Police Investigations 101

Interviewing Skills for Investigators: Identifying Deceitful Witnesses – Lessons from Shakespeare

Gilles Renaud (Ontario Court of Justice – Retired)

Introduction of a brief nature

We begin with these words of thought: the police are the servants of the community and are often taken for granted and asked to accomplish a great deal. Thus, “First Sentinel, Sergeant, you shall … Thus are poor servitors, When others sleep upon their quiet beds, Constrain'd to watch in darkness, rain and cold.” Refer to Henry VI (Part 1), Act 2, sc. i, l. 2-3.[1] This article is meant to assist the police in carrying out their vital work of investigating crime and of clearing the names of those wrongly thought to have committed offences by means of their investigations, by focusing attention on the complex and common issue of deceit facing investigators.

On the subject of deceit, one may assert that your main task is twofold: on the one hand, to scrutinize witness statements to ensure that you are not being deceived in the sense of being made to believe an innocent state of affairs existed when such was not the case or wrongly, that a criminal act took place when this is not accurate. On the other hand, turning not to witnesses but to accused persons, you must prepare a case against a person thought to be guilty of a crime committed by means of deceit or some form of fraud leading to harm to a victim. In brief, to assist the prosecution in satisfying the Court as to the true situation. In this context, note this passage: "Antipholus of Syracuse ... The folded meaning of your words deceit." See The Comedy of Errors, Act 3, sc. ii, l. 37. To repeat, the function of the skilled investigator is to discover the length and breadth of any deceitful conduct, at the investigative stage involving witness and at the trial level, leading to accusations.

Briefly put, investigators do well to recall the wise words written by Shakespeare in Act 5, Scene I, l. 104-105 of The Taming of the Shrew: “Gremio Here's packing, with a witness to deceive us all!" Packing refers to a conspiracy.

Discussion

Deceit by a complainant or witness – the example of foul Iago, who brings about femicide by false reports

It is suggested that a good introduction to this subject is found in Othello, Act 1, scene i, l. 60-65, wherein Iago, Othello’s would-be friend and military subordinate, describes himself with true words in the blackest tomes, something he then fails to do throughout the tragedy as he presents false reports and manipulates physical evidence to obtain a false belief that Othello’s wife is unfaithful to him.

Iago
Heaven is my judge, not I for love and duty
But seeming so, for my peculiar end:
For when my outward action doth demonstrate
The native act and figure of my heart
In compliment extern, 'tis not long after
But I will wear my heart upon my sleeve
For daws to peck at: I am not what I am.

[Emphasis added]

In effect, the speaker is conscious of the fact that people generally expect that the outward appearance of the face and person will "testify" as to their internal thoughts. Thus, if Iago appears to be loyal and loving to his superior, it is feigned in order better to deceive his intended victim. This is the challenge posed to investigators when complainants appear candid and reliable. How may the police officer know the “inside” falsehood that the "external" honest-looking Iago is hiding? Indeed, consider some later lines, starting at 169 of the same scene: "Iago ... Yet, for necessity of present life, I must show out a flag and sign of love, Which is indeed but sign ..." In few words, I am not sincere!” [Emphasis added] In the same vein, we read: "Iago. Men should be what they seem; Or those that be not, would they might seem none!" Refer to Act 3, scene iii, l. 130-131. Since they are not, investigators must be carefullest they be deceived into accepting a false complaint, or acting upon false information to not accept as reliable a true report of crime.

