body language

Secrets of body language – History Channe Full documentary

Google+ Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr

A walk to convey power. A greeting that gets the upper hand. A gesture that can hide a lie. Body language can betray us. When a president’s under pressure. Or celebrities in the media glare. Look beyond the words. Their body language says it all. -It’s a sudden poise. -Self-touch gesture. -Hot spots. -Microexpressions. In this special, experts will dissect the body, the face, and the voice to reveal its hidden meanings, its secrets. This is a world where what we say is all important. They said this day would never come. We hang on every word. Tomorrow, we begin again. Thank you. But are we getting all the message? Older, darker, psychopaths, serial killers’ handwriting- Research has shown that just 7% of human communication is through the actual words. 93% of what we communicate with others is non-verbal. Bam bam bam! 93%! Think about that. So, it’s our tone of voice, pitch, posture, microexpressions on our face. Different gestures that we might use. We put all the significance on 7% for words.

We shouldn’t be doing that. Beyond the words, life’s a fascinating world of non-verbal communication. The secret world of body language. We’re about to watch our wannabe world leaders. Our sport stars. -Good morning. We’ll revisit famous figures from recent history. -Did you kill our president? -No. Because people have got to know whether or not their president’s a crook. I’m not a crook. I’ve earned everything I’ve got. We’ll view our celebrities with fresh eyes. We’re going to show how people in the public eye try to control the way we perceive them. And how sometimes, despite their best efforts, the truth leaks out. Whomever it might be, if the truth is told, then my name will be cleared. And I can move on with my life. If you know what to look for. It’s not what you’re seeing, it’s what you’re not seeing. You’re not seeing an angered response. We’re going to equip you with the tools to read those body language giveaways. You’re getting a head and peek into the world of “what’s really going on there.

” When you can read body language, every moment you spend with others, you can make it valuable. And if you’re in business, you can make it profitable. Body language is crucial. For those who study non-verbal communication, one of the first indicators they look out for is the way someone’s body moves. At this Camp David summit, President Bush is the host to visiting Russian President Vladimir Putin. Vladimir Putin knows the world is watching him on American soil. And he also knows that his people are watching. So he must show strength.

Here, though, both leaders are making a strong body language statement. Here we are, two powerful world leaders, in a sort of striding contest. Because, of course, the fastest you stride, the more strong, powerful, and fit you are. It’s not just the speed of walking that sends out messages. Vladimir Putin and George Bush are fantastically powerful men. Have two completely different types of power. And it evidences itself through body language. I thank you all for coming. Vladimir Putin has what I would call “a very animal power. ” A strong man power.

And he walks by having his shoulders boucing back and forth. He walks, he also makes gestures. He’s very active. I would almost call it a kind of sexy power. George Bush, on the other hand, has a more traditional American power. There’s very little movement above the shoulders. He’s trying to look like he’s controled. There’s no extra wasted energy. I thank you all for coming. Perceiving the body language message of these two powerful presidents is straightforward. But body language is often complex and easily misunderstood. Here, President Clinton leads Israeli and Palestinian leaders, Ehud Barak and Yasser Arafat, out before the press during peace negociations. It’s all smiles for the cameras. But behind the facade of bon ami, there’s a power struggle going on. Clinton explains that none of them will take any questions. We pledged to each other we would answer no questions. Offer no comments. So I have to set a good example. The body language then revealed just why that was. Almost a physical fight. Many viewed this apparently light-hearted tussle as a sign that Arafat and Barak were getting on well.

Think again. There is a great meaning behind who goes through the door first. Here in the West, letting someone through the door first doesn’t really matter; it’s polite, maybe. But in the Middle East, it has a significant cultural impact. The host, the power person, says: “I’m in control, I’ll help you through the door. ” “I’ll show you the way. ” Throw in the fear and tension present in most Middle East negociations and suddely, the desire of both Arafat and Barak not to go through that door before the other starts to make sense. This is a classic example, in an extreme way, of how the last man through the door is the winner. Barak reaches for Yasser Arafat.

Arafat grabs his arm, moves around and starts waggling his finger at Barak who then uses it as opportunity to move around to actually be behind. Then grabs Arafat, holds him by the arm and shoves him through the door. You’ve got fear and power struggle showing in big bold body language movements. Arafat and Barak are not the only ones to appreciate the significance of “the last man through the door move. ” Even when friends and allies meet, subtle cues reveal who’s talked of. 2003. British Prime Minister Tony Blair plays host to President Bush. In this particular example we’re looking at, 10 Downing Street, and one would expect Tony Blair to be very territorial. It’s his territory, he should be host. He should be in charge, and the boss in terms of who goes through the door. And yet, Tony Blair, the Prime Minister, accepts that the seniority and place here is the President’s. So President Bush says: “Photos are over”. Gives him a little nod. And so they start going in. The President’s in charge of the choreography. He goes through the door last, used his left hand and taps Blair forward, not shoving Blair through the door.

But helping him through the door, meaning Bush is in charge. As they go in, the President being in charge and wanting to be clear that he’s in charge, not only displays the ownership symbol of putting his hand on Blair’s back but then he displays a further bit of dominance. He gives him three little taps, just to let him know that actually he’s a good little boy. And that George W. Bush is boss. A pat on the back is one way to demonstrate power. Getting the upper hand is another. Quite literally. When body language savvy world leaders get together, they know there’s one sure moment to demonstrate dominance.

The handshake photo op. If you’re looking at the left of the picture, they always want to be standing on the left of the picture. Let me demonstrate. If I’m shaking hands here, what’s gonna happen? I’m at the bottom of the handshake, my palm is facing up. That’s a very vulnerable position. If I’m shaking hands here, and I’ve got my arm around the person, I’m shaking hands, who’s got the upper hand? I’ve got the upper hand. If someone’s coming in to shake your hand like this, here’s a nice solid handshake. It should be straight and firm. If it’s not- Janine Driver teaches body language evening classes. She believes the visual impact of important handshakes was first appreciated in 1970. When Elvis Presley famously paid a visit to President Nixon, at the White House. We see pictures of Nixon shaking hands with Elvis Presley.

Nixon’s got the upper hand. That’s where the expression comes from. I’ve got the upper hand here. Now that people know about this in politics, you see them jolting for position when it comes time to take a picture. At this summit in 2006 hosted by Vladimir Putin, the Russian leader was on full handshake alert. He strategically placed himself in a position where they’re coming forward, he’s gonna get the dominant position. They’re coming out of cars this way, coming up to him, cameras are here. Every single picture, who gets the upper hand? Putin. Then up strides Tony Blair. We see that Tony Blair is going to grab on to Vladimir Putin’s hand. The classing thing of grabbing somebody by the elbow to show who is actually the leader. Score 1 for Blair. Next, it’s President Bush’s turn. George Bush, on the other hand, then comes in and realizes he’s on the wrong side of the photo. Morning.

