enough to encourage that individual to feel understood.²⁰
     In the interview setting, slowing the rate of speech to correspond with the pace of a halting witness allows for recall and communication at that person’s pace. By the same token, if a witness speaks with more volume and at a quick rate, the investigator should try to match the person’s animated and expressive manner of speech. By listening carefully and paying close attention to how people speak, investigators can, in NLP terms, get “in sync” with people by matching their paralanguage.
     Experienced investigators continually employ this technique, usually without even thinking about the mechanics or the process involved. Detective Hamilton also uses this aspect of NLP in his interview.
     The drive-by shooting witness speaks slowly, as if searching for the right words. Detective Hamilton slows the rate of his speech, giving ample time for the witness to get her point across without feeling rushed. He lowers his voice to match her soft volume and refrains from the urge to interrupt her. As the witness becomes more excitable, speeding up her speech rate and increasing her volume, Detective Hamilton increases his rate and volume as he attempts to mirror her. In so doing, he demonstrates to the witness that he is interested in her as an individual, and this allows her to communicate what she experienced in a way that is comfortable for her.

CONCLUSION

     Detective Mark Hamilton’s witness begins to feel support and understanding from the interviewer, who continues to match her kinesics, language, and paralanguage. When he sees her consistently looking down to her right, he realizes that she may be processing information on the kinesthetic level and encourages her to talk about her feelings. Slowly, she begins to trust Detective Hamilton.
     Unbeknown to the witness, Detective Hamilton had been matching her in specified ways until she finally felt secure enough to provide full details of the drive-by shooter and his vehicle. As a result, the witness’ emotional need was met and, from Detective Hamilton’s perspective, the interview was a success.

     Successful investigators listen "closely to the choice of words witnesses and suspects use."

     This scenario illustrates the importance of carefully observing how witnesses and suspects communicate through nonverbal, verbal, and vocal means. Neuro-Linguistic Programming is not a new concept nor used rarely. In fact, most successful interviewers employ some variation of it to gain rapport. However, by being conscious of the process and the benefits associated with NLP, interviewers can use these techniques to their advantage. By matching interviewees’ nonverbal behavior, the manner in which they say something, and even their choice of words, interviewers can increase rapport and enhance communication. As a result, the potential for gaining crucial information needed to help resolve investigations improves significantly.

Endnotes

¹ Genie Z. Laborde, Influencing with Integrity (Palo Alto, CA: Syntony Publishing, 1987), 27.

² Ronald P. Fisher and Edward R.

Geiselman, Memory-Enhancing Techniques for Investigative Interviewing, (Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas Publisher, 1992), 22.

³ John O’Connor and John Seymour, Introducing Neuro-Linguistic Programming (London, England: Harper Collins Publishers, 1990), 2.

⁴ Ibid., 3. ⁵ Ibid., 3. ⁶ Ibid., 26.

     ⁷ Richard Bandler and John Grinder, Frogs Into Princes (Moab, UT: Real People Press, 1979), 5.

     ⁸ P.B. Kincade, “Are You Both Talking the Same Language?” Journal of California Law Enforcement 20: 81.

     ⁹ Ibid., 19.

     ¹⁰ Jerry Richardson, The Magic of Rapport, How You Can Gain Personal Power in Any Situation (Cupertine, CA: Meta Publications, 1987), 21.

     ¹¹  Judith A. Hall and Mark L. Knapp, Nonverbal Communication in Human Interaction (Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers, 1992), 14.

     ¹²  Supra note 3, 19.

     ¹³  Supra note 7, 83.

     ¹⁴  Supra note 7, 35.

     ¹⁵  Supra note 7, 25.

     ¹⁶  Supra note 7, 25.

     ¹⁷  Supra note 7.

     ¹⁸ Aldert Vrij and Shara K. Lochun, “Neuro-Linguistic Programming and the Police: Worthwhile or Not?” Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology 12, no. 1 (1997).

     ¹⁹  Supra note 1, 30.

     ²⁰  Supra note 1, 31.