Deceit attempted by acting or feigning – a brief introduction

Acting or feigning, as we have just read, is a tool that potential witnesses, including a possible suspect or two or many, may resort to disguise their actions or thoughts, and thus frustrate the investigators work. It is not always to hide a crime but may arise out of embarrassment, such as hiding their recent presence at a “gentleman’s club”, or to avoid being suspected of infidelity if it was known they had just been at a “by the hour” hotel, etc. In this vein, many plays by Shakespeare include references to the ease with which a person may seek or succeed in hiding their thoughts by means of a false outward appearance or emotion. Indeed, Macbeth is famous for three useful quotes on this subject. Firstly, in Act 1, sc. iv, l. 11, King Duncan states: ‘Theres no art To Find the minds’s construction in the face …”, meaning that people can hide their innermost thoughts easily from our attempts at discovering them. Secondly, sc. v of the same initial Act includes these remarks at l. 57: “Your face, my thane, is as a book where men May read strange matters.” Shakespeare insisted on the ability we possess to fool others by our looks when he added: “… bear welcome in your eye, Your hand, your tongue; look like th’ innocent flower, But be the serpent under ‘t…” Lastly, that play includes advice on how one should try to trick others who rely on demeanour cues to read the mind by examining the face. Thus, investigators must be careful lest they be deceived by those who read Act 1, sc. vii, l. 82: “Away, and mock the time with fairest show; False face must hide what the false heart doth know.” These words were spoken immediately after the two speakers decided to commit murder.

Many, many other citations are apt to support the title of this rubric, notably what follows, taken from Act 5, sc. vi, l. 7 of Troilus and Cassandra: “Troilus … O traitor Diomed! Turn thy false face …” In brief, Shakespeare teaches investigators and criminals and non-cooperating witnesses two things:

1) Generally, we cannot assess accurately what thoughts a person may be entertaining by means of their facial expression, and

2) A person can assume a "facial guise" that may well trick and deceive the observer.

Deceit attempted by acting or feigning – a detailed review for investigators on the role (and dangers) of demeanour

In brief, we have seen that deceit may be attempted by those you interview with a view to lead you to incorrect conclusions. The following paragraphs seek to demonstrate that the investigator must turn to demeanour evidence to both understand the potential reach of deceit and duplicity aimed at you and later at the Court should a prosecution ensue, and the extent to which demeanour is a subjective and malleable tool to achieve deceit. At bottom, all human interactions involve some degree of demeanour evidence such as frowns and other facial expressions. We judge the sincerity of what others tell us by means of their demeanour, often to our peril, as demeanour is highly subjective and culturally insensitive, leaving aside other failings. What is meant, for example, by frowns and to what extent may we judge correctly what this outward manifestation of inner thoughts, or stomach trouble for all we know, is meant to communicate? In fact, the play Cymbeline begins with this passage: “First Gentleman. You do not meet a man but frowns; our bloods No more obey the heavens than our courtiers Still see, as does the King’s”. This actor adds shortly later, still in Act 1, sc. i, l. 13: “… Although they wear their faces to the bent Of the King's looks …” In other words, people wishing to curry favour with His Majesty “ape” his looks, for lack of a better description. Demeanour is thus a tool for those bent on deceiving others.

Some critics of demeanour go so far as to say the word is synonymous with “duping” others by “feigned” appearance. An excellent number of examples are seen in Hamlet:

Hamlet.
And therefore as a stranger give it welcome.
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy. But come,
Here, as before, never, so help you mercy,
How strange or odd soe’er I bear myself,—
As I perchance hereafter shall think meet
To put an antic disposition on …

[Emphasis added] [1-v]

In effect, he proposed to allow himself to be seen as suffering from mentally disorder, to better achieve his purpose of avenging his father’s death. Note as well a further quote from Hamlet:

King.
And can you by no drift of circumstance
Get from him why he puts on this confusion,
Grating so harshly all his days of quiet
With turbulent and dangerous lunacy?

[Emphasis added] [3-i]

The play Troilus and Cressida is useful on the dangers of witnesses you interview who are attempting to “con” you. Thus: “Buried this sigh in wrinkle of a smile. But sorrow that is couch’d in seeming gladness…” [Act 1, sc. i, l. 38] The reader is invited to interpret “couch’d” as the French word “cacher” or hide and you understand the danger of a “false face” being adopted by a witness with a view of hiding information from you. Having addressed a smile as a means of deceit, this play also contains a passage in Act 2, sc. iii, l. 109, that suggests that feigning sadness is not only a reality but is the subject of rehearsal to acquire skill. Thus: “Cassandra … Practice your eyes with tears …”

Further assistance of a signal nature is found in Act 3, sc. i, l. 8 of King Richard the Third:

Gloucester.