So when he reaches in to grab, he immediately crowds Putin. Instead of just grabbing and letting Putin grab his arm, George Bush puts his shoulder against Putin’s so that Putin’s left arm is no way in a position to grab hold of Bush’s right arm. Then as soon as Bush turns out, he immediately goes for a little tap. And stir on Putin’s back to actually give him a push. And Putin, making sure not to be outdone, puts his right arm up and give Bush a little tap as well. We’ll call that a draw. Even seated, the bodies of world leaders can speak volumes. Here’s a master class from FDR. With President Roosevelt presiding, the historic conference began. February 1945. Franklin D. Roosevelt, Joseph Stalin and Winston Churchill famously meet at the Yalta conference. The “Big Three”, surrounded by the chiefs of staff, with their staffs and civilian officials posed for the cameras in the patio of Livadia palace. The Allies had worked together for three years.

But now, with the end of the war in sight, Roosevelt knew all that was set to change. We see three powerful men all wanting to dominate. Visually, Roosevelt’s in the center. The central figure always appears to us to be the most important. Even when he’s talking to Stalin, he turns the other way. And Stalin leans in. Stalin is actually, if you like, following Roosevelt. Roosevelt is the real leader of the two. Meanwhile, Churchill’s body language is conveying Britain’s diminishing status. It doesn’t look as though Churchill is a full and equal participant. Not only is his posture hunched up, but Roosevelt barely ever talks to him. And Stalin doesn’t really meet him, except to shake his hand. Churchill has both elbows out. But the top is that he’s holding his hat in his lap to cover up his private parts. Which feel kind of honorable in this situation. You can see how each of these men are master in their own country. How they interact with one another, what their relationship is in the world stage.

Ladies and gentlemen, the President of the United States. A politician’s body language can easily give them away. Especially when he’s under pressure. Ladies and gentlemen, I welcome this opportunity tonight to meet with the managing editor of the nation’s newspapers. It’s the night of November 13, 1973. Watergate is at high tide. President Nixon holds a live televised question and answer session with the nation’s newspaper editors. His body language says it all. Nixon knew it was not going to be an easy evening. -Mr. Quinn. -Mr. President, this morning, governor asked you at Florida addressed this group- Stop. Right there we see Nixonís standing with his hands behind his back, which gives the indication that he has nothing to hide, he’s got this open front. However, he is holding his wrist like this behind his back, and he’s touching himself like this. Itís called the self-touch gesture.

He’s basically saying: “OK. Here we go. I can get through this.” His words are combative, but his body language betrays anxiety. As far as money is concerned, how was it possible for you to have this kind of investment when all you earned was 800,000 dollars as President? I should point out I wasnít a pauper when I became president. I wasnít very rich as Presidentís goal. You can see in his body as he is trying to defend himself against the sensory the press called that he’s acting like a pack of wolves. He is holding himself away from that podium like he is going to be attacked from it. In this case, Nixon is trying to protect himself from some searching questions. That I welcome this kind of examination.

Because people have got to know if their presidentís a crook. I’m not a crook. I’ve earned everything Iíve got. He says “I am not a crook,” and immediately goes into retreat. His body backs away. Really clear tell. When somebody makes a statement, a definitive statement, and immediately retreats, we know they don’t think they’ve told the truth, they know they didn’t tell the truth, They were escaping that lie.

Nixon also suddenly crosses his arms. He goes immediately from that, quick arm cross to protect himself. Oh, my God! I just said something! And also did the best of my ability. Right there, shaking his head no. Time and again, throughout this exchange, Nixon displays tellingly defensive body language. Stop. Look at this. Everyone’s body language is different. Each person has its own quirks. To unlock the secrets of body language, the experts rely on an analytical process they call “norming”. When it comes to deciphering body language, norming is crucial. Reading body language, you’re looking for what’s normal for that situation. And you’re looking for what’s normal for that particular person. Using the 24/7 coverage of politicians and celebrities, the experts construct a template of what’s normal for that person. See what they do when they’re under no pressure. See what the person in front of you is doing when you’re asking them regular questions about life.

Then you have a norm. But even without the chance to get this norm, experts can still read someone’s body language with accuracy. If you don’t know what’s normal for that person, you go back to the context again and say: “What would be normal in that situation?” If I am asked to look at a suspect in a crime, I’m thinking “What would be a normal response for a husband whose wife is missing? “What would be a normal response for parents if their children are missing?” And how far from normal is this behaviour? When someone’s body language departs from the norm, it can often be a sign that all is not well. Britney Spears makes a perfect body language case study because of her love-hate relationship with living in the public eye.

Spears was in the hate mode here. In terms of how we protect ourselves when we’re in trouble, the first thing you have to do if you’re a celebrity is to cover your eyes. If people can see your eyes, they can see your soul. So she puts on dark glasses whether it’s night or day. Irrelevant. The dark glasses go on. These signs of distress are in contrast to the Britney of earlier times. Everything was spontaneous, relaxed and “look at me. ” Now, she’s messed up. And her body language shows that lack of control over herself. Her body language is very defensive whereas it used to be welcoming. She’s closing down and looking panicky whereas she used to be absolutely adoring the limelight. Under this kind of intense scrutiny, a celebrity’s body language needs a helping hand. We can only guess it was sort of coaching or advice that someone in her position is getting. I’m sure she’s being advised all the time. She’s not alone. Take Paris Hilton. She rarely has a night in.

So how would she behave on a night out… of jail? When Paris Hilton is released from jail, as she emerges into the night, she knows the world is watching. She knows or has been told that she’s got to demonstrate that she’s learned her lesson. After all, she’s actually been to jail. So she can’t come out and be her normal playful self and jump on a table and start lapdancing. Because this moment doesn’t warrant such behaviour. Her body language has been carefully planned in advance. As she walks along, she straightens herself up a little because she knows she’s on. She does an very unusual gesture. A little kind of prim pose where she gets her hands, crosses her fingers that she holds in front of herself, like a very good girl.

