John E. Reid & Associates, Inc. proudly congratulates one of our graduates for doing an outstanding job using the “Reid Technique of Interviewing and Interrogation” to resolve the Featured Case.

Sergeant Radz holds the following positions with the Alsip Police Department, in Illinois, since his employment in 1985;

Juvenile Officer, Special Response Team Officer/Negotiator, Evidence Technician and instructor for our Community Service Landlord/Tenant program. Sergeant Radz wrote two police related computer programs; Major Incident File and a Background Investigation File. He was the recipient of the South Suburban Chief’s of Police Association Life Saving Award in 1997 and the Cook County Sheriff’s Award for Meritorious Service also in 1997. Sergeant Radz has proven to be a very successful interrogator securing confessions on a wide range of issues i.e., armed robberies, attempted murder, aggravated battery with great bodily harm, theft of over $30,000 in company merchandise, and false claims of criminal sexual assault with unlawful restraint.

Sergeant Radz started using the Reid Technique of Interviewing and Interrogation in 1999 after reading the text book Criminal Interrogations and Confessions, by John Reid, Fred Inbau and Joseph Buckley. He attended the Street Crime and Surveillance course and the Basic course on the Reid Technique of Interviewing and Interrogation in 1999. Sergeant Radz went on to attend the Advanced course on the Reid Technique in the year 2000, and became a Reid Institute member in 2001. He attended the Reid Conference in 2001 and became a Reid Certified Interviewer in 2002.

This case involves an allegation made by a 29 year old woman who related that she was walking home from work one evening when she was picked up by the alleged offender under the premise that he would give her a ride home. The alleged offender then passed her house and began to drive around with her in the car. The alleged offender was of Middle Eastern decent, and the woman alleged that he was calling someone on his cel phone about transporting her to Jerusalem. She alleged that he was trying to force her to sign papers. The woman stated that the offender brought her to his apartment and locked her in a basement room. He supplied her with a can to use as a toilet. He would occasionally take her out of the apartment when his son came home. He would then force her to drive around with him is his tow truck. She stated that he forced her head down on the seat of the truck with his hand. She alleged that this went on for three days. On two occasions she alleged that he brought her to a hotel and force her to have sex with him. She said the incident ended when the alleged offender received a phone call on this cel phone while they were driving. He abruptly stopped the truck and shoved her out on the street and drove off. She then walked to a friends house and reported the incident.

The alleged offender spoke only Arabic so an interpreter was used to assist in the interview.

During the interview of the alleged offender he stated that the woman called him on his cel phone. He picked her up in the parking lot of Brown’s Chicken. He stated that soon after picking her up they started negotiating the possibility of having sex. They went to his apartment to clean up and the subject alleged that the woman wanted to have sex there. The subject refused because his son was coming home soon. They left his apartment and went to a gas station where he alleged the woman bought some prophylactics. He stated that they went to a hotel and engaged in sexual relations two separate times. Afterward, he stated that he dropped her off at a home in a nearby town, near the spot where he picked her up. The subject stated that the whole incident took place within the span of a couple of hours in one afternoon.

"After asking all of the investigative questions, behavioral analysis interview questions, and evaluating the subject’s paralinguistic and nonverbal behavior, I thought the subject was being truthful. I was concerned that the cultural differences may have influenced my ability to accurately assess the subject’s behavior. Before I made my decision concerning the subjects truthfulness I wanted to interview the woman, who was also in the station at the time. The following is that interview."

Q: Do you know the reason why I’m interviewing you now?
R: Yes, because of what happened between me and John Doe.

Q: We are investigating some discrepancies between your stories of what
happened, if you forgot to tell me anything, you should tell me that now.
R: Was my story missing something?

Q: Tell me what happened that day.
R: (the subject reiterated her original story) The subject used a lot of
Memory qualifiers such as, “To the best of my knowledge”, and “As I recall” while restating her story.

Q: How do you feel about being interviewed concerning this matter?
R: I’m very upset, I did not do anything wrong. (No contraction)

Q: Did you tell any of your family members about what happened to you?
R: No, I didn’t want to bother them with it.

Q: Why do you think the person is saying that you are making this up?
R: I really don’t care what he says.

Q: Why do you think someone would make up a story like this?
R: Who knows, maybe because one person cared more about the other person or because they were supposed to be friends and friends don’t do that to friends.

Q: Why wouldn’t you make up a story like this?
R: I know someone who did that once and they got into a lot of trouble.

Q: What do you think should happen to the person who would make up a story like this?
R: That’s up to you, not me.

Q: Do you think a person who would make up a story like this would deserve a second chance under any circumstances?
R: Sure, it’s not as bad as what he did to me, friends don’t do that to friends.

Q: If it were to become necessary, would you be willing to submit to a polygraph test to verify what you have told me about this incident is the truth?
R: Sure, but I’m a really nervous and sweaty person. I probably wouldn’t pass.

Q: Once the investigation is completed, how do you think the investigation will come out concerning whether or not you were involved in doing this?
R: At this point it could show anything.

