here could impact the lives of my employees, their spouses, and their children.

These are special people.

They are often above average intelligence, gifted, and take personal risk with their own money.  They feel a responsibility to their employees, therefore, those of whom they hire are those of whom they hold a certain level of trust for, almost as if they are joining the family.  

This is especially true towards the person or persons hired who are responsible for hiring, as well as those who the business owner personally promotes.  It is not that the low level employee is a family member, which is why I wrote "almost" in the sentence above.

Small business owners often care a great deal more for their employees than the employees are aware of.

The small business owner often puts his own money, including mortgaging his own home, as well as his or her family name on the line, complete with the reputation the family has in the community.  It is anything but impersonal.

When interviewing small business owners over the years, I have learned this natural consequence of the concern they have:

Theft is very personal. 

When an employee steals from them, they often feel personally betrayed.  When someone files a fraudulent claim against them, or against one of their employees, there is the costs involved:

*Cost of hiring attorneys
*Cost of insurance
*Cost of settlements
*Cost of unemployment payments
*Cost of the loss of time

But there is also the cost of stress and the personal feeling of being attacked.  This can impact his or her health and family.

When, for example, a business owner runs a restaurant, the greeting the employees give, at the door, is a reflection of the owner. This is how owners often think.

Even when the business grows, the decisions become even more heavily weighted.

They are counting on Human Resources professionals to protect their investment, their employees, and even their name.

The one who considers himself or herself a "social justice warrior" will, one way or another, be involved in an "incident" that is the precise topic of their protest.

Hire someone with an agenda other than earning money and personal satisfaction and you run the risk of importing trouble of unforeseen consequence to your company.

For formal training opportunities for lie detection, content analysis and interviewing,  please see Hyatt Analysis

Friday, October 2, 2015

Lie Detection in Hiring: Sportsmanship, Language and Hiring

Sports are a marvelous tool to build leadership, face competition, and to enhance sportsmanship.  Sports teaches the rewards of effort, help boys and girls push their limits, and teach natural consequence of hard work:  victory.

In short, sports, like other endeavors for children which require effort, skill, and development, are essential to survive, and even thrive in a competitive world.  It also allows these human traits to advance technology and civilization.

For the HR professional, in business and in law enforcement, the expressions used in the application and interview process are crucial in seeking to hire the best and brightest.  Yet, there is also a strong caveat that must be considered.

Listen to the language.

Those from the sports world often use certain expressions including some I have both heard, and asked follow up questions from:

"I like to tackle challenges"
"In the argument, I took her right to the ground."
"I am a team player."
"In my career, I hit the ground running with my first job..."

Sports, and competition in general (which can include such school activities as band, orchestra, debate, chess, math, and so on...where competition is front and center) helps mold future employees who learn from experiences in sports, what hard work and effort may produce. 

An ancient example:

In ancient military, most combat was hand to hand.  This is brutally frightening.  Men would grow long beards, wild hair, and use markings to instill various forms of fear to the enemy. Even children recognize a form of 'paternal terror' and 'paternal wisdom' from close proximity to long beards.  

When an ancient warrior was significantly taller than the norm, he stood out and strategy could be produced centering upon him.  (It is interesting to read studies on promotions and height, in business today).  

The ancient Philistines had Goliath of Gath (and his brothers) who were "Shaquile O'neil" sized warriors surrounded by fierce, and also large soldiers.  They kept ancient Israel's warriors in fear. 

Saul, king of Israel, stood "head and shoulders" taller than the rest around him, yet even he would not face Goliath, who, morning by morning, approached the Israeli army, and shouted curses and insults at them.  

David, the boy with the harp and sweet voice, could stand no more and said, "I will fight him."

His brothers were enraged and must have considered how they would explain to their father why they let their little brother, a shepherd boy, be cut in half in a show fight for the Philistines' entertainment.  David, however, resisted their arguments and we are given insight into David's thinking, which is key for understanding:

David thought to himself:  'there was a time when I was out watching my father's sheep at night, with my staff and slingshot, when a mountain lion came and grabbed a sheep.'  A hungry mountain lion is more powerful than 5 grown men, but instead of running, David attacked it, and freed the sheep, saving his father a serious loss of revenue. 

David then reminisced again.  'There was that other time when a bear attacked and I fought it, too, and God delivered it into my hands.  This Philistine is going down!'

With deadly accuracy, in a tiny 12 year old boy going one on one with Shaquile, David's slingshot landed the smooth stone just beneath the massive armor, concussing the giant to the ground.  Israel's army, encouraged by this 'miracle' (a miracle being a "suspension of nature", which is was not), went on a major offensive against the enemy and on to a great victory. 