I’ve never seen her do that gesture in any other situation. In the same way some people arrive fashionably late, she’s leaving prison fashionably punished. Paris Hilton’s calculated little girl performance was her way of dealing with the inevitable media frenzy surrounding her release from jail. Politicians, like celebrities, are always in the media spotlight. But one world leader has a unique way of using body language to slide through any situation, however embarrassing: George W. Bush. The thing about Bush, no matter if he says something wrong or does some silly mistake…

What happens with him is he gets like a kid. He becomes this little kid, like, “I made a mistake. ” He does a full-shoulder shrug, look you in the eye and say “I tried to get off the store, didn’t work”. I tried to escape. It didn’t work. -It’s likeable. -Thank you all. This playful, likeable trait that if you saw your 5-year-old kid, you’d want to pinch his little cheek. But it’s the President of the USA! Bush’s body language reveals his resilience to his own mistakes. There’s an old saying in Tennesse, I know it’s in Texas, maybe in Tennesse, that says: “Fool me once, shame on… Shame on you. The fool can’t get fooled again. A beautiful example of G. W. Bush being completely lost in the middle of what he’s saying. He pauses a long time, he knows that the next word is “shame on you. ” But he knows also that he’s lost the next sentence. He has no idea where he’s going. What you see with his head is “Fool me once” and he bends down like this, like they’re about to throw tomatoes at him. The fool can’t get fooled again.

“Fool me once, shame on you” and then he comes up and misquotes the who. “Won’t get fooled again. ” Fool me, can’t get fooled again. There’s this long pause where he’s evaluating if he’s made a complete fool of himself. And then, he carries on regardless. We gotta understand the nature of the regime we’re dealing with. Body language matters. If you want to be President of the United States, it’s vital.

The facts are that he has said, in the last few weeks, that he really liked the ideas of the Republicans over the last 10 to 15 years. Politicians like Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama know that words are only part of their message. Voters are also influenced by the image they portray. When did it don on politicians that body language was so powerful? It’s 1960. Vice-president R. Nixon and Senator J. F. Kennedy campaign for the presidency. This election will be a turning point in the relationship between politicians and body language. It really wasn’t until “the Great Debate” between Nixon and Kennedy the first televised debate, that candidates began to realize they had to focus on their non-verbal visual image. Miss, Senator Kennedy. The things that Senator Kennedy said, many of us can agree with. The candidates square up to each other in front of a televison audience of 70 million people. Nixon looks far less assured in front of the cameras than Kennedy. Mr. Nixon, would you like to comment on that statement? I have no comment.

Thank you Mr. Nixon, that completes the opening… Nixon had just come out of the hospital after receiving treatment for an injured knee. And then refused make-up when he got to the TV studio. He was a manly man, he didn’t want make-up. Kennedy said: “Put the make-up on. ” He was already attractive. Nixon sweated under the lights. He compared unfavorably with the tanned and fit-looking Kennedy. In the polls after that debate, Nixon to the radio audience that had only heard him won by a landslide. But the polls of the audience that saw the debate, Kennedy won by a landslide. All of a sudden, politicians realized they had to be aware of their visual image. Nearly 50 years later, today’s presidential hopefuls receive saturation media coverage.

Voters observe their every move. Under such scrutiny, managing their image is a job for the professionals. The whole thing is a game of image versus objectives. Your objective is to win the vote. Body language is of course an important part of that image. Which is why many politicans employ coaches. Like Mark Jeffries. Very often, when working with a politician, someone who is trying to shape an image, you will ask that politician: “Who do you admire in the public eye?” If it’s a man, typically it’ll be someone like George Clooney. Because he’s someone who embodies style, charm, charisma. And yet isn’t extremely young so he’s kind of an ideal model. The very training actors like Clooney undergo usually leads to good body language in public. That puts them way ahead of politicians who have to be told how to walk, where to look, how to smile even. Is it possible to detect signs of body language coaching in a politician? This is Hillary Clinton. I want to thank you for letting me speak with you about an issue… Here is Hillary Clinton, back in 1993.

The overall body language here is soft, soft, feminine. “I’m not the President. I’m the President’s wife.” Back then, Hillary’s body language was very understated. Stand up, you silly woman. Alright. Okay. She comes in, a little hunched over because that’s what you do when you feel slightly threatened. When you don’t feel threatened and feel very confident, you stand up very staight, you thrust your chest out. Fastforward 15 years through Hillary’s journey from First Lady to US Senator, to candidate for the democratic nomination for President. How much has her body language changed? It’s so interesting and dramatic of a change from earlier Hillary to “Hillary light”; there’s been this transformation of her body language, how she’s approaching people. Now together, let’s give America the kind of comeback the New Hampshire has given me.

What she does now is she embraces the applause, she goes up to it. She almost wants to hug people for the noise that they’re making. For the reaction that they’re giving her. What are the coaching giveaways? You can tell when somebody is coached when their gestures don’t seem natural. When the beat is off slightly. When you can tell “I’m thinking and then I’m showing. ” Hillary always looks like she thinks before she shows anything. I am not going out there on my own. Mark Jeffries also detects signs of coaching in the new improved Hillary. …who believe as I do that this country is worth fighting for. When you coach your politician, you have to create the illusion that they’re loved by many. Even when you step onto a stage and the audience is applauding you, you still have to create this image that there are people out there who you know personally, people you’re thrilled to see. What you do is you point to the audience. As many times as you can use your finger. “Thanks for coming. ” Of course, there’s no one there that they know.

And if you are in the audience, you’re looking at her going “She’s pointing at me. ” “Is there somebody else?” The whole thing is a game, and a brilliant one. Because when you watch it on TV, you go: “She knows so many people!” Politicians now know they must pay attention to the 93% of communication that’s non-verbal. But what role does body language have in everyday life? Does good body language help close a deal? To find out, we hired two women to pose as new car customers. Our pretend customers Jackie and Kacy, are rigged with hidden cameras so our experts can watch the car salesman in action.

First stop is a BMW showroom, where they’re greeted by Cory, one of the salesman. Look at the fixing the tie, doing some cleaning. Must have saw that there are two cute girls waiting. He’s fixing things up. -Hi, I’m Jackie, nice to meet you. -Nice to meet you too. -Hi, I’m Kacy. -Hi, Kacy. I wanted to come and take a look at something in the 3 series if you have some available. -Certainly. Kind of quick on the handshake but he was smiling, genuine. Look at how he approaches. The salesman approaches the two women, he’s got a giant smile, which is what he needs to have. He’s also got his head slightly forward, which is very important for displaying submissiveness. Very useful for a salesman. Salesman Cory has started off well. Looks like he put a winter coat on, and an umbrella. He’s gonna take the girls outside. He wants to make a sale. And it looks like he’s going to give Jackie and Kacy a test drive. I’m looking more at the sedan, I think.

I’m not looking for anything particularly fast necessarily.? This is the big moment. Thank you. -Here’s the key. Look at him messing around. This guy’s on his A-game. Great posture, he had a little jump to step in going to the car. And off they go. I believe this salesman’s body language is near perfect throughout. Cory gets high marks from our experts.

