0:12

From NBI Studios, this

0:15

is Truth and Justice, a crowdsourced

0:17

investigation in real time. I'm

0:19

Bob Roth. Ahoy,

0:37

friends. Thank you for tuning in to Truth

0:39

and Justice. You are listening to the

0:42

Friday follow -up for Season 16, Episode 18. This

0:44

week, we dove back into the Delphi case,

0:47

and we heard Bob breakdown and analyze

0:49

Richard Allen's first police interview. For anyone

0:51

interested in Delphi, this was a fascinating

0:53

episode that drummed up a lot of

0:55

listener questions and theories. And

0:57

today, we have a special guest joining us,

0:59

the one and only Dr. Scott from

1:01

the LA Not So Confidential podcast. But

1:03

before we jump into that, do we have any

1:06

housekeeping? Just a little bit, it's what I

1:08

mentioned to you guys for, I know a lot of

1:10

you guys are listening to the Kids Podcast from my

1:12

school, the Underestimated Podcast. They have all

1:14

the different groups have all of their

1:16

first three episodes done and they asked

1:18

me today if we can speed this process

1:20

along so their episodes aren't airing in November.

1:23

So starting this week, we're gonna start airing two

1:25

episodes a week. So if you're watching this

1:27

live tomorrow, Wednesday, if you're here on Friday, a

1:29

couple days ago, Wednesday, the third

1:31

episode in the series on the Jeanette

1:33

Robertson case is airing. And then on

1:35

Friday, same day this is dropping, the

1:37

next group, who they're calling their series

1:39

voiceless, they're covering a series of missing

1:41

persons cases all out the East Lansing,

1:43

Michigan area, their first episode is

1:45

dropping on Friday. And then we're gonna continue

1:48

that, at least for the near term,

1:50

there'll be an episode Wednesday, then another episode

1:52

on Friday, as we move along here

1:54

with the podcast, because they're wanting their episodes,

1:56

at least their first three to get

1:58

out before they graduate. So we're getting that

2:00

process started. I mentioned last week that

2:02

I might reach out to Dr. Shiloh,

2:05

and instead I thought, you know who's

2:07

better than Dr. Shiloh? He's

2:10

rolling his eyes. Just kidding,

2:12

Shiloh. Shiloh was busy, so I

2:14

reached out to Dr. Scott. We

2:16

were my second choice at all. Dr.

2:19

Scott, they both host the LA Not

2:21

So Confidential podcast. They're both forensic psychologists.

2:23

So Scott is joining us today, as

2:26

Zach mentioned, on the follow -up. And

2:28

what I ask Scott to do leading up to

2:30

this is to... of give his own kind of analysis,

2:32

you know, watch the video and give his own

2:34

analysis of it or form his own analysis of it.

2:36

And then to listen to mine so that he

2:38

can be here to help answer any questions and then

2:40

give it, you know, any feedback to me and

2:42

you guys about how that analysis went before I guess

2:44

we'll go into because I'm already we have so

2:47

we have a bunch of questions we have Scott here.

2:49

So I'm going to try to knock a bunch

2:51

of them out real fast real quick. Bye.

2:54

Okay. I just the one thing I

2:56

want to address is that we got a few a

2:58

few questions about the use in comments

3:00

about the use of AI that I did

3:02

at the end of the episode. So

3:04

if you have one of those loaded up, I

3:06

guess I know you had one that was kind

3:08

of pretty concise. We got a few emails, but

3:10

if you want to read that and then I'll

3:12

kind of explain some things about that. Sure. So

3:14

we got an email from Tori. We got a

3:16

post from Nancy. I'm going to just read a

3:18

little bit of Nancy's post. I want to gently

3:20

push back on the idea that AI would be

3:23

unbiased. All computer programs work with the data they

3:25

have been given. In the case of AI, it's

3:27

data that has been pulled from all over the

3:29

web. often without the context of what it's actually

3:31

looking at, which means it isn't actually a reliable

3:33

source of information for much of anything. In part,

3:35

because if it doesn't have an answer, it will

3:37

just make stuff up instead of returning no results.

3:39

Note that the response you got didn't really tell

3:41

you anything you hadn't already come up with. It

3:43

also may well have a lot of information about

3:45

the case, including anything that was posted on Reddit,

3:47

which has been scraped for AI. And

3:49

so this idea of, and then Tori's email

3:51

was like, it's just It's just, it's

3:53

not really synthesizing information or giving an opinion.

3:55

It's just sort of regurgitating. And we had

3:57

questions about not necessarily debunking that, but just

3:59

asking you for more information about what your

4:02

process was. So yeah, how do you want

4:04

to address all that? Yeah. So I'll kind

4:06

of, we'll hit on all this so that

4:08

we can dig into the actual interview with

4:10

Dr. Scott Weiser here too. First of all,

4:12

the process I went through. So my process

4:14

was I, the same thing I'm going through

4:16

with the second episode or the second interview.

4:18

Right now, this one I'm not going to

4:20

run through AI because I've got a pretty

4:23

clear read, at least I think, on the

4:25

second police interrogation. But I

4:27

watched it twice, first

4:29

time just watched it, second time I watched it taking

4:31

notes, third time I went through and started like doing

4:33

a real time analysis of it as I was going

4:35

through it. And I kind of came up with my

4:37

thoughts on it. And that's when I thought about reaching

4:39

out to Dr. Scott or Jim Clemente or Dr. Shiloh

4:42

to see, you know, if we can get

4:44

another opinion on it. And then I thought

4:46

as I said in the episode like it'd

4:48

be interesting to see if we had something

4:50

completely unbiased just to hear like just because

4:53

everybody's wanting to and you can see from

4:55

the comments like people's people's biases already they

4:57

leak out pretty whether it's a bias that

4:59

Richard Allen's guilty or a bias that Richard

5:01

Allen is innocent or a bias about AI

5:03

in general or about you know or a

5:05

bias that thinks AI is amazing all these

5:07

things kind of leak out and so I

5:09

thought well let me look at just

5:12

something that's just gonna analyze the data

5:14

in this. And so that's when I

5:16

got the idea of using ChatGPT to

5:18

do it. So then what I did

5:20

is I had to first rip the

5:22

audio off the YouTube video, and then

5:24

I used some software we used to

5:26

do our transcripts where we generate transcripts

5:28

from our episodes for our transcription team

5:30

to use. I put the audio into

5:32

that to generate a transcript. Then I

5:34

uploaded the audio and the transcript into

5:36

ChatGPT. It compared them and then cleaned

5:38

up the transcript a bit, you know,

5:40

where it thought that things needed to

5:42

be cleaned up. And then I just

5:44

asked it to analyze the interview you

5:47

know, word choices and speech patterns and give me

5:49

an analysis of the behaviors exhibited in the, just

5:51

the audio, by the way, not the video, just

5:53

the audio. And I wanted to see like what

5:55

would, you know, how would this compare to what

5:57

I have? I thought it'd be interesting for people

6:00

to share it. So then it took several hours.

6:02

Like I'd left and it was like, I'll get

6:04

back to you a little bit with this. I

6:06

asked it how long you're thinking. It was it's

6:08

going to take like eight hours. So I left

6:10

it overnight came back and then and then downloaded

6:12

it and then had like conversations with the artificial

6:14

intelligence about, you know, you know, how it came

6:16

to its information and so on and so forth.

6:19

What you guys got was just like the summary.