                                                         How did David do it?

This is an important formula for success. 

How did David handle the challenge?

He did so by using his past experiences, and how not only his skills, once put to the test, and then again, to the point where he could draw upon the hours and hours of lonely practice with the sling shot, and then the two major tests; tests he could have failed.  Competition had not only sharpened his skills:

Competition sharpened his confidence.

David used his experiences to translate into confidence, which means heightened awareness and skill due to increased hormonal response.  History was his servant and friend.  

HR professionals should listen carefully to the question, "Tell me about yourself" not only with the training to pick up specific words, but to listen to the references used.  Did the applicant address challenges faced growing up, which is far more important than the proverbial answer about facing a challenge in his or her most recent employment.  Childhood creates the adult.  See the boy, see the man; see the girl, see the woman. 

future sensitivity trainer 
We always arm ourselves with a specific defense against theft in HR interviewing, but we also arm ourselves to pick out those who will be likely able to meet unknown and unpredictable challenges.  

Competition, which must include testing with "a lion and a bear", that is, challenges with consequences, to cause growth.  (So much for the "there are no winners and no losers because everyone wins, and everyone gets 100% and everyone gets a trophy, even just for maintaining a pulse!")

With all of these positive attributes, no company, and certainly no police department wants to hire someone who poses a risk of violence. 

I speak of two forms of violence, specifically:

Physical Violence and Bullying.

In western thought, bullies are weak.  In business, bullies are those who are also weak, pick their victims out specifically, and thrive in bureaucracy more than the private sector.  In law enforcement, they are dangerous, as they will combine verbal/emotional bullying, with the threat of lethal force.  

No police department can, or should, hire one who's nerves cannot bear up under pressure.  For law enforcement, it is not the "danger we face every day" that wears them down.  On the contrary, it is the threat of danger, every day, that does the most damage.  It is one thing knowing a threat, but it is quite another to not be able to identify a threat, or even if such a threat will be faced today.  This is far more weighing, and too often ignored. 

Bullies in business will steal ideas, ridicule co workers, pit one against another, and almost always set up a false dichotomy of "us versus them", as they always seek an allegiance.  Thin skinned, they can burn for years over what they perceive as a personal insult or slight and may seek to exact revenge even after an employee has moved on.  To bully is to create discord in the work place, push forward ideas that may not be best, and create an atmosphere of mistrust and eventually, hostility that will either push good employees out, or, for those who stay, destroy their health.  

Q.  How can you spot a bully?

Q.  How can you spot an officer who, under pressure, may not control himself?  This is the one who should never carry lethal force on his person.  

Answer:  it is the same answer to both.  The language will reveal this, and this vetting should be far more effective than the typical background checks and interviews with kindergarten teachers.  

The violent, including the emotionally violent bully, will reveal himself (most are males, though some are females, with female violence on a steady, 30 year increase) in his words, before you hire him. 

Since sports is such an excellent training took for life, it is also no surprise that it is within sports that we find the language which reveal:

domestic violence
child abuse 
physical violence 

  The caveat is singular, and the HR professional with training, especially in analysis and legally sound interviewing, will bring the applicant, by the applicant's own words, to the crucible where the answer will surface:  

 we  need to know a single critical element:  sportsmanship.

How important is sportsmanship?

Answer:  It is the single most important element of sports, even superseding the lessons of effort, testing, consequence, and confidence:


Sports, by nature, exploits weakness.  

Even if the applicant never played sports, but was in debate club:  he or she saw the weakness of the argument of the opponent, and exploited it. 

In football, if the opponent has a weakness on its left flank, the team will run the ball through that weakness each and every time it exists. 

In chess, a single weak square, created by the lowly pawn move, becomes the entire center of both long term strategy, and the implementation of tactics to obtain that weak square, to build up forces, and launch the final attack on the enemy king. 

I ask police officers to consider this within themselves, and their coworkers:

Would you be comfortable with Officer Smith pulling over your teenaged daughter or son,  late at night, on a rural road?  Would you know your child's best interest will be balanced with the enforcement of the law?  Not that you seek suspension of the law, but can you rest knowing that your child will be treated honestly, fairly, and respectfully, even if in the wrong?



For some, so hesitant to speak a negative word, the thought of Officer Smith or Officer Jones in such a scenario brings a chill down the spine, quietly wishing the department had never hired Smith and Jones.  

I once received a lengthy lesson in domestic violence from a chaplain who worked in minor league ice hockey in the Northeast.  His biggest concern? The athletes who physically or emotionally could not "turn off competition" when they arrived home to their wives and children.  Even those who were not "abusive", still, sometimes, "competed" with their wives, with such things as, "Well, they obey me!" regarding the kids.  