But were our customers impressed by his performance? What did you think of Cory’s first impression? I thought he was very friendly, easy to talk to, down to earth. His body language would’ve helped or hurt an actual sale with you guys? Personally, I think it’d have helped. -It’d have helped. His body language in with his personality. The following morning, they go to a Toyota dealership. This time, there’ll be an extra hidden camera rigged inside the frame of Jackie’s sunglasses. -This is Jackie. -Hi, Jackie. -It’s Jerry. -Nice to meet you. How will salesman Jerry compare with Cory? In this position where we see Jerry, see what he’s doing with his thumbs? He’s rubbing his hands, that’s called the self-touch gesture. Jerry’s self-touch gesture is similar to Richard Nixon’s hand rubbing during the Watergate investigations. This is a comfort gesture, it means that he’s feeling in some way uncomfortable. Body language can’t be considered in isolation. It’s usually an amplifier to what you’re already saying. He’s moving calmly, he’s assuring but he’s not assuring to them. He’s essentially assuring himself. Both cars come with a built-in remote. Here’s the problem. He’s looking down.

He did not connect with eye contact with the women. Here, there’s a disconnect. By standing up, you’re saying: “I”m more important than you. ” He should be down, crouched on his knees a little bit. Inside the car, Jerry’s showing off the various features. But is his body language helping to persuade a potential customer? -Oh, my God. -That is very nice. People buy not based on the product. They don’t even buy based on the data about the product. Ultimately, they buy based on how the feel about the salesman. So how do Kacy and Jackie feel about Jerry? He seemed a little distant to me. In general. It got better as it went on in time but there was some distance throughout the sale. Comparing their experiences, we asked them which salesman would be more likely to sell them a car.

Cory, definitely! -Definitely, why? Look at your genuine smiles pop up. -Because he has a genuine smile! He had confidence, sure, but it wasn’t overconfidence. It was natural. He just had it. One of the acknowledged? masters of body language is former president Bill Clinton. Bill Clinton is great at establishing rapport?. He’s one of the all-time best. In this televised Town Meeting in San Diego back in 1993, Clinton shows off his skills. My own belief is that we do need more jobs. And that we do need jobs tied? to continuing education and training. Bill Clinton has all the classic charismatic factors: likability, power, attractiveness. If you look at Germany, Great Britain, France, all the world- He’s a powerhouse because he’s open. He’s giving us his full front dorsing?. “I’ve nothing to hide. We’re together. We’re alike. ” That’s what rapport is. Every good speaker, who speaks formally, expresses from the heart. Clinton expresses from the heart. Clinton’s gestures deliver his message to an knee-size? audience. We do not need to build a bridge to the past, we need to build a bridge to the future. And that is what I commit to you to do.

He gestures on the beat. Very significant. Telling whether somebody’s being authentic, honest, you want to make sure they’re gesturing just a second before they say it. You feel it, you show it and then you say it. He’s gesturing just before he says it. The real mark of a body language master though is how they deal with a difficult situation. My question is: can you name one country that has taxed and spent itself back into prosperity? -President? -The answer to your question- You can see staight away that he is not happy with that question at all.

He betrays very quickly and for a very short period of time the fact that he does not have an answer. He does the mouth pulling. The answer to your question is I can’t. But you can’t fairly characterize my program. I have cut more spending than my predecessors did. He’s very quick. He instantly regains his composure. That’s one of the things with him, he has this power to regain composure. Like Bill Clinton, Tony Blair has a reputation for composure in public. But it didn’t always come naturally. Blair, his wife Cherie? and children are posing for the cameras on the day he first became British Prime Minister. Then came the moment everyone was waiting for. You’re told as a political couple you must show a bit of love from time to time, show the voters you’re real and normal people. The crowd is applauding, he puts his arm around Cherie, as if he’s gonna hug her. Cherie, remembering her lesson, decides to go for the kiss. He then grabs her, puts his hand right in front of her, so that she can’t kiss him.

He almost blocks her with his hand, like “No, not now dear. ” She goes and does a little cat thing on his chest. It’s at that moment when she does that that he realizes he’s missed the boat. That actually, he was supposed to kiss her. But then, it’s too late ’cause everyone’s seen the effort and you can hear a little bit of booing from the crowd then he realizes he’s made a mistake so he kind of kissed her hair. The whole thing was rather embarrassing. Rookie politicians aren’t the only ones to give themselves away. Even the masters can get exposed. Take this promotional appearance in 2005 by actors Angelina Jolie and the recently-separated Brad Pitt. Thank you, guys. When it came to the premiere of “Mr. and Mrs. Smith”, Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt, their body language was screaming to me. There’s more of a story here. The press had been full of speculation about whether Pitt and Jolie were having a secret romance.

Just before they run the film, Brad Pitt says cute little things, and Angelina Jolie becames like Princess Diana, with the whole looking down, she looks up at Brad Pitt and back down. “Take care of me”. It is a massive flirting technique. For me, it was the crucial point that said there’s something more to the story here. We’re really excited by it, we know you’re gonna like it. It’s great fun. Instead of being a chum and a pal, why does she have this little girl flirting thing going on? Just a few months later, Pitt and Jolie became an official item. President Clinton had a more serious problem when rumours of his relationship with Monica Lewinsky began to circulate. He decided to make a very public televised denial. His words very crystal clear. I worked till pretty late last night but I wanna say one thing to the Americans.

Clinton was addressing both the TV audience and the reporters of the White House. I did not have sexual relationship with Miss Lewinsky. But his normally assured body language was not conveying a reassuring message. These allegations are false. And I need to go back to work for the American people. Thank you. To show your integrity, your face, head, gestures and body need to be in alignment. In this case, he’s gesturing in one direction, and looking in another direction. So he’s pointing here but looking here. That’s a disconnect. It doesn’t make sense. Why is there an incongruence? It should be: “America, I wanna tell you something”. Now, look again at the way the president’s head moves. I never told anybody to lie. Not a single time. Never. Never, never, not a single time. We see the head shaking no but we didn’t see the head shaking no when he said he didn’t have sexual relationship with that woman.

Though he’s trying to control his body language, the truth was leaking out. Out on the streets, reading body language accurately can be the difference between life and death. On a typical patrol, these police officers are constantly evalutating people based on their gestures and facial expressions. As of right now, I see one person in the car. Throughout my time, my career, the first thing I look at is people’s eyes. Because eyes don’t lie. You could put your hands in your pocket, you can take a seat on a chair, but your eyes don’t lie. How to read body language accurately is an important lesson in police training. How you sit, dress, walk tells me who you are. Whether you’re a wolf, or a sheep. Former Marine Corps Intelligence Officer Frank Marsh has an audience of law-enforcement officials from all over the state of New Jersey. In the Western world, what happens when a man gets in your face like this? We’re about to fight! In the Middle East, this is how they talk. They’ll even argue like this. Marines are getting in trouble because these Arabs would get in front of their face and the Marines would hit them and down they drop.