6:21

I asked to give me just a summary that

6:23

I can read on the show for what you

6:25

came up with. So that was the process. To

6:27

answer the questions about biases of the AI or

6:29

its use as a tool, the first thing to

6:31

point out, and Dr. Scott and I were just

6:33

talking about this when we were in the pregame

6:35

for the patrons, is that it

6:37

is, it has, if it's going

6:40

to be used, it can only be used as a tool,

6:42

which is what I was using it for. Meaning,

6:45

I would never take, for example,

6:47

this interview, throw it into

6:49

AI and say, give

6:51

me a script. About

6:53

what you think and then just read that as

6:55

my own work and I think that's in Zach

6:57

and I talked to was just talking about this

6:59

too as an artist Yeah, that you know that

7:01

you know that that is a in my opinion

7:03

a misuse of the of the tool right now

7:05

I'm trying to get it to generate something that

7:07

I can present as my own work what I

7:09

was doing is trying to use it as kind

7:11

of a check and balance and Use it as

7:13

a tool just to give more information out there

7:16

and I think that is an effect of you

7:18

and keep in mind I'm a high school teacher

7:20

So, you know, I deal with like students using

7:22

AI and stuff all the time. And that's something

7:24

that I've worked through the last year of like,

7:26

how do you balance that? Like, where is it

7:28

a tool that's being used in industry that I

7:30

want the kids to know how to work and

7:32

where does it cross the line into their, you

7:34

know, they're not doing work anymore. They're not learning

7:36

anything. So there's always that balance there. And

7:38

as far as the comments I got

7:40

were the negative ones were where they said,

7:42

you know, if it doesn't know the

7:44

answer, it'll just fill something in. There was

7:47

the that it could be biased because

7:49

it's got you know, it's crawling Reddit and

7:51

everywhere else and getting opinions about things

7:53

like that. That from from my research into

7:55

it, that's that is not accurate. So

7:57

every the way chat GPT works. And I

7:59

think the other large language models as

8:02

well, they don't like every session

8:04

is new. When you log in, it's a

8:06

new session. It's a clean slate and it

8:08

starts looking for what you tell it to

8:10

look for. So so so your chat GPT,

8:12

it's just not possible. There's not enough computing

8:14

power in the world. for it to just

8:16

have stored in its air quotes brain, every

8:18

Reddit post and everything that's have, that's not how it

8:20

works. It all depends on your prompts

8:22

and what you're asking it for. So

8:25

in my case, what I

8:27

asked it to do was just

8:29

take this interview, analyze the

8:31

speech patterns and behaviors that it

8:33

hears and give me an

8:35

analysis of that. And I actually

8:37

asked the AI how it

8:39

did that. And the way it

8:41

does it is, what it

8:43

was able to crawl through and

8:45

do that a human can't

8:47

do in that limited amount of

8:49

time is crawl through it

8:51

said tens of thousands of human

8:53

recorded police interviews and the

8:56

analysis of those interviews and reports

8:58

and papers and things that

9:00

have been published online about what

9:02

certain choices were choices mean

9:04

about what different pauses and things

9:06

you know all the different

9:08

behaviors that come out in audio

9:10

that people that do statement

9:12

analysis use, it tapped into those

9:14

resources and then applied those

9:16

tools to this audio. So

9:18

as far as the bias angle, because I

9:20

had a few people that were like, well, it

9:22

knows from Reddit what people are saying about

9:24

Richard Allen being guilty or about him being innocent.

9:26

That's not accurate. That's not true. That's not

9:29

what the AI is doing. The

9:31

prompts that I gave it

9:33

were to analyze these specific things.

9:35

And so it went on

9:37

online. and found any resources, any

9:39

published books, any published papers,

9:42

anything about this subject, and

9:44

then applied that information to how it

9:46

analyzed it. But again, I'll just say that

9:48

it's not, you know, it's not something

9:50

that should be used to replace work. But

9:52

for me, I think as a tool, I

9:55

thought it was, for me, it was, I

9:58

thought their analysis was good. Somebody said,

10:00

I think the one you just read, Well,

10:02

it didn't tell you anything you already

10:04

didn't know. I didn't expect it to. You

10:06

know, if it had some kind of

10:08

crazy wacky, well, this means this person's guilty,

10:10

then I would have been like, no,

10:12

what do you mean? Like, there's a lot

10:14

of different schools of thoughts about behavioral

10:16

analysis in general already. But to

10:18

go to that extreme would have

10:21

been out of line. But for

10:23

it to say that based on

10:25

this and these behaviors, we detected

10:27

there was, and it even kind

10:29

of said that this seemed to

10:31

indicate, you know, nervousness or deception,

10:33

but it could also indicate just

10:35

that they're nervous, you know, that

10:37

they're uncomfortable about the setting or

10:39

something like that. And ultimately, what

10:41

did it land on? You

10:43

need forensic evidence and all these different things

10:45

to try to verify where it's at. So I

10:48

don't think that the takeaway from the episode

10:50

should be that the two minutes where we talked

10:52

about what chat GPT said about it, like

10:54

there, you know, that's just one of the other

10:56

tools that were that were used as part

10:58

of this process. And it was just really just

11:00

me trying to get something completely as close

11:02

to unbiased as we could get. So that's all

11:04

I want to say on the AI topic,

11:06

unless one of you guys have something you want

11:08

to add. Well, I was

11:10

just going to say, since Dr. Scott is

11:12

here, I would love to hear your

11:15

thoughts on that, Dr. Scott. Like, did you,

11:17

when Bob reached out to you, did

11:19

you listen to the episode before you watched

11:21

the video? Or like, what

11:23

was your process and what are your thoughts

11:25

about the kind of chat GPT piece?

11:27

That's a great question so what I did

11:29

was I didn't in fact I was

11:31

trying to find it and it was my

11:33

feed was all screwed up so I

11:35

watched the link of the video that Bob

11:37

sent me. And you

11:39

know tonic took down my own impressions

11:42

and I think there's a I

11:44

have an advantage or disadvantage in being

11:46

here in that I've followed this

11:48

but I have not done any kind

11:50

of deep dive research except in

11:52

two areas that really. piss me off

11:54

about this process that we'll, we'll

11:57

talk about. But then I went and

11:59

listened, you know, earlier, like really

12:01

early this morning, what the episode was

12:03

on. And I was really pleased.

12:05

Like we, we, I felt like we

12:07

were really sort of on the

12:09

same wavelength about what we were hearing,

12:12

what we were seeing. And I

12:14

don't know if he's guilty or innocent.

12:16

I don't, I don't not have

12:18

enough data. But when it comes around

12:20

to just one final thing on

12:22

AI for me is that You know

12:24

your listener really had a very

12:27

good point in that garbage in garbage

12:29

out has always been. Racism and

12:31

racism out yeah exactly like you have

12:33

to look about that look at

12:35

that in any equation. So

12:37

on top of that

12:40

psychology and forensic psychology and

12:42

behavioral sciences are all

12:44

about human behavior which is

12:46

not. Completely quantifiable

12:48

it's not an equation where we

12:50

can say. A plus B

12:52

equals C because humans don't work

12:54

that way we're squishy right

12:57

right and and we have a

12:59

lot of data in psychology

13:01

but it's not always an indicator

13:03

of course my ADHD monkey

13:05

brain was going all over the

13:07

place. With some of

13:09

Alan's answers and his invasiveness and

13:11

it's it wasn't typical of what

13:13

we're used to seeing. it was

13:15

indicative, but it wasn't typical and

13:17

we can get into that, you

13:19

know, in the particulars. But yeah,

13:21

I mean, everybody has a point

13:23

here. But again, as we were

13:25

talking in the pregame, this is

13:27

a tool, it's not going away.

13:30

It's just not AI is here to stay

13:32

unless we have, you know, the Dune,

13:34

our version of the Dune but Lurian G

13:36

had to wipe out AI or thinking

13:39

machines, right? Yeah, no, clearly, hopefully,

13:41

there are some geeks in the audience that

13:43

get that. But yeah, it's not going away.

13:45

So we're going to have to find a

13:47

way to use it ethically and morally and

13:49

correctly. Yeah, great answer. Yeah, before

13:51

we get in, because I don't want Zach

13:53

and Janet to get lost. Did

13:55

I say it right? I just say Jack and Janet. Jack

13:58

and Janet. To get lost. I want to

14:00

real quick ask, Zach, what did you

14:02

think about the episode before we really started to dig in? I

14:04

really appreciated the way you broke it

14:07

down. I also realized that it was just

14:09

way more confusing to me to actually

14:11

listen to the interview. Because of

14:13

what's happening like there's so many aspects

14:15

that you feel like I don't know what's

14:17

happening in this part And they're like

14:19

oh, I feel like he's being very truthful

14:21

here And then you're like well he's

14:23

obviously feels like he's hiding something here But

14:25

what does it mean right and that

14:27

was a hard part and there was like

14:29

a few little Minor things that I

14:31

picked up on that I don't you know

14:33

There was the part where he talks

14:35

about we go to the trails we go

14:37

to the trail That's my number one

14:39

honestly for some reason. That's my number one

14:41

like I can't I'm really so confused

14:43

by it I'm not yeah, I mean Yeah,

14:45

yeah, let me because I think that's

14:47

a great point Look look because I was

14:49

on the lookout for it when I

14:51

after I had heard Bob I was like,

14:53

okay Let me go back and listen

14:55

for that and then I go back to

14:58

when Bob Mada was on your show

15:00

back in December and he was talking about

15:02

the really in relationship

15:04

that Alan has with his wife

15:06

So he really thinks of them them

15:08

as a we So I immediately

15:10

said when he said we, he had

15:12

referred earlier to going there a

15:14

lot with his family, with his wife.

15:17

It's his meditation or his de -escalation,

15:19

his de -stress thing. So that didn't

15:21

bother me so much. And then

15:23

he used it again. He

15:25

used the plural later in another

15:27

context. God, let me read.

15:30

He uses we a lot to include

15:32

his family trips to park as

15:34

well as he then uses that we

15:36

with the police to include them.

15:38

We're not you know, what are we

15:41

doing here? What is our what

15:43

are we working on here in this

15:45

interview paraphrasing? But so it didn't

15:47

Step out to me as much as

15:49

like because I think if we're

15:51

you're going is are you we're is

15:53

where you're going with that? That

15:55

there could have been another person involved

15:58

not me he did it not

16:00

for me Sorry, what was jumping out

16:02

to me was that it was

16:04

that it seemed to me that his

16:06

norm for going there was probably

16:08

going there with his wife. And the

16:10

only significance of that, whether it's

16:12

significance, is what I took out of

16:15

that is that maybe it was

16:17

abnormal for him to go there alone.

16:19

Yes. Yeah. That was

16:21

my takeaway. And my takeaway was, yes,

16:24

it was just so very clear that

16:26

they are talking about one time. And

16:28

it's the time that everyone, including him,

16:30

has agreed and established that his wife

16:32

was not part of. And so for

16:34

me, it felt, and I also do

16:37

not know, I do not have any,

16:39

I just don't know at all about

16:41

whether I think he's guilty or innocent.

