Highest Five

They’ve got the info. You want the info. How does one get a person to give up the info, when said person simply doesn’t wanna? The following is a short guide on how to properly interrogate someone, without the use of car battery clamps or soul shattering water drips.

Before You Interrogate

Whether it’s your child, an employee, a criminal suspect or a POW, you should have as complete a psychological profile of them as possible before you even begin your interrogation. The more you know about them the better your questions will be, and the more you can use certain information against them as leverage. It also really helps to have an in depth knowledge of human psychology and behaviour to properly interrogate a subject. Get the info, and lock ‘em up! (until pardons release them, of course…)

According to a “confidential” army manual on “Interrogation Procedures,” which I confidentially found on the internet, the following are some examples of human behaviour which are useful to know as an interrogator:

1. Human beings tend to be talkative, especially after harrowing experiences. If someone accidentally crashed their car into a truck filled with live chickens, its best to ask them questions about the experience as soon as possible, while the traumatic images and emotions are fresh in their brain, and while they still feel the need to tell the story.
2. Human beings tend to be deferential when confronted by superior authority, and are therefore inclined to be cooperative with persons demonstrating power. This is usually why kids crack easily when interrogated by parents, teachers, the police, or anyone significantly older or larger than they are.
3. Human beings seek opportunities to rationalize acts about which they feel guilty.
4. Human beings, under pressure, tend to forget what they have been taught, especially if such lessons have not been practiced to the point of becoming habitual. For example, if a soldier has learned interrogation resistance techniques, while under the excitement and strain of capture, he or she will forget what they’ve learned and are more vulnerable to questioning.
5. Human beings tend to attach less importance to their own information when someone else demonstrates that he too possesses the same or related information.
6. Human beings tend to appreciate flattery and exoneration from guilt.
7. Human beings resent the belittling of cherished individuals or ideals, and may be aroused to the extent of sharp verbal defense.

When I read through these I had to laugh. They reminded me of the time when three of my idiot friends and I were being interrogated at the age of 17 for vandalising cars. The detective must have been well versed in dumb-teenager psychology, ‘cause he used nearly every one of these examples to get me to spill the beans.

1. Humans are talkative: I was dragged into the police station just hours after they caught one of my friends near the scene of the crime. I was still slightly traumatized from being chased through the neighbourhood backyards by the damaged car owner and his huge friends.
2. Humans are deferential: He was a big cop with a big gun. I don’t think “deferential” quite covers how I was feeling that day. I was feeling a little closer to “pooping in my pants.”
3. Forgetful under stress:  Under the stress of being caught, the stress of the big cop with the big gun, and the stress of my mother being in the room, I completely forgot the whole “right to remain silent” thing. This is the greatest lesson I learned during the whole experience, one which I will pass on to my kids should they get themselves in trouble: Whenever the cops question you, NEVER forget that “YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT!” It’s the first right they read you, and there I was, worried that I’d get in more trouble if I kept quiet. Idiot!
4. Info no longer valuable: When the detective told me that one of my buddies had already sang about who was there and what they did, giving names and street locations, I felt that my info was no longer important and went on to confirm what they “already knew.”
5. Flattery and exoneration: When the cop told me I had lovely blue eyes, I told him everything he needed to know. Just kidding, but he did say that cooperation would look good in his report, which may affect the judge’s decision when sentencing. If I was in the mob, I wouldn’t have lived to be 18.
6. Belittling of cherished individuals: The detective never told me that he banged my mom last night, but if he had I would have been upset.

During the Interrogation

“America’s Policy should be to oppose torture, to honour the Geneva conventions, for several reasons. One is, it’s almost always counter productive. If you beat someone up they’ll tell you what you want to hear. Two is it really hurts us and the rest of the world, and helps to recruit other terrorists. And thirdly it makes our own people vulnerable to torture.” – Bill Clinton

If you pinned me down and started tickling the bottoms of my feet with a feather, I would very quickly admit to being the captain of a Somali pirate ship. This doesn’t necessarily make me a Somali pirate. When a questioner uses physical abuse during an interrogation he or she is demonstrating frustration, impatience, a lack of interrogation skills, and the information acquired is at high risk of being false. The following are some basic approaches to an effective interrogation, and to help illustrate I’ve decided to invite some friends from a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away.  Don’t ask why, just run with it okay?