We are aware from main stream media just how bad domestic violence is in the homes of the NFL players, but whatever we read is far less than what happens, as most child protective intervention is kept from the media, as is the seeking of intervention for D/V where there is a willingness to work.  By the time we hear of it, it has already exploded.  

What is it that causes the competition to come to a screeching halt, so that life can peacefully go on?

What is it that makes a strong officer, under a threat, talk down the aggressor, without having to use his weapon?

What makes one man strong enough to walk away from an argument that has gone astray, than to stay put until blows are exchanged?

What is it that allows one to use highly controlled aggression, to the good of society, while not crossing the line to violence?

It is "sportsmanship."

The HR professional must seek to learn if the applicant learned "sportsmanship" or did not.  It is the "off switch" that is so necessary for civilized society, strong and useful debate in business that allows for advancement and forward leaning progress.

Sportsmanship shows self control and human empathy for the vanquished foe.  It is, historically, what led in early "English Knights" having a code of honor, to the code of ethics for prisoners of war.  It is evidenced in civilized nations and greatly evidenced in its lack in brutal regimes and cultures.

If a person learned to exploit and celebrate weakness, void of humility and empathy for the “loser”, we must learn if he will treat employees with kindness, especially when they struggle.

Sports, by nature, exploits the weakness of the opponent, which is expected.  Sportsmanship’s element sought by us is the attitude of the victor towards the defeated. Those who taunt, excessively boast, or feel that the victory, for example, was not just a sports victory but of “superiority” outside the sport, reveals  a very concerning signal for one who’s job is to encourage subordinates:  they must show empathy.

How much worse is this when the applicant, if hired, will carry lethal force?

The bully is thin skinned.  He often enjoys the infliction of pain on others, as his need for respect supersedes human empathy.  He is often a pragmatist and will do "whatever it takes to win", which may sound great, that is, until your company is under federal indictment, or your department, with its budget already stretched, facing a major payout for someone who got a confession after watching too many reruns of "The Shield" and injured the suspect. 

                           The "pragmatist" cuts corners and are not always male:

We have all met the officer who showed an acute need for respect, and felt the inherent danger involved, just as we have all met the one who could have cared less whether we were respectful or not:  he or she was secure in work enough to not be overly concerned. 

We have all met the business professional who, if his idea is challenged, sees "red" and is ready to not simply answer the argument, but compartmentalize the critic and personally demonize him. 

 "Your ideas are always weak."

In spite of a culture of "reporting" in the manner of ESPN, which glorifies violence, self, and narcissism in general, we still need to find those who, even in celebrating victory, maintain control and empathy for the loser.  What makes for a laugh on television, does not make for a good manager of real employees, with real problems, real weaknesses, and real issues. 

What may seem like "cowboy" heroics in a bar, may not translate to one, under pressure, who perceives the public as a constant threat.  

Recall the case of Cynthia Witlach who drove her partner (personal, not police) around in a patrol car to "show off" how she "teaches" citizens to respect her by bullying them.   She traumatized an elderly vet, who had never been in trouble, because his skin was darker than hers. 

Do not think for a minute that police officers were not whispering, one to another:

Who hired this psychological train wreck?

Someone did the interview and should have, with training, picked up not only the weakness of her character, but of her "victim status" mentality, who used gender, race, sexuality, and career, all as tools of "war against" perceived enemies.  Was not her blatant racism evident in her language?  Of course it was.  Was not her psychological need for relevancy, in its extremity, not evidenced in her language?  Only if one is not listening.  This leads me to ask:  Was someone afraid to not hire her due to her victim status? This, itself, is not just a red flag, but a red flag wrapped in a red flag, put in a red box handed to the Interviewer with a note, written in red ink that said, "DO NOT HIRE" in bold type.  

How do I get this information?

Professionals get professional training.  

I begin with simple, non-intrusive legally sound questions and immediately employ my training.  Once I get to competition, I set up various scenarios where winners and losers are in the same place, together.  

You might find it very funny, for example, to see a fan of one team "unable" to watch a game with a fan of his rival team, but what is funny on a Sunday afternoon, is not funny in a board room on Monday morning.  "In your face!  You ***!" is comical at a bar, watching a big screen, but what if it is more than just Friday night humor and it is brought into the work place?

I seek reactions where human empathy is necessary, accomplished by the "scenario" questions used after the open ended and relevant questions posed.    

I may bring up an injury, including a famous video of a professional being injured and I carefully listen to the reaction:

There are those who will absolutely love the video of a football player being severely injured, or will be one of the many "hits" on a youtube clip of a terribly violent action.  