16:43

But I just thought that felt like

16:45

a way of distance. And by the

16:47

way, you would probably distance yourself from

16:49

something like this anyway, because you don't

16:52

want to be a suspect. And because

16:54

you have watched the last years go

16:56

by seeing, you know, everyone analyzing on

16:58

Facebook, who is it? It sounds like

17:00

this person, I'm going to out this

17:02

person as a bad guy. Like, it

17:04

doesn't even sound like him, but this

17:07

guy's terrible. So I understand wanting to

17:09

distance yourself, so I'm not saying that

17:11

it's an indication of guilt, but it

17:13

just felt very, very obvious to me

17:15

that every time, and I also thought

17:17

it was a little interesting, and I'd

17:20

love to hear both of your thoughts

17:22

on this and you too, Zach, that

17:24

this police never say anything about it.

17:26

Like, I could see them saying, now you

17:28

keep saying we. Rick, are you saying

17:30

you were there with someone? And then he's

17:33

like, oh, then he would say, oh,

17:35

no, no, no, I just always go with

17:37

Kathy. You know, I always, like, it's

17:39

interesting that they just let that float out

17:41

there without ever saying. So

17:43

you say we a lot. Is it unusual that you

17:45

went out there by yourself? Like, wouldn't those be things

17:47

that you would kind of... To be fair to them,

17:49

though, at least in my experience, because

17:51

I have, you know, my prior experience, I was

17:53

trying to interrogate people. you know, as

17:55

an arson investigator and stuff. And then, you

17:57

know, now I've spent the last 10 years

17:59

trying to learn how to analyze statements and

18:01

interviews like this. And I can see how

18:03

like, they're two different things, right? I mean,

18:05

you're really trying to pick up on that

18:07

stuff when you're in the room, but I

18:09

think it's a lot easier to go back

18:11

and listen, you know, and watch it when

18:13

you're really looking at analyzing it, to catch

18:15

things like that, where maybe, especially, because they

18:17

seem very, Dr. Scott, I don't

18:19

know if you called this too, but like they were,

18:22

I said it many times through the episode, but

18:24

like, They were like textbook going down the read technique

18:26

steps. It almost seemed like they were like focused

18:28

on, you know, on what they were, you know, what

18:30

their plan was going forward. So maybe they weren't

18:32

being as observant as possible before we, before we went

18:34

forward and we all pounced real quick. Did you,

18:36

did you finish your thought or you have anything else

18:38

you wanted to say as that? No, I mean,

18:40

that's, I, Longwood Janet was going with

18:42

that is it wasn't so much for me, it

18:44

was more like he was trying to distance himself

18:46

by including another person, regardless if there was another

18:48

person, just that whole idea of like, were

18:51

you there? Yeah, we go down there a

18:53

lot. Yeah, like never really answering the question,

18:55

but just kind of continue. I mean, he

18:57

does that several times where a lot of

18:59

avoidance. There's a lot of evasiveness. Yeah. So

19:01

that's what I picked up on more so than like,

19:03

I didn't think it was a third party that we

19:05

don't know about. I thought it was still him just

19:07

trying to avoid whatever the question. And I didn't think

19:09

so either. I mean, he was pretty clear that he

19:12

was there alone that day. It was just, for me,

19:14

it was just, you know, when I'm doing these, I'm

19:16

trying to pick out every little word and every word

19:18

choice and everything like that. And it was just like,

19:20

What's that telling me the only thing

19:22

that I came up with that it

19:25

could be telling me is that the

19:27

norm? Yeah, when he goes there is

19:29

to go there with his wife That's

19:31

that's what I think right so we

19:33

talked you talk about in the episode

19:35

about the parking So he explains every

19:37

detail where he's going and then where

19:39

you park well I sometimes we park

19:41

here sometimes we park here sometimes park

19:43

Well, and who are you know when

19:45

we go down there we go down

19:47

there together, you know, yeah It was

19:49

very like there was certain point on

19:51

and on and on like for a

19:53

very long time that That whole I'm

19:55

sorry is that but no go for

19:57

it interrupt because I think that's so

19:59

important. It was one of the main

20:01

notes I wrote down is when we're

20:03

looking at people in interviews, providing too

20:05

much extraneous information is a huge red

20:08

flag for something. It doesn't necessarily indicate

20:10

guilt, but going back to what you

20:12

said in your show Bob is like,

20:14

this guy, innocent or guilty is definitely

20:16

hiding something. Like just so

20:18

evasive and and dancing around and what

20:20

we would call superficially cooperative. Mm -hmm,

20:22

right? He's like presenting. Well, he's

20:24

holding it together But how much information

20:26

is he actually giving during this

20:28

process? Right the avoidance was was huge

20:30

and also a point on to

20:32

that I don't even know that it

20:34

necessarily means that he's hiding something

20:36

but I always try to think in

20:38

terms just from You know my

20:40

and obviously you're an expert in this

20:42

I've just read some books and

20:44

had some mentoring on it, but I

20:46

always had stress to me that,

20:48

you know, don't think that these behaviors

20:50

mean they're lying. Don't think these

20:52

behaviors mean they're hiding. What

20:54

we can really judge is by these behaviors is

20:56

that they're uncomfortable. For me, like when I

20:58

judge baseline to something changes, like in the way

21:00

they're talking about, okay, there seems to be

21:02

discomfort there. And there definitely seemed a lot of

21:04

discomfort that then led to that avoidance behavior

21:06

too, which would lead me down that path of,

21:09

there's a reason, it seemed to me

21:11

that there's a reason he doesn't want

21:13

to commit. To where he was

21:15

parked was kind of like I was trying to

21:17

like to take as far step far back as

21:19

I could go with it There's a reason he

21:22

doesn't but then what we have to remember is

21:24

that reason could be that he was afraid that

21:26

he's being framed in That they're gonna say if

21:28

you parked there you did it it could be

21:30

as simple as that or it could be he

21:32

was He was doing something he wasn't supposed to

21:34

be doing or you know or he was there

21:36

killing the girls Who knows but there was but

21:38

it seemed to be very obvious that he made

21:41

a constant effort to avoid committing to

21:43

where he parked. Were

21:50

you ever too intimidated to start investing or

21:52

just didn't know where to begin? I've

21:54

been there. When I was younger, investing felt

21:56

totally out of reach for me. Like it

21:58

was something reserved for people with big money

22:00

or finance degrees. I can still

22:03

remember sitting in front of those investment websites

22:05

in my 20s just overwhelmed and thinking, this is

22:07

not for me. And I wish someone had

22:09

told me back then that you don't have to

22:11

be an expert or wealthy to get started. Today's

22:14

episode is sponsored by Acorns. And

22:16

April is Financial Literacy Month. And yeah,

22:18

that's a real thing. A whole month

22:20

set aside to encourage people to take

22:22

control of their money. But

22:24

the good news? You don't need the whole

22:26

month. Acorns makes it simple to

22:29

start saving and investing in your future

22:31

in just 5 minutes. You

22:33

don't need to know everything. Acorns

22:35

will suggest a diversified portfolio that matches

22:37

your goals. You don't need a

22:39

ton of money. You can literally start with

22:41

your spare change. And you don't need a

22:43

lot of time. You can set it up

22:45

and get rolling in just five minutes. One

22:47

of the things I love most about Acorns is how easy

22:49

it is to invest for my kids. It's

22:51

a pretty awesome feeling knowing that with just

22:54

a few taps, I'm building something for their future.

22:56

I didn't have those tools growing up, but I've

22:58

got them now. And I can

23:01

use them to give my kids

23:03

a better start and hopefully show

23:05

them what financial wellness actually looks

23:07

like. If you're ready to get

23:09

started, head to acorns.com slash truth

23:11

or download the Acorns app. Join

23:13

over 14 million people who've already

23:16

saved and invested over $25 billion

23:18

with Acorns. Paid non

23:20

-client endorsement. Compensation provides incentive

23:22

to positively promote Acorns. Tier

23:24

1 compensation provided. Investing

23:26

involves risk. Acorns advisors

23:28

LLC and SEC registered investment

23:30

advisor. View important disclosures

23:33

at acorns.com slash truth. Yeah,

23:45

I'm sorry, you got so many great

23:47

comments here and I should not be looking

23:49

at the comments because your listeners really

23:51

have some great observations. it's good though. No,

23:54

I don't see what you're seeing. One

23:56

of them, Lynn, said, remember,

23:58

it came out in court. He's

24:00

diagnosed with dependent personality disorder, which

24:02

is really fascinating because There

24:04

are so many things that have gone

24:06

wrong in this trial and badly done

24:08

as far as procedure. I mean that

24:11

that part is is horrific like how

24:13

badly this is all been handled, but

24:15

dependent personality disorder is not a thing

24:17

anymore. So that should have been like

24:19

the fact that an attorney didn't jump

24:21

out and go that's not in the

24:23

DSM that was done away with a

24:25

long time. You know that that could

24:28

have been a point so. I do

24:30

think it's very interesting, though, that, like,

24:32

we have ideas of what some personality

24:34

disorders reflect, like, narcissistic personality. Everybody thinks

24:36

it's going to be a big, below

24:38

-viating, huge personality. Will covert

24:40

narcissists present exactly the opposite?