Sweet prince, the untainted virtue of your years
Hath not yet dived into the world's deceit
Nor more can you distinguish of a man
Than of his outward show; which, God he knows,
Seldom or never jumpeth with the heart. …

[Emphasis added]

The reference earlier to “deceit” makes plain the link that detectives seek between appearances and reliability of information provided by would-be witnesses. But as noted by Gloucester: “… outward show” may be just that, “a show”, conducted by actors as we understand the word show. That is the main drawback to reliance upon demeanour, that it may be manipulated. As a detective, you might be fighting against falsehoods on a daily basis, as suggested by the following:

Bertram.

... But shall we have this
dialogue between the fool and the soldier? Come,
bring forth this counterfeit module, he has deceived
me, like a double-meaning prophesier.

[All’s Well That Ends Well - 4-iii-94] [Emphasis added]

The next quote demonstrates the belief that Shakespeare (and most playwrights and authors hold) to the effect that acting sincerely is quite easy to accomplish. Thus, Julia stated in Act 1, sc. ii, l. 63-64 of The Two Gentlemen of Verona: “… How angerly I taught my brow to frown, When inward joy enforc’d my heart to smile!” If indeed many persons are skilled actors, fully capable of manipulating their appearance to deceive, then the odds of detecting deceit diminish greatly.

Deceit practiced upon third parties is common by those seeking to hide actions

Consider this interesting illustration, from Titus Andronicus, Act 3, sc. i, l. 186:

Titus Andronicus

Come hither, Aaron; I'll deceive them both:
Lend me thy hand, and I will give thee mine.

Aaron

[Aside] If that be call'd deceit, I will be honest,
And never, whilst I live, deceive men so:
But I'll deceive you in another sort,
And that you'll say, ere half an hour pass.

[Emphasis added]

Deceit may dwell in a gorgeous palace – i.e., be very well disguised

Investigators are familiar with the expression “Judge not a book by its cover.” That one cannot judge a book by its cover is self-evident. The background to the “palace” expression includes this passage from Romeo and Juliet, Act 3, scene ii, wherein Juliet states: "... In moral paradise of such sweet flesh? Was ever book containing such vile matter So fairly bound? O that deceit should dwell In such a gorgeous palace!" [Emphasis added] This passage reminds us of Justice O'Halloran's remarks as to the dangers associated with a good "actor" in the witness box. Refer to the quite influential case of Faryna v. Chorny, 1951 CanLII 252, [1952] 2 D.L.R. 354 (B.C.C.A.), at paras. 10: "If a trial Judge's finding of credibility is to depend solely on which person he thinks made the better appearance of sincerity in the witness box, we are left with a purely arbitrary finding, and justice would then depend upon the best actors in the witness box..." Every police officer should read this case, available for free at the CanLII website.

In addition, it is useful to quote King Richard the Third, at Act 4, sc. iv, l. 395.

Duchess of York

Oh, that deceit should steal such gentle shapes,
And with a virtuous vizard hide foul guile! …
[Emphasis added] [Act 2, sc. i, l. 27]

In effect, to better succeed, a falsehood might be attempted with a pleasant or attractive element. Think of the child molesters who address a child while holding a puppy… Consider further two apt citations from King Henry the VI (Part 2) that demonstrate the depth and breadth of the means undertaken to succeed with a deceitful scheme.

Suffolk.
… Did instigate the bedlam brain-sick Duchess
By wicked means to frame our sovereign’s fall.
Smooth runs the water where the brook is deep,
And in his simple show he harbours treason.
The fox barks not when he would steal the lamb.
No, no, my sovereign, Gloucester is a man
Unsounded yet and full of deep deceit.

[Underlining added]

King Henry the VI (Part 2) [3-i]

The underlined words highlight the obstacles that police investigators face as they must identify and then counter the “wicked means” that “a simple show” harbours, not to overlook that as the fox does not signal his approach, the criminal does not alter victims and, ultimately, “deep deceit” may be at play, that you must defeat. In the passage below, the example is selected to show that meekness might, in some cases, hide evil intentions.

Queen Margaret.
Ah, what’s more dangerous than this fond affiance?
Seems he a dove? His feathers are but borrowed,
For he’s disposed as the hateful raven.
Is he a lamb? His skin is surely lent him,
For he’s inclined as is the ravenous wolves.
Who cannot steal a shape that means deceit?
Take heed, my lord; the welfare of us all
Hangs on the cutting short that fraudful man.

