Welcome to Community Sign in | Join | Help

Special interest Article;
Anthony J. Iantosca, BCFE

Body Language
The Torso of the body is the area of the body that we display how well feel. It is the area of the body that has very little movement. Unlike our faces, arms, hands, legs and feet that have much more movement and gives me much more information. The torso is where we will display ornaments such as jewelry, tattoos, shirts and blouses that have designer logos on them that show status. When animals and humans feel good about themselves and are in good health they maintain their fur, feathers and skin we maintain our clothing by keeping them clean and pressed. When a person has a problem or a possible pathology of some sort. You will see that their body and cloths are un kept, the cloths are dirty and  have a disheveled look to them.  
They are transmitting to the world, I am unhappy, I don't feel good about myself and I don't care anymore. Much can also be observed by the  colors a person choses and the amount of the torso that is visible in what is called "ventral fronting."  "Ventral fronting" is always perceived as being open and honest.
The choice of their suit  and how it is buttoned also gives us a great deal of information.
Many politicians will wear a low two buttoned suit jacket. This will give the maximum amount of "ventral fronting."
This is perceived as being open and honest. Governor Mitt Romney would have his suits tailor made in this exact fashion. He always wore two button suit jackets buttoned very low.  Men and women who wear a three button suit jacket with the buttons, buttoned very high up on the jacket are perceived as being  a somewhat closed off personality and is looked at as being somewhat dishonest. Research shows that people like Black or dark Blue colors for people who are in authority. Brown or tan colored suits are not very well liked.
The "Tunic" jackets or shirts that are buttoned very high up to the neck are always perceived as personalities who are very closed off to the world, secretive, somewhat deceptive and anti social. Look at the people who wore these "Tunic" style of cloths. Mao, Castro, Stalin, Hitler, Arafat and if you remember the old James Bond movie with the villain Dr. No who was this very evil person wore this "Tunic" jacket. These personalities are saying I am closed off to you, I am not open or honest nor am I accessible to you.
In last nights last debate between Clinton and Trump it was noted after the debate that Mrs. Clinton  wore white, in the first debate she wore red and in the second debate she wore blue. So Mrs. Clinton was showing the world how patriotic she is, wearing red, white and blue. I did not pay attention to the color of her clothing, I paid very close attention to the type of clothing she was wearing.
I found it very interesting last night that this same "Tunic" style of clothing was worn by Ms. Clinton. They must have missed that.
I sure as hell didn't.

Special interest Article;
Anthony J. Iantosca, BCFE

JonBenet Ramsey
Part two (2)

When analyzing a written or typed statement the examiner will look for red flags within the statement itself to detect for possible deception.
And to identify when deception has been identified. In Statement Analysis people mean exactly what they say. When a person or persons are committed to their statement their use of nouns, pronouns will remain consistent. Their personal dictionary will also remain consistent unless there is a justification for that change in their personal dictionary. This shows that they have a personal involvement in the actions being explained. They are speaking from their memory and not constructing the event from logic. We also look for punctuation and unique words and phrases just to name a few.
The complete two and a half page ransom letter is typed below exactly as it was found.

Mr. Ramsey,

Listen carefully! We are a group of individuals that represent a small foreign faction. We do respect your bussiness but not the country that it serves. At this time we have your daughter in our posession . She is safe and unharmed and if you want her to see 1997, you must follow our instructions to the letter.

You will withdraw $118,000.00 from your account. $100,000 will be in $100 bills and the remaining $18,000 in $20 bills. Make sure that you bring an adequate size attaché to the bank. When you get home you will put the money in a brown paper bag. I will call you between 8 and 10 am tomorrow to instruct you on delivery. The delivery will be exhausting so I advise you to be rested. If we monitor you getting the money early, we might call you early to arrange an earlier delivery of the money and hence a earlier delivery pick-up of your daughter.

Any deviation of my instructions will result in the immediate execution of your daughter. You will also be denied her remains for proper burial. The two gentlemen watching over your daughter do not particularly like you so I advise you not to provoke them. Speaking to anyone about your situation, such as Police, F.B.I., etc., will result in your daughter being beheaded. If we catch you talking to a stray dog, she dies. If you alert bank authorities, she dies. If the money is in any way marked or tampered with, she dies. You will be scanned for electronic devices and if any are found, she dies. You can try to deceive us but be warned that we are familiar with law enforcement countermeasures and tactics. You stand a 99% chance of killing your daughter if you try to out smart us. Follow our instructions and you stand a 100% chance of getting her back.

You and your family are under constant scrutiny as well as the authorities. Don't try to grow a brain John. You are not the only fat cat around so don't think that killing will be difficult. Don't underestimate us John. Use that good southern common sense of yours. It is up to you now John!



Statement Analysis of the ransom letter

Consistent use of pronouns

I was at the ATM machine getting cash out when I finished and walked outside a "man" came up behind me "he" put a gun to my back "he" took my money, "he" told me don't turn around or "I" will shoot you, "he" ran off. I called police. In this example the use of pronouns remained consistent.
There was only "one" man who was involved in the action being explained.

Inconsistent use of pronouns

I was at the ATM machine getting cash out when a "man" came up behind me when I finished "he" put a gun to my back "they" took my money, "he" told me don't turn around or "I" will shoot you, "they" ran off. I called police. In this example the use of pronouns were not consistent.
There was only "one" man who was involved in the action being explained. Yet the writer uses "he" and "they." This would indicate the
writer was making up the story or something else happened to to explain his lost money.

Ransom letter,

In the beginning of the ransom letter we have consistent use of the pronouns, "we" "we" "we" "us" They are talking as a group and should remain expressing themselves with a group mentality. As the ransom letter continues we see a deviation from that group mentality with the use of the following pronouns, "I" "I" "we" "we" "my" "I" "we" "us" "we" "us" "us." The use of the pronouns
"I" and "my" should not be present in the ransom letter when writing as a group.
This would indicate that the ransom letter was constructed from logic and indicates deception.

Consistent use of personal dictionary

If a person starts off writing about an event and calls a "gun" a "gun" they will use that same language throughout their statement.
Problems arise when the person calls the "gun" a "gun" then calls it a "pistol" "weapon" "firearm" etc. Unless there is a reasonable explanation for the change in their language.