24:42

Yes, everything is about them,

24:44

but they desperately, desperately need

24:46

to be attached to someone

24:48

who fulfills all those needs.

24:51

So I, just for land, anybody

24:53

else is like, there's a lot

24:55

of narcissism going on here. Again

24:57

regardless of whether or not he's

24:59

guilty like common sense would tell

25:02

us like anybody that Like if

25:04

you go 15 minutes into an

25:06

interview like that, it's like hey,

25:08

I don't like this is where

25:10

this is going We're gonna shut

25:12

this down. I'm leaving. Let's get

25:14

an attorney. That's what the rational

25:16

thing would be to do right

25:18

those guys I thought those in

25:20

the the investigators the interviewers were

25:23

really good because when they dropped

25:25

the hammer it was not It

25:27

wasn't like a huge ship. No,

25:29

it was still very polite. It

25:32

was still so measured. And he, it's

25:34

almost like he didn't know how to navigate it.

25:36

Because in a way, it would give him a lot

25:39

of attention for an hour, like a lot of

25:41

attention. That gesture you just made with your head is

25:43

exactly like, I felt like they were like testing

25:45

the fence. Like they came in, started to get real

25:47

forceful. And then they started to get the feeling

25:49

that he was going to lawyer up, walk out, and

25:51

then they would back off. And then they would

25:53

try to push it again until it was like, nope,

25:55

there's the break point. Let's pull back. It was

25:57

like just like testing those boundaries. Yeah. Like

25:59

I said, like they, to me, this was literally

26:01

textbook. You could walk there to the point where

26:04

the first time I was, I was watching it

26:06

and I was going like in my mind, I'm

26:08

was kind of playing through what's coming next. Like

26:10

I was, I could predict when they walked out

26:12

of the room that last time. I was like,

26:14

okay, so now they should come in and put

26:16

some evidence in front of him. Like that's what's

26:18

going to happen next. It's like, sure enough, here

26:20

they come. Like now, now we got a story

26:22

on the record. Now comes the interrogation part and

26:24

they followed it step by step by step. And

26:26

that was for me, as I talked about in

26:28

the episode, the thing that was jarring for me,

26:30

because I gotta be honest with you, up to

26:32

that point, because of the avoidance about the parking

26:34

spot, I know we're gonna have questions, we're gonna

26:36

talk about the fish things. I don't wanna talk about that right now. The

26:39

issues I have with the fish thing,

26:41

about what was there, I was in

26:43

there thinking to myself, like, okay, he

26:45

very well may be guilty. This seems

26:47

like there's some big red flags here.

26:50

But for me, there was something like when they...

26:52

him and put the evidence, which is the point

26:54

you're supposed to be starting to break him. And

26:56

his reaction to that and him getting like more

26:58

confident and more strong with that, I was like,

27:00

what the fuck is going on here? I was

27:02

like, this is not what I was expecting. I

27:05

was expecting because of what I had started to

27:07

build up in my mind. And that's why I

27:09

said I went through this three times. What I

27:11

had started to build up my mind through the

27:13

analysis of doing up to then is like, okay,

27:15

they got him on the ropes. He's probably guilty.

27:17

They're going to break him. And then they give

27:19

him the thing that just like I would have

27:22

done to try to break him. And there's like

27:24

the reaction goes completely the other direction than you

27:26

would expect it to go. He has a bigger

27:28

reaction to the idea that they're going to look

27:30

at his browser history. Right. And

27:32

that they called his wife. That is certainly

27:34

in line with what are they going to

27:36

find out? Are you going to tell my wife?

27:40

So yeah, I think that's a really

27:42

astute observation on your part is like

27:44

everything that we kind of would have

27:46

expected from an evaluation, a narrative, an

27:49

interview like this. Seems a little bit

27:51

off -chilter. Yeah, and that's so and I

27:53

guess we'll probably move into some questions

27:55

before we do that I want to

27:57

have you kind of give a reader's

27:59

digest version of what was your assessment

28:01

with that because you know My shortened

28:04

version is it seemed to me that

28:06

the way he was avoiding the parking

28:08

spot stuff and some of the stuff

28:10

about why he was at the bridge

28:12

seemed like he was he was maybe

28:14

doing something he wasn't he was hiding

28:17

something but then when it came to

28:19

his reaction once they started presenting with evidence about

28:21

the crime in the ways it just, I

28:24

did not get the impression that he was concerned

28:26

about being convicted of this crime. It seemed

28:28

like he was concerned about and being found out

28:30

about something else. And I'll say to that

28:32

before I turn it over to Scott too, a

28:34

lot of people had said, and hopefully this

28:36

isn't one of your, or maybe we could get

28:38

it through him anyway, Janet, but one of

28:40

the, some things some people had said to me

28:42

in conversations I was having online is, well,

28:45

yeah, but if that was the, like, If

28:47

you were hiding something, surely it wasn't as

28:49

bad as murder, they would have brought it

28:51

out to them. And I explained it. Yes,

28:53

that the question. That's why the read technique

28:55

works. Because during the phase

28:57

where you're putting that story on

29:00

the record and you're making those

29:02

mistakes, you don't know you're being

29:04

interrogated. Like, they're very good about,

29:06

this is just to clear you, we're just talking to

29:08

everybody. And so, especially if you're

29:10

an innocent person. I'm just sitting down helping the

29:12

police. I'm like, oh, but I don't want

29:14

them looking at the porn on my computer or

29:16

whatever the thing is, right? I'm going to

29:18

hide that because I'm not concerned about them. That's

29:21

why it works because

29:23

you make little missteps

29:25

and lies and mistakes

29:27

during that interview, rapport

29:29

building phase, and then

29:31

once they drop the hammer, It's like you

29:33

already feel like you're committed you're in too deep

29:35

at that point like you gonna be like

29:37

But okay, okay, okay I was parked here because

29:39

you know like that's gonna make it worse

29:41

now if I'm like I do remember I parked

29:43

I parked here I did this so it's

29:46

not like it's my point is it's not a

29:48

it's not a fair really comparison or thought

29:50

to make that Well, he was being you know

29:52

Whatever he was doing wasn't as bad as

29:54

murder. He would have came out with it I

29:56

I don't think that you're probably right if

29:58

he knew at the beginning that he was a

30:00

prime suspect in the murder, but he didn't

30:02

know that at the time when he was saying

30:04

those things. Well, I think the

30:06

pushback on that is from just to acknowledge

30:08

some of these posts, the pushback on

30:10

that would be like, at

30:12

some point post this

30:14

interrogation interview, however

30:16

you want to put it, that at some

30:18

point, you know, does Ed say, okay,

30:20

I lied about the ride because I didn't

30:22

want my mom to know I took

30:25

the car. Like, where is that? I think

30:27

people are. Saying like okay sure in

30:29

this interview, but where in the course of

30:31

him being found guilty through that entire

30:33

process Is is him saying all right i'm

30:35

gonna come clean it was this thing

30:37

which i know is horrible, but it's still

30:39

Better than murder well the problem is

30:42

though like he didn't testify to destroy like

30:44

once it once he he's arrested You

30:46

know we don't get stories from him anymore,

30:48

but also That listener or you whoever

30:50

brought that name up is the perfect example

30:52

Took ed 18 years before he admitted

30:54

that he lied the why he lied about

30:57

Which car he took. Yeah, that's why I

30:59

brought it up actually. Yeah. But I'll

31:01

turn over to you, Scott, your thoughts. So

31:03

just another, Susan is

31:05

in the comment section and said,

31:07

you know, is he more worried to

31:09

lose Hathi? Which I think is

31:11

a really great point because what if

31:14

this relationship is so important to

31:16

him that what could be discovered, what

31:18

could be revealed about searching the

31:20

house could be devastating because he seems,

31:22

and Bob even pointed this out,

31:24

this is a guy that really, really

31:26

is super, super enmeshed with, with

31:28

his, with his loved one. So the

31:30

other thing that, that confuses it

31:32

for me and somebody made a really

31:34

joke, a great joke in here,

31:36

which I was like, Oh my God,

31:38

they're talking about me because I'm

31:40

doing it right now. I just keep

31:42

talking, right? And like, I have

31:44

learned as an adult with ADHD, I

31:46

had to learn coping skills of going,

31:49

Oh, this person's eyes just went blank

31:51

that I've been talking to for a

31:53

half an hour about Battlestar Galactica. Right,

31:55

because that's my interest. It's not their

31:57

interest. Let me pull it back a

31:59

little bit. So I

32:01

see him doing a lot. So

32:03

I'm trying to discern, as I'm

32:05

listening to him, what is the

32:07

motivation for him in giving all of this

32:10

information? There was a whole thing about the red

32:12

car. Was it the red car and the

32:14

black car? They're two different cars.

