posted 07-17-2007 12:30 PM         

On Themes;
I don't play or watch football, so you will never hear me use the trite "its 4th down and 20 to go" theme. I only use biblical themes when I have an examinee who cloaks themself with scripture. I almost never use themes of high morality, and what does come out of my mouth, I typically believe with all of my heart. If someone instructs me to use a specific theme----pretest, postest--whatever, I might just resist such. I believe that everything the Examinee sees and hears is a theme----much like a theme park ride---it is a distinct, and intentionally guided experience. I am very much steeped in the research and concepts of memes (do a google on memes)---in that great themes must be like great songs, jokes, or stories---they must have a viral quality. I am sure that during tests you have intentionally unvalved some examinee pressure by digressing into a brief conversation about fishing, or cars, or whatever. Such digression is (IMO) itself a theme/meme-----just because it appears at face value to be a relief/ examiner grooming, does not negate the fact that we do such efforts as part of the greater examinee journey/experience. It is a means to an end.
I believe that the classic models of interrogation need to be tweaked and or enhanced---and I've been writing a book on such for over a year. Many of us do these things instinctively-----so in that respect, it isn't groundbreaking. My literary goal is to frame the exam/interview before we begin in a very simple way. To violate my own theme restriction, a football team never simply marches out on the field without some very specific plans/plays----as no two opponents are precisely the same. My ultimate goal is to see each examiner be able to use their own specific gifts and personas to get the admissions----without having to parrot themes that I or some other interrogater has taught them.I have always found criminals and deviant individuals to be not so smart, but in possession of a lop-sided talent for detecting BS and phony-ism. Even more so, they are in possession of a high volume of memes----viruses of the brain. The Examiner can either use those existing viruses to his advantage, or can implant new ones as the viral mind is more susceptable to "viral updates."

[This message has been edited by stat (edited 07-17-2007).]

IP: Logged

stat
Member posted 07-17-2007 10:59 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Barry and all----here is a site on Memes (rhymes with dreams) all should be familiar with----after viewing the gigantic wikepedia definition of memes first at ; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meme
I will start a new post in the days ahead for discussion. http://www.memecentral.com/
There are hundreds of sites---some interesting and new work on "Criminal Memetics." I am not so interested in the "self help" aspects, although I have done a thorough inventory of my own mind viruses---and have a new but very fallable "virus blocker."

I believe if interrogaters approach their craft like say, a marketing expert or a screen writer, the results might suprise. Like a magical date (by secret design)or an impacting movie, the interrogation process should be one of infectious quality.

You will find many definitions of Memes---with vearying specificity. In the context of interrogation, the Meme is a preconcieved notion within both the Examiner and the Examinee. Memes are infectious thoughts. Brain Memes have passwords just like a computer has passwords ----for example Sex (and sex parts), Profanity (the actual words), God, Poop, Vomit, Winning, Brother, Mother, Money, Fight, Hero, Dance, Movie, Music, Son/Daughter, Hot, Smoke, Coffee, High, Panties, Lost.--also, names of relevant figures are "passwords" to Examinee Memes.Anyone who has struggled along with their spouse to name a new child, also struggled with associations with the names. e.g. I named my first son "Ben", because at the time I had very strong and yet gental associations with the name Ben----the Bear in TV's Grizzly Addams (a meme---or viral implanted notion from my childhood), the name of the Biblical figure (named after the "right hand of Jacob(?)----but wife on the other hand had a meme of "Ben" as being the kid who was caught masturbating in the high school lockeroom by his early returning classmates, and also the sexist 70's comedian Benny Hill----you get the picture. I would never in a theme arbitrarily use the name "Jimmy" as it could have a very bad meme association---just as an example reffering to the "Jimmy's Story" theme. It is my goal as an interro. dude to access examinees brain in the same way that a good song or movie does. This makes for some pre-pretest investigating

happy researching, and I challenge all to evaluate your own personal memes---------------stat

posted 07-18-2007 09:45 AM         

------------------------stat

p.s. This field is so new (1976), like the vast Alaskan wilderness, it is ours for exploration.

posted 07-19-2007 09:46 AM            

It's probably not too much information - ust completely unfamiliar, and will require attention. I'm busy pouring caffeine into my brain and reading, but like others, I'm distracted by a long to-do list that will haunt me and hunt me down with a bad attitude if I don't give it the attention it deserves.

