Interrogation Tactics

Kalie61 · Sep 16, 2008

I wanted to separate this from the other threads discussing the contents of the taped interviews with KC.

Police often tell suspects that they have more evidence then they actually do, in order to get the person to confess.

I've been going through the interviews trying to determine what could be a lie from LE. I've come up with a few possibilities.

LE said they have video of the saw grass apts that prove KC was not there. He also mentioned that these tapes are kept for a couple of days by law. - I believe this is lie by LE to entice KC to confess. Even if saw grass does have a video surveillance it would not be pointed at the doors of residence, at least I would hope. I believe it would be at the gates of the complex and at the main office and community spots. What is the likely hood of one of these tapes lasting for more than a month? Even if it was done on a digital system, and saved on a computer the memory would have been taped over and reused.

LE also said that the house across the street from the ex boyfriends was an old folks home. I'm currently trying to verify if that is true or not. They also said there was surveillance at this place as well.

LE also said they had been in contact and had already interviewed everyone she had told them to interview. But during the interview a detective was receiving calls about interviews that were taking place at the same time. So I don't believe he had as much information as he wanted KC to believe he had.

I'm not knocking the tactics of LE during the interview. But I think it would be prudent to fact check what was said by all parties and not take LE at their absolute word. It would not be beneficial to LE to tell KC exactly what they have and say now confess! They wanted to back her in a corner, impress her with more than they had a bluff her into telling them where Caylee is.

Has anyone else found something in the tapes that LE might have used as an advantage during the interview that might or might not have been true?

This isn't about what KC said during the interviews, but what Law enforcement said. Please stay on topic.

Capri · Sep 16, 2008

Kalie61 said:
I've been going through the interviews trying to determine what could be a lie from LE. I've come up with a few possibilities.

This isn't about what KC said during the interviews, but what Law enforcement said. Please stay on topic.

I notice no lies from LE, for you. Sorry

Thanks for the reminder to stay on topic, though

raeann · Sep 16, 2008

Kalie61 said:
I wanted to separate this from the other threads discussing the contents of the taped interviews with KC.

Police often tell suspects that they have more evidence then they actually do, in order to get the person to confess.

I've been going through the interviews trying to determine what could be a lie from LE. I've come up with a few possibilities.

LE said they have video of the saw grass apts that prove KC was not there. He also mentioned that these tapes are kept for a couple of days by law. - I believe this is lie by LE to entice KC to confess. Even if saw grass does have a video surveillance it would not be pointed at the doors of residence, at least I would hope. I believe it would be at the gates of the complex and at the main office and community spots. What is the likely hood of one of these tapes lasting for more than a month? Even if it was done on a digital system, and saved on a computer the memory would have been taped over and reused.

LE also said that the house across the street from the ex boyfriends was an old folks home. I'm currently trying to verify if that is true or not. They also said there was surveillance at this place as well.

LE also said they had been in contact and had already interviewed everyone she had told them to interview. But during the interview a detective was receiving calls about interviews that were taking place at the same time. So I don't believe he had as much information as he wanted KC to believe he had.

I'm not knocking the tactics of LE during the interview. But I think it would be prudent to fact check what was said by all parties and not take LE at their absolute word. It would not be beneficial to LE to tell KC exactly what they have and say now confess! They wanted to back her in a corner, impress her with more than they had a bluff her into telling them where Caylee is.

Has anyone else found something in the tapes that LE might have used as an advantage during the interview that might or might not have been true?

This isn't about what KC said during the interviews, but what Law enforcement said. Please stay on topic.

Good post.. I too noticed that they tripped over their own misinformation on that one. They say tapes are kept for several days, yet they are talking about a month before! Also, I have two kids in college who have lived at a number of different apartment complexes. We have always chosen those complexes based on the BEST security, and none of them have cameras in the exterior stairwells. Most have them at the gated entrances and clubhouse/pool and some in the parking areas, but not in "private" areas.

If you listen carefully to the tapes, they use numerous stereotypical interrogation tactics. For example, they say that THEY have talked to Amy, and quite a few other people who are currently "giving statements" yet the dates on those statements don't match up with the date they are telling CA that they are being taken.

Melly53 · Sep 16, 2008

Kalie61 said:
I wanted to separate this from the other threads discussing the contents of the taped interviews with KC.

Police often tell suspects that they have more evidence then they actually do, in order to get the person to confess.

I've been going through the interviews trying to determine what could be a lie from LE. I've come up with a few possibilities.

LE said they have video of the saw grass apts that prove KC was not there. He also mentioned that these tapes are kept for a couple of days by law. - I believe this is lie by LE to entice KC to confess. Even if saw grass does have a video surveillance it would not be pointed at the doors of residence, at least I would hope. I believe it would be at the gates of the complex and at the main office and community spots. What is the likely hood of one of these tapes lasting for more than a month? Even if it was done on a digital system, and saved on a computer the memory would have been taped over and reused.

LE also said that the house across the street from the ex boyfriends was an old folks home. I'm currently trying to verify if that is true or not. They also said there was surveillance at this place as well.