32:16

He's describing the two cars. And he tells

32:18

that separate story about how he fell asleep

32:20

at the wheel or something. Yeah, exactly. And

32:22

then it's like this whole other thing that

32:24

you're going You know you're here

32:26

being asked about a murder like why

32:28

are you talking about this right so

32:30

it made me wonder about sort of

32:33

does he have sort of the different

32:35

different cognitive makeup is he motivated by

32:37

hiding things. But then you

32:39

look at the big picture

32:41

of the superficiality of his comments

32:43

the too much information that

32:45

we don't know what the motivation

32:48

for that is is the

32:50

motivation to hide or to obscure

32:52

or to redirect the conversation. I

32:54

don't particularly and this is no, you

32:57

know, I don't know him personally, I

32:59

have not evaluated him. He doesn't seem

33:01

like he's that swift to be able

33:03

to make these calculated, you know, long

33:05

game plans to navigate this or redirect

33:07

the interview. So that's one thing. The

33:09

other is that it's overcompensating. So there's

33:12

a lot of overcompensating he does narratively

33:14

that. is indicative of something again this

33:16

all just circles back around to what

33:18

is he hiding right and why wouldn't

33:20

it have come out by now right

33:22

after all this time has passed the

33:24

guy has is clearly not doing very

33:27

well emotionally behaviorally mentally where he is

33:29

if there is another big secret why

33:31

hasn't that been revealed and used as

33:33

part of his defense that's yeah that's

33:35

That's kind of where, if I may,

33:37

I'll just add Lura, Lura V's post

33:39

in here while we're talking about kind

33:42

of whether or not someone has a

33:44

cognitive brain load to be able to

33:46

manipulate a conversation. I'll just throw this

33:48

in here. She says, it seems as

33:50

though Richard Allen knew exactly when police

33:52

officers moved from making him feel comfortable

33:54

to interrogation. So she disagrees with kind

33:57

of what I think we were just

33:59

saying a minute ago, which is like

34:01

they do sort of seamlessly blend into

34:03

it. But perhaps for Lura, she feels

34:05

that She felt that perhaps he did

34:07

know. What if he knew ahead of

34:10

time that they would eventually get there

34:12

via internet searches or watching a lot

34:14

of law and order, and was mentally

34:16

prepared to react, quote, correctly, quote. He

34:18

may have even practiced it in his

34:20

head ahead of time. Would that have

34:22

skewed the results, or do you believe

34:25

it is impossible for someone to do

34:27

so believably? If he did so, he

34:29

might not have thought out what to

34:31

say about where he parked the car

34:33

ahead of time, but he had Pat

34:35

answers for the rest of the questions.

34:37

If he was guilty, he would have

34:40

had a lot of time to think

34:42

about what he would say when asked.

34:44

I think that's given them way way

34:46

more credit in my opinion to like

34:48

to be that because you saw if

34:50

you watch the video and it sounds

34:52

like you watch it. Did you watch

34:55

the tech? Yeah, you did too. Yeah,

34:57

you see but to me is a very honest

34:59

react I think I said in the episode too

35:01

like not only can I see when they shifted

35:03

into the interrogation phase Richard Allen also

35:05

say cuz he like called it out. They

35:07

were like, yeah, they were like, you know

35:10

his body Yeah, his body language changed and

35:12

then he said it cuz he was they're

35:14

like, well, we're treating you good He's like

35:16

you were but something but this is a

35:18

change now all of a sudden you're treating

35:20

me like now you're in I think he

35:22

said now you're interrogating me It is like

35:24

like he that was the moment and I

35:26

was like, yeah, that's exactly what they're doing

35:28

That's exactly what just happened as they shifted

35:30

from interview to interrogation, but no, I don't

35:32

I don't think he was like I don't

35:34

I mean even our true crime audience People

35:36

that have been listening to my show for

35:38

for years and years and years and have

35:40

heard just talk about read technique over and

35:42

over again I'm still not sure that a

35:44

huge overwhelming majority of this audience fully understands

35:46

the process of the read technique In general

35:48

to the much of word like because he

35:50

watched a lot of dateline He knows you

35:52

know for him to know like well first

35:55

they're gonna do this then they're gonna do

35:57

this then they're I don't I don't think

35:59

so. I don't know what he knows the

36:01

TV version Right, but also. Yeah, if this

36:03

that is any bit true. He's the best

36:05

actor I've ever seen. Yeah That would be

36:07

giving him a lot of credit that just

36:09

doesn't seem consistent for his life. I

36:11

want to circle back to the parking thing

36:13

too. I don't disagree with you guys at

36:15

all. And I know that

36:17

it's both sometimes slightly useful and also

36:19

like utterly dangerous and not useful

36:21

to apply to ourselves. But when we

36:24

are social creatures and when we

36:26

see behavior, we do tend to ask

36:28

ourselves like, Is it possible I

36:30

would have a similar reaction for perhaps

36:32

an innocent reason in the same

36:34

situation? So I was just kind of

36:37

thinking about, for example, there

36:39

is a really beautiful, great park

36:41

in San Antonio where Brandon's family is.

36:44

And whenever we go to San

36:46

Antonio, we always go to that park.

36:48

The parking areas are so confusing

36:50

to me. If

36:53

we go from one direction, we go in,

36:55

and I think we're in a totally different parking

36:57

area, and it turns out we're in the

36:59

same parking area. We just came at it from

37:01

a different way, and I've been there many,

37:03

many times. Truly, if I thought

37:05

I was just going in to help someone,

37:07

and I genuinely didn't think I was

37:09

a suspect, and I was just being

37:11

asked a question I wasn't expecting, which

37:13

is like, it is important for us to

37:16

know where you parked. Or even

37:18

if I just didn't, that's just not

37:20

something I had paid attention to. I could

37:22

absolutely see myself just verbal diary -ing, trying

37:24

to walk through everything, not so unlike

37:26

what he did. I'm not saying it's exactly

37:28

the same, but I just wanted to

37:30

leave a little room for the possibility or

37:32

just get your opinion, because I could

37:34

just see myself being like, okay, if we

37:36

had come from breakfast... that's I know

37:38

we go on you know hard burger road

37:40

to do what you know I'm saying

37:42

like I just I can totally see him

37:44

not remember I mean and to me

37:46

honestly I think that's given quite a bit

37:48

of credit even with that because one

37:50

it was like the next day he's in

37:52

there like giving statements about where he

37:54

was parking was a significant day to like

37:56

they I believe they had presented with

37:58

him what he had said in this previous

38:00

statement about oh they did okay well

38:02

then yeah like they told him like you

38:04

said then you parked at the farm

38:06

bureau so like to me it felt very

38:08

like it seemed like very obvious avoidance

38:10

it was like Yeah. Every time we want

38:12

to ask you where'd you park, you

38:14

told them then you parked here at the

38:16

Farm Bureau, where then it

38:18

was like, let me tell a story about

38:20

wrecking my car, you know, like anything

38:22

to get away from it is kind of

38:24

how I felt about it. Yeah. Do

38:32

you say data or data? In

38:35

my house, we say data. But no matter

38:37

how you say it, for the longest time I

38:39

thought it was totally normal to shell out

38:41

a ridiculous amount of money every month just to

38:43

use that data. That was until I found

38:45

out about Mint Mobile. Now let

38:47

me tell you, switching to Mint was like flipping a switch

38:49

on my wireless bill. Their premium

38:51

wireless plan started just 15 bucks a

38:53

month. I made the jump and

38:55

I've been blown away by how smooth everything's

38:57

been. No drop calls, super fast data, and

39:00

crystal clear service. Honestly, it's

39:02

been just as good as my old

39:04

provider at a fraction of the cost. So

39:06

say bye -bye to those overpriced wireless plans,

39:09

the draw -dropping bills, and the surprise charges

39:11

that show up like a bad plot twist.

39:14

Mint Mobile is here to rescue you. Every

39:16

plan comes with high -speed data, or

39:18

data, just take your pick, and

39:20

unlimited talk and text, all

39:22

delivered on the nation's largest 5G

39:24

network. You can even keep

39:27

your own phone, your number, and all your

39:29

contacts. No weird switching hassles or new device

39:31

headaches. And right now,

39:33

you can ditch overpriced wireless and

39:35

get three months of premium

39:37

service for just $15 a month.

39:39

No matter how you say

39:41

it, don't overpay for it. Shop

39:44

data plans at mintmobile.com slash

39:46

truth and justice. That's

39:48

mintmobile.com slash truth and

39:50

justice. Upfront payment of

39:52

$45 for three months, five gigabyte

39:54

plan required. New customers

39:56

offer for the first three months only

39:58

then full price plan options available. Taxes

40:01

and fees extra. See Mint Mobile

40:03

for details. Scott,

40:15

I wanted to ask you before we go into

40:17

too many of those other questions. We

40:19

touched on a little bit, but I

40:21

was yapping and you were just sitting

40:24

there. The element of when they made

40:26

the shift in interrogation mode and they

40:28

started kind of Presenting with

40:30

with with the evidence and sort of

40:32

pushing against him and his reaction to that.