So, in two or three sentences...

What's a meme?

------------------
"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here. This is the war room."
--(Stanley Kubrick/Peter Sellers - Dr. Strangelove, 1964)

posted 07-19-2007 10:56 PM         

Meme; A unit of information passed from human to human, which for some inexplicable reason, is difficult to get out of the mind---similar to a computer virus (memes are nicknamed "mind viruses"). Many times the unit of information (meme) causes behavior when it is activated or summoned upon by the host by an outside stimulus------ a.k.a. interrogater/ meme hacker.

Memetics; The scientific study of how memes originate , spread (are taught and learned), are stored (remembered), and activated (behavioral effects).

Memeplexes; A group of memes that work together (like a song with several catchy parts, or a play with several masterful acts.) An interrogation theme is considered a memeplex---- a group of compelling memes that work together to convince a resistant mind to disclose secrets.

Jeeez Ray, I can't explain memes in 2 sentences!!!

Read some of the hundreds of papers written on memes online. It is easier to state what memes are not.

Memes are not JUST ;
visual/audio/tactile and linguistic associations, preconcieved notions,borrowed ideas, traumatic experiences, advertisement implants, memorable movie scenes, quotes and wisdom from family/mentors/books, religious ideals and teachings, moral codes, figures of speech, tastes in arts, prejudices, primal jungian fears and much more.

They are all of the above-----only they are given one word. Memes. The interesting and most importantly, accessible thing about memes, is that despite the vast amount of biological "gigabytes" of these brain memes, we all SHARE as Americans, so many common memes. Most men wept at viewing Field of Dreams (reunification with dead father memes), most people laughed at the Blazing Saddles "campfire scene"--fart symphony memes---and most people were shocked, saddened, and then outraged upon viewing the World Trade Center attack-----even criminals in prison felt moved on that day. The above three stimuli were very powerful memes---infectious in that they are still talked about years later. Consequently, it would be a memetic folly to rebuild the twin towers as they were, as the negative residue (negative memes) would probably be catostrophic for the businesses located in the would-be new towers.

The scope of memes is just too doggone vast to sum up in 2 sentences. I am interested in the predictive nature of meme exchange in the American sex offender population.

posted 07-20-2007 09:07 AM            

quote:

---

wow. 2 sentences? hmm.

---

That is a bit of a punishing request.

I can't do anything in two sentences.

I have some thoughts, but first - more reading.

Actually, I read The Selfish Gene some years ago. It got my attention because the cover art reminded me of the works (paintings) of Hieronymus Bosch. Bosch would have understood memes.

r

r

------------------
"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here. This is the war room."
--(Stanley Kubrick/Peter Sellers - Dr. Strangelove, 1964)

posted 07-20-2007 04:59 PM            

So, here's a sort of meme...

quote:

---

Start with a cage containing five monkeys. Inside the cage, hang a banana over a set of stairs. Before long, a monkey will go to the stairs and climb towards the banana. As soon as he touches the stairs, spray all of the other monkeys with cold water. After a while, another monkey makes an attempt with the same result – the other monkeys are sprayed with cold water. Pretty soon, when any monkey tries to climb the stairs, the other monkeys will try to prevent it. Now, put away the cold water. Remove one monkey from the cage and replace it with a new one. The new monkey sees the banana and wants to climb the stairs. To his surprise, all of the other monkeys attack him. After another attempt and attack, he knows that if he tries to climb the stairs, he’ll be assaulted. Next, remove another of the original five monkeys and replace it with a new one. The newcomer goes to the stairs and is attacked. The previous newcomer takes part in the punishment with enthusiasm! Likewise, replace a third original monkey with a new one, then a fourth, then the fifth. Every time the newest monkey takes to the stairs, he is attacked. Most of the monkeys that are beating him have no idea why they weren’t permitted to climb the stairs or why they’re participating in the beating of the newest monkey. After replacing all the original monkeys, none of the remaining monkeys have ever been sprayed with cold water. Nevertheless, no monkey ever again approaches the stairs to try for the banana. Why not? Because as far as they know, that's the way it's always been done around here.