Consistent use of personal dictionary

I was cleaning my "gun" my wife came over and tried to grab my "gun" I tried to keep my "gun" away from her as we fought, the "weapon" fired and my wife let go of the "gun." This would be acceptable because it remained his "gun" until it fired and then the 'gun" became a "weapon."

Ransom letter,

The kidnappers start the letter off with,

Mr. Ramsey a very polite way of addressing a man who's daughter you will behead if your demands are not met. They change their language and start calling him by his first name John. They should have continued calling him Mr. Ramsey
or just Ramsey, the use of his first name is a little to personal and intimate for people who do not know each other. When they changed from Mr. Ramsey to John there has to be a justification for the change as I explained in example above. This would also indicate the letter was written from logic and also indicates deception. Also in the statement we have this line" use that good southern common sense of yours." How do the kidnappers know he was from the South? The kidnappers also demanded $118,000.00 that was a very odd amount. These personalities types are very greedy and would have asked for much more money. $118,000.00 was the exact amount of a bonus he received from his company that year. Only someone close to the Ramsey's would know that exact amount.

Kidnappers would never state who they are as they did in the ransom letter, "We are a group of individuals that represent a small foreign faction." Kidnappers would never make that statement and help law enforcement reduce the possible suspect pool. The alleged kidnappers misspelled the words business and possession but spelled "attaché" correctly, even including the accent on the word "attaché." This would indicate to me that the author of the ransom letter was highly educated. In the known handwriting samples of Patsy Ramsey she used "exclamation points" sparingly in her written statements and letters. The use of exclamation points were also found in the ransom letter. The letter was signed "Victory! S.B.T.C there has been a lot of speculation as to what the letters S.B.T.C mean. At this time no one has come up with a reasonable explanation of the letters and their meaning.
How could you claim "victory' when you have not received any money yet. This is nonsense attempting to have people believe this was some sort of terrorists group.

The most damaging evidence found in this bogus ransom letter is the following unique words and statement,

The kidnappers state, "If we monitor you getting the money early, we might call you early to arrange an earlier delivery of the money and hence a earlier delivery pick-up of your daughter." The word "hence" is not a common word that most people use, the kidnappers used "and hence" the word "and" is not needed. When investigators were analyzing known handwriting samples from Patsy Ramsey they found a Christmas message written on December 14, 1997. The First United Methodist Church in Boulder, Colorado held a memorial service for JonBenet. There was a Christmas message from the Ramsey family that statement had the following words.

"Had there been no birth of Christ, there would be no hope of eternal life, and, hence, no hope of ever being with our loved ones again"

What are the chances of two different personalities and one being a foreigner use the exact same wording.

This ransom letter was staged by someone who wanted to confuse and interfere with a law enforcement investigation into the death of JonBenet Ramsey. Why would innocent people do this? Innocent people would not. The only innocent person in this botched investigation was that poor child JonBenet Ramsey.

Special interest Article;
Anthony J. Iantosca, BCFE

JonBenet Ramsey
Part one (1)

I do not know where to begin on this alleged kidnapping gone bad. This poor child was murdered in her own home buy someone yet to be identified. This murder is unsolved so I find it questionable that anyone including the Ramsey's are no longer suspects.
The staged ransom note found by Patsy Ramsey on the kitchen staircase that morning was a deliberate attempt to send investigators on a wild goose chase wasting valuable time and resources. The investigators would have seen right through this "ransom note" ploy if they had examined and conducted a Forensic Statement Analysis on the alleged ransom note. I will go into the ransom note in more detail in part two tomorrow.

Second asking John Ramsey to look through the house to see if anything was missing was a huge mistake. That was the responsibility of law enforcement. Why? So you do not have the possibility of cross contamination and if something was found, as it was in this case. John Ramsey found JonBenet in the basement. John Ramsey walked, stepped over and picked up his daughter and brought her back up stairs. John Ramsey also removed the tape covering JonBenet mouth. This action contaminated the crime scene. Law Enforcement should have taken numerous crime scene photos of JonBenet and the surrounding area for any and all trace evidence before moving the body. I also find it very interesting that John Ramsey waited for the police to ask him to search the house, any reasonable person would have torn the house apart looking for his daughter and outside the house as well.
Even if you had a ransom note stating that your daughter was kidnapped you would still search the house in the hope that you may find something that would help the investigators.
JonBenet was found with her favorite blanket covering her. This alone should have red flagged an investigator something was wrong.
Rapists and or murders do not take the time to care about their victims in such a loving / caring fashion. This is a subconscious sign of guilt. They rape you, kill you and leave you in a ditch or at least try to hide the body.
For someone to cover the body in her blanket tells me that someone who knew and cared for JonBenet killed her and felt guilt after the fact. Also this blanket was just washed and was in the dryer, how did the kidnappers know where to look? I say kidnappers because the alleged ransom note states such. This is where the ransom note becomes a key piece of forensic evidence.

Document Examination;

I do not know what procedures were used when the document examiners acquired known handwriting samples called exemplars (formal/informal standards) of Patsy Ramsey and John Ramsey to compare with the ransom letter. From everything I have read many of the document examiners who rendered an opinion of the author of the ransom letter, never examined the original ransom letter. They conducted their examination from photo copies of unknown generation. This would be the first question a judge in a court of law would ask. If they did not examine the original ransom letter, their opinion would be dismissed unless they could explain why the original was not examined that would be accepted by the court. Also Patsy Ramsey was ambidextrous so I would imagine they required exemplars (formal standards) of Patsy Ramsey's known handwriting using her right and left hand.

I would hope they used a similar writing instrument that was used on the ransom letter a flair tip pen was used, so flair tip pen to flair tip pen. Written on the same paper and writing pad. All handwriting exemplars (informal standards) obtained from the Ramsey's should have been written in or near the time period of the ransom letter.
The most important procedure that a competent handwriting expert would ask before taking handwriting exemplars (formal standards) if either Patsy or John Ramsey were under the influence of alcohol, any prescription drugs or sedatives of any kind. All of these listed will alter a persons true handwriting.
There is the possibility that two people wrote the note in an attempt to disguise the handwriting of the true author of the ransom letter.
I would have taken this into consideration and had both John and Patsy Ramsey write the note together taking turns, if using the exact wording on a reproduced document is allowed by the state of Colorado. Many states will not allow exact wording, formal standards, used for comparison in questioned document case of this nature.

