|
Author
|
Topic: maintenance and montoring targets - transferred topic
|
rnelson
Member
|
posted 06-20-2007 09:53 AM
  
stat: quote:
Maintenance tests are not to contain Monitoring questions and visa versa. Maintenance tests are supervision issues---secret contact with minors, giving gifts to kids, having sexual conversations with minors, drugs, alcohol, porn, travel, breaking laws in order to earn money, using a computer for sexual reasons, unreported sexual partner(s), threatening anyone with violence---to name the most common.(again, you may already know this and accidentally used the word maintenance as a surrogate (generic) for maintenance and monitoring tests. Monitoring tests are more of a single issue test regarding having committed a sex crime while on parole/probation. i.e SYSP, have you touched the sexual parts of anyone under the age of 14? SYSP, has anyone under the age of 14 touched your genitals? SYSP, have you committed any sexual crimes that we discussed today? SYSP, have you engaged in any stalking activities? chow!-----E
I was hoping to see some discussion on this. If no-one's interested, then I suggest we take up a collection to get stat amped up on vitamin S(tarbucks) and send him back to the anti-site for more shenanagans... r
T ------------------
"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here. This is the war room."
--(Stanley Kubrick/Peter Sellers - Dr. Strangelove, 1964)
IP: Logged |
stat
Member
|
posted 06-20-2007 06:03 PM
It's funny you mentioned "shanenagans" as that is the name of a swingers club which TODAY an offender admitted to using in the Indianapolis area. This idiot has been swinging with clubs (while on parole) as far as West Virginia----get your maps out folks, that ain't exactly part of the tri-state area from Indiana. He admitted that a couple in Indy (not Shanagans but a web-based swingers contact site) wanted to have sex with my Offender and his girlfriend along with the other couple's 14 year old son.Offender told me that his scummy girlfriend was up for it but that he wasn't-----call me synical, but I don't believe him and neither would any of you pros. Along with admissions to weed, alcohol, porn, trips to Ohio and Kentucky for swinger activities, he had contact ("wrestling around") with his girlfriend's nephews ages 6 and 8. In case you were wondering, this guy was convicted (1993)once for child molest (5 year old girl) and again more recently when while babysitting a 2 year old boy who was crying incessantly, this ass bit the boy's penis nearly in half. That most recent charge (1998) was for sexual battery. Say goodbye to mister perv as we will be rid of him by tommorrow.FYI, I ran a monitoring test (sex crimes) which he failed.AFMGQT---here's the sequence
C Before your conviction, did you ever do something sexual that you would lie to me about today?
R sysp, have you touched the sexual parts of anyone under the age of 14? C Have you lied to me today about your sexual fantasies and/or masturbation habits? R SYSP, have you threatened anyone with violence if they did not engage in sexual activity with you? C SYSP, have you fantasized about sexually victimizing anyone? R SYSP, have you committed any sexual crimes that we discussed today? Don't get me started on themes. I can't imagine some agency telling me I have to use the same themes (Canada thread). I'm afraid I'd have to quit if that were the case. Sometimes I wish that this board had a PCSOT exclusive board so some wouldn't have to bother reading such depravity------depravity that to many of us is just something slightly new, but not completely different than our past experiences. This is a wierd job, ain't it y'all? --------- E
[This message has been edited by stat (edited 06-20-2007).] IP: Logged |
rnelson
Member
|
posted 06-20-2007 06:50 PM
That's not funny at all.Sounds like outstanding work though, getting that guy to give up all that info. Will you be sending him to his room for a long while? I wonder if the treatment provider had any inkling of all that. Ever feel like victor the cleaner?
r
------------------
"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here. This is the war room."
--(Stanley Kubrick/Peter Sellers - Dr. Strangelove, 1964)
IP: Logged |
stat
Member
|
posted 06-20-2007 07:37 PM
Actually, the therapist didn't seem very optimistic before the test---and the agent wasn't either. He disclosed in group that he and his girlfriend had entertained the idea of swinging----but decided not to. yeah right.