And that, my friends, is how company policy begins.

---

Peace,

r

------------------
"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here. This is the war room."
--(Stanley Kubrick/Peter Sellers - Dr. Strangelove, 1964)

posted 07-21-2007 07:38 AM         

Monkeys Attack!-----now that is infectious. It would be a great name for a band.

E

[This message has been edited by stat (edited 07-21-2007).]

posted 07-24-2007 08:38 PM            

The humpdy-dumpty of all issues.

Shatter it, out of selfishness or carelessness, and all the king's horses and all the king's men...

With sex offenders and others we sell all kinds of false hope about "earning" trust, there is a powerful line of manipulative logic that runs throughout the mythology of earned trust - simply because its useful to us, not because it is real.

Con artists have an intuitive awareness of the economics of trust transactions - they know that unless our job title is warden or jailer, our ultimate goal (stated in writing) is to let them go. The only real questions to them how many heartbeats, and what kind of to-do list has to be completed before we let them go. Or, what can they do to wear down our vigilant concerns about them.

We on the other hand delude ourselves into thinking we aren't somehow in the business of letting them go. We think we're in the business of catching them, but really we're in the business of catch-and-release. Even with registration and lifetime supervision, the presence of a known offender in the community is easily and readily misinterpreted as a form of trust.

Progress in therapy is rewarded by fewer restrictions, reduced supervision, and greater freedom. Naive persons look at those external badges and misinterpret them as a basis for trust, somehow thinking it was earned or that humpty dumpty was put back together. In reality, reduced restriction reduced treatment intensity and reduced supervision contact means greater opportunity for problem behaviors to re-emerge.

OK, nuff - o - that.

I've spent the day with some slippery folks and I'm ranting now.

Dinner calls.

r

------------------
"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here. This is the war room."
--(Stanley Kubrick/Peter Sellers - Dr. Strangelove, 1964)

posted 07-26-2007 12:31 AM            

I have a notion that the advertising industry has known about this phenomenon for quite some time.

posted 07-26-2007 08:29 AM         

One good micro-meme that I use is this. After using all of the technobabble while speaking with the examinee about about how poly works and the technology in the pretest---e.g. establish your technical prowess-----that is when you can be more memetic and analogous. Too often examiners tell their DI or NDI (control Q interrogation) examinees that they "are having a problem" with a question (in the post test)or worse yet---"you are arousing greatly" to _____question(s). Yawn.

Well, I have a "problem" with my colon, and a "problem" with my cell phone bill. This kind of language is very ambiguous (unmemetic) to the human brain. I will say in a post test that "my laptop is smoking over here" or " you are jack-hammering this question" or if the examinee is interested in say, cars--I will say, "your big block just threw a rod" or if he's interested in fishing "you just snapped your line-----or you either hooked a stick or a log." (you get the picture.) I try to make the polygraph experience as a whole relevant to the predictive memes of that individual---and do so while desperately avoiding being trivial or cheesey. It isn't easy using memes without them being quite conspicuous----as they are after all meant to be infectious. While interrogating him, the examinee will be hearing/echoing in his mind "his lap top is smoking!"----rather than "I have a problem".It just seems counterintuative to spend time cautioning an examinee about the accuracy of poly, and then later be so wishy-washy. If the examiner expresses compassion while using such memetic statements, the line of communication can still me maintained without having to be too "soft-languaged."

[This message has been edited by stat (edited 07-26-2007).]

posted 07-26-2007 09:26 AM         

From a purley theatric standpoint, the test builds from the meeting, through the test itself-----and so the way we inform our examinee's of their results should be, like a play or film----very intentionally orchestrated. The results should be anything but understated or appearing to be clumsily culminated, don't you all agree? How do you tell examinee's their results, especially if they are DI/SR? I am interested.