If he "enjoyed" the carnage, run, do not walk, away, from hiring him.  

I "confirm" analysis always.  

"The thrill of victory; the agony of defeat" from the old Wide World of Sports introduction gives us the perfect, natural reaction:

The person seeks the crashing skier, and looks away, but really can't look away.  Squeamish duly noted; no problem. 

But what of those who actually enjoy seeing a violent injury?  Recall the "hobby" of Shawn Adkins and Billie Jean Dunn in their collection of "blood lust" videos where the cheerleader is dismembered. 

I ask, "does the subject affirm my assertion, or does he negate it?  Lastly, is his language indifferent to my assertion?"

In other words, he, himself, will tell me if I am right or if I need to go in a different direction. 

If I have a football player, for example, who scored a touchdown.  I begin with,

"tell me about that!"

I allow him to relive his high school glory. 

"What was it like for you when you crossed the goal line?"

You know where I am going...

"What did you do right after?"

If I get a description where the applicant is unafraid to boast how he wiggled his rear end, or taunted his opponent, I begin to get my answer, though I continue to press on. 

I am seeking to learn if he will guide his subordinates, or exploit them.  To guide them is to benefit my business.  To exploit them is to damage my business. 

If it is law enforcement, you may be impressed with his tales of conquest, but it is his reaction to the vanquished that will tell you if he is safe with a public who is on high alert, very sensitive, and a main stream media that targets police. 

It takes one poor hire to damage the reputation of an entire department, even of an entire profession. 

Within bullies, is also an element of "supremacy" which gives birth to "victim status", a powerful psychological drive that will lead to trouble.  Please see my article on Supremacy thinking and language.  

More than ever before, law enforcement needs to hire the best and brightest, with no political pressure involved, hiring confident, humble (confidence is humility's first cousin) and trustworthy.  Just as dishonesty keeps one from being hired, so much bullying and violence.  

The one that "took to the ground" another in an argument:  

This was a case in which I interviewed the subject for the company after the company had already hired him. 

I told them he was violent and it was a matter of time before the violence erupts.  I said that he was a bully, thin skinned, and had never learned to govern his own emotions growing up.  Not in childhood, not in sports, not in school, and it won't be here. 

Several weeks passed when he got into an argument with a co worker in front of vulnerable clients.  The owner of the business decided to have a look for herself, and drove to the location.  

She called police for intervention. 

He threatened her when he perceived that she did not believe him. 

What lawsuits may emerge from this?  What costs?  What of the company's reputation?

Sports are a marvelous way of teaching children to become responsible adults who must compete in the work place and can give them confidence to “tackle” responsibilities and challenges. 

Sportsmanship combines these great skills along with human empathy that translates into good management. 

I was often teased by parents for not allowing my sons to be overly demonstrative when they hit a home run, and later, when they scored a goal in ice hockey.  I knew that they needed to learn to govern their own passions but I also knew that the parents of the kids who were doing choreographed celebrations and taunts of the opponents, would never grasp this, so I simply said,

"Well, by not celebrating it certainly puts a reminder into the opponent to expect more..."

I'm not certain that even this was understood.  

Even with the cultural change, there is still nobility of those who can celebrate a victory, without the need of humiliating the opponent.  By watching even the reaction of one observing the very public display of ostentatious celebration, we learn whether or not the applicant holds the human empathy as a prized trait, which will work to help keep him (or her) from crossing the line, and bringing harm to the public, loss to the company, and a black eye to the reputation.  

It always comes down to:  "Who hired this $%^&?"

For training for yourself, or your company, visit Hyatt Analysis

Next up:  Agenda in Hiring:  Social Justice Warriors 

Thursday, October 1, 2015

Sensory Description in Analysis of Sex Assault Cases

"His hands smelled like motor oil."

"There was the smell of tobacco on his breath."

"He was very hairy and rough, rough hands."

Studies in Lie Detection have shown that when someone uses "sensory" description in language, it is a signal of memory.  Some will, therefore, use it as an indication that one is telling the truth about a report of a sexual assault.

Not so fast.

Although sensory  perception is  linked to memory it fails to answer the question:

Is the memory experiential memory?

Is it memory that one experienced, or is it a memory from a movie, or a book, or memory from what someone told the subject?

In other words, it may have come from memory, but did it come from the victim's own life experience?

If this question is answered, whether or not it is experiential memory, what about the next?

"If this did happen to the victim, did it happen now, or is she referring to something 20 years ago?

Sensory description, alone, will not answer this question.

Perseveration in Lie Detection 

Perseveration is commonly seen in the language of adults with autism, or adults with various forms of developmental delays, including adult mental retardation.