Ransom note part (1)

Mr. Ramsey,

Listen carefully! We are a group of individuals that represent a small foreign faction. We do respect your bussiness but not the country that it serves. At this time we have your daughter in our posession . She is safe and unharmed and if you want her to see 1997, you must follow our instructions to the letter.


Now lets start off analyzing the first portion of the ransom letter. These psychopathic murders and rapists start off with Mr. Ramsey,
how polite these murders were. Lets look at the pronouns used in this portion of the ransom letter; "We" "we" "we" "our" and the collective noun "group." This would indicate that more than one person was involved in this crime. This is a very important piece of evidence when analyzing a statement for possible deception, the pronouns should remain consistent throughout the statement. If you are a "group" you will remain and keep a "group" mentality. We also have two misspelled words "bussiness" and "posession." I find it interesting that they misspelled very easy words because the author of the ransom note wanted investigators to believe they were foreigners but these so called foreigners were very good with their punctuation.
Something people who study ESL have a hard time with or misuse. Kidnappers would not care about their punctuation.

Kidnappers would be short and to the point such as;

"Ramsey we have your daughter get 500.000 by tomorrow or she is fucking dead we will call you with instructions do not call the police or we will kill her"

Also their note would have been pre written before hand and they would have had a rape kit with everything they would have needed to commit the crime and not waist time looking for items around the house.

So based on the ransom note a "group" of kidnappers came in through a basement window yet cob webs were still in place in that same window. A group of kidnappers found JonBenet in her bed and took her downstairs and decided to sexually molest and then kill her. After the murder the kidnappers decided to go back up stairs spend time looking for a pen and paper and spend almost twenty minutes handwriting a two and a half page ransom note while everyone was still sleeping in their beds. They used Patsy Ramsey's note pad and her pen to write this note. They also used Patsy Ramsey's paint brush to make a wooden garrotte to strangle JonBenet. These first time kidnappers seemed to know their way around the Ramsey household quite well. Then they all went back down stairs and put a suitcase in front of the same window they came in from because they could not get back out? Why didn't one of the other kidnappers help push one another other back out the window? Again, all this going on, with a group of adults coming in and out the basement window and the cob webs were still intact on the outside window area. These cob webs would have been disturbed if someone had come in through the window.
Tell me something? Why not just go out the back door? Kidnappers would not waist all that time going in and out of a window they could not reach or had trouble reaching. So lets make as much noise as possible trying to balance ourselves on a suitcase that might not be sturdy and fall over making unwanted noise. No one came in that window and no one went out that window. There was only one person involved in this murder, with the help of an accomplice or someone who knew what happened the night Jonbenet was killed.

More tomorrow in part two (2)

Special interest Article;
Anthony J. Iantosca, BCFE

The dark side of morbid jealousy.

Insecure personalities with extreme low self esteem who are extremely jealous and possessive will use violence to control and manipulate their targets. Many times than not they have used violence before. This is not the first time these personalities used aggressive or violent behavior patterns on their love interests/targets. I have taught you that "past behavior is indicative of future behavior" and "behavior reflects personality." Personalities who are extremely "jealous" who have morbid and or sexual jealousy, cannot handle being rejected by their love interest. These personalities are on emotional thin ice to begin with, losing their one magic person can and many times will send these people over the edge.

I have also taught you, getting to know someone takes time. When these personalities are triggered they will use violence by means of destroying your personal property, damaging your reputation, and in extreme cases physical assaults, rape and death are inflicted on their targets. This is their only face saving, emotional way out. They need to release their pent up frustration and anger. This loss of control over you is their worst nightmare. Remember the saying,

                                        "If I can't have you, nobody will."

Many times you will hear statements such as, "you will remember me" or "I will fix you" "you have not heard the last of me" "just wait and see what happens to you." These statements are threats which must not be taken lightly. It is very important that you take every means possible to protect yourself. Talk to your family, friends. Talk to the police, make people aware of your situation. You must be very alert when going out alone. These personalities will call, text, e-mail come by your house or place of work in an attempt beg forgiveness. They will plead for a second chance. They will say and do anything to get you back. Once violence has reared its ugly head in the relationship. The relationship is over. These personalities need help, their core issues of jealousy, insecurity and low self esteem must be addressed with the help of a licensed medical professional. Remember, these core issues were part of this personalities makeup long before they met you.

Research is quite clear, one out of every ten American women is beaten or abused by a husband or lover. Men can also be abused but the majority of reports that are reported to hot lines and police are by women. The number one mistake I see when talking to men and women on my sites is the attempt to start "rationalizing" away the abusers behavior. This is a very dangerous mind game you are playing with yourself.
The victim starts to take responsibility for the abuse, "maybe I should have not said this or done that." He or she didn't mean to act this way, I would have never dated him/her in the first place.

The reason for this is two fold; First, the victim does not want to look foolish that they choose this partner in the first place. Second, that they put time and energy into a relationship and they want believe their time was not wasted on this personality type. I could not be that stupid.
It is also very important that you do not start posting your personal life all over social media, after a breakup . These personality types are known to use Facebook, Instagram and other media outlets to stalk you. How do I know this? They have told me time and time again. Knowing you have a new love interest or how happy you are could trigger them into a "revenge seeking" patterns of behavior. Do not rub the breakup or your new love interest in their face all over social media. Not a very smart move on your part.
Until next time, be safe, smart and alert. If I can answer any questions please call me on my ex. 01155. I will send you free time so we can talk.