[This message has been edited by stat (edited 07-26-2007).]

posted 07-27-2007 10:02 PM            

quote:

---

From a purley theatric standpoint, the test builds from the meeting, through the test itself-----and so the way we inform our examinee's of their results should be, like a play or film----very intentionally orchestrated. The results should be anything but understated or appearing to be clumsily culminated, don't you all agree? How do you tell examinee's their results, especially if they are DI/SR? I am interested.

---

Lately I've enjoyed an ambiguous approach, starting with something like "we have a little bit of big problem here, lets talk more before we're done..."

Then I can see how he want's to control the pace by escalating, balking, dispairing or acting dumb... - the thing is, after 10 or 20 polygraphs, the examinee's behavior is all scripted drama too, so it helps to size up what kind of drama he wants to use. Then I can pace or counter that as I see useful.

Getting confessions from non-naive subjects seems to be getting more difficult. Sex offenders are professional manipulators who rapidly size up the situation, and quickly recognize that confessing to polygraph examiner brings consequences. So, using memes or memeplexes to foster the perception that it is in one's self-interest to admit is a very interesting idea.

r

------------------
"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here. This is the war room."
--(Stanley Kubrick/Peter Sellers - Dr. Strangelove, 1964)

posted 07-27-2007 11:07 PM         

Here is a theme on a hardened criminal---a man who is no stranger to PCSOT, nor interrogation from authorities. The examinee ---an African American was found with a list of chemicals written on paper that was unmistakably a knockout drug rape kit---you know, Ammonia and the like. The Examinee was a professed nation of Islamist----you know, the American branch. He denied that the list was a rape chemical ingrediant list completely to his parole agent.

I asked the examiner (I consulted for the interrogation) as an exercise before meeting the examinee, what is the worst thing that could happen to this man? The other examiner answered "prison?" "prison rape?" I said NO. The worst thing that could happen to this man is that he would end up in Gitmo with no trial, being tortured/abused physically and mentally for years upon years. The Examiner said "huh?"
I said that you must start with he worst consideration that the examinee will be memed with, and work back to the best case scenario. I instructed the examiner to inform the offender that there are certain authorities that believe that the chemical list he wrote is a recipe for a terrorist bomb, the same kind of bomb that is used in mail pakages. Ultimately and in short order, the Offender stated "no no, it is a knock out drug for women."

I have hundreds of these memes/themes bouncing around in my head and scratched in my book, which will be completed in the year 2050 (lol)

Dirty tricks? yes. Extreme caution must always be used when using the Negative Reinforcement Variety of theme.I prefer Positive Reinforcement Themes, but often times with sex offenders, there is little gold at the end of the rainbow, so you have to get him/her to create a "golden out"---in this case, no trialess prosecution.
Powerful memes on that above theme? uh, yea---terrorism, bombs, torture, Gitmo, abuse.
I nearly wet myself just thinking about being falsly accused of terrorism/subversion.

The key in my mind is to take the interrogation into the most unexpected realm possible, as these people are loaded with expectations, expectations that we must shatter. A new to me but experienced sex offender who has his 20th test with me would be quite suprised in the stark difference in my test----not because of ability, test structure or superficial reasons, but because I am trying to stand alone and create the most impact. Otherwise I will feel like a barber saying "next."

[This message has been edited by stat (edited 07-27-2007).]

[This message has been edited by stat (edited 07-27-2007).]

[This message has been edited by stat (edited 07-27-2007).]

posted 07-28-2007 08:42 AM         

I am also faced with examinees who "know the game."
I also like to let examinee's set a certain pace, but only to a point. Too often the offender wil become too invested in his facade, and be too embarrassed to back track. A wise Texas examiner once said you can let an offender unwind, but don't let the offender put his feet up on his story.