However, it is not exclusive to adults with various intellectual issues, it is also, at times, the very "trigger" of post trauma stress from a childhood assault.

Compounding this is if the adult victim of sexual abuse was assaulted prior to speech development leaving the victim utterly unable to describe what happened.

Lie Detection, in advanced study, can and will successfully show:

Did this really happen?
Did this happen now?

Why is this important?

to whom is this important?

1.  Criminal investigators--if it happened, was it an assault or was it consensual?
2.  Corporate or Human Resources investigators:  Do we have a law suit on our hands?
3.  Psychologists, Counselors,  child abuse investigators, mental health professionals.  What was the victim's self-protective capacities, and how may we help her defend herself?

When advanced analysis is done, we will learn:

Did this happen?
If so, did it happen now, or years ago?
Was it consensual, or was it a crime?

This advanced analysis is not "101 analysis" nor does it come easily, nor quickly, but takes patient, consistent, and applied work within training.

The results are truth; truth that is best confirmed in the confession; obtained because the training led the Interviewer's questions, understood the psychology of the subject, and knew which strategy was reflected in the analysis, itself.

The language of adult victims of childhood sexual abuse has a code all its own.  Without detailed and specific training, it is very likely that actual victims will be viewed as deceptive, and predators will go free to seek their next prey.

The same lack of training, even with those with much experience, will falsely accuse, as well as miss the indicators of perseveration, or may confuse patterns that victims often reveal.

Our methods get admissions and confessions, which only reveal how powerfully accurate Lie Detection is when principle is adhered to.

As those in study know, I stand upon this.  I stand upon the failed polygraph, yes, but even more so:  the confession will show that the language had already revealed the truth.

Lie Detection is not easy work, but its rewards are great.

Supremacist Psychology and Violence

"Ishmael is a wild man; his hand against every man."

I guide companies in hiring via training.  Companies that wish to hire the best and brightest learn to reduce theft, fraudulent claims and an assortment of costly trouble, by using Statement Analysis in the hiring process.

They root out the deceptive, as they show themselves in their language, and a major element of deceptive are those who seek work because it provides opportunity to exploit.  These are those who see themselves in a certain ideological light and their language reveals them.

This is on a small scale, but on a large scale, one soldier becomes an army, and an army represents an entire nation.

Yet, the psychology of the one is the same as the many, and being able to have a strategy of coping with it is vital to every society in mankind that must defend itself and its interests.  From the family, to the business to the nation, it is the same.

The basic strategy of defense is:

know your enemy.

This is true in baseball, chess, war, and in countering deception.  Lie Detection skills become key in protecting companies from fraudulent claims, of all sorts, and the lack of understanding of the psychology that runs basic through one's veins, is to be harmed. Interviews must be based upon analysis, if a confession is hoped for.  Those who study obtain more confessions and admissions, which put the analysis in clear sight for accuracy.  Know what your enemy thinks and believes for:

What one believes, one will do.

When America entered World War II, it was ill prepared for the ideology behind the Japanese war machine, and never would have surrendered, for example, in the Philippians, if they had known the ideology or psychology of the Japanese warrior, and what "surrender", as a non-existing term, actually meant.

Better equipped in Europe, the U.S. military commissioned a team of psychologists to study the basics of Adoph Hitler and give them a 'psych eval' based upon only collateral interviews, since Herr Hitler was in no communication with the United States.

They concluded, correctly, that should the war turn against Hitler, his personality would turn against the people of Germany, and appropriately predicted his "scorched earth policy" and his suicide.

America knew "Mein Kampf", even if she did not believe it, at first, in order to properly prosecute war against Germany.

Today, Syria is the 'hot bed' where an ideology behind violence is being deliberately ignored by our government, just as it is in other governments of the world, and it is leading exactly where such deception always leads:  to death.

America knows little of "supremacist" thinking, though she thinks she knows it well.  When someone says "supremacist" in the United States, one of two thoughts arise:

1. The White Supremacist associated with the KKK, with the flag of St. Andrew flying behind it, representing all of southern culture and racism.


2.  Black Militancy where "The Black Panthers" show a raised fist in rage and anger against the "white oppressor" that is "holding me down."

Neither are large samples of supremacist thinking, though you would not think so in following the media.

8 unwashed and unshaven heavily accented whites gather in the deep South and chant, "White Power!" with media portraying that "white racist cops are killing black males everywhere" though they know that, at any given time, 8 radical or mentally ill people who "stand" for something, can be found.  They also know that blacks are most always the victim of murder by blacks, and not by whites, and most certainly, not by police.

Truth be damned, however, it sells papers and it gives journalists access to the White House.

