Susan Constantine, MPsy, discusses with Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse her Behavior Lab analysis of Sam Brinton and his story. Sam was made a poster child for the Trevor Project as he told his story about the supposed horrors of conversion therapy. He discussed the forced treatment he received which tried to change his sexual orientation, which included shock therapy, electrocution, heat and coils, needles, government killing people, a suicide attempt, and abuse from his father. She and her team at the Human Behavior Lab analyzed multiple tellings of his story (which is publicly available on social media) to determine whether or not he was being deceptive or truthful.
She is the world’s leading authority on body language as it pertains to leadership and deception detection. She is the author of The Complete Idiot’s Guide to Reading Body Language and has for the past decade been a go-to source for media outlets analyzing the body language of public figures.
The media regularly turns to Constantine for analysis of U.S. and global political leaders, celebrities, and suspects in highly publicized trials. She has appeared in more than 1,000 national and international television programs, print publications, and radio programs.
Constantine often appears as a Prime Time Contributor and analyst on CNN, Dateline, Nightline, Fox News, Dr. Drew, Hannity, Inside Edition, On the Record w/ Greta Van Sustern, Good Morning America, The Today Show, The Marie Osmond Show, The History Channel, Nancy Grace, Jane Velez Mitchell, Geraldo at Large, and World Japan News. In addition, she has been invited as a guest host on The Chat, The Daily Buzz, and Emotional Mojo. She has a role in the documentary film Be Natural, produced by Robert Redford and Jodi Foster in 2015.
Constantine has been interviewed and published by the Washington Post, New York Post, The New York Times Journal, Chicago Tribune, Miami Herald, Reuters, Orlando Sentinel, Business Week, Elle, Glamour, Mademoiselle, Town and Country, Self, GQ Australia, New Idea, Yahoo, Monster.com, Google, and AOL.
Training courses developed by Constantine teach government agencies to detect deception through the five channels of communication (the face, body language, words, tone, and space). She has been hired to train in the Department of Defense’s Office of the Inspector General, the Department of Children and Families, public defenders’ offices, state attorney’s offices, judicial associations, mediation and arbitration associations, international law enforcement and intelligence agencies, law schools, universities, and State Bar Associations around the U.S. Her courses are approved for continuing legal education in over 30 states. Constantine also provides scalable corporate leadership training.
Constantine’s positive leadership coaching helps individuals overcome psychological barriers to reach their peak potential for career advancement or transitioning and goal attainment. She is the only body language expert with a master’s degree in Leadership Coaching Psychology. Constantine imparts scientifically proven methods to improve body language and verbal communication skills, self-esteem, power, confidence, presentation and public speaking skills, and other areas of performance. Leaders also learn smart techniques for media coaching, leadership skills training, and personality and workplace assessments.
Her masterclass, “How to Spot a Liar in 7 Seconds or Less,” was released this past summer.
Readings & Resources
- Ms Constantine’s website: susanconstantine.com
- Reparative Therapy Counselor Robert Vazzo wins suit to counsel in Florida & is our guest on the Dr J Show: “Florida is Sued over Reparative Therapy?”
- Ms. Constantine’s course, “How To Spot a Liar in 7 Seconds or Less”: finance.yahoo.com/news/human-behavior-academy-launches-online-110000825
- “Listening To Body Language With Susan Constantine”: https://www.oscartrimboli.com/podcast/066
Action Items
- Sign up for our weekly newsletter here: ruthinstitute.org/newsletter
Transcript
Susan Constantine:
And you can see all the emotions or lack of them in the face. Right. And also the breathing. Um, if it was high in the chest, which is anxiety, um, or the duping delight, the smirking baseline in his vocal tremors, it was off the chart. So then you’ll look at the language and he was speaking about something like that occurred in present tense versus past tense. There you go. Another one, then you’re looking at his behavior and his facial expressions are not showing remoting the appropriate expression that one would have. And we went all the way down the list from the shock therapy to the needles in his fingers and over and over and over again, it was deceptive. Overall.
Dr. Morse:
Hi everyone. I’m Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse, founder, and president of the Ruth Institute. Welcome to today’s edition of the Dr. Jay show. My guest today is Susan Constantine, who heads the Human Behavior Lab. That means she’s a specialist on, well, I’ll let her tell you what she’s a specialist on, but I think you’re going to find her discussion very interesting, because she has something to tell us about a co uh, issue that is vexing. A lot of people, which is the question of so-called conversion therapy or what we prefer to call sexual orientation change efforts. And whether this is something that should be banned or something that should be allowed. Susan Constantine, welcome to the Dr. J Show.
Susan Constantine:
Thank you. And thank you so much for inviting me.
Dr. Morse:
Oh, I’m delighted. You spoke at our summit for survivors of the sexual revolution last summer, and you only had 15 minutes in that environment. And I wanted to be sure we gave you plenty of time to tell people more about you and what you do. So just let’s jump right in, tell people about the human behavior lab and what you guys do there.