                                                    Anthony Iantosca, BCFE

Special interest Article;
Anthony J. Iantosca, BCFE
Therapeutic / Forensic Profiling
Threat Assessment
Personalities are as diverse as colors of a rainbow. We can fit a personality into a basic category based on their profile (emotional make up, intensity level, traits and behavior that is consistent over a period of time.) But that is where it ends. No two personalities will behave / act in the exact same way.
For example;   We have four primary colors Red, Yellow, Blue, Green. These four primary colors will give you every color in the color spectrum, depending on the percentages of how they are mixed together.  Personalities and their traits are much the same way. Personalities and their behavior patterns are on a bell curve.  A Dysfunctional Personality or narcissist who in the old days was called egomaniac or megalomaniac who is an emotional extrovert will act much differently  than an emotionally controlled Ambivert. Their core issues are the same but how they will express and act on those core issues will be much different.
 This is where many people get confused. I have four situations right now where all four personalities are Dysfunctional Personalities .Each one behaves and acts much differently than the other. Their Gas lighting and Defense tactics range from the silent treatment to violent  behavior. One client is ready for the insane asylum due to her husbands relentless badgering and accusations of her infidelity. In Forensic Profiling we would call this "Sexual Jealousy"  or "Morbid Jealousy"  which is the most dangerous. Any act of independence, setting up boundaries and addressing his behavior and not giving him, her complete undivided attention. Triggers his insecurity and abandonment fears. The last episode lasted over four days because she made a very innocent comment on a Actor in a movie he wanted to watch.  He used a tactic called "Baiting."  He asked her a question on a black actor who was in the movie, I like this actor myself by the way. She stated that she liked him as an actor. That was all it took, I have warned her to be careful when he asks her loaded questions.
This personality seems to recycle every four to six weeks. I have explained to her to watch his behavior after this time period, the change is always the same. He will start small fights, be in a bad mood, pick at her,  find fault with everything she does or says. He is looking to be pacified like a baby wanting his pacifier. This fight lasted four days, no matter what she said to explain herself he took it as she was being defensive and lying. When in this state of mind he as all  insecure Dysfunctional Personalities he/she will "Twist the facts to fit their Emotions."  Normal functioning personalities "Our Emotions fit the Facts"   I warned her that he was capable of violent behavior when I first profiled him, when they first met. He destroyed their house caused a great deal of damage to her, her home and  personal belongings. A Threat Assessment profile detected  his violent  behavior potential.  She remembered my initial profile on him and left the house before he could attack her. He has since calmed down and is acting like nothing happened. The next epoxide he beat her very badly over a statement she made that triggered his jealousy.
My client sent me the pictures of her beaten and bruised body. It broke my heart. She finely had had enough, she asked him to leave her home and got a devoice.
Never equate "jealousy" with love. Many people, male/ female who are insecure personalities themselves make this very serious mistake.  
Remember this statement "If I can't have him/her nobody will." This statement made by someone who is a very jealous personality could and will have very serious consequences.  
It could cost you, your life.

Special interest Article;
Anthony J. Iantosca, BCFE


So please tell me FBI what the word "intend" means? It is very simple. Let me lay it out for you. The word "intend" means a person has in mind to do something. It does not mean the person will do it. People always have great intentions. Every New Year people "intend" to start an exercise program, many never do. People accused of some type of wrong doing, "intend" to defend themselves in a court of law, most never do. The word "intend" does not mean "I will" or "I won't." It does not mean "I did" or "I didn't." It means "I might" or "I think."

Do you remember the movie "A few Good Men" do you remember when Tom Cruz was asking Jack Nicholson questions about following orders, Nicholson had stated that private Santiago was not to be touched, he was to be left alone. Do not give him a "code red." Cruz asks Nicholson are you sure your men obeyed your orders? Do your men always obey your orders? Nicholson is getting angry and states that men obey orders or men die. You got that! You got son! Tom Cruz turns around to Nicholson and states if your orders are always obeyed and private Santiago was in no danger, he was not to be touched because your orders are always obeyed. "Than why was private Santiago being transferred off the Base"

"Why the two orders?"

Now I will ask you Ms. Clinton if you had no "intention" to break the law, no "intention" to circumvent Government protocol, no "intention" to compromise the security of the United States then,


Special interest Article;
Anthony J. Iantosca, BCFE

Deception Detection
Answer #8
I want to get into more detail on shoulder display's  called the "shoulder shrugs" when one or two shoulder come up. We will use "shoulder shrugs"  to indicate lack of knowledge. Look for both shoulders to rise at the same time. When only one shoulder comes up the message given is suspect. When both shoulders only rise partially, very little, this shows a lack of commitment.   Also many times but not always, you will also see the palms turn up called the "rogatory position."
When you ask a person a question and they harbor no "guilty knowledge" of the question asked seeing the shoulders pop "shoulder shrug" up and the palms turn up with the shoulder shrug, would not be a sign of deception.
When talking to a person and they are making a passionate and assertive declarative statement and the palms turn up with or without a shoulder shrug this "tell" is not very affirmative and this tells me the person is asking or begging to be believed. With any declarative statement "no, I didn't do it" those palms should be face down demanding to be believed and not asking or begging to be believed. 
Remember the innocent go forward the person who is harboring  "guilty knowledge" will retreat and give off "tells" that scream low confidence and discomfort.      

Special interest Article;
Anthony J. Iantosca, BCFE

Deception Detection Quiz


1) When a person does not look at you in the eyes when answering a question he/she is lying. False
There is no evidence to state that gaze aversion is a sign of deception. When people are comfortable and feel no immediate threat or when answering questions looking at faces causes cognitive overload.  

2) When a person is answering your questions and starts rubbing their nose or ear is lying. False
When a person is put in a stressful situation blood pressure will rise and the behavior of rubbing the face is a pacifying gesture to relax and bring the subject back into a state of comfort. The nasal passages become dry. The hairs in the nose start to stand up and become itchy.

3) When a person looks you in the eye through out your questions he/she is telling the truth. False
Practiced liars and psychopaths have been taught at a very early age to look at people directly in the eyes when talking, they believe that doing so will be seen as a sign of truthfulness. They will over compensate and look at you to much.
4) Words and actions come before Emotions. False
Emotions are always expressed before words and actions.
5) When a personality looks to the right when answering a question he/she is lying. False

6) When a person looks to the left when answering a question he/she is being truthful. False
Both questions 5,6 are bases on NLP.

