What Drew Peterson and OJ Have in Common.
Drew Peterson and OJ Simpson
What do they have in common?
Stan B. Walters
Drew Peterson and OJ Simpson have something in common?
If we review the interrogation personalities that we discuss in our
Practical Kinesic Interview & Interrogation® courses we find that
OJ and Drew share a lot of common characteristics from the Ego
Dominant Personality Interrogation type.
1. Listen to how both OJ and Drew Peterson treat anyone who challenges
them or asks them questions. Both are very quick to put those
people in their place and dismiss them and their comments as
being insignificant. Note that their rejection of these people
has nothing to do with facts, just the person.
2. Both OJ and Drew Peterson blame everyone else for their problems. OJ
blames Nichol and her family and friends. Drew blames both his
dead wife and missing wife for all his marital problems.
3. Both OJ and Drew Peterson blame their victims. It’s as if in both cases
the situations are direct results of what the victims did or did not
do.
4. Both appear to do some very bizarre and impractical things.
OJ goes to a Las Vegas hotel room and expects none of the other
5 people to say anything about him being there or guns being
involved nor that it could be construed as kidnapping or robbery.
Drew allegedly gets his half-brother to help him move the “blue
barrel” as well as possibly gets two different truck drivers to move
the “blue barrel” for him to a dump location.
5. Both men blame the media and their bias for their situation.
The media is to blame for all the hysteria around their cases.
6. Both men come up with some bizarre thinking and explanations.
Drew has no explanation why a “good mother” just leaves and
doesn’t call to tell her children not to worry. OJ says “they had my
stuff.”
7. Drew contends that his wife just ran away with another man and
has no explanation why she doesn’t call. Even though we
have the tape of OJ screaming and cursing at his victims we’re
expected to believe it wasn’t a hostile confrontation.
8. Drew thinks lawyers will all clamor to take his case and help
him. OJ says “I’m OJ. I’m OJ. Everybody loves OJ.”
9. Drew says that the email his missing wife sent about her fear of
him is fake, a forgery and not her words. OJ says the photos of
him wearing the shoes similar to those that found in the blood on
the scene and at his house are forgeries and fraud and the actions
of racists cops. OJ says the pictures Nichol had in her safe
deposit box that shows her injuries are all posed, fake photos.
10. Drew Peterson says the cops instantly made him a suspect and that
they have zeroed in just on him. OJ says the cops just wanted to frame
him and he’s the only suspect they ever had.
11. Both OJ and Drew treat their cases as nothing more than a
tempest in a tea kettle and that everything will go away just
because of who they think they are.
Before both of these cases are done and over with we are going
to get some more bizarre and damning behavior for both men.
Eventually it will be the egos of both OJ and Drew that will do
them in. It’ll be their ego dominant behaviors when they committed
their alleged crimes OR it will be the idiotic things they both say or
do during the ongoing investigations, stupid things they will say
when interviewed or make statements to the media or during any
subsequent grand jury, hearings or trial.
Also make no mistake. They have their loyal sycophants that are
going to hang around and loyally support each man denouncing
the horrible injustices of both these cases.
Well, at least this is just my opinion anyway!
Stan
Stan B. Walters
“The Lie Guy®”
Stan@TheLieGuy.com
www.TheLieGuy.com
TheLieGuyAcademy.com
Effective Interviewing On-Line Course
Find Upcoming Training Courses
Linkedin
Twitter
Facebook
Add Gerry and Kate McCann to your list.
“Ludicrous! Simply ludicrous!”
Correct. And why do they do all these things? To distract us from the poor content of their lies. Research shows that it is not the lies of psychopaths that con people:
“To summarise: psychopaths’ lying and truth-telling do no have the usual markers, and psychopathic speech on its own is not particularly convincing. Perhaps they lie more often than others (?), but psychopaths do not deserve their reputation for telling good lies.
And yet we know that psychopaths are most proficient at deceiving people. How do they accomplish this? Not through their ingeniously constructed lies, but through their manner and accompanying actions.”
Dr. Steve:
I’m with you! These guys don’t really “lie” any better than anyone else. I’m of the opinion that they just get the other person to fall “in like” with them and they miss any deception cues that may be generated. Then when you try to point out to the deceived person that they have victimized they get defensive because they just can’t believe they would be duped AND just don’t believe they were even lied to in the first place.
Stan