[Emphasis added] King Henry the VI (Part 2) [3-i]

In effect, Queen Margaret suggests that even those who appear innocent (like a dove or lamb) can easily disguise their true, malicious intentions. Pursuing this thought that the best show does not necessarily suggest the truest foundation, the investigator must ask themselves in the exercise of their judgment: can anyone be trusted? Investigators must make many such decisions in all manner of cases, and they ought to consider the wisdom of consulting their peers and those with greater experience in terms of the issue(s) in play. There are potential witnesses who seek to deceive and there are those whose potential evidence is unreliable, but without malice or design. Thus: “Cleon. Thou speak’st like him’s untutor’d to repeat: Who makes the fairest show means most deceit … [Pericles, 1-iv] [Emphasis added] Of course, we hasten to add that, as in the case so many elements of human nature, one cannot judge by means of absolute statements in the sense of “never – always believe relatives, friends, bowlers, Maple Leaf fans …” It is always a question of judgment based on the information at your disposal.

Deceit arising from bias, from distrust as between certain individuals arising from other situations or litigation

The Two Gentlemen of Verona includes this useful quote about the possibility of a deep enmity emerging from a strained situation or relationship that will endanger the reliability of information provided to investigators.

Silvia

… Thou subtle, perjured, false, disloyal man!
…That hast deceived so many with thy vows?
Return, return, and make thy love amends.
For me, by this pale queen of night I swear,
I am so far from granting thy request
That I despise thee for thy wrongful suit,
And by and by intend to chide myself
Even for this time I spend in talking to thee.

[Emphasis added] [4-ii-90]

It is easier to find that the putative witness is biased, and thus prone to deceit, when someone such as Silvia is so open about her dislike of the other person, but one suspects that most police cases do not present such obvious statements of dislike!

Deceit by a would-be witness may occur at the scene or in your office at the police station

In The Taming of the Shrew, Katherina provides a “medium” force example of a warning to be honest to her sister Bianca: "Of all thy suitors, here I charge thee, tell Whom thou lovest best: see thou dissemble not." Refer to Act 2, sc. i, l. 9. In 28 years as a judge and a number as a defence counsel and later a prosecutor, I have heard this admonition frequently and yet, I have never seen a witness state "I was about to dissemble, but your reminder stopped me in my tracks." I suggest that it is a requirement by police officers, but I know that opinions differ on this subject. Our point is that it is wise for the investigator to always impress upon the person interviewed that police inquiries are serious and grave in nature, and any foolishness will result in a prosecution.

Deceit – past may be repeated in the future

A comment by Brabantio in Othello, Act 1, scene iii, l. 293-294, illustrates this concept: "Look to her, Moor, if thou hast eyes to see: She has deceived her father, and may thee..." Othello includes these further relevant remarks at Act 3, scene iii, l. 210-214: "Iago. She did deceive her father, marrying you; And when she seem'd to shake and fear your looks, She loved them most." In other words, past is prologue to events to happen. For investigators, the warning is to the effect that a prior event of deceiving the police is a warning to be vigilant to an even greater extent.

Deceit, the evolution in the thinking of those who complain, or not, of such a crime

In forming your judgment respecting a complaint that a deceitful act took place, be mindful of the evolution in one's thinking. Let us consider the area of familial relationships. Indeed, in King Henry the IV (Part 1), Shakespeare illustrates the simple fact that all individuals evolve in their thinking, and this necessarily includes their perspective on all kinds of relationships, notably domestic and romantic ones. Hence:

Adriana.

... The time was once when thou unurged wouldst vow

That never words were music to thine ear,

That never object pleasing in thine eye,

That never touch well welcome to thy hand,

That never meat sweet-savored in thy taste,

Unless I spake, or looked, or touched, or carved to thee.

How comes it now, my husband, O, how comes it

That thou art then estrangèd from thyself?