NLP was invented in the 1970s by Linguist John Grinder and a Psychologist, Richard Bandler. The concept of NLP was since the right hemisphere of the brain controls the left side of the body and the left side of the brain controls the right side of the body than watching the eyes called "eye accessing cues" when asking a question the eyes would access top right, "construct" top left, "recall" we could ascertain if the person was being deceptive. To this day there is no credible research to back up its claims. For example if a person is rehearsing a lie over and over again for later recall, where do you think this information is being stored? It is being stored in long term memory. In a situation where a person is being asked a question in which they have rehearsed a deceptive answer where do you think their eyes will access? Their eyes will access top left for "recall." Take in the fact that some people are what is called "opposite orientated" looking top right for "recall" and top left for "construct." You can understand why NLP is not a valid proven science for detecting deception. The past president of the NLP Society John LaValle has stated that there is no correlation between eye movement and deception detection.

7) When a person is sitting and folding their arms when answering your questions, is lying. False
Many people sit this way and may be a sign of comfort. When a person is sitting with their shoulders up called the "turtle" trying to hide in the open and clinching their opposite arms tightly this would be a sign of discomfort. I would take note of that part of the interview and return back and ask additional questions.

8) When a person turns one of their palms up when answering a direct question stating they could not do such a thing or they were not involved, he/she is being truthful. False
When answering a question and a person turns both palms and shoulders up at the same time and states "I don't know"  the person is Limbic committed to their statement, when only one palm and shoulder turns up. This tells me they are not Limbic committed to their statement I would return and ask additional questions to understand why. 
9) In a statement verbal or written the longer the answer/explanation the more truthful they are. False
The shortest answer to any question is the best answer. Many times deceptive people will answer your question with a lot of equivocal, unnecessary language in the hopes that you will believe they are being cooperative and truthful. The only problem is that many times than not they never answer your question.   

10) When a person states they would not or could not do what you are accusing them of, he/she is being truthful. False
You cannot substitute the words could not, would not or the word never, for the word "no"  
The shortest answer is the best answer " No, I didn't do it" is the most truthful answer to your question or accusation.

Anthony J. Iantosca, BCFE
Deception Detection


Detecting deception is very difficult. Even the professionals who are trained in deception detection such as law enforcement, judges
and attorney's are only 50 - 60 percent accurate. Many of the body language "tells" that people look for as a sign of deceit are a signs of nervousness and anxiety when being interviewed, more than accurate signs of deception. Lets take a quiz and see how accurate you are
in your ability to detect deception.


I am going to ask all of you ten questions. I want you, based on the information I have posted here and your ability to detect deception when you know someone is lying to you. The answers are true or false. Lets see how good you do.

1) When a person does not look at you in the eyes when answering a question he/she is lying?

2) When a person is answering your question and starts rubbing their nose or ear he/she is lying?

3) When a person looks you in the eye through out your questions he/she is telling the truth.

4) Words and actions come before Emotions.

5) When a personality looks to the right when answering a question is he/she is lying?

6) When a person looks to the left when answering a question he/she is being truthful.

7) When a person is sitting and folding their arms when answering your questions, is lying.

8) When a person turns one of their palms up when answering a direct question stating they could not do such a thing or they were not involved, is he/she is being truthful?

9) In a statement verbal or written the longer the answer/explanation the more truthful they are.

10) When a person states they would not or could not do what you are accusing them of, is he/she being truthful?

Tomorrow part 2 answers.

Anthony J. Iantosca, BCFE IAFEI Deception Detection Detecting deception is very difficult. Even the professionals who are trained in deception detection such as law enforcement, judges and attorney's are only 50 - 60 percent accurate. Many of the body language "tells" that people look for as a sign of deceit are a signs of nervousness and anxiety when being interviewed, more than accurate signs of deception. Lets take a quiz and see how accurate you are in your ability to detect deception. Quiz I am going to ask all of you ten questions. I want you, based on the information I have posted here and your ability to detect deception when you know someone is lying to you. The answers are true or false. Lets see how good you do. 1) When a person does not look at you in the eyes when answering a question he/she is lying? 2) When a person is answering your question and starts rubbing their nose or ear is he/she lying? 3) When a person looks you in the eye through out your questions he/she is telling the truth? 4) Words and actions come before Emotions. 5) When a personality looks to the right when answering a question he/she is lying? 6) When a person looks to the left when answering a question is he/she is being truthful? 7) When a person is sitting and folding their arms when answering your questions, is he/she lying? 8) When a person turns one of their palms up when answering a direct question stating they could not do such a thing or they were not involved, he/she is being truthful? 9) In a statement verbal or written the longer the answer/explanation the more truthful they are. 10) When a person states they would not or could not do what you are accusing them of, is he/she being truthful? Tomorrow Part 2 answers.
Special interest Article;
 Anthony J. Iantosca, BCFE

 Statement Analysis
 The personal pronoun "we"

This pronoun has many different meanings when stated in an oral or written statement depending on the context of the situation you are involved in. The pronoun "we" connects people together in a partnership, relationship, friendship, etc., with each other. This pronoun can also be used by someone who does not want to take full responsibility for an act or decision they have made. They want to spread responsibility around to others. Politicians are notorious for this.
Also, it is a word that can indicate deception in an assault or rape case.

Example; If I asked you "What did you do last night?" You might say " My friend Catie and I went to a movie." First, the person has introduced Catie as his/her friend into the statement which is a proper social introduction and shows me there is a good relationship between Catie and her partner/friend. The word "and" would be acceptable at this portion of the statement. Now the shortest sentence is the best sentence. I would expect him/her to start using the word "we" when continuing on with his/her statement. Now if the person changes the statement and uses the word "and" somewhere in the narrative, such as, after the movie "we" decided to go to dinner, "we" went to dinner, after dinner Catie and I went home. This would indicate to me the examiner that something happened during or after dinner between Catie and her partner/friend. We have a change in language from "we" to "and" I would want to know why? Even though the word "and" connects to people together, in this situation it is a down grade from "we" to "and" which is separating the two people.

 Example; A Judge was sitting on the bench when a large company was being prosecuted for fraud. The Judge owned stock in the company. The defense attorney brought up this to the sitting Judge. The Judge stepped down because of the appearance of a possible conflict of interest. The Judge stated later when asked why he did not disclose this fact before the court case was held, he said, "I hear many cases and I don't know how this got by me. I promise that "we" will do a much better job moving forward."  Ok Judge, who is "we?" You owned the stock.