And the Arabs would stand up and go: “Why’d you hit me?” -Because you got in my face. With Americans, if you get in a male’s face, it’s a challenge to fight. So pay attention to somebody’s body language. Officers Jones and Ruchy are on a patrol in Mount Vernon, north of New York City. They pull over a woman for going through a red light. As Ruchy approaches the car, he has to be sensitive to the body language of the driver.

If she’s fidgety, and can’t give a direct answer to a question, if her hands are moving, if she’s constantly looking at her rear-view mirror… Officer Ruchy is very comfortable with this car stop. Police officers have learned through bitter experience that if they don’t keep their body language antenna tuned, things can go terribly wrong. Former Sergeant in the NYPD Lou Savelli trains police officers to recognize key body language indicators. He uses this video of a 1998 incident recorded by a dashbord camera to point out the danger in not being sensitive to body signals. What you have here is a sheriffís deputy in Georgia pulls over a vehicle for a traffic infraction. As he pulls the vehicle over, several indicators tell us that this was gonna be a bad stop.

The sheriffís deputy was alone. The car is stopped, and right away he opens his door, which tells he’s either gonna attack the officer or heís hiding something in the vehicle. He’s trying to distance himself from that vehicle. Everybody knows once a police pull you over, you’re supposed to stay in the car. Come on back here for me. Come on back. The driver gets out of the vehicle, which is alarm bell number one. Here, the officer says: Now, step towards me.. He hesitates. Heís not ready to do his thing, because he doesnít wanna do based on what the officer says. Heís got a plan in his mind. More indicators that heís about to do something to this officer. Comes out, closes his coat, which tells heís nervous. He goes right, puts his hands into his pockets. That tells you that he is either nervous about what’s about to happen, heís gonna get aggressive, or may have something in his pockets.

Keep your hands out of your pockets. Alarm bell number two: the driver is out of his car, he’s put his hands in his pockets, both potentially threatening body language indicators. Now the sheriffís deputy gets out of his patrol car to talk to the driver. He’s dancing around trying to intimidate the officer, show that: Iím not listening to you, you have no authority of me. ” And right before he finishes up his dancing routine, he claps his hands. Clapping the hands is one of the last indicator you see when someone is about to fight. They clap the hands to get the blood flowing, then they got to attack, and thatís exactly what he does. Come here! Sir, get back! A scuffle ensues off camera. And before the deputy can stop him, the pick-up driver goes back to his vehicle. He appears to be searching for something. I repeat my line. Get back here now! The driver now has a gun. Put the gun down! What I got now the gun. I need help. The situation gets out of control.

Shots are fired. And the deputy is killed. This horrific incident is one of many examples Savelli uses for body language training. Itís important to read body language for a police officer because if you can recognize a threat that you are in danger, you can counteract that threat. Itís the most important thing to teach police officers. I believe more important than self-defense, firearms tactics is that they need to understand when they are being threatened.

Out on the street, a police officer can use often subtle body language or tells to pick up on possible guilty or criminal behavior. There’s various ways that people try to hide a gun. One of the most common is blading. They notice an officer on one side, they’ll blade their body real quick this way. Keep the bolter on this side away from the view of the officers. Another way of concealing a weapon is by billowing your shirt or coat by pulling down like this. The weapons arenít visible. If Iím gonna try to grip my gun, my thumbís gonna twitch like this and clears the top of the shirt.

My hands are gonna go up. The first thing Iím gonna got is my thumb and a pull-up. Iíll try to rid my weapon. I know that my thumbís gonna clear this weapon before I pull it out. Blading, billowing and the thumb twitch, all potentially threatening signals for those that can see them. For police officers, there are situations when body language has to be evaluated in just a fraction of a second. When Savelli was a New York cop, he worked in Narcotics with Officer Paul Rossi. Our team was making undercover of vice. We are hitting drug locations, end up coming to this drug location. I’d do a buy-and-buster on the undercover, make a buy. Then us and part of the field team would go in and bust the drug dealer. The drug dealer, on this occasion, ran for it towards this street corner. We were up there. We canít fire around the corner. Then we canít fire him here. We saw him run into there. Saw the back of him from a distance. And then we just throw in. We jumped out of the car, arrived right over here.

Yep, I remember. The drug dealer was familiar with the neighborhood. We come out. We fly out the car. We see him coming around. He goes in and what he sees Lou isÖ The back of his body goes right through the door. We come in. We’re face to face with him. And of course when we come in, the gun was already at him all this time. A man was standing behind the counter with a gun, pointed straight at them. Iím doing this trying to hide behind something. Louís coming up that side. Both Lou and Paul were about to shoot. Drop the gun. By that time, Lou is up. Something about the guy told us he wasnít a danger to us. The way he was acting, holding the gun, the way his body was point, the way of his eyes. Although his face was fixed on Paul, his eyes kept going that way which meant he wasnít intent on hurting us.

The man behind the shop counter was a frightened shop clerk. We hear the gun go hit the floor. Turns out his eyes were giving up the guy in the back. His body language told us that guy’s back there. We went to the back room, caught the guy in the back room hiding. We got our drug dealer in the back room. It all only lasted for a few seconds. Savelli knows it was his split second reading of body language that stopped him from shooting the shop clerk. More than half of what we communicate is through the gestures we make and the looks on our face. Scientists have dissected the thousands of different expressions that appear on the human face. The secret to understanding the face correctly is learning how to decode the expressions that all of us use. In the late 1960s, a pioneering American psychologist, Dr. Paul Ekman, tried to discover if there were universal facial expressions that crossed all cultural boundaries.

Dr. Paul Ekman is like the Buddha of body language. Ekman is so important because of a study he conducted that compare the emotions in facial expressions of people in Papua New Guinea, and Japan with those of people in Western countries. His team asked volunteers to make faces corresponding to a particular emotion and filmed the result. Ekman found that there were 7 universal expressions of emotions on the face: happiness, sadness, anger, fear, surprise, contempt, and disgust. We all have them, doesnít matter if you are 6, 66 or 106. Doesnít matter if you are born in Iran, Japan or the United States. They appear pretty much the same way in our face. But Ekmanís facial research didnít stop there. He developed an entire system of looking at the muscles of the face. Such as movements that would happen between this muscle and this muscle so you can get a smile. He then characterized those giving us a centering alphabet whereby scientists could talk to one another and characterize exactly what facial movements people were making.

The influence of Ekmanís facial expression research can be seen today. Can we turn off the lights please? Look happy, sadÖ This is a demonstration of the face reader. The very latest and automated facial recognition technology. Surprised. Face reader uses the 7 basic emotions as established by Paul Ekman, and 55 points on human face to classify those 7 basic emotions. The face reader instantly maps the complex interactions of the muscles of the human face.