[Emphasis added]

Obviously, inspired by this example of a person who once could not object to anything advanced by his spouse is now of the quite opposite view. Investigators must consider such factors in interviewing witnesses, lest surprises arise. By way of limited example, it ought not to be surprising in a civil case embracing a contested will that certain adult children who have experienced separation and divorce might be sympathetic to the perspective of their surviving parent, who wishes to claim a share for their "new" spouse in a revised will, while those children who will inherit less as a result might be at the local station suggesting fraud and deceit!

Deceit, the role of emotions

Further, when detectives are called upon to exercise their judgment on the possible role that emotion may have played in actions that are said to be rooted in deceit, they must consider human nature and whether emotion have led to faulty reasoning by those who provided a statement or played a role leading to the giving of a statement. As is plain, emotions are part of the human psychology, of the human nature, and they might have impelled individuals to be forthright or deceitful, as the case might be In this vein, note this guidance from All’s Well That Ends Well:

First Lord

The web of our life is of a mingled yarn, good and
ill together: our virtues would be proud, if our
faults whipped them not; and our crimes would
despair, if they were not cherished by our virtues.

[4-iii-66] [Emphasis added]

Deceit, the role of imagination

This rubric and the one just above on “emotions” serve to alert investigators as to the unconscious role that emotion and imagination may play in convincing a witness-complainant that they have been the subject of some form of deceit, leading to a visit to you at the police station. In reaching a judgment as to the potential impact that imagination may have played in the minds of potential witnesses, we suggest that you be wary of this factor far more than your superiors or training might have suggested. Although we doubt very much that there is any great scientific justification for the quote that follows, in our minds based on a lifetime before the courts, there is no doubt that imaginative persons represent potentially unreliable witnesses. Thus: “Theseus … The lunatic, the lover and the poet Are of imagination all compact …” [A Midsummer’s Night Dream - 5-i-6] and later, in the same play, we read “Theseus. … Such tricks hath strong imagination …” [5-i-18]

Deceit, the role of stereotypical thinking

An example of this type of situation is seen in Much Ado About Nothing, Act 3, scene iv. Recall that Balthasar sings: "Men were ever deceivers". Act 2, sc. iii, l. 63 and Margaret echoes this thought. Investigators must be wary lest they fall into the trap of neglecting judgment and analysis in receiving a complaint of this nature and substituting mere prejudice for analysis in the formation of the possible criminal grievance. For example, Shakespeare has Balthasar state: “… Sigh no more, ladies, sigh no more, Men were deceivers ever…” The investigator must ask themselves the question: “Was this man [or woman], in fact, guilty of deceit?” As well, did this witness, in this instance a male, deceiving me in my investigation, innocently or by connivence?

Deceit, the role of the weather, of the seasons

Consider this passage:

Rosalind.

… No, no, Orlando;
men are April when they woo, December when they wed:
maids are May when they are maids, but the sky
changes when they are wives. …

As You Like It, Act 4, sc. i, l. 140-144.

In other words, persons who complain of the misconduct of others, notably persons they have been involved with romantically, may well advance misleading reports depend on a few subjective factors they are subject to, but without being aware of these influences. Of course, it may be that the season, such as the wedding rush in May or the summer, leads to a review of past wrongs suffered against such a background and a decision is made to seek justice by reporting domestic violence either experienced or witnessed. The subject matter of plays may be well be accurate as to human nature, but it may also be stereotypically unreliable as making light of serious subjects.

Deceit, the investigator guilty of poor judgment

It is suggested that a further issue is that of too great a belief, by the investigator, that they are quite skilled at detecting deception. As we read in The Two Gentlemen of Verona, at Act 2, sc. iv, l. 10, it is not easy to read the demeanour of others, including those we know well: “Silvia Servant, are you sad? Valentine. Indeed, madam, I seem so. Thurio. Seem you that you are not? Valentine. Haply I do.” If it is difficult to read the faces and non-verbal language of non-strangers, what of persons the investigators meet for the first time? In the same play, Eglamour states: “This is the hour that Madam Silvia Entreated me to call and know her mind.” See Act 4, sc. iii, l. 1-2 and sc. iv, at l. 67-68: “Proteus. … But chiefly for thy face and thy behavior, Which, if my augury deceive me not, Witness good bringing up, fortune and truth…” That is the ultimate test: what if your augury, your ability to predict what is to happen based on what you have perceived, your judgment in the final analysis, did deceived you as a matter of fact?