He had also maintained that he bit the boy only over his clothes----until today's moment of clarity. I have a toddler of my own---and I know this to be impossible. He finally (mid-pretest)admitted that he removed the boy's urine-soaked diaper before the bite----and that he was aroused (he also beat the boy within an inch of his precious life.)There was never a cross word in the entire test and the Offender and I got along well. It's funny, but I never had the desire to spontaneously bite a grown man's penis off until today. It passed thankfully.
I've been getting big hits like this every other day for months now. I think I'm getting the hang of it. I'm fortunate that my state has been giving me the worst of the worst. I'm waiting for them (the worst)with a thousand themes, and the "dirty dozen" (Dr. Bill Elliot)criminal thinking patterns that criminals believe they hold the patent on. Please, excuse the brag.[This message has been edited by stat (edited 06-20-2007).] IP: Logged |
Polyscoring
Member
|
posted 07-15-2007 11:27 AM
Regarding Maint and Monitor Testing,i know that many of us that perform PCSOT use engaging in acts of prostitution (that is paying for rather than getting paid) as a Monitoring question. My experience is that most agents do NOTHING when an offender admits that and what do you guys think about either changing it to a Maint question, or removing it from out R question lists for Monitoring? thanks... IP: Logged |
Barry C
Member
|
posted 07-15-2007 04:36 PM
quote:
Don't get me started on themes. I can't imagine some agency telling me I have to use the same themes (Canada thread). I'm afraid I'd have to quit if that were the case.
I'm not sure where you got that. When it comes to the CPC, it's no holds barred in the theme department. You can use all you want. They only teach eight CQs for their single-issue, but that's apples and oranges here. From a validity / standardization standpoint, I think they are on to something. I've seen some strange CQs, but that doesn't happen on a CPC test, and what they use are all probable lies. IP: Logged |
stat
Member
|
posted 07-16-2007 08:42 AM
I agree with polyscoring---in that we have to ask ourselves if prostitution is a sex crime. I think that the less obvious judge over such activity is the therapist. Hell, I deal with a faith-based therapist (among many other types of therapy approaches and styles)who's group has a complete prohibition against masturbation--------as you might have guessed, this rule is not really empirically backed up in the research. Prohibit me from masturbating and I will either lie, or I'll be too grumpy to talk to.
To me the problem has to be weighed in this way. If a person goes DI to a MTC Q regarding unreported sexual contacts, he will probably not admit that it is a prostitute----thereby throwing out a chicken bone---say, an ex-girlfriend giving him a hand job.
Conversely, in a MTG test, a DI on sex crimes (pretested to include prost's) will usually result in the admission or the Offender will use the Prostitute as a chicken bone, thereby withholding a more serious offense.
To sum up, which is most important----the unreported sex chicken bone, or the sex crime chicken bone. My issues with the unreported sex chicken bone is that it sends us on a wild goose chase to be sure that the ex-girlfriend (MTC excuse) didn't have children present (all the while the offender was just having paid sex). The MTG prostitute chicken bone on the other hand provides the Examiner with a dead end----no names, no contact with children. So, I will have to agree with Polyscoring in that I'd rather be chasing the contact goose-chase over a unreported sex chicken bone, than to be stopped in my Monitoring tracks over a doggone prostitute. To counter this issue ---and it is a very good point poly------I have used a very lame relevant question on 2 or 3 occasions which combines arcade porn in adult bookstores, strip clubs, and prostitutes.SYSP, have used the products or services of any sexual businesses? Again, I know that the above question is a stinker----but it is only a biproduct of polyscoring's posed question field-related problems.----stat [This message has been edited by stat (edited 07-16-2007).] IP: Logged |
stat
Member
|
posted 07-16-2007 10:27 AM
Barry said: "I'm not sure where you got that. When it comes to the CPC, it's no holds barred in the theme department. You can use all you want. They only teach eight CQs for their single-issue, but that's apples and oranges here."Barry, I was referring to a Canadian Police protocol that mandated that examiner's tell a specific word for word story/theme---I don't remember the name of the theme---but I recall it was an applicant screening theme---which to my recollection sounded like an afterschool special from the 70's. I was in no way attempting to degrade the Canadian Polygraph community or the great nation of Canada in general. I will however ask that they please re-patriotize Celine Dion.Her cover of ACDC's "Shook Me All Night Long" angered the rock gods and might be responsible for many of the western wildfires. [This message has been edited by stat (edited 07-16-2007).] IP: Logged |