1. The direct approach. Just come right out with it.  Darth Vader attempted this approach in “Star Wars IV: A New Hope”: “Where are those transmissions you intercepted? What have you done with those plans? If this is a consular ship, where is the ambassador?” This approach only works, however, when the interrogator knows that the interrogated will not refuse to give up information. Vader failed to pull up a psychological profile on the rebel before questioning him, and as a result he obtained no information, and the rebel obtained a crushed oesophagus.
2. Stressing the futility of withholding information. A person is more likely to talk if: a) They feel that defeat is already inevitable for their cause. b) Someone has already talked c) More casualties will result if the information is withheld. For this technique to work, the interrogator must be aware of any weaknesses the captor may possess in order to exploit them.  An example would be when Governor Tarkin interrogates Princess Leia as to the whereabouts of the secret rebel base. Even with the knowledge that her execution is imminent, Leia remains steadfast in her defiance. It is not until she discovers that her home planet of Alderaan  is about to be destroyed that she waivers. Tarkin knew Leia’s weakness was for the millions of innocent lives back home, and he exploited it. Leia refused to give up information until she heard the intercom voice announcing the Death Star’s approach to Alderaan, and knew that defeat was inevitable. Of course, this technique doesn’t always work, as Princess Leia demonstrated by lying in the end about the base being on Dantooine.
3. The emotional approach. When you toy with someone’s emotions you are more likely to get them to talk. People’s security walls come crumbling down when they begin to feel scared for their lives, angry about what you’re threatening to do to their country, sad about their family, or hatred towards you. When you have personal information about someone it becomes easier to manipulate their emotions towards your advantage. Being a Jedi is all about controlling your emotions. In “Return of the Jedi,” Luke Skywalker thought he had his emotions under control as he hid in the shadows from his evil father. There was nothing Darth Vader could say to get him to reveal his hidden location (the desired information) and fight. That is until Darth Vader threatened to turn his sister to the Dark Side of the force. Luke goes berserk and comes out of hiding, letting his anger, his fear, and his hatred get the better of him.

There are many variations of these techniques, where the interrogator can manipulate a captive by means of messing with their national pride, their egos, their sympathies, and many of which would work on most criminals, POWs, Jedis, and anyone in between. But unfortunately, as interrogators in Afghanistan, Cuba and Iraq have discovered, modern terrorists are unlike any enemy the military has encountered in the past, and they are dealing with people who don’t play by the army rule book. They do not answer direct questioning, they do not crumble under any form of intimidation, and they do not fall for any psychological or emotional games.

There has been a lot of talk in the media these days about the use of torture as an interrogation method, and where does one draw the line between harsh interrogation methods and torture. In Star Wars the line is pretty clear: Threatening to turn Leia to the Dark Side, Harsh. A floating black droid with needles sticking out everywhere, torture.

Do harsh methods work? According to a Kandahar interrogator, the answer is yes. “The harsher methods we used . . . the better information we got and the sooner we got it.” Apparently, in the face of frustration and futile interrogation techniques, there are even cases where soldiers are following the lead of “24’s” Jack Bauer: Doing “whatever it takes” to protect the country from attack. They seem to work 100% of the time on 24, so how does one interrogate an enemy invulnerable to interrogation? Feel free to respond in your comments.

As was mentioned earlier, when you beat up somebody they’ll tell you whatever you want to hear. Princess Leia pulled a fast one on Governor Tarkin when she told him that Dantooine was the location of the rebel base. So how does one tell when someone is lying to them? Watch Fox’s new television series “Lie to Me.” Not home Wednesday nights? Watch this clip from one of the world’s experts at lie detection, Steve Van Aperen.