These colored graph bars represent the type of emotion appearing on the face. Every expression is given a value in terms of the degree of happiness, sadness, anger and so on. Technology like this is being used in all sorts of fields. Consumer research how do people react to different foods, marketing research how do people react to ads. Today, facial recognition systems are being installed in airports to refine security checks. The face communicates so much more than just the 7 universal emotions. Ekman identified more than 3,000 different facial expressions that convey a meaning that most of us will react to, both consciously and unconsciously. Todayís politicians are acutely aware of the importance of non-verbal communication. They employ coaches to hone their gestures. But new research suggests they would do well to pay more attention to the expressions on their face. I will be our partyís nominee for President in the United States. Thank you. Every presidential candidate has to try to win our trust. They need us to believe they’re competent for the job before we’re willing to vote for them. You and I together, we will change this countryÖ But how do we decide whether they’re competent or not? We asked Georgetown University to rerun a revealing experiment conducted at Princeton in 2005.

Student volunteers make instant decisions between pairs of faces appearing on the screen. The studentsí task is to decide in sometimes less than half a second which of the two people is the more competent. It seems that we are so sensitive to facial expressions that we are comfortable making snap judgments like this. Even when the students have several seconds to choose, they donít alter their initial decision. What they donít know is that the photographs are of candidates who were running for the Senate, the House and Governor in 2002 and 2004. What kinds of expressions communicate competence? I’d say a genuine smile. Anytime there is a nice smile. If there was no smile, maybe I didnít think they were as competent. What other expressions influence the students? I wanted someone that had a genuine look. Eye contact. Looks you in the eye. I think I tend to pick the ones had more stoic face. An interesting pattern emerged in the students’ choices.

As in the original Princeton experiment, more than 70% of the faces they chose as more competent turned out to be the people who were actually elected for office. This suggets that come election day, the expression on a politician’s face is an important factor in our choice. We’re hardwired to understand 3,000 different facial expressions. But there’s even more information to be gleaned from the human face. If you’ve got the skill. It takes a keen eye to spot what’s known as “a microexpression”.

Microexpressions are the expressions that come out quickly from your emotional state before you have time to think about them. You might be in the middle of saying something happy and then your face would suddenly form itself into a very sad face. But just for half a second. And then your face would resume its happiness. These are quite rare but when you see them, it shows that the person is actually trying to hide something. During his campaing for governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger gave this speech at a rally. What I want to say to you is yes, I have behaved badly sometimes. He was responding to allegations of sexual misconduct. But are his regretful words backed up by his facial expressions? I like to watch something like this frame by frame so I can see those microexpressions. And I have done things I thought then were playful. But now, I recognize… Here, we have this look of rage. A snarl that comes across his face instantaneously, fraction of a second.

Microexpressions can be a 20 fifth of a second. That shows he is angry about having to make this apology, at being attacked in this way. View it again in slow motion. The microexpression can be isolated. As Schwarzenegger opens his mouth, his nose muscles flare upwards into a momentary snarl. But it seems the voters didn’t spot this body language giveaway. Three days later, he was elected Governor of California. People who are media savvy sometimes think they can fool the world over our eyes.

But their faces can still give them away. In 2004, track-and-field star Marion Jones held a press conference following allegations that she had been taking performance-enhancing drugs. First of all, I’d like to thank everybody for coming out today on such short notice. She was being investigated by the United States’ Anti-Doping Agency, USADA. To begin, I wanted the world to have an opportunity to hear from me.

JJ Newberry runs the Institute of Analytic Interviewing in California. He trains people to identify the telltale signs in a personís face that indicate they could be lying. …So that you can get a good idea of how I am feelingÖ She’s saying she wants us to know how sheís feeling, so Iím gonna look to see if sheís gonna express how sheís feeling. That in the end the truth’ll prevail and my name will be cleared. However, the events of the last several weeks have led me more in sadness than in anger.

Have led me more in sadness than in anger… but she doesnít show sadness and she doesnít show anger. Iíll ask you what is missing from this whole tape? If somebody accuses you of something you didnít do, would you be mad, or would you be sad? Iíd be mad at them! And I have done all I can do to provide USADA with information that I have knowledge of, because I believe in the drug-free sport.

As Newberry watches Jonesís performance, he looks for microexpressions that may conflict with what she was saying and reveal her true emotions. Her eyebrows go up almost into the corner. Eyebrows are up and coming together in the corner, almost like a fear. Surprise and fear almost together. Ideally, if she’s telling the truth, we’d like to see the brows come down. Because she should be angry. You’re being falsely accused of something you didn’t do, the brows should come down. I have truthfully answered every question asked of me under oath. There shouldn’t be fear and surprise. It might leak out maybe a little bit. But it’s non-stop here.

The fear and surprise is the dominant emotion leaking out subconsciously. Fear and surprise weren’t the only emotions leaking from Jones’ face. If the truth is told, then my name will be cleared and I can move on with my life. “The truth can be told, then I can move on with my life. ” Then immediately, she creates this unbelievably sad expression. She looks down, she’s got a long face.

Marion Jones’ brief flash of sadness is a classic example of what experts call “a hotspot”. These are facial expressions that seem to be at odds with what someone is saying. Or inconsistent with how they would be expected to behave in a given situation. That’s a point where you have to look for more information. It could mean a lie but also many different things. Do we know that it’s guilty and not something else? At the time, it would’ve been very hard to tell.

For Newberry, the biggest hotspot of all is the absence of one specific emotion on Jones’ face. It’s not what you’re seeing, it’s what you’re not seeing. You’re not seeing an angered response. I’m not going to engage in USADA’s secret kangaroo court. Jones’ words were defiant. Her face certainly wasn’t. Her body language just didn’t go with what she was saying. Three years later, all that had changed. Here she emerges from court to face the media again. Having been found guilty of lying under oath to federal agents. It is with a great amound of shame that I stand before you, and tell you that I have betrayed your trust.

It moves me now to even talk about it. That’s what happens when people are being authentic. You are taken to thei level of pain, anger, fear. When she’s finally coming clean, you see a more relaxed Marion Jones. And I am responsible fully for my actions. This kind of facial analysis can be applied to anonymous people catapulted into the media spotlight. I just can’t stress it enough that we just got to get them home. That’s just where they belong, with their mamma and daddy. Susan Smith’s face was all over national television in late 1994 after she claimed her two young sons had been abducted. JJ Newberry saw Smith’s televised appeal for their safe return. Shortly afterwards, she admitted she had murdered her children. That was very obvious to us. Before she even confessed. Anybody can look at this after the fact and come up with all this.