Further, on the issue of self-induced error leading to deception, note these references from The Merchant of Venice. Firstly, Act 2, sc. vii, l. 65 reads: “Prince of Morocco … There is a written scroll. I’ll read the writing. All that glisters is not gold …” Consider as well the quote from Bassanio: “So may the outward shows be least themselves. The world is still deceiv’d with ornament.” [3-ii-73]

Deceit – the case of love!

One of the dangers faced by investigators in seeking to judge the demeanour of would-be witnesses surrounds the stereotypical belief that those in love act in a certain fashion. Thus, The Two Gentlemen of Verona play contains this passage: “Julia. They do not love that do not show their love.” [1-ii-31] Is this a universal truth? Far from it, will say all bashful Romeos! Investigators must be prudent lest they fall prey to stereotypical beliefs about behaviour.

Deceit versus craft

The Merry Wives of Windsor, Act 5, scene v, l. 213 reads: "Fenton. And this deceit loses the name of craft…” In other words, you might succeed in defeating such deceit so long as the person seeking to dupe you is not very skilled in this “art”.

Deceit versus genuine emotions in the case of potential witnesses you seek to interview

Careful investigators must be alert to the fact that those who have suffered a grievous loss, let us say the loss of a brother as in the play Hamlet, and who have been instrumental in causing that death, will do their best to feign sadness. It is a challenge in such cases to seek information without being insensitive to those who are innocent of any wrongdoing and whose emotion is genuine. The danger is that you will re-victimize the person grieving over the murder of a loved one. How to tell genuine emotion from feigned grief is quite difficult and requires a careful study of the demeanour of these potential witnesses who are all strangers to you. In this context, note how Claudius, the newly crowned King of Denmark, uncle to Hamlet, can show a “brow of wow” though he poisoned his brother. As we read at Act 1, sc. ii,

King.
Though yet of Hamlet our dear brother’s death
The memory be green, and that it us befitted
To bear our hearts in grief, and our whole kingdom
To be contracted in one brow of woe …

Deceit - Gendered elements in your analysis of the complaint(s) are to be avoided

Rosalind expresses a gendered opinion of the capacities of women to express the truth, but the true professional investigator will analyze information objectively, asking if this woman or man, to name but two descriptors, is not only capable of deceit but whether the suggested testimony is the product, in part or in whole, of a deceitful state of mind, conscious or otherwise. Thus: “… that is one of the points in the which women still give the lie to their consciences. …” Refer to As You Like It, Act 3, sc. ii, l. 379-382. Consider this further excerpt: “Rosalind. … and certainly a woman's thought runs before her actions.” As You Like It, Act 4, sc. i, l. 133-137. Again, the only true question you must ask is whether this woman acted in that fashion such that her statement to you at the police station is not reliable in the precise circumstances at hand.

Deceit might be quite difficult to detect

Consider this quote from King Henry the VI (Part 2)

SUFFOLK.
… Did instigate the bedlam brain-sick Duchess
By wicked means to frame our sovereign’s fall.
Smooth runs the water where the brook is deep,
And in his simple show he harbours treason.
The fox barks not when he would steal the lamb.
No, no, my sovereign, Gloucester is a man
Unsounded yet and full of deep deceit. [3-1] [Underlining added]

Deceit might be quite prevalent, and this increases the danger of wrong information being acted upon

Regarding reposing trust in those that deceive us, a quote that is found in Timon of Athens, at Act 5, sc. i, l. 103, is relevant to the fear that detectives will accept the information put forward by deceivers and liars: “Timon. There's never a one of you but trusts a knave That mightily deceives you.”

Deceit that is the subject of a confession

Admissions of this nature are no doubt rare. The world of Shakespeare’s plays includes this example, however, useful to illustrate our area of interest. Although, as noted, the experienced interviewing officer will rarely encounter this type of admission, it was thought interesting to point out when a witness admits to being deceitful:

Cæsar.

And you are come in very happy time,

To bear my greeting to the senators

And tell them that I will not come to-day.

Cannot, is false, and that I dare not, falser;

I will not come to-day. Tell them so, Decius.