 When there was an attack on our Embassy and the Secretary of State was asked by Congress to testify on how and why this attack could have been prevented, how did this happen and what could have been done to protect our personal? She stated "I am responsible for the protection of our Embassies" but then goes on to say "we" could have done a much better job and "we" will work to make sure this does not ever happen again." She was the person in charge, it was her responsibility, yet she does not take full responsibility. She spread that mistake around by using the personal pronoun "we." I would have asked who is "we?" Ms. Secretary.

 Example; I was asked to analyze a statement on a rape case, the attorney wanted to know if the woman was telling the truth and if I could detect any deception in her statement. The statement read, " I called my husband after work and told him I was going out after work with the girls from the office for a few drinks and would not be home late. I left the bar which was near my office and was walking down the street to get my car and go home, it was around eleven pm and a guy walking up to me asked me for directions. We were walking down the street as I was giving him the directions. The next thing I know he is forcing me into a vacant building and started raping me, we were in there for a long time.
When he finished he said do not call the police or I will come back and kill you, that is what happened tonight and about all I can say to you." I analyzed the statement and gave the attorney my report. I explained to him there were many deceptive markers in her statement and based on her language the statement was coming from logic (creating the story) and not a true auto biographical memory of the alleged rape/event.
 Her statement was also lacking many details that should have been in her statement. Such as the attackers height, size, shin color. The street she was on, the bar she was in, also the unique word "back." I can only return back to a place I was in before, does this woman live in a vacant building? I also told him that she used the pronoun "we" when the attack took place. Victims do not pair up with their attackers. It would be acceptable for her to use the pronoun "we" before the attack took place when they were walking down the street. Once the attack took place the pronoun "we" should not have been used.

 This told me she was either making up the story or she knew her alleged attacker. I explained to the attorney he should question her in detail on these inconsistencies. Come to find out she was making up the story to explain to her husband why she got home so late. She also and knew her alleged attacker. A man she was having an office affair with.
Special interest Article;
Anthony J. Iantosca, BCFE

Dysfunctional Personalities
Deception of the Borderline, Psychology Today

This article by Psychology Today is a very accurate description of why Dysfunctional Personalities attack and rage at you. The defense tactics they will use to protect themselves from being exposed for the insecure personalities they are. Why it is so confusing to "you" the partner or loved one who is on the receiving end of their insane behavior. I have explained to many of my clients that what these dysfunctional personalities project outwardly and what they are feeling on the inside emotionally are two different matters.

 Psychology Today

 Not all Borderline Personality symptoms will present with the exact patterns. This is one reason why it is so confusing to bystanders who are not mental health practitioners. It is a common experience for the borderline personality to give the appearance of being a very normal person to most people and unnoticed by people in the family, friends, and circle, of acquaintances. Nevertheless, at the same time the BPD is inflicting excruciating emotional pain upon family members and loved ones through a pervasive pattern of behaviors that just does not make sense. The response of many family members can be confusion and being made to feel a little crazy themselves. A common behavior of the Borderline personality is to act out or act in exhibiting attention seeking behaviors that are convincing enough for onlookers to evoke a sympathetic response. The natural response to acting out is to enable or to rescue the Borderline from every impending crisis, which seems very real to the BPD. The behavior of acting out has earned many Borderline's the label of "Drama Queen or King, i.e., individuals who "act out" to gain the sympathy and support of others. This calculated performance is portrayed to deflect attention away from the internalized fear beneath the behavior. Obviously, onlookers who do not fully understand what is happening, so it triggers a response to console and rescue the person from their tragic circumstances.

 As a result, individuals with Borderline Personality Disorder are constantly managing a lifestyle unconsciously played out in a constantly developing drama where they are constantly "faking it" to make it in the world their skewed perception creates. In the drama played out, the great fear of abandonment and continual threat of rejection must be managed by the behaviors exhibited. Therefore, at the heart of the BPD's crisis management is the morbidity potential attached to the phobic thinking that sooner or later he/she will be "found out" and face permanent abandonment and rejection. Consequently, the behavior often observed centers around a concerted effort to manage life at the cost of others that contributes to a life-long pattern of manipulating people, information, and perception in ways that spin reality to match their mentally distorted view of life. The goal of the pervasive thinking pattern is to manipulate, control, and hide the underlying problem from people around them on a daily basis.

The danger felt by a Borderline is motivated by the neurotic fear of being found out and facing the possibility of being rejected or abandoned. As a result, the very idea of someone exposing the reality of the borderline behavior is a trigger that evokes fear of being exposed along with the subsequent fear of abandonment. Facing this stress, triggers the core issue, the fear of abandonment, isolation, and public exposure to the truth resulting in Borderline Rage. Consequently, the behavior following is an intense feeling of rejection, pain, along with outbursts of anger. Neurotic fear triggers defensive mechanisms designed to try to regain control of the skewed mental perception of many Borderlines by re-spinning reality to those around them. Therefore, what results is rage, acting out, as well as, acting in behaviors resulting from emotional dysregulation from the perceived threats. Unfortunately for you, if you are the person who identifies the deception of the borderline, be prepared to become the focused object of rage motivated by an irrational belief that you caused abandonment, social isolation, and rejection.

Rage is directed at you by the Borderline in a very personal way that is designed to destroy you and disable your credibility to everyone she can influence. Something to remember is that for the borderline, the loss of control coupled with the fear of abandonment triggers a heightened level of stress that is unmanageable, which results in deregulated emotions, panic, and the attention seeking behaviors that will follow. Consequently, a common experience for the BPD is when dysregulation is triggered is that splitting occurs and what was once all good has suddenly become all bad. This symptomatic pattern among Borderlines threatened with a feeling of lack of control, or being found out, is to turn their anger toward the person who knows their secret and threatens the myth that they have created. In the distorted reasoning of the Borderline, the identifier endangers their ability to maintain a feeling of control, which in turn triggers emotional dysregulation under the stress.