I had a lovely depression-era-mentality grandmother who had plenty of money, but was frugal beyond imagination. She would take all of her little pieces of left over soap bars and combine them in a mesh hacky-sack sized bag so that she could get every molecule of the substance for use.Needless to say, her soap smelled like pot pourri on steroids. With offenders who have too much experience and cynisism, I will attempt to create such a hybrid from the little dislosures---often times with success. I see the relations with those offenders who are repeat customers as being like a marriage where the passion is waning. It is time to be creative, like we often are forced to do with our spouses in the bedroom (i know, yuck).
Here is the clinical polygraph equivelant of dressing up like a construction worker in the bedroom. Tell the examinee that you are running a new kind of test (every test is a "new" kind of test, if the questions differ from previous). It's an Israeli type test (all polygraph tests are "Israeli" type tests and all Israeli type tests are American types too [CQT].) Tell him that the scoring is a little different (use the 3 point scale if you must be truthful). Tell him that you are worried about some possible outcomes. Too often examiners tell offenders that polygraph is so accurate, they fail to see how stating the opposite on multi-issue tests can be extrememly potent. Explain to the examinee using memes what anti-climactic dampening means, and reinforce that with stating how paronoid officials are starting to get as of late. Tell him that question mixing is beginning to indicate horrific behaviors. Tell him that polygraph, although very accurate, is quite clumsy (I know Ray has addressed this subject)and that say, if a person fails on alcohol, and had some innocent but secret contact with minor family members also, it could indicate that they were getting drunk with kids. Tell him that if a person had a little harmless internet activity plus at a 4th of July party was around a nephew, than the test will suggest that they were chatting with minors online. Tell him that if he had a hand job from an unreported old gilrfriend plus a harmless contact on the 4th with the step daughter, it will appear to "those paranoid officials" that you were having sex with a minor----all because of a little hand job, and a hug from a family member. The point on this theme is to combine every issue to make a WORST CASE SCENARIO----which will groom the offender to feel a certain safety line is offered, even if it is by a known tattle tale.Here are more combinations ----- also for the cop applicant examiners, such multi-issue combinations are just as powerful.Remember to use the control in your formula---and if possible, make the control exponent as the lynchpin

drugs+lying to group+contact= dealing drugs to kids

alcohol+giving gifts to minors+unreported sexual contacts= getting kids drunk for sex

porn+unreported sex+ contact=you get the picture.

The combinations are numerous (I think I've used most at this point and most examinees no matter the veteran status will give pause to your new "Israeli test combination."

Incidently, thirsty for new controls? Tell the examinee that there has been a couple of incidents----anonymous threats of violence have been made (what state doesn't have such threats?)--you can't go into specifics as to who has been threatened and what not, but you've gotten an order straight from "up top"(your brain, not your boss) that you have to ask "have you had any violent fantasies of any of your supervision members." Tell him that surely you haven't been thinking thoughts about assaulting anyone in your group, your therapist, agent, or me, have you?...as you know that you become what you practice." This works quite well with the passive aggressive offender. It is a one time shot, and should be used for a short period of time within a given therapeutic group-----and don't forget to inform the therapist about your ploy, to stave off the same ole same ole---if at all.The therapist might learn---through control question interrogation, as I have, that some offenders are stewing with far more violent thoughts than what was previously known----thus necessitating that the offender be confronted in less "hostile confrontational" ways while in group.

To summarize, I will combine the issues to paint a very grim picture----using oft times outragious pretest, non accusatory memes.

[This message has been edited by stat (edited 07-28-2007).]

posted 07-28-2007 03:05 PM            

I was almost looking for a disclaimer after all that: something like "don't try this at home..."

I've sometimes interrogated on issues I'm not interested in, just to create a perception of a more comfortable space for an admission about what I am after.

r

------------------
"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here. This is the war room."
--(Stanley Kubrick/Peter Sellers - Dr. Strangelove, 1964)

posted 07-28-2007 07:43 PM         

The amount of flexibility with pcsot depends on the state in which you practice.

