From: jcs
Effective interrogation techniques are crucial in criminal investigation and can involve detailed planning, psychological strategies, and careful observation of a suspect’s verbal and non-verbal cues. The interrogation of Stephanie Lazarus demonstrates several of these methods.
Preparation and Strategy
Detectives meticulously prepared for Stephanie Lazarus’s interview, more so than for any previous case, knowing they were dealing with a fellow law enforcement officer [00:00:06]. Their strategy included:
- Creating a Ruse – Lazarus was invited under the pretense of advising on an art theft case [00:00:00].
- Maintaining a Casual Tone – The initial plan was to keep the conversation as casual as possible for as long as possible [00:00:13].
- Strategic Confrontation – Detectives carefully waited for key moments to initiate the confrontation [00:00:15].
Setting the Scene and Tone
To manage the suspect’s perception and behavior, police interrogation strategies often involve manipulating the environment and initial interactions:
- Compatible Tone – Detectives established a friendly and compatible tone with Lazarus immediately upon her entering the interrogation room [00:00:37]. This aimed to negate the negative implications of the interrogation environment through a friendly disposition [00:00:43].
- Concealed Motives for Location – The stated reason for meeting in an unusual location (the interrogation room) was to avoid spreading rumors or innuendo [00:00:59]. The actual reason was to ensure Lazarus would check in her firearm before entering the area, without arousing suspicion [00:01:05]. This established a false perception that detectives were on her side [00:05:59].
Psychological Tactics and Observation
Detectives employ psychological techniques in suspect interviews and keen observation to identify deception:
- Mispronunciation Test – The investigators intentionally mispronounced John Ruetten’s name, a crucial figure in the case, to observe Stephanie’s reaction [00:01:50].
- Observation: Stephanie’s pause was four times longer than it should have been, indicating deception as she feigned not having thought about the name for a long time [00:02:02].
- Identifying Omission – Although not directly asked, a truthful subject would typically volunteer information about a significant past relationship, such as dating for four years and going on holidays together [00:02:42]. Lazarus omitted these details [00:02:42].
- Recognizing Fight or Flight – When John Ruetten’s wife was mentioned, Stephanie likely experienced a psychological fight or flight reaction, triggered by an influx of hormones preparing her to confront or escape [00:03:47]. She chose to “fight” [00:03:58].
- Verbal Indicators of Deception – The use of exclamatory remarks like “gosh,” “god,” and “jeezy” was identified as a continuous attempt by the suspect to insinuate a vague memory due to a lack of contemplation on the subject matter [00:04:23]. She tried to convey she had no reason to think about John or anything related to him for two decades [00:04:41].
- Confrontation and Naivety – Guilty suspects often act naive to blatant confrontations to avoid them, while truthful subjects address them directly or seek clarification [00:05:15]. Stephanie, as a police officer for 25 years, knew acting oblivious would be a red flag [00:05:04].
- Subtle Evasion and Reassurance – Detectives subtly avoided Stephanie’s direct challenges by offering deceptively reassuring responses, diverting her focus back to the false premise of privacy and confidentiality [00:05:47].
- Terror Management Theory (TMT) – Stephanie exhibited hyper-arousal and a derivative of TMT, over-explaining trivial matters and going off on unrelated tangents [00:07:30]. This is believed to be a subconscious coping mechanism for momentary relief from the terrifying reality [00:07:51].
- Increasing Pressure – When Stephanie challenged the detectives a second time, they avoided her question but maintained the topic without offering reassurance, subtly increasing the pressure [00:10:45].
- Facial Expression Analysis – Detectives observed changes in Stephanie’s facial expressions, noting when she was genuinely reflecting versus pretending to think about answers [00:12:26].
- Unmitigated Terror – When Stephanie verbalized the victim’s death, her face displayed “unmitigated terror,” a significant non-verbal cue [00:14:43].
- Disposition Shifts – Her disposition shifted from passive (truthful) when discussing John’s apartment location to frantic (vague memory) when asked where he moved after marriage [00:15:36].
Confrontation and Miranda Warning
Eventually, the detectives progressed to a direct confrontation:
- Suspect Recognition of Interrogation – Stephanie recognized she was a suspect and that it was an interrogation, expressing concern and the need for a lawyer [00:17:32].
- Request for DNA – Detectives directly asked for a DNA swab, stating their job was to “identify and eliminate” suspects [00:19:00].
- Miranda Rights – Stephanie Lazarus was read her Miranda rights, and she immediately chose to remain silent and speak to a lawyer [00:21:52].
Stephanie Lazarus was later found guilty of first-degree murder of Sherri Rasmussen and sentenced to 27 years to life [00:22:48], [00:24:45].