Fool Me Twice

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.LINKSBook Steve Van Aperen as your next keynote speaker: Click hereGet coached in stand-up comedy with Brad Oakes: Click here

Episode 7 of the Fool Me Twice podcast dives deeply into the nature of lying, deception, and the psychology behind why people mislead others, sometimes deliberately, sometimes by omission, and often for self preservation.The episode opens with light hearted banter between hosts Brad and Steve, touching on everyday complaints, injuries, and humour around masculinity, before quickly shifting into the core theme of the episode: what actually constitutes a lie. Steve defines a lie as wilfully misleading someone while knowing the information is factually incorrect. This definition is immediately tested through the idea of lying by omission, where a person withholds key information while still technically telling the truth.Brad shares several vivid personal stories from his school years to illustrate this concept. One standout anecdote involves accidentally setting a classmate’s hair on fire, then truthfully stating that the hair caught fire while conveniently leaving out his own role in causing it. The story demonstrates how omission can be just as deceptive as an outright falsehood. Further stories about hypnotising classmates and forging parental notes reveal how quickly young people learn to exploit authority structures, especially when questioned poorly.A major theme of the episode is the importance of questioning technique. Steve argues there is no such thing as a bad interviewee, only bad interviewers. Closed yes or no questions often allow deception to continue, while open ended questions encourage detail, expose inconsistencies, and reveal motive. This idea is reinforced through real investigative examples involving document examination, handwriting analysis, and forensic techniques.One particularly sobering case involves a fabricated sexual assault allegation uncovered through document analysis, highlighting how lies must be carefully constructed, maintained, and emotionally supported to remain believable. Motive, such as revenge or jealousy, is repeatedly emphasised as the key to understanding deceptive behaviour.The discussion expands into micro expressions, contempt, and behavioural cues, drawing on psychological research to explain how fleeting facial movements can reveal underlying emotion. These insights are linked to comedy, public speaking, and leadership, showing how reading a room and identifying who others take cues from can be critical.Overall, Episode 7 blends humour, personal confession, psychology, and investigative insight to show that deception is a deeply human behaviour, and that understanding why people lie is often more revealing than simply catching them out.LINKSBook Steve Van Aperen as your next keynote speaker: Click hereGet coached in stand-up comedy with Brad Oakes: Click here

Episode 6 of Fool Me Twice explores deception in its many everyday and extreme forms, blending humour, criminology and behavioural science. The conversation opens with a lighthearted discussion about lying what it is, how common it is and how easily people rationalise small deceptions. This theme quickly shifts to modern petty crime, particularly self serve supermarket checkouts, where customers mislabel produce or snack while shopping. What begins as comedy becomes a broader commentary on how removing oversight, such as checkout staff or tram conductors, subtly encourages dishonest behaviour.Steve, drawing on his policing background, explains that studies show most people will steal if they believe there are no consequences. The hosts reflect on how visible authority once regulated behaviour and how its absence has led to widespread fare evasion, retail theft and even organised swarming, where large groups overwhelm stores and steal openly. This raises a recurring question of the episode: is deception driven more by opportunity than morality?The discussion then moves into the psychology of lying and detection. Steve recounts moments when being labelled the human lie detector created ethical dilemmas, particularly when revealing the truth could cause unnecessary harm. From this, the hosts explore how truth and deception appear in storytelling, comedy and real life. Truthful people, Steve explains, tend to self correct and provide detail, while liars remain vague to reduce cognitive load.From petty deception, the episode escalates to large scale fraud. The hosts examine historic and modern scams, including the Ponzi scheme run by Bernie Madoff, who defrauded investors of around 65 billion dollars by exploiting trust, greed and perceived exclusivity. They also discuss massive government level corruption overseas and corporate scandals closer to home, emphasising that intelligence and wealth do not protect people from deception.Crypto fraud provides a modern parallel, with discussion of the collapse linked to Sam Bankman-Fried. The hosts highlight how hype, fear of missing out and lack of regulation fuel financial deception, much like traditional scams.The episode closes on a reflective note. While deception is everywhere, from fake smiles to financial schemes, life’s real value may lie in simple pleasures like coffee, beer and paying attention to what truly matters.LINKSBook Steve Van Aperen as your next keynote speaker: Click hereGet coached in stand-up comedy with Brad Oakes: Click here