40:34

What did you? Did you have

40:36

a similar reaction to mine or what

40:38

were which was like, huh? That the posture

40:40

changed everything that he seemed very confident

40:42

that but what were your thoughts about that

40:44

part of the interview? Yeah, I mean,

40:47

I didn't I think I was prepared for

40:49

it I was thinking that it was

40:51

gonna be a lot more overt. It was

40:53

gonna be bigger I thought it was

40:55

actually pretty subtle. It was almost like my

40:57

interpretation was Not necessarily an

40:59

indication of guilt, but an

41:01

indication of, oh, I'm screwed. You

41:04

know, that was mine. Because, you know,

41:06

we've seen, I mean, all of us here,

41:08

how many in tapes have we looked

41:10

at? Even like with the pinion pines, like

41:12

all of those interrogation tapes. And there

41:14

are some, you see some very

41:16

big body motions, especially from the

41:18

kids, the teenagers that are being interviewed

41:20

and stuff. This one to me

41:22

was a lot more subtle, but I

41:24

did see something. you know,

41:26

I felt like something was happening in his

41:29

thought process. You know, he just feels

41:31

like I'm in, like you were saying earlier,

41:33

I'm in deep. But I didn't feel,

41:35

I mean, it wasn't like, you know, I've

41:37

seen evaluations where people throw themselves back,

41:40

you know, where they do that thing, where

41:42

they lean back in their chair to

41:44

exaggerate, like I'm really relaxed and I'm comfortable

41:46

with this, where you know, oh, no,

41:48

this is, this is really a defensive way

41:50

of trying to. push back against they

41:52

know it knowing that they're screwed. Yeah, for

41:54

me it was it was less you

41:56

know there was there was a definite obvious

41:59

shift in posture but but as far

42:01

as the it was me to me it

42:03

was more about what he was what

42:05

he was verbalizing you know what you're looking

42:07

for in that phase of the interrogation

42:09

is like you're tripping them up and now

42:11

you're what you want to happen next

42:13

is for them to start making excuses and

42:15

part of the the read technique is

42:17

then to like offer them excuses right like

42:20

Oh, maybe we're there. Maybe it was

42:22

an act. You know, maybe they did this

42:24

and it was it was just the

42:26

next step is to try to get you

42:28

to admit you did something, but maybe

42:30

it was an accident or maybe it wasn't

42:32

your fault or something like that. It's

42:35

all like death by a thousand cuts

42:37

is the way the read technique works, right?

42:39

So you're just like, first I got

42:41

you to commit. You put a story on

42:43

the record. Now I've convinced you that

42:45

you've lied about that. Now you're on the

42:47

offensive. Now I'm going to make some

42:50

suggestions until you'll give us you know, an

42:52

excuse like, okay, yeah, I was there,

42:54

but I didn't do the, and now you're

42:56

there. Well, now you did it, but it was

42:58

an accident, right? And so like, when I

43:00

expected him to start making excuses

43:02

about the thing, I'm to be careful

43:04

because I started analyzing the second

43:06

interview and I'm trying to separate my

43:08

brain, one from the other. So

43:10

I don't want to go too far

43:12

with this, but in that point,

43:14

instead of where you start, where I

43:16

would have expected maybe some backpedaling,

43:18

To some trying to explain things. I

43:20

just I just what it seemed

43:22

to me was like a very strong

43:25

is like oh like No, you're

43:27

trying to say absolutely not there's nothing

43:29

like there was he gave nothing

43:31

He gave he would once it came

43:33

to we think you might have

43:35

done this or been involved It was

43:37

like all a sudden like I'm

43:39

going to powerfully and consistently tell you

43:41

absolutely not this is crazy What

43:43

are we doing here? This is nuts.

43:45

I'm not doing this now. You

43:47

piss me off. You know It was

43:49

just that reaction caught me off

43:51

guard. When he

43:53

ramped up to that,

43:55

the first thing I thought

43:57

of was Patsy Ramsey.

44:00

When Patsy Ramsey really pushes

44:02

back against the police

44:04

after, and again, that's a

44:06

whole other case, but the public was,

44:08

or the police were so... dug their

44:10

heels in when she said well, then

44:12

you need to go back and do

44:14

your effin work and figure this out

44:16

and get you know Because she had

44:19

she was exhausted by it and I

44:21

thought wow. He's really pushing back Hard

44:23

in a way that seems That was

44:25

not like like that was saying I

44:27

don't think he's that good of an

44:29

actor right now either again doesn't indicate

44:31

guilt or innocence I know we keep

44:33

saying that over and over again I

44:35

just think it's important because God knows

44:37

how many people are gonna take anything

44:40

that we say out of context But

44:42

it is notable like to use

44:44

a clinical term if I'm doing

44:46

evaluation or writing a note or

44:49

writing a piece. It's like it's

44:51

a notable reaction that is not

44:53

consistent with what you would expect

44:55

from someone who's already been through

44:57

this long of a process with

44:59

them. Yeah. And

45:02

to me, the word

45:04

I keep choosing myself is confidence,

45:06

but I just didn't get

45:08

the feeling from him during that

45:10

part. That he had any

45:13

worry at all that they were going to

45:15

prove he did this It was just like

45:17

it was kind of like fuck you. I'm

45:19

done being nice. You're trying to accuse me

45:21

of murder now. Hell. No, I didn't do

45:23

this I'm not worried about it do what

45:25

you got to do because I there was

45:27

just I don't know in interviews I used

45:29

to live talked about this to show there

45:31

before but there used to be a show

45:33

on oxygen Called criminal confessions and I loved

45:35

it and that was about the time I

45:37

was working with Jim Clemente a lot and

45:39

he was like training me and a lot

45:41

of the stuff So I would watch every

45:43

episode of it because they were these were

45:45

people that were guilty They were proven later

45:47

to be guilty and you got to watch

45:49

the entire interrogation process and you watch How

45:52

they react when they make that shift and

45:54

it was just like This was just so

45:56

different from that notable. I guess it was

45:58

just like Oh, he's like he's a really

46:00

good actor or he's really not worried. They're

46:02

gonna find evidence and and again, I'm My

46:04

brain just bled over to the next interview

46:06

again. So I'm going to pull back before

46:08

I might want to see what you're doing

46:10

next week's got to because I have you.

46:12

First of all, have you seen the second

46:14

interrogation yet? No, but I'm ready to watch

46:16

it now. Now that now you've hooked me

46:18

into this whole other thing, I have to

46:20

go like bury myself. That interview involves them

46:22

really like that really presenting presenting him with.

46:24

some hard evidence and his reactions to it.

46:26

It's interesting. So maybe we can get you

46:28

back next week again too. That'll be an

46:31

interesting one. But let's keep going on with

46:33

this one now before I spill the beans.

46:35

But I would quickly say just as

46:37

a side note, I think what's interesting

46:40

about behavioral analysis is that using the

46:42

John Bernay Ramsey case as a really

46:44

good example, you can have five behavioral

46:46

analysts look at One thing and they

46:48

all like half of them say that

46:50

that that they are just they decided

46:52

that that use of that word means

46:55

that that person guilty and then the

46:57

other half are like i use the

46:59

tools a totally different way and to

47:01

me i'm seeing an indication of innocence

47:03

now we're not doing that either way

47:05

with the richard ellen interview but a

47:08

tool is a tool but it's still

47:10

in the hands of a human being

47:12

so still things are getting filtered through. our

47:15

own lens and the other pieces of evidence

47:17

that we're choosing to look at. And I

47:19

just wanted to point that out. Yeah. And

47:21

that's precisely why I wanted Dr. Scott to

47:23

come on and even why I use the

47:25

chat GPT because I don't, there's people that

47:27

are like all behavioral analysis is reading tea

47:29

leaves. I don't subscribe to that school of

47:31

thought. I think there's definitely something to it.

47:34

I think it is overused. It is used

47:36

to do things that it can't be used

47:38

for. You can't watch this interview. We're like,

47:40

he's guilty. Like that's, you can't like. Yeah,

47:42

or the human lie detectors. I think that's

47:44

bullshit. My personal opinion. Absolutely bullshit. Yeah. But

47:47

I do think there's something too. If

47:49

you sit there and watch somebody and

47:51

get a good baseline on them for

47:53

15, 20 minutes, and then you present

47:55

them with a question and you watch

47:57

their posture, their tone, everything change, I

47:59

think it's notable that there was a

48:01

behavioral change there. And I think that

48:03

it's something worth, I don't think it's

48:05

not worth analyzing and interpreting, but

48:07

I don't think it's the end. It's all data.

48:09

Yeah, and you want as much data as you can.

48:12

And then the job is to filter through it.

48:14

And I think that that's where AI isn't. I

48:16

don't know if it will ever

48:18

be there, but like the human

48:20

experience and expertise and filtering that

48:23

information is what's so important. And

48:25

like, look, I do have to

48:27

make one comment about, you know,

48:29

sort of immersing yourself in the

48:31

read technique. And look, it is

48:33

the gold standard for doing this

48:36

kind of work. But it doesn't.

48:38

Again, it's it's looking through a

48:40

particular lens. Yeah. And if you

48:42

are given a list of videos

48:44

to watch where it has worked,

48:46

then it's creating a bias because

48:49

you're only looking at the times

48:51

that it absolutely has been successful.

48:53

Yeah. You know, I should point

48:55

out, I hate the re -technique.