There is a danger in withholding information, or by outright lying, by the media to conform to political correctness.

In the UK, at least 2,000 children were raped and the secondary fault lies solely with police who deliberately withheld information from parents and schools solely due to fear being labeled "racist", though no single race was involved.  A single ideology was, however, the impetus for these rapes.

One military leader reported giving a "stand down" order in Afghanistan to his subordinates who listened to the chilling cries of young boys, being sodomized by Afghan men, forbidding, against his own conscience, his men from rescuing the little boys, lest he, himself, be prosecuted for disobeying orders.  There is no mention of how he suffers today, from nightmares of what he says he was "forced by the military" to do.  My guess is that as he gets older, and experiences the natural decline of defensive hormones, his suffering will become much worse.

In this case, he said, his superiors understood the ideology, but themselves, were under orders from "higher up", to not only stand down, but to forbid troops from talking to the press about the rapes in the caves.

Here is a question that the ideology may help you answer:

Why do the followers of Islam fight each other the same brutality as they do the "infidels"?

A simple answer comes in the pathology of violence, learned from childhood,about "supremacy."

This ideology is one that has insulated itself from outside persuasion for 1400 years.  Each generation not only teaches (verbally) the ideology of supremacy, but, due to the ideology itself, examples it, in brutal manner, because of it, itself.

If a father, for example, must teach his son that Islam is superior, and that it teaches making war against "infidels" (non followers), to take the infidels women as "prize", to impose "tax", to use deception, and to spread Islam through, as specifically stated, coercion and immigration. It is a basic tenant of Islam.

Now, the father with the son, must show his own "supremacy" over his son, while teaching his son that he is "supreme" over others.  Think of what this creates.

The father teaches his son supremacy, while he, himself, believes in his own supremacy, from childhood on out:

Question:  what must, he, the father, feel about his own position, in relation to his son?

Answer:  he must feel superior, therefore, will inflict this lesson with marked harshness and violence, which in turn begets violence.  Then, the son, having been made "inferior" to his father, while being taught his own "supremacy" turns to his sister and is brutal and harsh, as he must be, due to the teaching of the supremacy of men to women.

This supremacy is what we see in the hyperbolic language:

"You will drown in a river of blood"

In the Western mind, therefore, when one strikes a woman, men will often come to her defense, and mock the man who struck the woman as "unmanly."  This is not how Islamic thought works.

If you get into an argument at work, and the argument loses its logic and your co worker says, "well, you're a jerk", you are likely to simply walk away.  The one who walks away is seen as the stronger of the two, with the one who ran out of ideas and resorted to name calling, the weaker.

This is Western thinking and not that of Islamic ideology.  For the Islamist, once one called you a "jerk", for you to walk away is to affirm his supremacy over you.  Hence, you must retaliate.

This is why Islamist often use not only hyperbole in language, but passivity as they have a ready made excuse for every failure:  "Allah will not allow" which works itself in these ways, which were experienced in business:

"Allah will not let the car start."

This was to avoid responsibility for not properly repairing a car before the sale, and this next one regarding a theft:

"Allah has delivered your property into my hand."

The individual must excuse inability or what we perceive is unethical behavior.  There is a root cause that shows itself in the language:

                        The Greatest Danger of Supremacist Thinking  

The greatest danger of supremacist thinking is not what you think.

It is not the small group of yokels swinging a rope threatening black people, nor is it the "black lives matter" chanting anti-police slogans; yes, these are both dangers and all it takes is one unbalanced individual to act upon it, and it happens.  It is dangerous.

It is far more dangerous for the press to propagandize these matters, as we see in Germany, recently, or in Sweden, the "Rape Capital of the West" where Sweden has more rapes per capita than any country in the world, sans the spotty reporting in southwest Africa.

But there is an element even more dangerous, that gets to the very heart of all of this, that you should listen for, and be prepared to deal with.

"Supremacy" thinking has its one major flaw of illogic:  whenever you lack what another has, you are a "victim" in some form, because it is the only explanation for one having something that you lack.

Supremacist Ideology creates a "Victim" mentality in each and everyone of its followers.

It matters not if it is Islam, White Power, or Black Power:  it creates a victim mentality and it is this status that creates the fuel for violence:  deep resentment.  When Ben Carson decries the "victim status" he is labeled a "sell out."

If I am a "supremacist", unless I am a billionaire, I hold contempt, resentment, and hatred towards anyone "above" me, and the only explanation I can give is that I must attack and destroy or degrade that which is "above" me, so that I can fulfill what I am and what I must be:  supreme.

The "victim status" drive people powerfully to do things that most all of us would never do.