 Then, comes the anger, rage, passive aggressive anger focused by the internalized threat upon the person who knows their secret and may expose the BPD to accountability for their distorted behaviors. So, before you assume responsibility for the rage, pain, and dysfunction, remember that this is not your fault, it is BPD.

Deception of the Borderline, Psychology Today
Special interest Article;
Anthony J. Iantosca, BCFE

Over the last few months I have written about the behavior patterns of the highly insecure personalities. Dysfunctional personalities as I have called them and the games they play with people in their personal and professional lives. How they think, feel and will respond when their abandonment/engulfment fears are triggered and when their ego and sense of self is threatened.
Today, I will talk about the psychopath. Research has stated that a psychopath may be narcissist but a narcissist is not always a psychopath.
The reason for this statement is a Narcissist needs outside validation from others for his/her sense of self worth "narcissist supply."  The psychopath does not. A psychopath can live on an Island alone and survive the narcissist cannot.
The psychopath is in a class all by themselves. Please do not read through the traits and instantly analyze everyone in your life. This information is meant to give you an overview and it's something you can use as a tool to assess yourself and to use wisely when assessing others. Being involved with a psychopath it is not a question of if you are going to get hurt, it is a question of when. These personality types are very good at slipping below your radar. I hope Dr. Hare's checklist will give you a better understanding of their behavior patterns.   

Listed below is the  Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Revised, a diagnostic tool used to identify psychopathic  traits. 

It was compiled by Dr. Robert Hare, Emeritus Professor of Psychology at the University of British Columbia, where he has taught and conducted research for more than four decades, devoting most of his academic career to the study of psychopathy.

Dr. Hare created the psychopathy checklist as a tool to determine the length of stay for criminals in prison.  It's obvious that the degree of psychopathic traits present in criminals would play a deciding factor on the length of stay. Dr. Hare ranks each trait on a  scale of 0-3. For example, if a prisoner ranks 1 on all 20 traits, then he or she would rank 20. Someone who ranks a 3 on all 20 traits would receive a score of 60 and would probably receive a longer length of stay in prison.

Dr. Hare spends much time with each prisoner  and consequently, scores them to his best abilities. But even to Dr. Hare's own chagrin, he has been duped by many psychopaths. 