Episode 5 of Fool Me Twice centres on one of Australia’s most infamous criminals, Ivan Milat, using his case to explore how lies, fear, and behavioural deception operate in serious crime. Rather than focusing on sensationalism, the episode examines the mechanics of deception surrounding a serial offender and the long lasting consequences those lies can have on victims, families, and the justice system.The discussion revisits Milat’s murders in the Belanglo State Forest and highlights how deception extended well beyond the crimes themselves. A key focus is an earlier shooting of taxi driver Neville Knight, where another man spent years in prison for a crime Milat was later believed to have committed. This case illustrates how fear, intimidation, and misplaced loyalty can lead to false confessions and prolonged silence, allowing the truth to remain buried for decades.Drawing on first hand investigative experience, the episode explains how behavioural analysis and polygraph testing are used in serious criminal cases. The emphasis is not on technology alone, but on how people tell their stories. Truthful individuals tend to include themselves naturally in events and provide consistent detail, while deceptive individuals often distance themselves, avoid direct answers, and show subtle signs of concealment through language and behaviour.The episode also challenges common myths about serial killers. Milat is presented as an example of how these offenders are typically methodical, organised, and patient rather than impulsive. The discussion explores how serial offenders target vulnerable victims, operate in remote locations, and refine their methods over time. It also touches on recurring behavioural patterns, ritualistic elements, and why many serial killers have a strong interest in forensic processes.Importantly, the episode examines why offenders like Milat rarely confess. Even when facing life imprisonment, maintaining secrecy can provide a final sense of power and control. Milat’s refusal to cooperate meant many questions were never answered, and it remains widely believed that additional victims were never formally identified.The episode closes with a striking contrast. A lighter but revealing story is shared about a young man who claimed an uncollected lottery win. With no ticket to prove it, his claim was assessed through investigation and a polygraph examination. He was found to be truthful and ultimately awarded more than 20 million dollars. The story reinforces a central message of Fool Me Twice: polygraph testing and behavioural analysis can expose devastating lies, but they can also validate the truth when it matters most.LINKSBook Steve Van Aperen as your next keynote speaker: Click hereGet coached in stand-up comedy with Brad Oakes: Click here

In this episode of Fool Me Twice, Bradford and Steve take listeners inside the mechanics of lying and explain how easily confidence and charm can mislead us. Steve defines a lie as a deliberate attempt to mislead while knowing the truth, then challenges many popular beliefs about how liars behave. He explains that nervousness, lack of eye contact, or awkward pauses rarely signal deception on their own. People show these behaviours for many innocent reasons, including stress, fear, or simple distraction.The conversation centres on cognitive load and how lies strain the brain. When people tell the truth, they recall real memories. When they lie, they must invent details, maintain consistency, and respond to follow up questions in real time. This mental effort often leaks through behaviour. Steve describes how trained interviewers and modern technology focus on changes in eye behaviour, response timing, and speech patterns rather than dramatic physical reactions. Heart rate and sweating, for example, often reflect anxiety instead of dishonesty.Benchmarking plays a major role throughout the episode. Steve stresses that interviewers must first understand how someone behaves when telling the truth. Only then can they spot meaningful changes. Without this baseline, even experienced professionals can miss deception. Charismatic personalities, confident speakers, and attractive people often distract interviewers and influence judgement. The episode highlights how easily appearance and personality can override logic in criminal interviews, workplace situations, and romantic relationships.The discussion also dives into lying by omission. Steve explains that many people avoid direct lies by leaving out key details. By saying less, they reduce the risk of contradiction. Others overwhelm listeners with excessive information to steer attention away from the real issue. Both tactics appear frequently in interrogations and everyday conversations.Through case experience, humour, and relatable stories, the episode connects professional interrogation techniques to real life situations like dating and social interactions. The message is clear. Spotting deception requires attention to patterns, context, and behavioural change over time. There is no single behaviour that exposes a lie, and anyone who relies on shortcuts will likely be fooled.LINKSBook Steve Van Aperen as your next keynote speaker: Click hereGet coached in stand-up comedy with Brad Oakes: Click here