"Black Lives Matter" look at Baltimore and when one interviews school children in Baltimore, the interviews reveal the same thing:  it is the white man's fault.  The white man won't give us money.  The white man is in control.

So, propagated by the press, over time, only blacks are elected, and money that is not earned is poured into the city, and...

violence increases.

If you tell someone that they are a "victim", you fill them with raging violence.  They "deserve" better and rather than say, "I need to get an education, take advantage of college, and work hard", the victim status fuels rage with "I am being held down" and the one holding down must be targeted.

The "White Supremacist" in various forms, also embraces this ideology so that where he is found, so "victimization " is also claimed.

Yet, take billions of people, and teach them this from childhood:

That you are superior to all others (infidels), and you (male) are superior to females, and because your ideology resists progress, they (the infidel) has more than you, you are a "victim" of them, therefore, take from them, by force, what they hold dear.

Germany's leader Merkel spoke of Nazi crimes against Jews, as a justification for the immigration that is happening today.  She is importing an ideology that teaches that Jews are not only "inferior" but should be exterminated. Jews taxed, as is done to Christians, is not acceptable; they are not worthy of slavery even (via this tax).

The hatred of Jews is pathological, but the victim status turns one against another, against another.

Crisis and Suffering Brings People Together 

Major upheavals in life cause us to pull together, as we realize how short and precious life is.  The first pilgrims in America came very close to starving to death and had to pull together, and even make friends with natives who had food to survive winter.

When Pearl Harbor was bombed, a deeply divided nation was suddenly, in one hour, powerfully united.

When 9/11 hit, people came together and volunteers from all sorts, came together, to help first responders.

When natural disasters happen, Americans pour money, without government coercion, to assist victims, with great examples of human kindness.

What would be more of a crisis than walking from country to country with the only belongings of what you could carry?

Yet, the migrants must be separated, with reports of 90% Muslim.  Officials found that they had to separate the few Christians due to the violence of the Muslims.  Then, they had to separate those of different countries, as they turned violent towards each other.  Now, after the rape epidemic has hit, with the deception by the German press for political reasons, they admit that they have to separate the males from the females, as the women and children are in danger, from their own men, and are outnumbers, with most accounts being 80% male, aged 18-30.  In Denmark, a hospital's prayer room has become such that they have had to build a separate "muslim" prayer room, due to hostilities.  Think of the context as an American:  families of those in serious medial jeopardy often show kindness one to another, praying, helping, encouraging words, one to another, during this time of crisis.

Supremacy leads to Victim Status; Victim Status leads to Violence. 

Being inherently "superior" (my brand of Islam is better than yours), the ideology leads by victim mentality, and will attack first infidels, but as the migrants show us at the most opportune time:  when they should be supporting one another during a time of life crisis, it is the very time they attack one another.  Officials (and citizen journalists who have been forced to video that which the main stream media edits) have reported the need to even separate people who come from the same country, have the same ideology (Islam) but come from different tribes.

When food was delivered to the migrants, their fellow local Islamists descended from their apartments and stole the food from the migrants.


Because they are "superior."

This is baffling the officials in the European Union.  They are shocked when "poor migrants" spit out food, demand new cell phones, air conditioning, and money.

When comparison is made to United States own immigration of yesteryear, what is forgotten is that the US did not pay people to come here, and when they did come here, they worked hard, learned then language and loved being an "American", often overcoming prejudice by loyalty, hard work, and humility.

The supremacist Islam ideology holds free speech as an "evil", which is called the "Sharia blasphemy laws", punishable by death.  When free speech advocates are told, "Do not provoke them with cartoons", they are imposing the Sharia blasphemy laws de facto, not understanding the necessity of maintaining freedom of thought, as expressed in freedom of speech.  When a German school told its female students to "cover up"lest their be "misunderstandings", they deliberately refused to say "lest you are raped", even though they know, this is exactly the meaning.

Little protest comes from the European gay community about the Islamic stoning (and recent very public roof throwing) of homosexual men, though we are now just beginning to get more from advocates of children's groups about Islamic pedophilia (as exampled by the "supreme" man, Mohammad, in his "marriage" to a 9 year old little girl.).

In Europe, there has been no "integration" of a utopian dream, and the "no go zones" have multiplied many times over.  Snopes and Fox should both apologize.  It is only a matter of time before one European nation is the first to cede over territory to the ideological supremacists believing this would pacify their demands and bring peace.

It is to not understand the inherent danger of supremacist thinking and how it is related to violence.  Where we prize humility, this ideology despises it.
Where we prize truth, (which is less prized in our generation), this ideology sees it as a weakness, and weakness, from the perspective of the supremacist, is to be exploited, not protected.

