In episode 8 of the Fool Me Twice Podcast, comedian Brad Oakes is joined by former police detective Steve Van Aperen for an in depth discussion on lying deception memory and investigative interviewing. The episode examines how professionals distinguish between deliberate dishonesty and genuine human error and why this distinction matters.
Steve Van Aperen defines a lie as the intentional act of misleading someone while knowing the information is false. He contrasts this with common memory failures where people unknowingly provide incorrect information. The discussion opens with a light hearted clarification after a previous episode caused confusion when Steve accidentally implied he had been married. He explains this was a misstatement rather than a lie and uses it as a practical example of how easily memory and language can mislead without malice.
A central theme of episode 8 is the unreliability of eyewitness testimony. Steve recounts a robbery investigation where several witnesses described completely different getaway vehicles despite observing the same incident only minutes earlier. The inconsistencies were later traced to the witnesses speaking with each other and unintentionally influencing their recollections. CCTV footage ultimately confirmed the true vehicle demonstrating why corroboration is essential.
Brad Oakes questions how investigators decide which witness is most accurate. Steve explains that confidence detail and certainty do not equal truth and that every account must be supported by independent evidence. He highlights how mistaken identification has contributed to wrongful convictions including cases involving the death penalty.
The episode then shifts to police interviewing techniques. Steve explains that closed yes or no questions give deceptive people an advantage by limiting what they must say. Open questions such as asking someone to explain events from beginning to end require the speaker to construct a narrative. Truthful people tend to recall events using sensory and emotional detail while liars struggle due to increased cognitive effort which often reveals itself through hesitation filler language and inconsistencies.
Steve also introduces behavioural benchmarking where investigators observe how a person responds to neutral questions and compare that behaviour to responses during sensitive topics. While changes may indicate deception he stresses the importance of accounting for stress fear and normal memory lapses.
The episode concludes with examples of people lying for self protection rather than criminal guilt and a discussion of carefully worded denials using a famous athlete case. Episode 8 reinforces that while lying is universal exposing deception is not always useful particularly outside formal investigations.
Book Steve Van Aperen as your next keynote speaker: Click here
Get coached in stand-up comedy with Brad Oakes: Click here