Recognition lies in the study of NOF

In the early stages of the research issue under investigation that determines the truth of the reported fact. The main objective of the third stage is collecting the most detailed information relating to the fact: the available physical evidence and eyewitness testimony.

Tactics of questioning of witnesses and the actions of the researcher in obtaining material evidence of NOF allows to obtain all possible data for the study, but it becomes necessary to assess the credibility of the obtained facts.

Methods of detecting lies and inconsistencies, for example in criminology is clearly defined and described (for example in narrow methods described in [1,2], and is widely aimed, which find applications not only in forensics, but also in everyday life [3]). However, these techniques are not always suitable for use in the study of NOF. Feature of unexplained facts is the presence in the incident incredible, unusual, illogical details.

Kinds of lies about unexplained fact

There are some types of false evidence as bona fide misleading, unfair, misleading and deception. To avoid or detect them at early stages helps special tactics of questioning of witnesses described in the relevant article (it also describes in detail the kinds of false testimony, their causes and diagnostics), and thoughtful analysis of the information received.

An honest mistake is such an error that is not recognized as an error, i.e. the man takes error for truth. This assumes that he sincerely believes that it was true and not a false judgment. For example, false memories, i.e., memories about the story that never happened that are ideas about themselves or about the events.

Unfair misconception is realized and recognized the man before him, but not in front of others. That is, people know that's a lie, but argues that this is true. [9]

Most often, researchers found cheating. It is a conscious action which is inherent as witnesses and participants of the fact. It is possible to allocate:
Among the testimony of the witness

• the denial of the fact;
• the distortion of actual fact with an unexplained nature.
• the distortion of actual fact, not having unexplained nature;
• description completely invented fact.

Among the material evidence

• the destruction of the traces of past fact;
• concealment or misrepresentation of material evidence of the fact of having unexplained nature;
• adding parts to a scene of fact or attempt to link physical evidence from the scene of the fact and other that have a common origin;
• full re-enactment of the fact and place of its occurrence.

Deception and unfair misconception are the most easy to expose. Tactics and techniques are built on the fact that man knows that he is lying.
The main problems and challenges in identifying false statements and material evidence/

The main objectives of the experts in this field can be considered:

• the determination of the truth of material evidence provided by the witness
• the determination of the truthfulness of the information provided by the witness
• the determination of the truth of material evidence taken from the scene of the fact

The main problems of this region can be considered:

• specific psychological reaction of the beholder (from a complete denial to distortion resulting from excessive daydreaming);
• the originality of the accident;
• voluntary submission of information and the lack of consequences for false testimony;
• bias relation to unexplained facts;
• discredit, directions from the media and the public.

Specific methods of detecting lies

In particularly complicated cases, standard tactics when questioning witnesses may not be enough and there is a need for specific methods of detecting lies.
Conventional methods are divided into:

• liespotting using technical means (lie detectors)
• liespotting without the use of technical means (the lie is recognized by the person intuitively or logically, using special knowledge)

The principle of the lie detector (polygraph)

The job of a polygraph lies in the simultaneous registration of parameters of respiration, cardiovascular activity, electrical skin resistance, and, if necessary and possible, other physiological parameters with the subsequent presentation of the results of check of these parameters in analog or digital form. Less common options such as lie detector voice and definition of lies by the verifier by physiological signs, mostly on facial expressions, with the use of additional equipment or without it. Modern lie detectors can record up to 50 physiological parameters [6].

The history of the formation of the principles of operation of the devices of recognition lie is well described in [5].

Factors influencing the end result in psychophysiological research:

• Incorrect interpretation of results — the detector measures do not lie, and change the physiological reactions of the organism, evidence of the importance placed on incentives for tested individuals. Failure to comply with existing specialist techniques and basic principles of research, this factor may cause errors.
• Prejudice of a subject — body reaction does not reflect the truth of the facts, and only the faith test in their truth or falsity. The test may think that his knowledge of the true, but in fact it does not reflect objective reality.
• Prejudice polygraph, as the data obtained with the use of the polygraph, can be interpreted very broadly, in cases when the expert has a bias towards testing, there is a danger of false conclusion.
• The opposition argues that there are ways in which checks can affect the readings, using various manipulations, we do not notice a specialist.
• Check the condition of the person — physical or psychological exhaustion of a subject; the presence of the test persons a mental disorder or exacerbations of the disease associated with dysfunction of the cardiovascular or respiratory systems; the presence of a subject in a condition of alcoholic or narcotic intoxication; regular consumption of studied the face of strong medicines or psychoactive substances; the presence of the test persons pain syndrome associated with exacerbation of any disease, and the presence of women in the second half of pregnancy and if the age of the test persons at least 14-18 years. [4]

Thus, we can conclude that the technical means are quite limited in their characteristics, and their results cannot be used as unequivocal evidence of false or truthful statements. Examples of "inaccurate" work of the polygraph, as well as ways to deceive him, is given in [6].
For example, it is enough just to believe his story that the polygraph showed that this is true, it can take place as an honest mistake, and deception. In forensic science these methods have been criticized because the effect is achieved more through fear of punishment for perjury, and not because of the polygraph, etc.

Liespotting without the help of technical means

These include the methods of recognition of lies by facial expressions, postures, tone of voice, etc., i.e. verbal and non-verbal level. It is a science. On this topic there are many video tutorials, articles (e.g.,[8]) and books (e.g. [3,7]).

Here the main indicators of deception are certain "closed" posture, hand position changes the timbre of the voice, the inclusion of certain phrases and turns in it, etc., however, it works when recognising there was ample opportunity to study his companion: to know the peculiarities of his behavior and conversation, his "fad", etc. the Researcher when questioning witnesses often deprived of this opportunity.

Conclusion

Based on the foregoing, we can draw some conclusions, and make recommendations to the experts.

Technical tools and psychological techniques to relied upon as a panacea, not worth it. Separate application of the above methods will not allow to unambiguously separate the lies from the truth, however, this does not mean that they do not use it. In order to draw conclusions about the real picture of the incident, the researcher is to obtain the maximum possible amount of information.

This can be done through not only standard individual the witness described the tactics of questioning of a witness, and a joint survey of a group of witnesses, the witness group or by several researchers, and to use a technical device recognition lies and psychological techniques.

Before, during, and after collecting the material evidence necessary to record any information one way or another concerning fact: the situation and its changes, the sensation of the researchers, etc.
Too much depends on the human factor, therefore, with due perseverance of the researcher identifying deliberate lie is an easy enough task. Unconscious lies (honest mistake) technical devices and psychological techniques, not detected (recognized as true), so in this case it is necessary to focus on the material evidence, considering the fact that "true" until there was conclusive evidence, to build a different picture of the incident fact.

In General, the principle of operation of the group is to assume that the witness is telling the truth until proven otherwise, no matter how unbelievable it seemed not his story.

Translated by «Yandex.Translator»