48:57

You know, I'm looking, I can see

48:59

the aspects of it. I've studied, I was

49:01

taught it years ago when I did

49:04

it and then You know, I've studied it

49:06

since for like statement analysis. So like,

49:08

so I recognize the how it works and

49:10

what they're doing and what they're trying

49:12

to do. But it also as the creator

49:14

of the read technique, as said, like, it's,

49:17

it's too powerful of a tool and

49:19

it's, it's so good at getting confessions, it

49:21

gets people to confess when they didn't

49:23

do it. That's it. Yeah. That's my big

49:25

problem with it. It's, you know, and

49:27

there are other tools, you know, Shiloh and

49:29

I. You know, she had been doing

49:31

this before as law enforcement or been exposed

49:33

to it. But my first exposure to

49:35

polygraph was us doing our internships together with

49:38

sex offenders. And, you

49:40

know, our polygraphers came in

49:42

and they were evangelical

49:44

about it. Like there was

49:46

no, no error. This

49:48

is 100 % correct. And

49:50

I was like, my mama

49:52

didn't raise me to

49:54

fall for who do. Yeah,

49:56

quickly. We need to look at

49:58

this. Is it a tool for black

50:00

robe effect? Yes, it's a

50:03

tool for black robe effect, much as

50:05

many of the techniques in the

50:07

reader, but it's not working if it's

50:09

getting a forced confession, a false

50:11

confession out of somebody. Yeah, that's a

50:13

tool that's it's working, but it's

50:15

not working in the correct way. Yeah,

50:17

I say this all the time

50:19

in the very first chapter of the

50:21

read technique book, it literally says

50:23

it's psychological warfare. And speaking of

50:26

polygraphs, as you get later into the

50:28

chapters, we'll get an interrogation phase. One of

50:30

the things that suggests is get them

50:32

to take a polygraph and whether they pass

50:34

or fail, lie to them and tell

50:36

them they failed. Oh, that's so scary and

50:38

awful. It is. Oh, excuse me, get

50:40

a lawyer, get a lawyer, lawyer. And that's

50:42

also, and that's in the manual that

50:45

you're being ethical enough to read and understand.

50:47

And the rest of the public doesn't

50:49

know that. Right. Right. You know,

50:51

they're being fed one fraction of what's

50:53

going on and going, oh, well,

50:56

these guys know what they're doing. And

50:58

they held this teenager for 16

51:00

hours until they were exhausted and dehydrated

51:02

and blah, blah, blah. And they,

51:04

the teenager confessed to these multiple murders.

51:06

Well, how, you know, garbage in, garbage

51:09

out, as far as data is concerned, that

51:11

situation. Yeah. Well, and

51:13

just to call out Jen, because

51:15

I know you posted this on the

51:17

Facebook post as well, Jen, and

51:19

you're here in the chat. Jen thought

51:21

that this had been widely accepted

51:23

and understood by larger groups than the

51:25

ones sitting here, that it's out

51:27

there, that the re -technique has been

51:29

largely discredited or had been discredited because

51:31

of false confession. That's

51:33

not true. We just want to draw a

51:35

circle around it. By

51:38

and large, it's still like, that's what

51:40

we use and that's what goes into

51:42

a court of law. Listen, there are

51:44

defense attorneys and defense experts that will

51:47

attack it and cite examples of it

51:49

and how to try to push against

51:51

a false confession in court. But

51:53

no, I mean, there's a Supreme Court

51:55

ruling that says the police can lie

51:57

to you. So there's certainly no Supreme

51:59

Court, there's no law that says you

52:01

can't use these manipulative tactics to break

52:03

somebody down to give a confession. because

52:05

I think the overwhelming majority. think there

52:07

is no such thing as a false

52:09

confession. Like I think that most people

52:11

still think like this tool is fine

52:13

because people would never confess to something

52:15

they didn't do period. Like they keep

52:17

thinking that that persists. Or they recognize

52:19

that there are false confessions, but they're

52:21

like, what is it? One out of

52:23

a million, you know, like I don't

52:25

think people collateral damage. It's like when

52:27

I when I've interviewed Jim Trainham, he

52:29

said, he's like, everybody thinks I would

52:31

never. But the way he put

52:33

it to me was There is a particular

52:35

gun that you can hold to everybody's head,

52:37

even yours, that will get you to do

52:40

it. Oh, I totally confess. Yeah.

52:42

I would totally confess. Right. It's

52:44

interesting. There are some people that

52:46

won't, that actually there's a narrow part

52:48

of the population and people that

52:50

are neuro -atypical like on the autism

52:52

spectrum. Yeah. Like really, really high functioning.

52:55

is true. Because it's not the

52:57

way they're wired. They're like, nope, I

52:59

don't. I don't why I cannot they can't

53:01

be manipulated that way. Yeah, that's like you

53:03

guys talk about that on your show Because

53:06

I really love to hear more about that.

53:08

We should and you guys I'm so sorry.

53:10

This is fascinating, please I would love to

53:12

come back next week if you'll have me

53:14

I got a client coming in the door

53:16

in 30 seconds same time same channel next

53:18

week if you're available. Hi guys. Thanks doctor

53:20

Scott. Thanks doctor Scott. Bye

53:22

That's what we got to do is just wrote

53:24

people into stuff, like in the moment live, when

53:27

they have to do it. it here, Dr. week.

53:29

We just made him commit to it. I can't

53:31

wait, because I went through my second pass of

53:33

the second interview today, and I have strong opinions

53:35

about it. Well, so I made a note in

53:37

my phone, and you told us all listeners to

53:39

make a note of it when he talks about

53:41

that I told my wife that I was down

53:43

there, so that now we have to go to

53:45

the police station. Yeah. Yes. You

53:47

definitely told us to end that. Yeah. So I've

53:49

made that note. I'm very curious to see where that

53:51

goes next week. I've

53:53

got different thoughts on that now

53:55

too, but I'll save it. Uh -oh. So

53:59

here's what I would say. I know

54:01

we've been doing this a while. I

54:03

also am going to have to break

54:05

loose pretty soon. We didn't get to

54:07

a ton of literal actual questions and

54:10

comments. Jen, I was able to give you a

54:12

shout out. We talked about Tori and Nancy. One thing

54:14

that I didn't want to do with Scott

54:16

because he wasn't brought in here to talk

54:18

about facts of the case or Delta Innocence

54:20

was address. some of the posts that are

54:22

more in line with like the evidence and

54:24

how the evidence comes into play or lack

54:26

thereof with what he did or didn't say

54:28

or what they did or didn't get out

54:30

of him. Do you want to take a

54:32

couple of minutes to talk about that and

54:34

address a couple of those or do you

54:36

want to just push to next week and

54:38

like see where we are? Yeah, I think

54:40

we'll wait because we're already over 50 minutes

54:42

in and I really want to, because that's

54:45

the problem with this case in a lot

54:47

of cases, right, is everybody wants to take

54:49

what you're saying and then like

54:51

when we were analyzing the Bridge Guy video with

54:53

Dr. Shiloh, right? And take it to

54:55

what they know about the case, what the facts of the

54:57

case is that innocent or guilty, what does

54:59

it mean? Their biases seep into it.

55:01

And I don't want this to be about that.

55:03

I don't want anybody walking away from this thing

55:05

that, well, Bob thinks that Richard Allen's innocent or

55:07

Bob thinks Richard Allen's guilty. I'm

55:10

just, you know, as we're getting

55:12

stuff fed out to us, trying to

55:14

look at one piece at a time, what

55:16

does this thing tell us? And then,

55:18

you know, later we can talk about how

55:20

that fits into the bigger picture. But

55:22

I don't think it's a useful conversation for

55:24

this conversation to break to get into

55:26

all that evidentiary stuff. Yeah. Okay.

55:29

And I will say just shouting out

55:31

readers or listeners like Christina and people

55:33

who, and Nancy, no one's saying like,

55:35

I think this means he's guilty or

55:37

innocent. I think they're just saying, you

55:39

know, postulating like, and, and the fish,

55:41

you know, they're there. We should talk

55:43

about the fish. Yeah. I

55:45

wanted to just touch on that because we

55:47

definitely had people push back on that and say

55:49

that's that I don't that they didn't feel

55:51

that you should have said that as an absolute

55:53

Yeah, somebody said it to me and to

55:55

be clear. I wasn't saying it as an absolute

55:57

what I was saying was in my You

55:59

know what I was giving you was my opinion

56:01

and I think what I said was I

56:03

feel confident saying from my perspective that That's not

56:05

what he was doing. I did have people

56:07

share with me that Ali Mada had gone out

56:10

there and there's a video out there for

56:12

her and then Dr. Laura Lee had given a

56:14

really good clear video from the bridge to

56:16

show that you could see fish from up there.

56:18

I still, I would be more comfortable with

56:20

I go up there and looking for fish was

56:22

in another review. I think at one point

56:24

he does say looking to see if I could

56:26

see fish or something along those lines. The

56:29

problem is so like,

56:31

and Dr. Lee's, not

56:33

Dr. Lee and lawyer Lee's video, you know,

56:35

she zooms to like, look how clear

56:37

it is. You can see, and she says

56:39

like, I see a fish, I see

56:41

a fish, but she zooms in and it's

56:43

not, it's a log. It's not a

56:45

fish. So there's a couple things there that...

56:47

The water is exceptionally clear, at least

56:49

on the one side of the bridge. It's

56:51

exceptionally clear for you to look down. You

56:54

can see from the shadows, at least in,

56:56

I remember, Alley Mottas, that the sun was kind of low at

56:58

that point, which makes it easier to see in, as opposed

57:00

to Richard Allen saying he's there around one in the afternoon.