Susan Constantine:
Okay. So the Human Behavior Lab, as a company that we analyze both videos, video analysis of a nine 11 tape, a video of a suspect, and maybe could be involved in a crime, um, in addition to voice stress analysis and behavioral analysis. So what I do at my company is we detect deception to find out the veracity, the truthfulness of a person or suspect. And we’ve been working on a lot of high-profile cases. Um, some of the most notorious cases have the Jeffrey Epstein case and the Michael Jackson case. And, uh, and I think a lot of you have heard about this new, uh, case has come up about Gabby. Um, the missing girl that was found, uh, they found, they think human remains of her in Wyoming, big national case has been everywhere, is on the Dr. Phil show right now. And so I assisted one of the experts on there and reading, um, the, uh, uh, a tape, a video tape between a police officer and the subjects. So you can learn a lot about people and human behavior, whether what’s really going on behind the scenes and whether they’re being truthful or not.
Dr. Morse:
You have several, you’ve already mentioned several different types of expertise to spell out some of the different ways that you and your colleagues detect deception. What are the different tools that you might have available to you?
Susan Constantine:
Okay. So when you’re reading people, we’re looking at both verbal and nonverbal. So in your verbal communication, it is the way you pronounce your words. It could be your vocabulary, um, the types of choices of words, and pronouns, or the lack of pronouns, um, a person’s verbal dictionary. So to speak can give you a lot of information about the person and whether you, you can find missing or emitted information information that is leading to deception. So you’ve got the verbal part of it, which you can also not only just in the verbal and analyzing the language through what we call statement analysis, but there’s also voice stress analysis and voice.
Dr. Morse:
So hold on, hold on. Just let me meet, make sure. So if you were analyzing the transcript of something, uh, so you’re not looking at their affect or their stress or anything like that, you’re just looking at the words on paper. This language part that you just described could be applied to just plain words on paper. Is that, am I reading that correctly?
Susan Constantine:
That’s correct. Um, doctor, you can analyze it the truthful enough as a truthfulness of a person just in language also in behavior and also in voice stress analysis, three different distinct types of modalities to reading people. But when they’re combined together, it’s a very powerful, um, collection of data that we can analyze both verbal and non-verbal and of course technology. Right.
Dr. Morse:
Right. Okay. So I didn’t, I didn’t want to get you off track. So I do want to hear now about the verbal stress analysis, because that’s the next thing you’re going to tell us about. I think
Susan Constantine:
You can also read what a person is really saying through voice stress analysis, voice stress analysis is a machine that analyzes the very minute vocal tremors of your voice. And then that it will provide us as experts to analyze areas of where there is high levels of what we call cognitive load and cognitive load is, can be found. I want you to kind of look at this, like if you’re looking at an EKG, a heart EKG, so if you’re looking at an EKG and you find what a person’s baseline behavior is, and then if there was something wrong with her heart, it might leap up and come back down, right? So you can also analyze it in your vocal tremors. When a person is under stress, it will change the dynamics of the vocal tremor. There they’re bolt the [inaudible] and you can actually find this on a voice stress analysis. So this is a very powerful piece of equipment. And what I love to do is analyze all the data. So if a person is being deceptive and you, you can determine it in their behavior and their body language, their gesturing, and their facial expressions, you should be able to see it in their language and through the vocal tremors. So what makes my work different than a lot of other ones is I do a three-prong test.
Dr. Morse:
I see. I see. So how does this compare to the, what we would think of as a lie detector test? Is it similar or is it completely different?
Susan Constantine:
Well, it’s based on similar things. The, what you’re talking about is a polygraph heart rate, perspiration and cognitive load to anxiety. That’s just one modality and it’s very highly accurate. And a lot of police officers use it. Um, agencies use it, but this, but they’re always looking at the body language too. So I don’t want to just throw that. That is the only thing that people look at because of a police investigation. They’re looking at someone they’re also analyzing behavior office, body language off, there’s a language, not match. Are they emitting information? And the more you, they become more astute to it, they become, it becomes more natural to be able to pick up, but it’s great to use the actual tools to detect deception, but you’re speaking about a polygraph test.
Dr. Morse:
I see. And so, so let’s tell, tell people about the third modality, which is the, uh, the body language, the body leg behavior, body language. Yes. Tell us about that.
Susan Constantine:
So body language is, if you think about whatever we’re thinking and feeling it, first of all, it starts with a thought, provokes an emotion in our body. And then you’ll see the outcome of that emotion. What I mean by that is when you’re thinking about something, let’s just say, it’s a football game. And they use this, see someone throwing the ball, some catches it and they, they get a touchdown. What does a normal person do? They’re their base because we’re excited, their hands go up. Their voice will become very high and excited. So it’s the same thing. When a person is being deceptive, there are indicators that we can find in their behavior that are what we call deceptive clues. For example, if a person is talking about, let’s say I’m missing person and their wife or their child is missing. And the parents were the last ones that were with them.