In Episode 2 of Fool Me Twice, the conversation moves beyond why people lie and into something far more revealing. What do liars actually do differently from people telling the truth?The episode opens with a deceptively simple question most of us ask every day. How are you? What appears to be a polite greeting is often an invitation to edit reality rather than reveal it. Social convention encourages people to offer safe answers, and that instinct to manage information sits on the same behavioural spectrum as more serious forms of deception.Drawing on years of police interview experience, the discussion explores how truthful people communicate in a fundamentally different way. When someone is telling the truth, they naturally include sensory detail, consistent timelines, and personal ownership. They talk about what they saw, heard, felt, and experienced because they lived it. Liars, by contrast, must invent or embellish, which creates cognitive strain. That strain often reveals itself through shifting tense, vague language, evasive answers, or responding to questions with questions.One of the central insights of the episode is that most people do not start by lying outright. They begin by avoiding, editing, or redirecting information. Only when those strategies fail do they resort to an outright lie. By that point, inconsistencies often begin to appear. This leakage can show up in language, body movement, or vocal delivery, especially when a fabricated story has to be maintained under pressure.The episode also challenges popular myths about deception. Confident speakers, politicians, and narcissists are not necessarily good liars. In fact, confidence often leads people to expose themselves more. The conversation pushes back against crime television fantasies popularised by shows like CSI, noting that real investigations rely far more on rapport, listening, and behavioural analysis than instant forensic results.Importantly, the hosts emphasise that deception is not limited to criminals. It appears in everyday life, from social interactions to sport to comedy. Comedy itself is framed as a harmless form of deception, where the audience understands that they are being led in one direction before expectations are subverted for humour rather than harm.The key takeaway from Episode 2 is simple but powerful. Truth tends to flow, while lies take effort. Detecting deception is not about spotting a single tell. It is about observing patterns, clusters of behaviour, and changes from a person’s normal way of communicating. And in doing so, listeners are encouraged to recognise that deception is not just something other people do. It is something we all engage in, often without realising it.LINKSBook Steve Van Aperen as your next keynote speaker: Click hereGet coached in stand-up comedy with Brad Oakes: Click here

In the first episode of Fool Me Twice, comedian Brad Oakes and former police detective and deception expert Steve Van Aperen dive headfirst into one deceptively simple question: why do we lie, and how can we tell when someone else is doing it?The episode opens with the idea that lying is not rare, criminal, or even unusual. It is an everyday social behaviour. From comedians exaggerating stories on stage, to people misrepresenting themselves on dating apps, to politicians and professionals shaping the truth to suit their audience, lying is framed as something most people do routinely, often without thinking. Brad brings humour and self awareness to the discussion, openly admitting that fabrication is a core part of comedy, while Steve grounds the conversation in psychology and real world investigative experience.Dating apps become a recurring and relatable example of social lying, where people exaggerate height, appearance, personality, and intentions. These stories highlight a key tension: lies may get someone through the door, but reality eventually catches up. The hosts explore how people knowingly create false versions of themselves, despite understanding they will ultimately be exposed.From there, the conversation shifts into how lies can actually be detected. Steve explains that there is no single tell. No magic eye movement or nervous twitch that guarantees deception. Instead, lie detection relies on patterns, inconsistencies, and changes from a person’s normal behaviour. Language choice, pronouns, tense shifts, response delays, body language mismatches, and micro expressions all provide clues when examined together. Crucially, Steve emphasises that most people are poor both at lying and at spotting lies, often because personality, trust, and desire cloud judgement.The episode also tackles darker territory, discussing narcissists, sociopaths, and psychopaths not as movie villains, but as everyday individuals who may lack empathy and use deception strategically to manipulate others. Steve draws on his experience interviewing criminals, fraudsters, and even pleasant seeming psychopaths to show how dangerous lies are not always obvious or dramatic.Throughout the episode, humour balances the heavier insights. Anecdotes about being conned, interrogated by police as a teenager, or falling for deals that sound too good to be true reinforce the central idea that we often want to believe lies when they benefit us.The episode closes by reinforcing the show’s core message: lies are everywhere, truth is fragile, and learning how deception works is less about paranoia and more about self protection.LINKSBook Steve Van Aperen as your next keynote speaker: Click hereGet coached in stand-up comedy with Brad Oakes: Click here