LE also said they had been in contact and had already interviewed everyone she had told them to interview. But during the interview a detective was receiving calls about interviews that were taking place at the same time. So I don't believe he had as much information as he wanted KC to believe he had.

I'm not knocking the tactics of LE during the interview. But I think it would be prudent to fact check what was said by all parties and not take LE at their absolute word. It would not be beneficial to LE to tell KC exactly what they have and say now confess! They wanted to back her in a corner, impress her with more than they had a bluff her into telling them where Caylee is.

Has anyone else found something in the tapes that LE might have used as an advantage during the interview that might or might not have been true?

This isn't about what KC said during the interviews, but what Law enforcement said. Please stay on topic.

Sorry, I don't believe that LE lied during the interview. So far as the security tapes at Sawgrass goes, if they were digital, it is not uncommon for that type of system to save the images for 90 days or even longer.

Spangle · Sep 16, 2008

Kalie61 said:
LE said they have video of the saw grass apts that prove KC was not there. He also mentioned that these tapes are kept for a couple of days by law. - I believe this is lie by LE to entice KC to confess. Even if saw grass does have a video surveillance it would not be pointed at the doors of residence, at least I would hope. I believe it would be at the gates of the complex and at the main office and community spots. What is the likely hood of one of these tapes lasting for more than a month? Even if it was done on a digital system, and saved on a computer the memory would have been taped over and reused.

.

Not all video surveillance run constantly. Some record with movement.

f it is a gate cam, it would turn on when a car shows up. Then it would turn off after a time of no movement. Using a whole lot less memory then one that runs constantly. Which would mean that it would take longer before it would start recording over it's self.

Also, it depends on what the recording device is. Video tapes are rather out of style. They don't hold much, etc. Newer systems are being recorded on hard drives. Hard drives hold a whole lot more info then a tape.

Depending what hardware is being used to store the information, the amount of information that is being added (number of camera's and frams per minute, etc) all decides how long it takes before the system starts recording over it's self.

mysteriew · Sep 16, 2008

I'm not going to go looking for them, but yes it is entirely possible that LE did overstate what they had or they may even have outright lied. But LE is permitted to lie to a suspect if they feel the suspect is not being honest and forthright with them. This has been litigated all the way to the Supreme Court. And the court determined that it was legal.

CiCi · Sep 16, 2008

I agree, LE usually does lie during interrogations trying to entice a confession.

And I am with you 100% on the sawgrass apartments surveillance "lie".

raeann · Sep 16, 2008

Melly53 said:
Sorry, I don't believe that LE lied during the interview. So far as the security tapes at Sawgrass goes, if they were digital, it is not uncommon for that type of system to save the images for 90 days or even longer.

The point here is not how long they COULD have existed, it is that LE SAID they kept them for a few days! If they kept them for a FEW DAYS how could they be available over a MONTH later? The point is that they proved their own untruth in that one statement. At that time, they were talking about a time span from June 9th to July 16th. In addition, NO WHERE in any subsequent statement from LE or ANYWHERE in their numerous leaks, the statements from the Sawgrass employees, no where, was there any reference at all to viewing tapes. IF THERE WERE ANY TAPES, they would have immediately seen that the dates of ZG's visit were mistaken.

Spangle · Sep 16, 2008

Anyone got a direct link to the transcripts that we will be talking about in this thread??

Breaking Heart · Sep 16, 2008

I've listened to most of the interviews. I don't know anything about interrogation techniques. But, as I was listening I found myself telling the investigators to shut up and let her talk. Did anyone else get that feeling? They just kept saying the same things over and over...and they just kept talking and talking...they never really gave her a chance to continue with an answer. Whether they thought her words were lies or not, I wish they would have let her keep going...maybe if they had they may have gotten more clues out of the interview..ya know, 'there's usually some truth even in the lies"? What do you all think?

raeann · Sep 16, 2008

mysteriew said:
I'm not going to go looking for them, but yes it is entirely possible that LE did overstate what they had or they may even have outright lied. But LE is permitted to lie to a suspect if they feel the suspect is not being honest and forthright with them. This has been litigated all the way to the Supreme Court. And the court determined that it was legal.

YES... this is quite true... but remember this means that LE is also permitted to lie to the public, about anything at any time. This is the reason that the information that is out has come through "LEAKS" and "UNIDENTIFIED SOURCES" this allows them to correctly deny later in court that they released any untruthful information. It all came from unofficial and unsubstantiated sources, not THEM.

It would also be wise of people to realize that LE does not have to believe someone is lying to them or is guilty of anything in order for them to lie when they are questioning that person. They can lie anytime they please about whatever they please. It is a "tactic" that is taught and practiced on a daily basis.

MnkeyBznes · Sep 16, 2008

Kalie61 said:
I wanted to separate this from the other threads discussing the contents of the taped interviews with KC.
Police often tell suspects that they have more evidence then they actually do, in order to get the person to confess.
I've been going through the interviews trying to determine what could be a lie from LE. I've come up with a few possibilities.
SNIP!

I guess I don't get the point of this. Of course LE probably made some stuff up. They are legally allowed to do that. You can go thru the 400 pages and probably find lots of inconsistencies but why? What is the reason for doing it?