Susan Constantine:
And unfortunately in today’s society, a lot of this, it comes a little bit too close, but when they’re on TV and they’re talking about like, I think of Suzanne Smith years ago when she had driven her two kids, I think it’s two or three kids into, uh, into a lake. And she said that somebody else picked up the kids and they took off with her car, et cetera, et cetera. But what you noticed was that when she was talking that she didn’t show sadness or remorse in your forehead, and she had a small little smirk that would came out in her mouth, it was just called duping delight. So when you learn how to read facial expressions, because we have over 42 muscles in our face and they fire all the time in communication, you and I are talking to one another and I’m reading your facial expressions, you’ve got your eyebrows up and you’re interested, right.
Dr. Morse:
I’m interested. And I’m shocked. I’m shocked by this phrase that you used. Dupers delight, duping delight. Okay. Pause on that for a minute. I mean, I know you’ve got a great train of thought going here, but I’m sure I’m not the only one who wondered what Dupers delight. What is that even true?
Susan Constantine:
So duping delight is, it’s really interesting. What happens with that when a person is being deceptive and they feel like they have in themselves, they think that they have duped you, they get an arousal from that. So they feel like they were really good, really clever and telling you a story that was untrue and they felt you were buying it. They actually reward themselves and you can see it as smart coming out is a form of contempt. Um, I do, do I pull one over on you? And I’m so smart as narcissism, you can see it come out in their face.
Dr. Morse:
That is so interesting. And, and, and I’ve gotten away with it. She’s buying my lie. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. I see. I see. But they’re not doing this, but they do a little smirk there that gives us that gives away the game. If you’re, if you know what to look for.
Susan Constantine:
Correct. And oftentimes when people think that when they’re trying to detect deception, that it’s a Verde eyes, you know, if they don’t make good eye contact with you, they’re being deceptive. That’s really a myth. It’s a myth because people, when they’re being deceptive, they tend to lock eyes at you. Like, I’m going to tell you one more time. I did not have sex with that woman.
Dr. Morse:
It’s so deliberate. It’s not natural in a way,
Susan Constantine:
Right? So people tend to lock eyes on you rather than avert their eyes, averting eyes. They’ve debunked that a long time ago, they’ve also debunk that lots of research behind that there’s other research has been debunked about what I, what way you out your eyes. Me, whether to the left or the right 22 out of 23 period, viewed research articles, also debunk that. And sadly, even law enforcement still applying, it’s called neural linguistic programming. And that that research has been debunked. But when you, when you talk about reading people, um, it’s really interesting. What happens is that when a person knows the truth and attempts to tell the truth differently, from what they know, it causes a physiological response. It builds what we call cognitive load. In other words, I know the truth. I’m going to tell you something different from what I know and create this other scenario that is not to.
Susan Constantine:
So I’m making this other scenario a lot. What happens is you will see physiological responses from that and they happen in clusters. So they happen in what we call seven seconds or less. So when a person determine a person’s baseline, you know how they respond, you watch their facial expressions. You’re watching their movements early on in an interview, or in any scenario, you get, you get a taste for what that person’s baseline is. So what we’re looking at, when you start asking more probative questions, or they start deviating into a story, you can then pick up small deviations. And usually when a person is being deceptive, you’re going to see it in the different channels of communication. It’ll be in your body language. It could be in your body language, your gestures, your make in your voice, pausing hesitation, stammering. It could be leaning back when they were landing forward. It could be a shift. It could be a movement in their mouth. We look for three indicators within a seven second period. So if I asked you a question, where were you last week at seven o’clock on Thursday night when the murder occurred and then you’re leaning in, but then all of a sudden you lean back. You, you squirm a little bit, you get a facial expression that looks like a momentary fear or surprise. That’s a cluster.
Dr. Morse:
Okay? It’s not one thing. It’s generally not one thing that you’re looking for.
Susan Constantine:
Never. So now when you look at that’s that’s behavioral analysis, behavioral analysis is determined a person’s baseline and finding deviations in their behavior. Um, that’s different. And you’re looking for these clusters is pockets like actually called hotspots. And then what you do is when you find the hot spots, you probe those hotspots and to gather more Intel from that. So there is a technique in that. Now imagine how much more powerful I’m reading people, reading people is when you can start adding some of the other pieces to it, which means I can take everything that you say, our conversation, you and I have. And then I can run it through my program and provide a transcript and every end and arm and pause and hesitation and every word pronoun, our article change, verb, tenses, everything is all in there. And there’s a science, very strong science.