Some states have demonstrated a clear trend of "chart rolling." This of course is the charge to run short tests, and the "call" is the word of God. This is folly and will ultimately lead to the demise of pcsot.Clearly it is a system set up for scandal, and the criminal justice system drives this form----despite the fact that the justice system is giving less a hoot about interrogative confessions than it had previously accepted. I am afraid of this system, and the examiners who claim to have the kind of accuracy with their AFMGQT tests, that a UTAH-single issue has in the best of research. Honesty wins, not more people who believe that polygraph "results only" should be admissable in court just because the examiner has silver, regal hair and 20 years of experience. This is why I like anonymity on this site, so that I can tell those examiners (you know who you are) that tell institutions and governing bodies lies about your test accuracies that; YOU ARE CLOWNS. I am getting tired of meeting parole supervisers and even some treatment providers who tell others that they were told by examiners that our pcsot work is 98% accurate.It's a great crooked business tactic that requires the honest practioneer to educate, but also potentially leaving doubts in our consumer's minds that the braggerts' are running more accurate tests or have better gizmos than the bubble- burster realist.

The other kind of pcsot state is a state which is more therapy-oriented. In the therapy guided system, there is a great deal more knowledge of the polygraph by policy makers. The information rules---not the charts. Therapists seem to better understand that multi-issue polygraph tests are less than wonderful, but also aren't interested in throwing the baby out with the bathwater. One therapist told me that he didn't care if polygraph were 0% accurate, he loves it, and he demands from his clients that they pass their tests. Sometimes I think that the "accuracy-faithless" have a more healthy approach to the use of sex offender polygraph testing. If the offender fails his test, be worried. If he passes his test, be secretly worried----he is after all, a sex offender!

There are 2 distinct kinds of pcsot Examiners in my experience. There is the Examiner who believes rather sanctimoniously that the offender should tell the truth immediately or suffer the DI rapture. The other Examiner type, is the cynical type who believes that people will lie about breaking rules as habit---and require to be gently taken by the hand toward disclosing uncomfortable truths (or even half-truths.) I am the latter. I have often said that any examiner can fail an examinee----if they arrogantly expect people to kneel before them. I as an examiner feel honored to be given secrets, and unfortunately, have to constantly circum-navigate people's egos in sometimes manipulative ways in order to convince them it's not stupid to be truthful. Ray's mentor was right, we can never forget that we are F.....g with people's lives.

My earlier theme examples were a bit extreme. I wouldn't trust just any examiner or any scenario to be appropriate/befitting for such themes. As with all polygraph interviews, any statements must be made in a very lawyerly way.

[This message has been edited by stat (edited 07-28-2007).]

[This message has been edited by stat (edited 07-28-2007).]

[This message has been edited by stat (edited 07-28-2007).]

posted 07-28-2007 09:23 PM            

I've decided that you need a motorcycle.

Go get one now. Calm down. Enjoy the wind.

I share your concerns about misrepresentation of what PCSOT screening polygraphs are capable of, and what the test results mean.

I've spent a bit of time this past year thinking about the combinatoric problems with mixed issues (PCSOT) tests, and have some interesting ideas. More later.

We also have to be careful about what lengths we go to gain confessions. In some ways, working with sex offenders is an endurance race. Its a matter of who's going to wear out whom first. For that reason we have to pace ourselves for the long game.

r

------------------
"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here. This is the war room."
--(Stanley Kubrick/Peter Sellers - Dr. Strangelove, 1964)

posted 07-29-2007 07:36 AM            

Be assertive. You can do it. Put your foot down. Lift your leg with the big dogs. Show her who's boss.

(honey... er, uh,... they guys on the website.. . they thought it might be a kind of good idea if I might... in fact they gave me permission... oh... you say 'no way'..., ok..., well, at least we can relax with one of those inspirational lifetime movies)

OK, seriously. I understand. Its really a small and worthwhile price to pay for your family's time and peace.

Or, you could become obsessed with sky-diving and bungee jumping - that way motorcycles and fast cars almost seem like a compromise....

(don't try this at home)

r

------------------
"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here. This is the war room."
--(Stanley Kubrick/Peter Sellers - Dr. Strangelove, 1964)