                                          The Hare Psychopathy Checklist - Revised 


  1. GLIB and SUPERFICIAL CHARM - The tendency to be smooth, engaging, charming, slick, and verbally facile. Psychopathic charm is not in the least shy, self-conscious, or afraid to say anything.  A psychopath never gets tongue-tied. They have freed themselves from the social conventions about taking turns in talking, for example.
  2. GRANDIOSE SELF-WORTH - A grossly inflated view of one's abilities and self-worth, self-assured, opinionated, cocky, a braggart. Psychopaths are arrogant people who believe they are superior human beings.
  3. NEED FOR STIMULATION or PRONENESS TO BOREDOM - An excessive need for novel, thrilling, and exciting stimulation; taking chances and doing things that are risky. Psychopaths often have low self-discipline in carrying tasks through to completion because they get bored easily. They fail to work at the same job for any length of time, for example, or to finish tasks that they consider dull or routine.
  4. PATHOLOGICAL LYING - Can be moderate or high; in moderate form, they will be shrewd, crafty, cunning, sly, and clever; in extreme form, they will be deceptive, deceitful, underhanded, unscrupulous, manipulative, and dishonest.
  5. CONNING AND MANIPULATIVE - The use of deceit and deception to cheat, con, or defraud others for personal gain; distinguished from Item #4 in the degree to which exploitation and callous ruthlessness is present, as reflected in a lack of concern for the feelings and suffering of one's victims.
  6. LACK OF REMORSE OR GUILT - A lack of feelings or concern for the losses, pain, and suffering of victims; a tendency to be unconcerned, dispassionate, cold-hearted, and non-empathic. This item is usually demonstrated by a disdain for one's victims.
  7. SHALLOW AFFECT - Emotional poverty or a limited range or depth of feelings; interpersonal coldness in spite of signs of open gregariousness.
  8. CALLOUSNESS and LACK OF EMPATHY - A lack of feelings toward people in general; cold, contemptuous, inconsiderate, and tactless.
  9. PARASITIC LIFESTYLE - An intentional, manipulative, selfish, and exploitative financial dependence on others as reflected in a lack of motivation, low self-discipline, and inability to begin or complete responsibilities.
  10. POOR BEHAVIORAL CONTROLS - Expressions of irritability, annoyance, impatience, threats, aggression, and verbal abuse; inadequate control of anger and temper; acting hastily.
  11. PROMISCUOUS SEXUAL BEHAVIOR - A variety of brief, superficial relations, numerous affairs, and an indiscriminate selection of sexual partners; the maintenance of several relationships at the same time; a history of attempts to sexually coerce others into sexual activity or taking great pride at discussing sexual exploits or conquests.
  12. EARLY BEHAVIOR PROBLEMS - A variety of behaviors prior to age 13, including lying, theft, cheating, vandalism, bullying, sexual activity, fire-setting, glue-sniffing, alcohol use, and running away from home.
  13. LACK OF REALISTIC, LONG-TERM GOALS - An inability or persistent failure to develop and execute long-term plans and goals; a nomadic existence, aimless, lacking direction in life.
  14. IMPULSIVITY - The occurrence of behaviors that are unpremeditated and lack reflection or planning; inability to resist temptation, frustrations, and urges; a lack of deliberation without considering the consequences; foolhardy, rash, unpredictable, erratic, and reckless.
  15. IRRESPONSIBILITY - Repeated failure to fulfill or honor obligations and commitments; such as not paying bills, defaulting on loans, performing sloppy work, being absent or late to work, failing to honor contractual agreements.
  16. FAILURE TO ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY FOR OWN ACTIONS - A failure to accept responsibility for one's actions reflected in low conscientiousness, an absence of dutifulness, antagonistic manipulation, denial of responsibility, and an effort to manipulate others through this denial.
  17. MANY SHORT-TERM MARITAL RELATIONSHIPS - A lack of commitment to a long-term relationship reflected in inconsistent, undependable, and unreliable commitments in life, including marital.
  18. JUVENILE DELINQUENCY - Behavior problems between the ages of 13-18; mostly behaviors that are crimes or clearly involve aspects of antagonism, exploitation, aggression, manipulation, or a callous, ruthless tough-mindedness.
  19. REVOCATION OF CONDITION RELEASE - A revocation of probation or other conditional release due to technical violations, such as carelessness, low deliberation, or failing to appear.
  20. CRIMINAL VERSATILITY - A diversity of types of criminal offenses, regardless if the person has been arrested or convicted for them; taking great pride at getting away with crimes. The word psychopath can be replaced with the word sociopath throughout this page. The meaning is very similar, if not the same.
Special interest Article;
Anthony J. Iantosca, BCFE
Understanding Splitting
I was asked by my client if I would explain "splitting."  I hope this information from a profilers perspective will help you to understand what is called "splitting."
Splitting is when you are loved one minute and hated the next.  You are idealized one minute and devalued the next.  These personalities "project" their self hatred  on to you. "You" are the canvas they paint all of their dysfunction on to. The problem they will have is when "you" do not fall for their gas lighting, dysfunctional tactics. That ramps up their game playing and attempts to regain control over you. They are losing control. When they feel that loss of control, abandonment is not far behind.  Dysfunctional personalities use sex in the early stages of the relationship to get you emotionally hooked in. That is why sex with these personalities is off the charts in the early stages or the seduction phase. This causes most of the confusion when getting involved with these personalities. Many people confuse sex with love. The split comes when they cannot control you. That intensifies their insecurity. That triggers their abandonment fears. I can't control you, you will leave me. You do not jump to my drum beat, you will leave me. Their rage against you is their self loathing,  they are really raging against themselves. You are their dart board.
 When these personalities get involved with a strong personality who will not put up with their nonsense, their biggest fears are realized. It is that they are not worthy of you, not that you are not worthy of them, as they would have you believe. The very same fears they felt in childhood. I am not lovable, I am not good enough, there is something wrong with me, etc.   They split and run from you because they fear being exposed for the insecure personalities they are. Their fake mask has fallen off. Something they need to avoid at all costs. Why? Now you see me for who and what I really am. You will abandon me. They run from you as a form of "ego protection" I left You. You did not leave me. That game never really works. One of the reasons they will attempt to keep in contact.  They need to stay in your head. Because you are still in theirs. Everything they say and do is nothing but smoke and mirrors. Their gas lighting and the terrible things they say to you is a failed attempt to make you feel bad. Why? They feel bad and hurt. They are only projecting that inner pain on to you. Hate, anger are very strong emotions. You do not harbor strong emotions for people you really don't care about or for people who are no longer still stuck in your head. They need to hate us, they need to make themselves believe they hate us. So they will not feel the intense abandonment pain.
You see they really loved and had intense emotions for you. These emotions triggered engulfment fears. People misunderstand these engulfment fears. It is not that "you" are putting emotional pressure on them. It is they are feeling intense emotions for you and are engulfed by the emotions. These emotions are telling them "stop" you are losing control, you will be hurt, this person does not love you as much as you love them, this person will abandon you. This is when they must run from you. They split you. They will leave you before you leave them. They cut off their finger to save their arm so to speak. Their irrational fears are not based in reality. It is usually at this time in the relationship that you will get tested, they look for anything that will validate their irrational thinking. The first time you do not jump to their demands, that is the proof that they need that you do not love or want them. Their actions full fill their own prophecy. These personalities just never believed you loved them or would have stayed with them for the long term. How could you love me, when I do not love myself. They are very good at tearing you down, they have to.  Why? You are spending all your time defending yourself and not paying attention to the real issue. Their fear, insecurity and dysfunction.
Remember these personalities are very good at making "you" believe that "you" are/were the problem. If you believe this false bill of goods, they feel better about themselves for the short term. It never lasts. Just like helium in a birthday balloon, day after day it leaks out. Their feeling of superiority is very short lived.    
A deep need for attention. A tactic of the insecure. I see this game being played so much in my daily conversations with some clients that I wanted to write about it. This is a emotion manipulation tactic.  The "I am walking away game,"   the "silent treatment game,"  the "I have walked out game,"  " I am leaving you game." I could go on and on. This is a tactic of the insecure personality who cannot talk about their relationship concerns in an adult manner and uses this tactic in a attempt to get you worried and concerned that they are leaving the relationship or have left the relationship. This is a tactic that many times than not is an attempt to trigger your abandonment fears. What these personalities do not realize is they are using a tactic that works on them, so they think it will work on you. The problem arises with these people when this little drama game does not work anymore.
They want you to chase them, to pacify their insecurities and make them feel wanted and loved. Here is the problem, when the game does not work. I have told my clients over and over again, do not walk this road unless you are serious about staying on this road. I am not talking about victims who are in abusive relationships and have found the strength to leave and get out before they are hurt or killed by their Dysfunctional abusive partner.
I am talking about the drama kings and queens who use this gaslighting/manipulation tactic in an attempt to get their emotional needs met.  
These personalities are jealous and insecure and need to be the center of your world. When they think they are not, "real or imagined," many times its "imagined" they walk away, leave, make this grand gesture of packing up their belongings and walking out. Their partner calls, texts and tries to make heads or tails of what happened. The partner chases them, calls and the drama king or queen does not answer their phone or text. They are getting the desired effect, temporally. Until the partner who has some self respect stops chasing them. What happens? Now your abandonment fears are triggered.  
They become angry and upset that the game has stopped working. Now they are chasing the partner who they walked out on and are using every game in the book to get them back. They become very angry and are now accusing their partner of "playing games." Excuse me!
Remember the fable of the little boy who cried wolf. Stop using and playing this childish game, it may work once. With a confident personality, it will only work once. Ok, you want to go, go. Keep playing this foolish game and you will not be taken seriously again.
Talk about your concerns in an adult manner. If your partner does not want to address your concerns then you can walk away. But at least you have voiced  your concerns / issues and have explained why you are unhappy and why you are leaving the relationship. If your partner will not discuss your concerns, then your partner has no one to blame but him/herself.

If you have any questions I will be more than happy to talk to you. I give five free minutes to all callers. My Ex. 01155 on Ingenio.

                                                 Anthony Iantosca, BCFE    

More Posts Next page »