Susan Constantine:
It’s called, it’s called it’s a linguistic statement analysis program or training that you have to go through as I’ve gone through four of them, very, very, very difficult to do. So anyway, then you’ve got the language. You can S you can go through the statement and you start to dissect the statement and you can look for deviations and changes in mindset when somebody stops and pauses and picks back up and goes back. Either they’re speaking in past tense versus future tense. For example, if an event had occurred, which is what we’re going to talk about a little later is about Sam Brenton. When he’s talking about his experience of him being, um, forced into what they call conversion therapy techniques, um, then he, when he’s talking about, or anyone is talking about an event in present tense, that is a strong indicator of deception. If someone is speaking about an event that happened in past tense, we were, I went, that would be considered being past tense.
Susan Constantine:
So when you’re looking at that, you can tell what the statement, whether the person is speaking in, first of all, first singular pronoun might I was there. Um, and then you are also looking at to see, um, whether they’re speaking about it in past tense as cause it had to have been in a course that happened in the past. So it should be in past tense. And sometimes they fluctuate. They tell you partial truths, right? They go for the, weave it from, from, uh, future tense to past tense, et cetera. Then you have the third piece, which is now we have view on tape. I can then take this interview and I could run it through our voice stress analysis. So then the voice stress analysis, we’ll pull out certain areas and what you say, and to see if it picks up those vocal tremors, a change in your baseline, in your vocal tone.
Susan Constantine:
So then you can imagine how powerful it is is when you can analyze someone through just a behavioral analysis, watching their movements, their gestures, or facial expressions, looking for inconsistencies. And then you, you add on the other modalities, which is analyzing what they say and the voice stress analysis. It really adds high level of accuracy, whether the person is being deceptive or not one case that was had that happened here in not in Florida, but in Tampa, there was a shooter. They could not identify because it was footed. It was at night and he was just walking up to people, randomly just shooting them dead, right? Just in the street that Tampa shooter. So they had some footage from a, um, a video cam and they said, I want you to analyze the TV stations. I want you to analyze this and tell me who you think this isn’t a male.
Susan Constantine:
Is it a female? Um, is it, are they young? Are they older? And so based on their strides, their movements, um, their, their gait, um, they’re gesturing and so forth. You can learn a lot about someone. So I went on the news and said, okay, I think this is a male he’s younger. Um, he’s a in great, he’s in great shape. I mentioned what I thought his ethnicity was or multiple areas that I looked at well within a short period of time, there were callers that called in off the TV station to the TV station that had seen the segment on the news that I did. And they bounced someone that looked or acted like the person that I mentioned led to his arrest. So you can use it in so many capacities, so much, so many different areas. They’re primarily it’s analyzing, uh, deposition tapes.
Susan Constantine:
Um, for example, I, I was hired by the Michael Jackson mistake to analyze seven hours of, uh, of a deposition that was videotaped of two of the subjects that said that they were sexually molested by Michael Jackson at the Neverland ranch. So I was hired by in my team. We all jumped in on this. I analyze the behavior, I had my statement analysis guy do the statement. And in my voice stress analysis guide, do the state voice, stress analysis, three separate areas. We don’t even talk about whether we think who’s guilty, if there is true, or if it’s not, because that you could run into a problem with truth bias didn’t or bias in general. So then you just pull, collect all the data together, and then if a person is being deceptive, you should be able to see, wow. When I was doing behavioral analysis, here’s where I saw a hot spot.
Susan Constantine:
Here’s where I saw cluster. Hey, let’s go look to see what the voice stress analysis, and also what the statement analysis looks like. And it’s just really a beautiful marriage. And you can detect a subject high level of accuracy by doing that. So lots of high profile cases, missing cases, parents that are, um, that are looking for their children. They don’t know what happened with spouse. I do a lot of pro bono work for, uh, parents, with their kids that are missing and having me analyze video tapes of different people that are going in front of the media, talking about their missing person. And they may have been the last person with them. And interestingly enough, a lot of times, which I actually think is kind of stupid, but they do it anyway. A lot of times, people, when they are guilty, they put themselves on social media. Everything they do is right there. Right? And we found that again with us, Sam Brinton, Sam Brinton was one he’s very loud. He’s out there. He loves the attention, man. There was all kinds of YouTube videos and so forth that we can analyze to get determined, baseline behaviors and looking at normative behavior and comparing it to some of the other videos that he had done.
Dr. Morse:
So I want to talk about Sam Brinton, but before we go there, I want to ask you just one question about if you, if you’re a witness of some kind in a civil case or a criminal case, your analysis that your three-pronged analysis, how much weight and what kind of weight does it carry, uh, in a court of law,
Susan Constantine:
It doesn’t hold weight at all in a court of law, just like a polygraph polygrapher can not testify in court. It is subjective, even though it has scientific basis for data, it is really up to the person who is highly skilled because their interpretation could be different. Even in a polygraph. The polygraphers interpretation could be different from another polygrapher. So that’s where you run into a little mucky water, but I have been hired on multiple cases to analyze all the videos so that I can arm them with the information that they can use, especially if they’re going to be cross-examining.