Barry C
Member
|
posted 07-16-2007 03:31 PM
No. During the pre-test in a criminal test, they tell the "Jimmy story," which is a "rationalization" for a burglary / theft (with a necessity defense) that means, in essence, "If you had an acceptable reason for doing this crime, then tell me now (before the test)." During the post-test, our CPC-trained examiners are some of the best in the business.IP: Logged |
stat
Member
|
posted 07-16-2007 03:57 PM
I stand corrected. The "Jimmy Story" is not a theme, but instead a story to aid a potential DI suspect into confessing guilt through minimizing or excusing the theft----a sort of benevelant invitation. uhhh...wait.....isn't that a theme? Wasn't that theme.....or story.... a required device of certain Canadian LE officials?Barry, I wasn't trying to insult the CPC, I was commenting on a weakness of mine that prohibits me from using other people's themes (stories). Theme use is very personal to me, and often times criminals are very sensetive to BS themes from people who they sense don't "talk that way" in real life. If I used the "Jimmy Story" to my Latin Kings, Vice Lords, and Hells Angels in Gary Indiana for instance, I might get stabbed. No mayonaise allowed. Alternatively, I can extract key components of the Jimmy story---as I am always open for new themes. PS I have no doubts whatsoever that there are remarkably talented CPC examiners. IP: Logged |
Barry C
Member
|
posted 07-16-2007 04:46 PM
Again, you miss the point. You said they use only one theme. They don't. They use several. The "Jimmy Story" falls under that category, but they don't use just one. It is a theme that works for anything, but it's told in a story fashion. Sure you could use it post-test, but that's not the issue. All I was doing was correcting your one-theme-only error. Use whatever works for you, but if you're going to run a CPC pre-test, then Jimmy's it. Keep in mind it's done is such a way that the examinee shouldn't know it's an "I want you to fess up now story" - unless he's DI.Whether one thinks it belongs in a pre-test is another issue. IP: Logged |
stat
Member
|
posted 07-17-2007 09:58 AM
I don't recall ever writing that they only used one theme Barry.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 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.
happy researching, and I challenge all to evaluate your own personal memes---------------stat
[This message has been edited by stat (edited 07-17-2007).] IP: Logged |
Barry C
Member
|
posted 07-17-2007 12:11 PM
You said "same themes" referring to the Canada post, which stated only one "theme" in the pre-test: the Jimmy story. If they (CPC examiners) think they can get a pre-test confession, then they use whatever themes they think will work - with no limits to the number and type.IP: Logged |
Polyscoring
Member
|
posted 07-17-2007 09:51 PM
Very interesting STAT.... thanks for the insightful website. IP: Logged |
stat
Member
|
posted 07-18-2007 11:30 AM
In my opinion, when an interrogation becomes a home run, it is because the examiner connected to the Examinee in a very intrinsic way------be it that the examinee just "got tired" or became complacent/indifferent, or that the examinee became infected with a powerful idea that he would be doing something self-serving or proxy-serving by confessing. On the other hand when we fail to bag the confession, I (personally) assume that I was simply unable to infect or access the examinee with the proper passwords/virus. The very cool thing about PCSOT, is that through repeat testing, if and when an examinee that confessed a high volume of disclosures to you, returns months or even years later------that examinee, if asked to reflect on the prior test, will likely inform you of many of the "ideas" you gave him, and the subsequent "afterthoughts" and very specific discussions---if it was a theme-ladden previous test. Conversely, an examinee who gives little if any disclosures on prior tests will have difficulty remembering the test at all-----much like many *Lifetime Channel movies, they are utterly forgettable.When we have scored the big confessions, what happened to facilitate it? OK, so I read the stuff on memes (infectious implanted ideas)---big woopty doo----so how do we get confessions from memes?------after all, if criminals are loaded with erronious memes a.k.a Criminal thinking errors, than how do we and how did we pierce those memes (in past successes)?