Kalie61 · Sep 16, 2008

Breaking Heart said:
I've listened to most of the interviews. I don't know anything about interrogation techniques. But, as I was listening I found myself telling the investigators to shut up and let her talk. Did anyone else get that feeling? They just kept saying the same things over and over...and they just kept talking and talking...they never really gave her a chance to continue with an answer. Whether they thought her words were lies or not, I wish they would have let her keep going...maybe if they had they may have gotten more clues out of the interview..ya know, 'there's usually some truth even in the lies"? What do you all think?

this is a tactic that police use. they often give suspect choices to choose from.
Usually when they do, it ends up in a confession because there is no way out once a suspect deciedes to travel the path offered by a detective.

websurfer · Sep 16, 2008

Her statement at one point was:

" I will Lie ,Cheat or Steal"
To find my daughter then the detective tells he "we do not want you to do that,we just want you to tell the truth"

He line was from the movie "Gone With The Wind"

Also the name JULIETTE LEWIS
[ an actress] in lots of movies but for some reason "Natural Born killers"
is one of her favs?
Read the synopsis...
maybe that is why?

JL has been in several movies such as that.
I wondered also where and whose hairstyle Casey is wearing?

The only good thing about her for me is she does have a pretty hairstyle.

under that pretty hair is one confused young woman...

Kalie61 · Sep 16, 2008

Kalie61 said:
I wanted to separate this from the other threads discussing the contents of the taped interviews with KC.
Police often tell suspects that they have more evidence then they actually do, in order to get the person to confess.
I've been going through the interviews trying to determine what could be a lie from LE. I've come up with a few possibilities.
SNIP!

MnkeyBznes said:
I guess I don't get the point of this. Of course LE probably made some stuff up. They are legally allowed to do that. You can go thru the 400 pages and probably find lots of inconsistencies but why? What is the reason for doing it?

To weed out fact from fiction. I don't think we can determine everything that KC has lied about if we don't first figure if the information used by LE during the intergation was truthful or not.

How can we say that she did not drop off Caylee at the sawgrass, if a video never existed to prove otherwise?

TURBOTHINK · Sep 16, 2008

Melly53 said:
Sorry, I don't believe that LE lied during the interview. So far as the security tapes at Sawgrass goes, if they were digital, it is not uncommon for that type of system to save the images for 90 days or even longer.

I don't remember where, but it was disclosed that Sawgrass kept all of theirs for a minimum of 6 months and sometimes longer because of the corporate office's rules. (I don't know who the main corporate entity is for that complex)

Many apartment complexes in my area have the digital and keep them for up to a year in case there is a "slip and fall" or other instance which they need to defend in court. My friend works as a manager of one who keeps them for a year.

Someone said there would not be tapes of the stairwells. That is one of the main places the ones in this area have taped, because of accidents and muggings.

CiCi · Sep 16, 2008

Breaking Heart said:
I've listened to most of the interviews. I don't know anything about interrogation techniques. But, as I was listening I found myself telling the investigators to shut up and let her talk. Did anyone else get that feeling? They just kept saying the same things over and over...and they just kept talking and talking...they never really gave her a chance to continue with an answer. Whether they thought her words were lies or not, I wish they would have let her keep going...maybe if they had they may have gotten more clues out of the interview..ya know, 'there's usually some truth even in the lies"? What do you all think?

I 100% agree. I wished they shut up as well.

Short_Stuff · Sep 16, 2008

If they could interview her again I am SURE they could have gotten more out of her. But noooo, she's lawyered/has rights, but where are CAYLEES rights? Who speaks for poor Caylee? NO ONE.
IMO They should be able to question more in the case of a missing/presumed dead person!

MnkeyBznes · Sep 16, 2008

Kalie61 said:
To weed out fact from fiction. I don't think we can determine everything that KC has lied about if we don't first figure if the information used by LE during the intergation was truthful or not.

How can we say that she did not drop off Caylee at the sawgrass, if a video never existed to prove otherwise?

I think we safely say she is lying about Sawgrass because that apartment has been empty for months. I don't need a video to prove that to me. Personally I think if Casey's lips are moving she is lying. JMHO

maskedwoman · Sep 16, 2008

raeann said:
The point here is not how long they COULD have existed, it is that LE SAID they kept them for a few days! If they kept them for a FEW DAYS how could they be available over a MONTH later? The point is that they proved their own untruth in that one statement. At that time, they were talking about a time span from June 9th to July 16th. In addition, NO WHERE in any subsequent statement from LE or ANYWHERE in their numerous leaks, the statements from the Sawgrass employees, no where, was there any reference at all to viewing tapes. IF THERE WERE ANY TAPES, they would have immediately seen that the dates of ZG's visit were mistaken.

I did raise my eyebrows at the phrase "a few days". But, all in all, that's the only thing I heard that sounded like exaggeration from LE.

Interrogation Tactics

New Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Member

New Member

A diamond in process

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Member

New Member

Active Member

New Member

Former Member

New Member

New Member

Member

Well-Known Member

DNASolves

Online statistics

Forum statistics