Dr. Morse:
Gotcha. Gotcha. Because you’ve uncovered areas of likely deception. And if the examiner, whether it’s in a deposition or cross-examination or whatever it might be, if they know that, so that’s a soft spot. They can hone in on that and see if they can get them to contradict themselves or something like that is that, that would be, that would be the tool. Okay. I see.
Susan Constantine:
The other thing is to injury. De-selection I call it the election. You know, I started my career as a trial consultant. That’s how I began. And I don’t know if you knew this or not, but I invented a technology that reads human emotions. So, you know, uh, AI has come so far along the, there was another company that I own, which is called the jury lab and the jury lab, when we were talking about reading all the muscles in the face. Well, that is a technology that is the technology itself that could read the algorithms of your facial expressions. So I created a, um, a, uh, technology and had patent. I’ve got a full patent on it that reads the human emotion of jurors. Now this is not to be used in the courtroom it’s to be used as pre-trial intelligence before the AI was created.
Susan Constantine:
I have been in the courtroom many times. So how sitting with the juror with, uh, with an attorney side-by-side, and as they are asking questions to the jurors, then I’m analyzing what they’re saying and their behaviors and detecting whether that person is really Harbor any sort of bias just by the language they use in their meaner. And you would be so surprised even their clothing, their hair, the tattoos on their body, their demeanor, the type of work that they do, all those demographic factors and things that they’re wearing. And their background tells you a lot about how to profile the person, to determine that person tends to be more egalitarian or authoritarian.
Dr. Morse:
And this sounds like something right out of a John Grisham novel, you know, right. That you’re there coaching the lawyers, you know, what to do and so on and so forth. So now what I’d like to do is to go directly to Sam Brinton. Um, and, uh, I wonder if you could give people a little background about Sam Brinton and who he is and what he has been testifying about and to whom it will give people some context for why we think this is significant.
Susan Constantine:
All right. So it’s interesting that, um, I came about the San Bernardino. I’ve never heard of him before, and I was, um, attending a conference and I kept hearing about this person, Sam Brenton, and about that, he was, um, a victim of what called a process called conversion therapy, which was trying to cause a gay person to become straight and by using methods, um, all different types of methods doing it. And usually it’s with a Christian conversion therapy, like a priest or a Christian counselor, so forth inflicting pain or whatever on a person, um, and to get them to not have the same desires for the same sex. Well, they kept talking about this guy named Sam Brinton, and he was just making headline news. He’s been everywhere. He, um, Ms. Mall would they call the Trevor project and he stands for, um, uh, eliminating conversion therapy on any human being saying that he was horribly harmed by it.
Susan Constantine:
And he has been speaking everywhere. I mean, from Google he’s stood before Congress and he keeps telling the story about what happened to him. And, but what happened was is that they just were like, he just don’t know about this guy, you know, historic keeps changing. Can you look at some video of him? So I said, sure. So they sent me a little video. Um, and I, then I started doing my own investigation is, are pulling up all kinds of other video because he’s actually out there on the lot. So he’s done a lot of YouTube videos. So, which is really to me as like the candy and the candy store, right? So anytime somebody puts them on, puts themselves in front of a camera and they put it out on social media, that’s evidence for someone like, and my team. So interestingly, he tells you the story about that, uh, when he was younger, uh, which by the way, it changed the age in which he says this occurred changes dramatically, depending on which audience he speaking with, but he’s gotten really big attention. Uh, even he was, I think it was like, uh, awarded in the Emmy awards. He’s he is really rubbed shoulders with probably the most famous people in our country. And he’s gone.
Dr. Morse:
He’s been to the United nations. He’s told the story for the United nations,
Susan Constantine:
Right. He’s all over. And I was about to say that it’s not only just national anymore. So when you see me peering off, I’ve actually got a PowerPoint that’s right here that I had created on him. And so I want to know, was this story really true because he tells you the story about that. Um, he had been electrocuted, he went to this, um, versus says he went to a doctor, um, and then he changes it to a therapist. He says the government was trying to kill him and lived in some parts of Africa. And it was very normal to see people killed in front of him. Um, he talks about that when he was in therapy, they put these heated coils on his hands, showed him photographs of same sex couples. And every time they saw that it was Zappa, would this heat coils, which would cause pain.
Susan Constantine:
And, uh, so did try to get him not to, you know, be attracted to men. He also talks about his hands being tied down with blocks of ice, that, that he was a pinprick with needles. He was electrocuted, he was received shock therapy. I talked about abuse from his father and also a suicide attempt. So what I did, as I said, okay, well, let’s look at all these videos when he’s telling the story in different audiences and let’s compare them. So I pulled out multiple areas, which I thought were important. He said that the government was killing them. That was one area. The therapist’s where the location was, who was the therapist, the heat coils, et cetera, when he was electrocuted in shock shocked. So we went through that and I sent the, uh, report the statement or the, the transcript of the statements of what he said. He had it transcribed. And then I had my statement analysis expert, who was a Sergeant, former Sergeant and trainer in statement analysis nationwide for multiple police stations in the nation. And then I ran it over to my other guy, Jerry Crotty, who was a specialist in this, and also a trainer in a voice stress analysis, three separate studies. And what we found is there were some consistencies, both in behavior. I was analyzing his behavior when he was telling the story as every one of those events unfolded and found some very interesting information. And
Dr. Morse:
So could I just clarify one thing where you, did you have multiple videos of him looking for contradictions in his statements, or did you have one video that you all analyzed at the same time?