Supremacy ideology is always dangerous and it will always be violent because if you think, and have been taught since childhood, that you are superior to your neighbor, you will always be malcontent as to whatever your neighbor possesses, or excels at.

The victim status seeks "justice" and burns with rage.

The Japanese of 1938 believed themselves to be superior, and as superiors, they were "cheated" by Woodrow Wilson after World War I, and would not trust their former ally, the United States. This powerful ideology led them to see themselves as "victims" who were "cheated out" of the hegemony that the Allies divided among themselves.  This nationalistic thought was seen in the individual soldier, who, himself, received brutal treatment, even as a Japanese, from his own superior; how much more brutal was he, therefore, to this 'inferior' American who did not "surrender" but "quit"?

Hitler's ideology of supremacy is obvious but what of Stalin? Ignored in history, we see today that envy of leadership in the world may, once again, lead to annexation of eastern European lands.  Those, like Hungary, who recognize Islamic supremacist thinking, or ideology, because it still bears the scars of its scourge, are deemed "Nazi like" and "hateful Islamaphobes" for wanting to protect their own borders.  The world mocked Hungary's president who may just find more in common with the former Soviets than the European Union, with its politically correct, suicidal importation of those who believe themselves as "victims" of the "Crusades" and who now want "justice" in the form of money, free housing, free food, free automobiles, even if it means displacing German citizens, or seizing their properties.

The ideology gives birth to victim status.  Victims always feel the sting of what they perceive to be "injustice" and the demands of the supremacist can never be fully satisfied.  It is "western" humility that allows for any form of tolerant satisfaction in life.  There is always the "offense" of some sort, to deal with, as the "victim status" has pathological thin skin.  The "victim" is easily offended because of his personal belief of supremacy.  This is the powerful root of Islam:  you are supreme, therefore, any failure is exploitation of you, making you a victim in need of restitution.  Thin skinned politicians do not take criticism well, but when it turns personal, it can lead to all forms of malicious and deliberately vindictive behavior.  Recall the description of rage from Obama when Hilary Clinton, in her own anger, went to him and "dared" to say, "Listen, Barak..." as he does not allow his first name to be used.  This comes from what he called "my Muslim faith", or the Islamic ideology he was raised in.

This is why, as one Islamist supremacy group battles another, we find a shifting in labels.  The "Muslim Brotherhood" once, evil terrorists, are not so bad as "ISIS", or, as he says, "ISIL."

Yet for the United States, the ideology that causes the various factors to war with each other is one:  Supremacy Ideology, who must be "victims" from a war, more than a thousand years ago, who now need "reparations."

As Europe projects its own beliefs to the Islamist ideology, it does so to its own demise.  This may be the first invasion that is not only done without a single shot being fired, but perhaps, with the funding of the invaded country.

As goes a man, so goes his family.  As goes a man, so goes the company.  As goes a man, so goes a nation.

When one is deceptive, he becomes part of a fabric of deception.  It was not "a handful" of Japanese soldiers" or "just a small minority of Nazi solders" who were cruel.  It was part of the ideology of supremacy that was acted upon, and it was the "small examples"  of those who showed kindness, or who resisted the Nazi tyranny.

We don't establish a norm on the exception.

Supremacists, in any cloak, are dangerous.  Yet those who are taught supremacy from childhood, and who have it enforced, not only by violence and violent example, but as part of a "religion" where eternal reward awaits the 'most spectacular' violence (rather than eternity as a reward for the meek, humble, and those who do good to others), we have an ideology that must be fought against first, to stop its spread.  Only when contained and isolated, can citizens be safe.

As long as Baltimore politicians keep telling their inhabitants that they are "victims", there will be violence.  Most of it will be against one another, but still more police will die, as they are slandered against, falsely blamed for the actions of a very few criminal elements.  That police now fear for their jobs (and lives), is simply the predictable reaction to the hostility.

Do not underestimate the power of the "victim status."

The "clock boy" deception will have its bottom line.  The "Islamophobia" claim was premeditated and we saw how quickly the president embraced it.  How will the "suffering" of the "victim of Islamophobia" have his "suffering" mitigated?

There may be 20 million ways to mitigate it, that the school system may soon learn.

When a business interviews potential hires, they must consider how many people, today, see themselves as "victims" of some sort or the other.  Victim status is becoming epidemic in America.

The business owner will have to "pay" to "mitigate" the suffering of the victim, as courts are readily rewarding victims, not only against police and municipalities, but again "the man", that is, the business owner.

For the company's Human Resources professional:  those who see themselves as "victims" of any flavor, do, by their language, reveal tangent motives for employment other than making money and having emotional satisfaction.  The training is essential.