FBI Interview Techniques

FBI agents often employed techniques to make people feel more at ease. Contrary to the portrayal on television where suspects are usually depicted sitting in a corner during interviews, we would seat them near the door. This was not an arbitrary choice but a conscious decision based on the principle of psychological comfort.

Let me begin by dispelling a common myth: there's no "Pinocchio effect" when it comes to detecting deception. The idea that certain physical behaviors like touching one's nose or clearing the throat signify lying is pure nonsense. In fact, I'm revealing this for the first time on video – what we really look for are signs of discomfort and distress. Rather than searching for deception, we focus on these indicators.

Allow me to share a favorite anecdote. A woman was brought to the FBI office as part of an investigation. During the initial 20 minutes, meant to put the person at ease, she exhibited behaviors like biting her lip, touching her sternal notch, clutching her neck jewelry, and wringing her hands. I finally asked her if something was bothering her, and she confessed that she only had two tokens for the parking meter, which was about to expire. These behaviors, which might have been seen as deceptive in the past, were actually related to her concern about getting a parking ticket. As it turned out, she had nothing to do with the case.

Whether we're dealing with honest or dishonest individuals, we may observe behaviors indicating psychological discomfort. It's crucial not to jump to conclusions about deception based on these behaviors. Instead, we should strive to understand the underlying reasons for their discomfort.

To put people at ease, I employed several strategies. I would introduce myself as an FBI agent conducting an investigation and adjust my tone to be calming and reassuring. Lowering my voice and speaking slowly at a subconscious level helped individuals relax. Our goal was to create a calm environment that promotes better memory recall. Stress impairs memory, and we wanted individuals to be in a state of calm during interviews.

Contrary to TV portrayals, we didn't sit too close to them but maintained a distance of about four to five feet to respect personal space and prevent discomfort. Instead of intense eye contact, which can be intimidating, I made less eye contact to facilitate relaxation. I also used cathartic exhales while looking at my notes, a technique that the person being interviewed would subconsciously mirror. Additionally, I initiated conversations with benign topics like asking about their name, allowing them to share positive memories associated with it, further enhancing psychological comfort.

Now, the question arises: are there situations where we should create psychological pressure? The short answer is no. Based on my extensive experience of conducting over 13,000 interviews, I can attest that escalating a situation rarely benefits anyone. In fact, it can derail the interview process and hinder clear thinking, as I once experienced in an espionage interview that took place under stressful conditions. Ultimately, raising one's voice and creating stress should be avoided.

When I began my law enforcement career in 1975, we were taught outdated beliefs about detecting deception, such as the idea that nose-touching, throat-clearing, or coughing indicated lying. Even in 1979 when I joined the FBI, misconceptions persisted, like the belief that looking up and to the left indicated deception. These myths were rampant, and they persisted for decades.

However, the downside to these misconceptions became evident when I examined 261 DNA exonerations. In all these cases, individuals had been wrongfully convicted and were later exonerated by DNA evidence. Astonishingly, not a single police officer or prosecutor could detect the truth during the initial interviews. They all claimed to have detected deception. Even more troubling, 25% of the wrongfully convicted individuals falsely admitted to the crimes, likely due to the immense psychological pressure and stress applied during interviews.

The truth is, humans tell lies for various reasons, and lying can be considered a tool for social survival. We are remarkably adept at lying, with research suggesting that people lie anywhere from three to five times an hour. However, habitual liars, like the spy I encountered, can be exceptionally convincing, weaving intricate and believable stories.

To protect ourselves from deception, we must rely on what is being said and the evidence available. Simple questions should yield straightforward answers. If someone's story starts to unravel or creates cognitive load, where they struggle to answer basic questions, it should raise suspicion. However, non-verbal cues alone should not be used to accuse someone of lying, as they are not admissible in court.

In summary, the myth that certain body language cues can reliably indicate deception needs to be dispelled. Such beliefs can lead to damaging consequences, both legally and personally. Instead, we should focus on understanding human behavior and rely on factual evidence when assessing the truthfulness of a statement.