We actually did it before. Why was Newberry so confident of Smith’s guilt? First thing we all notice is that there was no real tears. It was a fake cry. I want to say to my babies that your mamma loves you so much. This is all connected: eyes, ears, nose and throat. So when you start crying, the physiology takes over: your sinuses swell up, your nose starts running you start swallowing and the tears come out. You don’t see any of that. Smith’s performance is peppered with hotspots. We don’t see any stress in the forehead. And when she’s?, she’s closing her eyes. She’s thinking about what she’s gonna say. About what she did, who knows? All I know is there are hotspots. A hotspot does not indicate a lie. It’s simply a hotspot, an emotional response that should tell the interviewer: “I have to delve further into this aspect of what she’s saying”. There is not one minute that passes by that I’m not thinking about these boys. Now take a look at the face of Smith’s husband, David, during the same press conference. We ask that you continue to pray for me and my wife and for our family.

But most of all, that you continue to pray for Michael and Alex. Where she’s faking it for the cameras, his face tells a different story. You do not have to be a body language expert to look at someone and as they’re experiencing emotions, to feel it. His emotions and facial expressions are more consistent than his wife’s. Susan Smith has no activity on her forehead. The husband, his brow is down, very engaged in stress. His jaw… he’s very stressed. This is an emotional person. He does have concerns, feelings. He’s showing this emotion. The evidence was right there. We just had to open our eyes and look at the body language.

Body language is about the gestures we’re all familiar with. And the fleeting facial expressions that often escape our notice. Together, they make up 55% of human communication. But a crucial 38% comes from the voice. There’s its tone and pitch. We have to choose between change and more of the same. Its speed. We have to choose between looking backwards and forwards. And rhythm. We have to choose between our future and our past. Barack Obama’s voice seems very natural. But most politicians work very hard to achieve a sound that impresses the voters. Body language and voice tone have a profound effect on how well you communicate. Normally, as people rise up the runs?, the more noticeable they are, the more likely they’ll have coaching.

By the end, most politicians at the very top will have thought about body language and especially their voice tone. How did their voice is, and how modulated and slow it is. I personally think they had ideas but they were bad ideas. Bad ideas for America… Female politicians have an additional hurdle to overcome with male voters. Research shows that a woman’s voice effects the emotional part of a man’s brain. So we think women are so emotional when they speak. So shame on you, Barack Obama! Former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher provides a voice-case study for British impressionist Steve Nallon. This is Thatcher in 1960 when she was a new member of Parliament. Very much so. but speaking in the House of Commons is a unique experience. What’s really intersting about Thatcher is she’s young, in her early 30s, and for anybody in their early 30s, you have a younger sounding. And it really is very very high up here.

Over the years, that was brought lower, because it doesn’t sound as good; it sounds patronizing. Very very high. The higher the pitch, the more shrill of a waiss?; the less credibility it’s given. It’s perceived very negatively. Our voices often become marginally lower in tone as we get older. But Thatcher appears to have given this process a helping hand. Fastforward to the year 1983. She’s just won a second term as Prime Minister. I think we should have to make up our minds about the Cabinet very quickly. Otherwise, the press will discuss it all for me. She’s learned, as a politician, that that high sound is not going to help her get elected. Did I say it? Even husky, sexy voice just might appeal. Evidence can be found though that despite Mrs. Thatcher’s suspected coaching, her natural voice would often reassert itself. I must say I can’t stand those who carp and criticize when they ought to be congratulating Britain on a magnificient achievement. At this stage in her premiership, although the voice was very low, it’d been sort of trained to be low. Just wait a little more patiently. After all, not all results are in yet.

When she gets excited, those old shrills keep coming back. I can’t stand those who carp and criticize. If you want to make it as a top politician, you need to know how to deliver a great line. If you see liberalization: come here to this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate. Known as “The Great Communicator,” President Ronald Reagan was reknown for his ability to use his voice to work a crowd. Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.

Among today’s politicians, Barack Obama stands out for his effect on an audience. How does he do it? Thank you, Iowa. They said… They said… They said this day would never come. Obama has used his voice to match his body, to get gravatass? and yet a massive response. The melody within his voice rouses people. They start to join in with the rhythm of the words as they flow. They believe themselves to be part of it. It’s a great trick of auditory. They said our sights were set too high. The canes? and the rhythm are hypnotic. So he actually speaks on a beat. It’s a model of a Baptist preachure. They said this country was too divided. He’s got an incredible resonance for his voice. When he says: “They said… “, it’s almost as if there’s reburb on the voice. He builds the voice up, starts down here, builds up, builds up here and has that long long pause.

And then, he lets the audience have it. We are one nation, one people and our time for change has come. It’s so powerful! He doesn’t really matter what he’s saying because his voice tells you what you should be feeling about what he’s saying; the words become irrelevant. You might not even remember the words after he’s finished speaking. But you feel something really really powerful.

John McCain has a very different style. I didn’t need to tell you what the polls said you wanted to hear. I didn’t tell you what I knew to be false. I didn’t try to spend you. John McCain uses his voice almost in the exact opposite way that Barack Obama does. Here, McCain is speaking on the night he won the 2008 New Hampshire primary. I just talked to the people of New Hampshire. I talked about the country we love. Number one: he’s reading this speech, his eyes are down for most of the time. The words are very important to him. He has a little bit of a nasal voice. He speaks from up in his head. And has sort of a little accent: he squeezes his words together so it sounds like you’re talking to a salesman of some sort.

Or someone who’s a technician. The work that awaits us in this hour, on our watch… He’s saying: “I’m not Mr. Slick Presentor. I’m not someone who will wow you with the ryhthm of my voice. I’m gonna tell you how it is. ” McCain’s unadorn sound fits needly with the words of his speeches. He makes a virtue of being a straight talker. I will never surrender! Tony Blair is another consumit? public speaker. A master at judging how to pitch his vocal performance. I say to the people of this country we run for office as New Labour, we will govern as New Labour. But our experts have identified at least one moment when his performance was almost too perfect. It’s the morning of August 31, 1997.

Tony Blair has just received the news of the death of Princess Diana. All eyes are on him. I feel like everyone else in the country today, utterly devastated. Our thoughts and prayers are with Princess Diana’s family. Tony Blair, in this particular piece of footage, is fantastically milking the sadness. Some of it is really sadness in this feature. But Diana’s death didn’t affect him nearly as much as he’s making out. Normally, he has a very rapid delivery almost like a machine gunfire. When somebody is being real, authentically feeling something, it isn’t very that dramatically from their normal rate of speech. Blair’s delivery here seems studiously slow. in particular to her sons and boys. Our hearts go out to them. You can hear him off and taking long breaths in or out. He’s giving a slightly less powerful voice for sadness. He’s using lots of… pauses. And you can see him preparing to act. We are today a nation, in Britain, in a state of shock. Then he makes the statement. So the voice doesn’t sound natural. She was the people’s princess. And that’s how she will stay, how she will remain.