Susan Constantine:
We all analyze multiple videos. Oh,
Dr. Morse:
Oh, oh, oh, I see. Okay. All right.
Susan Constantine:
So if he was speaking in front of Google, that was one of them. I sent it to my team. Um, another one where we was, uh, being interviewed by a, um, a journalist, I, there was that one on YouTube. So I took that and gave it to everybody. Um, he was also speaking at another conference in front of her and also in front of Congress. I took that one and I sent it off to the team. So there were multiples and it was really good idea to do that, especially in this case, always very, he was very easy to read. We were able to compare the stories. So when he was telling the story, what I’m looking for in behavior, now, if the situation had happened before, it’s not unusual that a person would kind of rapidly go through the events and almost kind of separate themselves, almost disassociate from the occurrence kind of a form of numbing or, um, just to be able to, to deal with the trauma.
Susan Constantine:
So, uh, but then in other times he would tell the story, it would change. He would have these very animated expressions, um, what we call over facing meaning you’re using expressions to, it’s like an actor that is trying to, um, overact. So you’re seeing expressions that are not fleeting cause real emotions, Dr. Fleet in and out very quickly. So for example, if you’re sad and you’re telling a sad story, you don’t abruptly stop being sad. There is a trickling down from that moment because you’ve emotionally taken. Our recall information was stored in your subconscious. You’re not almost reliving it. And you could see all the emotions or lack of them in the face, right. And also the breathing, um, if it was high in the chest, which is anger, um, or the duping delight, the smirking there’s, there’s multiple things that I’m looking at. And what I found is is that there were more multiple areas within each one of those categories.
Susan Constantine:
I spoke about like the heating, the coils, where when we ran it through voice stress analysis, when he would mention, then, then it went on to, um, heat in coils he would use, then it would go into heating coils rather than, and then he would put heat and coil. So now he’s talking in future tense versus past tense. And he’s now talking about this heated coil. So I might, I’m looking to see if he’s using gestures to show that when, when that happened, you know, and, and then at his facial expressions, did you showing any sort of pain or suffering, anxiety, fear, sadness, you know, I’m looking for expressions that would correlate with that experience being a very painful experience. So what we look, what we found is that when he would speak about like the heat and the coils on his hand, the stress analysis just would crazy.
Susan Constantine:
So when he would talk about certain areas that he say that happened based on his baseline and his vocal tremors, it was off the chart. So then you’ll look at the language and he was speaking about something like that occurred in present tense versus past tense. There you go. Another one, then you’re looking at his behavior and his facial expressions are not showing remoting their appropriate expression. That one would have given that type of an experience that he had. And we went all the way down the list from the shock therapy to the needles in his fingers and over and over and over again, it was deceptive in multiple areas for now. I will tell you that there was truthful parts because I want you to understand that no one tells you a hundred percent lies. It’s just impossible. First of all, I’ve created way too much cognitive load.
Susan Constantine:
It’s too hard to, to lie. So they, most people will kind of pepper in untruths with truths. So did he go to a therapist? Well, we couldn’t find the therapist. Number one, we couldn’t even find the location. Um, he couldn’t remember the name. Uh, all of these things just didn’t even make any sense. So he could have had some experience that he or someone else maybe had or read about. And he literally put himself in that place. So in other words, he’s telling somebody else’s story. Yes. Okay. So, you know, did it really occur? Well, based on the analysis, there was too many indicators that he was being deceptive and so many areas that his, his whole entire story just fell apart. It was just, it, it just fell apart, but he was being truthful when he was talking about this relationship that he had with his father.
Susan Constantine :
And so there was one area that was very disturbing to me where he was when the emotion was so visceral and he’s in. And his father says that what he was doing was just so disgusting like this. I mean, he showed disgust in his face. It was a combination of disgusting anger and his voice would just punctuate it. I’m like, okay, that’s what his father has told him. Um, he, you know, there was no doubt that he was, uh, not abused by his father, both mentally and physically, which I think that it had to have been extreme, which I think threw him down this trajectory in his life. And we know you, and I know that these are wounded people who did people do things that are, um, are harmful to themselves. So, I mean, I have empathy for him, but where I draw the line is is that how many people, he has been duping for his to serve an agenda. And I also think that there is a bigger piece here that the LGBTQ is using him as a poster child
Dr. Morse:
To also trumpet his agenda, their agenda. So he’s getting paid for it, which is now it’s what we call high stakes. Okay. It was what we, people, when they’re lying there, when a person’s lying, there’s generally where you can see the deceptive indicators is when we’ll call high stakes situations. So in this case, he’s got a really pull off a really good Whopper to convince people because the stakes are so high. So now, now, now when he started telling the story, simply on his own steam, for whatever reason he had, that’s one thing. But now you add the layers of money and fame and adulation that he’s getting as a result of it, the stakes become higher for him to pull off the deception. Is that what you mean when you’re talking about a high stakes?