One of the things we’ll be doing is pulling John Doe’s cel phone records. Would there be any reason why there would be a phone call from the Brown’s Chicken pay phone?
R: Wow, I don’t know. (Nodding her head yes before answering)

Throughout the interview the subject was overly polite, and smiled or giggled at inappropriate times. The subject seemed open and cooperative answering the interview questions but became noticeably nervous and guarded after the bait question was asked. The subjects posture became very rigid and lacked frontal alignment.

"After evaluating the interviews of both subjects I came to the conclusion that Jane Doe was not telling the truth. I therefore initiated an interrogation with her. Here is a summery of her interrogation."

The following interrogation lasted about 20 minutes and was conducted immediately after the subject’s interview.

Themes Used
The primary theme used in this case was to blame John Doe’s actions causing her to be upset. I also suggested that she made up the story to explain why she was unaccounted for three days. I suggested that she told someone else what happened and they suggested that she make up the story.

I reentered the room and gave Jane Doe the Direct Positive Confrontation
“Jane, our investigation clearly indicates that you made up this story”. She nodded her head yes and slumped in her chair and said “He had sex with me”.
I responded by saying “I want to sit down with you and see if we can get this matter straighten out before it gets any further out of control.

I explained to her when the situation began she and the man were probably friends and that he obviously stepped over the line at some point. I told her that I thought she cared for him and that he was just using her for sex. I explained to her that when I interviewed him he did not express any concern for her. He was very matter of fact and non-emotional. However, I told her that even though he may have used her for sex I didn’t think he forced her to have sex.

During the development of the themes the subject would occasionally interject “We had sex”, I countered with “ I’m not saying that you didn’t have sex, I’m just saying that it wasn’t against your will”. She made not comment to that.

“You don’t make up stories all the time do you Jane? This was the first time wasn’t it?”

Subjects Statement written for Sergeant Radz
The previous report that I made to the officer originally was a lie. This is what really happened. I called John Doe from Brown’s Chicken in Burbank and asked him to come pick me up. We went for a ride voluntarily. We then went to his apartment where John Doe made an advance on me but I did not want to do anthing there because he was married and I did not know who was home. So we left his apartment and we headed towards Cicero Ave. John Doe and I ended up at the De-Lux Budget hotel where we got a room. Once inside the room we talked. I took a shower and had consensual sex with John Doe. Then we sat around a little while and I had consensual sex a second time with John Doe. I did not give John Doe any indication verbally or physically that I did not want to have sex with him. After that I got dressed right away while John Doe took a shower. Then we left the hotel in his car. He drove me to my friend Willie’s house at ---------- . While in the driveway there John Doe called me a couple names and gave me a $100 bill. He then proposed the idea of sleeping with a friend of mine and kept being persistent about it. I then just gave him my work number on a card and told him to call me if he does not hear from me in an hour. I have not talked to him since. After what had happened I was upset because he gave me $100, called me names, and asked to sleep with a friend. The more I thought about what had happened the more upset I got. I told my ex-boyfriend and he conviced me to go to the hospital. Once I went to the hospital my boss came and everything got out of control and I could not stop it.

The Subjects Excuse and Rationalization for the story

The subject explained that when John Doe gave her $100 he said she was nothing more than a whore anyway. She had started to develop feelings for him but he didn’t want her, he wanted to sleep with her friend. She wanted to tell her ex-boyfriend she but didn’t know what to tell him. So she made up the story about being abducted. This caused her ex-boyfriend to take her to the hospital. Then when her boss came from work and wanted to know where she had been for the last three days, the story got worse. Her boss stayed by her side and made sure she reported this to the police.

The female offender was charged with Filing a False Police Report. The case is still pending.

This case is a good example of the importance of asking Behavioral Analysis Interview Questions (BAI) even when you are interviewing an alleged victim of a crime. Many investigators reserve the BAI questions only for alleged offenders.

As you can see in this case they can be particularly helpful in victim interviews as well. If the BAI questions were not asked of Jane Doe in this case it would be difficult to conclude that she was making up this story. However the BAI questions reveal clues that indicate she is lying and also clues as to how to approach her in the interrogation.

In the response to the first BAI question, Reason For The Interview, Jane Doe fails to indicate that she is there to be questioned about the fact that she was kidnapped and raped. It is typical of a deceptive person to avoid descriptive language in their responses to questions. When restating her account of what happened she used several memory qualifiers, another common verbal behavior we see from deceptive subjects. She also indicated that she failed to tell her family members about the incident because she didn’t want to “bother them”. Truthful subjects usually discuss the investigation with loved ones. Keeping it a secret from loved ones is a common deceptive behavior. Deceptive subjects often fail to tell loved ones because they do not want to put themselves in a position of having to lie to them.

When responding to the Motive question she reveals her motive for making up the story, “Who knows, maybe because one person cared more about the other person or because they were supposed to be friends and friends don’t do that to friends.” Again, in her response to the second chance question she repeats the same motive, “Sure, it’s not as bad as what he did to me, friends don’t do that to friends.”

The subject is clearly revealing to the interviewer that she felt betrayed and taken advantage of. She had feelings for the offender that the offender did not share.

Sergeant Radz identified this and used it as his theme in the interrogation. If the BAI questions were not asked of Jane Doe these attitudes may not have been revealed.