57:02

I think it's probably more like two or three, or two o

57:04

'clock, than he's there. When the sunset, I

57:06

mentioned polarized glasses, because there's help with the

57:08

reflection that's coming off of the water. It

57:10

makes it harder to see down into the

57:12

water. So you have like amber colored polarized

57:14

glasses, you could certainly see better. The issue

57:16

I have with it is the type of

57:19

fish in there. So like in a river

57:21

like that, that's what I was looking to

57:23

see. Like, does that somehow feed out into

57:25

like the Great Lakes? And there's like a

57:27

salmon run through there because like that's something

57:29

to watch. If you're up there, these, you

57:31

know, big 15, 20 pound fish that are

57:33

coming up in giant schools that are, you

57:35

know, feeding on the surface and they're spawning,

57:37

like that's something to watch. The type of

57:39

fish that are in that stream are smaller.

57:42

And much more camouflaged fish, you

57:44

know, you've got, you know, smallmouth

57:46

bass and bluegill, which are little

57:48

bitty fish. It's, you know, so

57:50

to, to the point, I'll say,

57:52

yeah, it's not an absolute. I'm

57:54

not saying, and if I did then

57:56

that I'm saying now, like I'm not saying

57:58

there's no way he could possibly absolutely

58:00

have been looking at fish. All I'm saying

58:02

is I don't not, not only that,

58:04

but the kind of the way he was

58:06

talking about it, it seemed like he

58:08

was, it was kind of. replacing

58:10

something else, but also it just

58:12

seems like, like to go stand up

58:14

and look 63 feet down to

58:16

look at, you know, for those of

58:19

you that don't know, a smallmouth bass is

58:21

a copper colored fish with a little bit of

58:23

black on it. Like they're, they're designed to

58:25

blend into the bottom. Like, you know, and they,

58:27

and they stay in deep holes. They don't,

58:29

they're not in the shallow as like a trout

58:31

is, you know, so they're, they're down deeper

58:33

in the darker spots of the water. So that's

58:35

what I meant. Like, And I

58:37

think to piggyback off your point, I think there's

58:39

a difference between him saying he went to watch the

58:41

fish and went to see if he could see

58:43

fish. Because I could see you going out there and

58:45

go, I want to see if I can see

58:47

anything. Yeah. Absolutely. But

58:49

to say you were watching them, that's a much different

58:51

story. Yeah. And that was when I did go

58:53

back through and check that because somebody pointed it out

58:55

to me that he does kind of say, I

58:57

think if I remember correctly, like the first couple of

58:59

times he's like, I go up there and I

59:01

look at the fish. And then there was like,

59:03

I think it was like a third time or another time down,

59:05

he said, I was out there to see if I could see

59:07

the fish, you know. Yeah. A couple of

59:09

things for me, and then I do need to jet. And

59:11

I'm sorry, I said jet, I'm already embarrassed that

59:13

I used that term. Susan, shout out to you,

59:16

Susan. Susan did some

59:18

research was looking to try to

59:20

figure out if there was trout

59:22

and the DNR website and walleye

59:24

kind of listing different areas in

59:26

the area. A couple things. Just

59:28

to acknowledge a couple of other

59:30

posts like people from Tiffany or

59:32

Nancy, this I am

59:34

not suggesting this. I don't think they

59:36

are either. It is a question.

59:38

It is an open -ended question. But

59:40

I would like your opinion on whether

59:42

63 feet is high enough that

59:44

if somebody who had felt that they

59:46

wanted to end their lives in

59:48

the past, would that be a

59:51

place that you might go to think about

59:53

what it would be like if you jumped? Yeah,

59:56

and I saw some of those comments

59:58

and like I'd said it to me and

1:00:00

seem like Dr. Scott kind of felt

1:00:02

the same way like he was hiding something

1:00:04

he didn't want it known what he

1:00:06

was doing there and somebody a few people

1:00:08

have made this suggestion like what if

1:00:10

he was out there to either consider or

1:00:12

or maybe had a plan to end

1:00:14

his life out there. You know, he had

1:00:16

depression issues. He had a lot of

1:00:18

those things going out and I think that's

1:00:21

I think that's there's no way for

1:00:23

me to know if that's it. But is

1:00:25

that a reasonable, is that something that

1:00:27

you would try to kind of hide and

1:00:29

avoid in that conversation seven years later? Probably.

1:00:32

Yeah. Yeah, I think. Oh my God,

1:00:35

I can't. Living in that environment

1:00:37

and the nation that we live in

1:00:39

where we have a very negative

1:00:41

like relationship to mental health and being

1:00:43

a white male in the middle

1:00:45

of America. I would say I

1:00:47

was looking at fish. I wouldn't even feel, I

1:00:49

don't think I would even feel comfortable saying, I

1:00:51

just like to go there and meditate or like,

1:00:53

I like to go there and just think my

1:00:55

thoughts. I feel like in this context, you have

1:00:57

to have like a family. I'm

1:01:00

making a lot of assumptions here.

1:01:02

But I do, I mean, I have

1:01:04

friends who have gone much more

1:01:06

regularly to places like that alone and

1:01:08

they would not want their family

1:01:10

to know because many times you

1:01:12

go over and over. It's a thing you do.

1:01:14

It's almost like a release valve. It's like, I

1:01:16

don't have to do it today, but I can

1:01:18

just go and know I could. Yeah. And to

1:01:20

answer the question poignantly, 63 feet.

1:01:22

Yeah, absolutely. To put in perspective, I

1:01:24

had a friend, Becky and I had a

1:01:26

mutual friend years ago that, that passed

1:01:29

away after falling off. It was two rungs

1:01:31

high on a ladder and fell back

1:01:33

and hit his head and passed away. So

1:01:35

63 feet, definitely. Yeah. And,

1:01:37

and I think with that, let's go ahead. Janice got to go.

1:01:40

We're running long, so we'll go ahead and wrap

1:01:42

this thing up here, but make sure you

1:01:44

tune in on Sunday. I'm gonna be breaking down

1:01:46

Richard Allen's second interrogation video on Sunday, and

1:01:48

that sounds like we're gonna have Dr. Scott back

1:01:50

again next week to talk about that. Awesome.

1:01:52

So we'll see you guys then. Very cool. Thanks

1:01:54

for all the great feedback and questions, everybody. Bye,

1:01:57

guys. Truth

1:02:09

and Justice is an NBI

1:02:11

studio's production. Co -written and

1:02:13

produced by Erika Bergenheim. Music

1:02:15

for Season 15 is created and

1:02:17

composed by Kaden Ladislav. Follow -up

1:02:19

episodes are co -hosted by Janet Barney

1:02:21

and Zach Wieber. Our logo

1:02:23

font was created by Tate Krupa of

1:02:26

Red Swan Graphic Design. Our website

1:02:28

is created, managed, and maintained

1:02:30

by Katie Ross of CreatedInTandem.com. Thank

1:02:32

you to our volunteer transcription

1:02:34

team, Erica Cantor, Kathy McElhaney, Courtney

1:02:36

Wimberley, Kay Wood -Yomnick, Danielle Rohr,

1:02:39

Jennifer Athe, and Caroline Dwyer. Truth

1:02:41

and Justice provides all investigative and

1:02:43

advocacy work for the wrongfully convicted completely

1:02:45

free of charge. We're able to

1:02:47

do that in large part thanks to you, our

1:02:50

listeners, through your generous pledges on Patreon. Patreon

1:02:52

accounts for the overwhelming majority of

1:02:54

our funding. The number one way

1:02:56

you can support our work is

1:02:58

to become a patron at patreon.com

1:03:00

slash truthandjustice. For just $5 a

1:03:02

month, you'll get all episodes ad

1:03:05

-free, a bonus pre -game episode

1:03:07

every Wednesday, and also a video version

1:03:09

of the Friday follow -ups exclusive to

1:03:11

our patrons. Patrons also get

1:03:13

to participate and join the chat live in

1:03:15

many of our interviews and get early

1:03:17

access to much of our content. Just go

1:03:19

to patreon.com slash truth and justice to

1:03:21

sign up. You can also help us out

1:03:23

by going to iTunes and leaving us

1:03:25

a five -star rating and review. Doesn't cost

1:03:27

you a penny and goes a long way

1:03:29

towards making the show more visible. If

1:03:31

you have a new case that you'd like

1:03:33

us to consider, you can submit your

1:03:35

cases on our website, truthandjusticepod.com. Just click on

1:03:38

the case submission button and fill out

1:03:40

the form. You can always keep in touch

1:03:42

with us through our email at theories

1:03:44

at truthandjusticepod.com. You can like our Facebook page

1:03:46

or join in on the conversation on

1:03:48

the official Truth and Justice podcast fans page.

1:03:50

You can also connect with us on

1:03:52

social media platform X at Truth Justice Pod.

1:03:54

And to follow our personal accounts on

1:03:56

social media, I can be found at Bob

1:03:58

Ruff Truth, Janet can be found at

1:04:00

Janet Barney, and Zach is at the Z

1:04:02

to the Q. However you do

1:04:04

it, stay engaged and stay in touch.

1:04:07

But as for now, we're signing off.

1:04:09

I'm Bob Ruff. I'm Zach Weaver. And

1:04:11

I'm Janet Varney. And this has been

1:04:13

The Truth and Justice.