Susan Constantine:
That’s exactly what I’m saying. So, so
Dr. Morse:
The fact that there are high stakes, did that make it easier for you to detect that he was being deceptive because he was his cognitive load was greater. Is that the point?
Susan Constantine:
Correct? What I found was overall overall, when I finished everything, is that we’re looking at a personality profile. That is an attention seeker. Um, this is a person that will go to extremes to, um, to get people’s attention somewhere. And he has bast. I mean, if you were to really, if there was any sort of, um, psychological, uh, evils, I would assume that they’re somewhere around here in, in growing up where he just wasn’t there, he was looked over, he was vacant or he was just belittled and abused that caused him to become so good at lying. And then the more he lied, the BETTERY became, and then he got, he got everybody clapping and, you know, you’re, you know, you are so courageous to tell your story and the more he got attention, he fed from it. That’s where he made the mistake. Because the more attention he got, the stories also got bigger.
Dr. Morse:
You’re saying the story got bigger. Meaning as you looked at, not only tape by tape interview by interview, uh, event by event, is there signs of cognitive load and deception, but also if you compare them one to the next, um, there’s, there’s contradictions, there are things that are inconsistent and that’s also a big
Susan Constantine:
Clue, right? It’s a big clue. And his story has become, became much more sensationalized. And, um, and the more he became sensationalized, lots of smirking and duping delight over facing that. Try to convince you rather than convey. Um, a lot of the indicators started to come out much more than they did, even in the original, uh, videos that I watched. So I just noticed that there was a, um, uh, Gary up, in other words, he told the story, the best story to get as the first one, that’s usually the best when the story comes out, the first story that comes out, that’s a good one to use because you watch to see how they change and manipulate the story later on when they’ve told the story over and over and over to different audiences. And then it’s interesting because then the timelines are different. The location, it was that there was a pastor than it was a therapist that was a doctor. Then it happened two years ago. And then it was like, when I was a teenager, it just kept going on and on and on. There was just, it was, it was an easy one for me and my team. It was an easy catch. This was not a hard one to
Dr. Morse:
Yes. And you know, if I’m not mistaken, um, a number of people caught the inconsistencies. So before I had ever heard of you and this very systematic work that you have, I had already heard people talking about, you know, this guy, it doesn’t sound right. These, these things aren’t adding up, including people on the LGBT side, there was one guy and I, I hope I get his name correctly. Wayne Beeson. I think his name is he’s a big guy. Um, uh, being opposed to the whole concept of ex-gay being opposed to conversion therapy. At some point I’m quite certain, he said, you know, guys, we got to quit promoting this guy. Cause we’re going to end up with egg on her face. Cause he’s, you know, he’s not, this is not adding up, you know? And so what those people were saying where the inconsistencies in the story and you’re, you got another layer of depth because every one of those stories you could detect deception of.
Susan Constantine:
Yeah. So now since I have no skin in the game and I’m looking at it from, as, from a neutral, then just give me the data. It’s like any scientists, give me the data and we’ll analyze it. That’s it, that’s all we did. And, uh, you know, you just do the three-prong test and you analyze one against the other. And it’s just like any other research, uh, project that you do. And you’re going overall. This guy’s story is so fabricated. So bolstered and exaggerated to the extreme, that every bit of what he said, lost credibility,
Susan Constantine:
You know, was it, you know, just giving you an example, did there know, did he poke his finger or did somebody just poke a finger, his father or somebody who says here, that’s what you get for being a bad boy like that. And then he took that to somebody put ice and stuff in his hand and coils and zapped him and so forth, you know? And here’s the other thing that we had to look at. If this has occurred the way he said it occurred, then those people, or that person needs to be removed their license revoked because this is not about, you know, what a person believes to believes to be. He tends to think, I think he’s a transgender or something to that nature. This is not about that. What is about is, is the story true that happened. And if it were true that he was forced through conversion therapy, poked with needles, elector, shocked, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera, that’s horrible. And that needed to stop. So either way we needed to find out what the truth was, whether it was
Dr. Morse:
Yes. Yes. And, and this is something I’ve had a very early guest in the Dr. Jay show was a therapist who, uh, who was actually the, uh, the plaintiff in one of these things to overturn the ban. I know this gets a little confusing, but this is a therapist to just, it’s absolutely possible for people to change their pattern of sexual attractions. And he made the point. He said, there has never been a complaint against a licensed therapist. All these stories that you hear are meant to kind of throw dirt on the licensed therapist and the laws are about the licensed therapist. But in point of fact, this is even the story itself is not actually about a licensed therapist. Otherwise, like you said, somebody should have and would have, uh, hauled the guy into court and said, let’s get rid of this guy’s license or whatever.