Here is a pre-pre-pre-test meme strategy any pcsot tester can achieve. To begin with, I ask the parole agent what the examinee drinks at home---in the fridge-----as any good sex offender parole agent knows what's in the fridge of their offender-----so that I have that beverage. For whatever reason, the examinee was infected by the beverage preference, and I prefer to access a little meme of refuge as a "coincidental" reward for ongoing disclosures-------and if they don't disclose and I can stand to drink their brand of soft drink, I will drink it in front of them in order to mirror their desires (in terms of NLP, this is called mirroring). Have you ever been to a stranger's house and they just happen to have your favorite drink brand---and you suddenly have taken a psychological baby-step toward comfort? Although Reed wrote that he liked uptight environments for interrogation---which is fine----sometimes we all know that fear will inhibit a confession just as easily as it will facilitate. Just another example of meme access. The soft drink companies, and our friends and family have provided us with some wicked soft drink memes. When I get thirsty for a soda, I am programmed to salivate to thoughts of Sprite----like a damn Pavlov dog. I am still compiling lists of memes in criminals and people alike. I am not sure at all what impact some of these memes have, as the searching phase is still ongoing. An example of how I blew an interrogation as a result of memes was this. Last week I tested a young man for the second time----previous test was DI. On the previous test, he gave no disclosures, and did a very poor performance of acting innocent in the postest. On this recent test, I just happened to have worn khaki pants and a button down (no suit as I usually wear.) The Examinee had a completely different demeanor. He disclosed a huge volume of violations----to the point that the test was a "big hit" regarding supervision issues. I asked him what the deal was with his last test. He told me that he hates suits. He was raised by the criminal justice system since age 7, and had constant negative associations with suits. Even in his adulthood, he never met a person in a suit that wasn't a predator in his memetic mind. The test and my demeanor were virtually indistinguishable from the previous fruitless test. The man was so brutally and counterintuatively honest about his parole behaviors, I had little reason to believe that he was lying about the "suit" meme. Since that test, rather than using the old H.R./Baxter "dress in a suit for dominance" standard, I am questioning such a rule---regarding certain circumstances.My office, my instrument, and my training, trappings, and scary context. Is the suit absolutely necessary? Maybe not. Regarding memes, my goal is to better understand what memetic activity in the examinees that I can predict with reasonable probability, and to also try to understand the scope of unpredictability. I believe that within everyone and every examinee, there is a "Randolph Scot" moment--------concepts that are unique yet shared----which will draw great infectious interest in individuals. BTW, the "Randolph Scot" reference is from "Blazing Saddles" when the ingnorant and bigoted townspeople paused with removed hats to revere their sung hero at the very mention of his name. [This message has been edited by stat (edited 07-18-2007).] [This message has been edited by stat (edited 07-18-2007).] IP: Logged |
rnelson
Member
|
posted 07-19-2007 09:41 AM
Good stuff here stat.I know nothing about memes, so I'll be reading about that when my head clears from long night of travel and flight delays. Interesting, I used to wear a tie to work every day, but it occurred to me that my laborer clients viewed me as from a different planet. Even professional people begin to see it as overdressed a little. I'm sure there are regional considerations. I once saw an attorney in court in Boulder - with no tie or jacket. Still waiting for the flip-flops and uncovered/visible tattoos though. r ------------------
"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here. This is the war room."
--(Stanley Kubrick/Peter Sellers - Dr. Strangelove, 1964)
IP: Logged | |
Polygraph Place Bulletin Board