[Act 2, sc. ii, l. 60-64] [Emphasis added]

Deceit – in the sense of a double-meaning that is selected to confuse

In this context, note the following excerpt from All’s Well That Ends Well:

Bertram.

I mean, the business is not ended, as fearing to
hear of it hereafter. But shall we have this
dialogue between the fool and the soldier? Come,
bring forth this counterfeit module, he has deceived
me, like a double-meaning prophesier.

[4-iii-94] [Emphasis added]

Deceit that is the subject of a false confession

The rare example that is set out next demonstrates how certain individuals will confess to crimes they have not committed, for private reasons often difficult to explain. In this case, to avoid being called upon to lead troops in battle to defeat Macbeth, the bloody killer of his King and father, as Malcolm thought himself lacking the necessary talent. For present purposes, this quote was selected to make plain that deceit might be resorted to for a non-criminal purpose. The first part describes Macbeth as deceitful, and the second refers to his own faults, that he has largely made up.

Malcolm.

I grant him bloody,

Luxurious, avaricious, false, deceitful,

Sudden, malicious, smacking of every sin

That has a name: but there’s no bottom, none,

In my voluptuousness: your wives, your daughters,

Your matrons, and your maids, could not fill up

The cistern of my lust; and my desire

All continent impediments would o’erbear,

That did oppose my will: better Macbeth

Than such an one to reign. …

[Macbeth, Act 4, sc. iii, l. 55] [Emphasis added]

Deceit that is foiled by investigators – a comment when the witness is made to lose their composure

“Worcester … To put him quite beside his patience. You must needs learn, lord, to amend this fault …” King Henry IV (Part 1), Act 3, sc. i, l. 178-180. It is suggested that the sound investigator collects information, assesses strengths and weaknesses, and develops an opinion on how to defeat the deceitful witness, if this be the case, by means of a second or subsequent interview based on the careful collection of information. In such cases, the interviewing officer must clarify all ambiguous responses to avoid a “wriggling away from the hook”, so to speak, later due to a suggested misunderstood word or reply. The example that follows illustrates the need to ask follow-up questions to avoid any danger of confusion touching upon quite important subject matters such as deceit and lies:

Hermia

Lysander riddles very prettily:
Now much beshrew my manners and my pride,
If Hermia meant to say Lysander lied. …

But, gentle friend, for love and courtesy

[Dream - 2-ii-56] [Emphasis added]

Conclusion

We begin these closing remarks by repeating a very famous quote found towards the end of the play titled King Henry the VI (Part 3), at Act 5, sc. iv, l. 83: “Queen Margaret. … You fight in justice … Be valiant.” It is the best method of proclaiming the importance of the vital task of police officers. That being expressed, one hopes that training and the experience that others have shared about deceitful witnesses, and possibly this article to a certain extent, will result in investigators not having to echo the concerns found in the quotes that follow about persons having been duped. In the first example, drawn from The Winter's Tale, King Leontes mistakenly believes he has been fooled by the perceived innocence of his wife and friend in Act 1, scene ii, l. 239: “… but we have been Deceived in thy integrity, deceived In that which seems so.” Further, in Act 3, scene I, of Hamlet, Ophelia tells Hamlet "I was the more deceived" during the nunnery scene. This line marks her realization that Hamlet's love was a deception, as he cruelly denies his affection for her.

In the ultimate analysis, our hope is that investigators who review articles of this nature will gain insight into basic psychology and will improve their skills in detective work “by the books”, just different ones from the Police Foundations and Police colleges. In that context, we quote from the play Titus Andronicus at Act 4, sc. i, l. 34: “… But thou art deeper read, and better skill'd …” This article is best concluded by voicing this belief that deceit may be better confronted by studying different and perhaps unorthodox sources of information on human nature, includes this relevant passage, at Act 1, sc. i, l. 53 of Titus Andronicus: “CLARENCE … but as I [and all] can learn …”

[1] A related quote follows: “FALSTAFF, … You see …how men [persons] of merit are sought after. The undeserver may sleep when the man [person] of action is called on. …” Refer to Henry the Fourth (Part 2), Act 2, sc. iii, l. 385.