You can see that he also… swallows, really big swallows for the sadness as well. Like the other aspects of body language, our voices can be hard to control. They can give us away. Especially when we’re under stress. This is very personal for me. On the eve of the crucial 2008 New Hampshire primary, Hillary Clinton is asked a question that many feel changed the tide of the primary contests for a while. As a woman, I know it’s hard to get out of the house and to get ready and my question is: how do you do it? I couldn’t do it if I didn’t passionately believe it was the right thing to do. Then suddenly, the tone of Hillary’s voice changes. I have so many opportunities from this country. I just don’t wanna see this fall backwards. Many commentators believed that this moment helped swing the vote in her favor.

But was it real of fake emotion coming out in her voice? This is very personnal for me. It’s not just political or public. I see what’s happening. And we have to reverse it. And some people think elections are a gain, it’s like who’s up or who’s down. It’s about our country, our kids’ futures. It’s really about all of us, together. This is a difficult one because at this time in the campaign, she was often being accused of being a little hard, cold. It was almost like it was required that she should prove that she’s a woman and maybe show some emotion. Some people think elections are a gain, it’s like who’s up or who’s down. Her voice gets quiet, and it even starts to crack on the word “elections”. She starts to have her voice fall apart. If you just listen to her voice, you can hear it crack and break up as she’s speaking.

A lot of politicians have practiced and gotten that down pat. In this case, you can hear it’s real. Others are not so sure. It’s about our country, our kids’ futures. If I was being synical, and had coached Hillary to cry at some stage, that’d be the moment to do it. Body language works as a package. Gestures, facial expressions, and the sound of the voice. But what if we take away the visual clues? How good are we then at decoding the secret messages of the human voice? We devised an experiment to find out. These Georgetown university students are listening to two audio clips. All they know is that both recordings are of distressed parents talking about their missing children in front of reporters. First, Mark Lansford talking to reports in Florida in March 2005 about the search for his daughter Jessica. She had been missing for nearly three weeks. I have confidence in my sheriff’s department. And I truly believe in my heart that my daughter is coming home. I just don’t know when. Sometimes, it’s a little hard to swallow.

But you swallow it and keep searching because that’s what she wants me to do. Lansford’s search would sadly be in vain. A few days later, it was discovered that his daughter had been murdered by a local man. Next, a recording of Susan Smith in South Carolina whose two young sons had allegedly been abducted. I came to express how much they are wanted back home. This emotional public appeal occured in November 1994. Ten days after the disappearance of her sons. We love ’em, we miss ’em. Later that same day, she would confess to their murder.

As the students listen, their physiological reactions are being monitored. Heart rate and the degree of sweating are both measured. Deprived of any visual clues, what is their impression of the two recordings? I felt that the mother in the second recording sounded really desperate. You could hear that she really wanted her kids to come home. For the majority of students, Smith’s voice sounds very convincing. How does Lansford compare? I focus on searching for Jessi and try to block everything else. You could tell he was also missing his daughter but it wasn’t as… engaging. He seemed to be holding it together a lot more until the very end, and then he cracked a little bit. 8 out the 10 students failed to identify anything in Smith’s voice that would suggest she had something to hide.

This shows that most people find it hard to tell if someone is lying just from their voice. But two did detect something that didn’t ring true. The woman didn’t seem to be talking about her own children but other people’s children. I thought her emotions seemed a little more forced than the man’s. Comparing the two, I thought the man was more sincere in his reaction. The physiological data from these two students revealed their bodies weren’t picking up on something in Smith’s voice. Now, new technology is trying to identify the subtle changes that occur in our voices when we lie. Could this be the key to detecting deception? It’s now possible to analyze a voice recording with some scientific precision. This recording is of Lee Harvey Oswald, arrested shortly after President Kennedy was shot. Lynn Robbins, CEO of Voice Analysis Technologies, is assessing Oswald’s voice with an investigative tool used by over 70 different law-enforcement and federal agencies.

It’s called: “Layered Voice Analysis”, LVA. The brain communicates with the human voice box. It’s not something you can control. With this technology, it’s difficult to learn how to beat it. You would never be able to beat it. As we speak and think about what we’re saying, our brain is sending messages to our voice box, which constantly varies the sound our voices produce. Layered voice analysis evaluates the several audio variations labels them in different categories of emotional mental activity. Such as inaccuracy. Or probable false. I pratically know nothing about this situation. As Lee Harvey Oswald speaks, the categories of mental activity identified by LVA are giving number values that appear on the right hand-side of the screen.

The numbers mean everything: the higher the number in some values, the better the chances they’re not being completely honest with you. Now watch what happens to the read-out when Oswald is asked this question: Did you kill the President? No, I’ve not been charged with that. Nobody has said that to me yet. The first thing I heard about it was when the newspaper reporters in the hall… asked me that question. The high numbers appearing in the category “probable false” suggest that in this instance, it’s highly likely that Oswald was lying. Nobody’s told me anything, except that I’m accused of… of murdering a police man. I know nothing more than that.

And I do request that someone come forward. That is a false statement. “I know nothing more than that. ” He did know what took place. It appears that he really knew what took place because in this whole statement, there’s inaccurate and false. Obviously, Robbins’ analyzing someone who was in a stressful situation. Where their voice was more likely to show signs of lying. But can this technology pick up signs of deception from someone who is not under any stress? I am not a fan of this area. Body language expert Janine Driver is going to act as a guinea pig and answer a series of personnal questions from Robbins.

I have two sisters, they have kids. I lived with Kayleen for a year. It’s all truthfull responses. Until they get on to the subject of Janine’s choice of college. They tell me the further state college away from Massachussetts it was North Adams. I didn’t care where it was. It could have been in Virginia. -You cared where it was! -Did I care? -Yes, you did care. LVA identifies a false statement from Janine. Just as with Lee Harvey Oswald. A revealing change in the voice has been identified. I’d rather be in the mountains rather than the ocean. Why is that so stressful? It comes as stressful because I’m terrified of sharks, I don’t go swimming in the ocean.

Screwed me up forever and ever because I won’t go past my ankles in the ocean. I even see my body language, I’m rubbing my hands. Now, we’re getting a stress reading. And Janine’s gesture, rubbing her hands, is confirming that stress in her voice. This technology does seem to detect what we’re genuinely feeling. We pay so much attention to the words people speak but 93% of human communication is delivered through body language.

When there’s a conflict between the words and the body language, always believe the body language. Read body language accurately and you’ll look at the world through new eyes. A celebrity secret exposed by an unguarded gesture. A lier unmasked by her own face. A power stuggle played out beneath a false geniality. And when a politican tries to convince an audience with winning words, press that record button. Rewind, and take another look. .