Dr. Morse:
It was, whatever, whatever that was the truth of that, of that circumstance. So there’s obviously something not adding up about this very elaborate story about going off to this camp in the woods and all these terrible things being done to him. And so, uh, what the bottom line of your analysis, which confirms the suspicions that a lot of people had, which is that this story is not accurate, that he is not being truthful in this story. Okay. And, but now the problem is given that that story has legs and it’s out there. What do we do now, Susan? You know, I mean, a lot of people still in their minds, they think conversion therapy, Ooh, that’s bad. That’s just people being shocked, you know? Um, w how do you confront, how do we, as a, as a people, you know, as a nation, how do we confront this magnitude of deception here?
Susan Constantine:
I think guilty by social media, take everything that he said, and then have it analyze and start putting it out there. That’s because when somebody is Googling his name or wanting to speak an event, if there’s all of these, uh, lies, expose that there’s deception, that the stories don’t match up and there are credible people, I think the more that’s out there is going to then overshadow, overtake his story. So there’ll be way too much controversy to have in there, especially with a big company named Google, um, or to be speaking in front of Congress. And also too, I think that, um, if he has ever, um, brought up in, uh, in his testifying, in a court case, I think that this is information that should be gone going to the attorneys that are, um, the, uh, that are defending what he’s saying that happened to them.
Susan Constantine:
And so this is, this is good stuff. I mean, you can use it in multiple different areas. You can use someone like myself or voice stress analysis, or, um, in a civil case, criminal cases, it’s different as a civil case, as it has been used. For example, I testified in, uh, it was, what was it called a, uh, Dolbert hearing for a case that happened here in Florida D’Elia Dippolito case, which is a hit far higher case. And it was actually on the TV cops TV show. So I was hired as a consultant trial consultant. In that case, I met Ms. [inaudible] and, uh, there were, uh, there were video tapes of her in the car, and she didn’t realize that the person was an undercover police officer and she was alluding to, she wanted to have her husband gone. So now in that case, I was brought on to, um, an adult board hearing.
Susan Constantine:
And I would just say Delbert hearing is where you’re getting qualified as separate hearing, qualify you as an expert. I see, okay, are they called a Frye hearing bell brokering, or they got different names for them. So I went through a very strenuous, you know, cross examination about whether, you know, my skills were raised to the level of being called as an expert. So the judge, um, had ruled that if the police officer who was involved in the case that met with Mrs, Ms. Dippolito, um, mentions anything about her demeanor, her body language, which he did do in the first, um, uh, I think it was, there was a pretrial or a trial then I could be brought in as a rebuttal witness. So that’s how I kind of was getting through the back door. So I was qualified to be a rebuttal witness only at the police officer, um, testified regarding her demeanor, because he’s basically saying I’m a body language expert, or I’m, I’m specialized in behavioral analysis. So therefore he was an expert testifying on how would he know what is considered being abnormal or deceptive.
Dr. Morse:
And, and so the point is, if he brought up this subject, then you could be brought in to say, this is not a reliable, well, I don’t agree with his analysis of the situation because, because, because you’re only brought in to rebut you’re, you’re brought in, and this is how it connects with Sam Brinton. Your analysis is there to cast doubt on something, which is really important, right? And in the civil case, it’s obviously important to the outcome of the case, but in our public discussion about homosexuality and its causes and cures and so on, it’s important for people to know that this information, this testimony is not reliable. That’s what people need to know. And if you’re relying on that, you got to put that aside and try to find other evidence to bolster your 0.1 way or the other, because that’s really not going to in San Brendan. That’s not, no, you can’t go with Sam Brinton as your reason, why you think this should be banned, you got to give us something else.
Susan Constantine:
And here’s the thing Dr. Is that there is no one to collaborate that these events happened. But
Dr. Morse:
Exactly, exactly. That was the other big red flag. That was the big old red flag. Yeah.
Susan Constantine:
I think we just wanted to know, was it true? Didn’t actually happen because it’s impacting people’s lives. You’re impacting other people that are hearing his story and adopting a philosophy, a philosophy, and a belief system that they from hearing his story and it has impact on people, right? And then if it were happening, then we need, there’s a big problem within the psychological association. If this is something that was happening and, you know, either way, all we need to know was, did it happen? Did it happen the way you said it happened and how it impacted him and other people? And the story has so many loopholes breaks and in his testimony and his story that there, it just lost all credibility, literally Fred minute and multiple pieces.
Dr. Morse:
So let me ask you this. Could he be, if he let’s say he had said all this in a, in a court of law, uh, in a deposition where he was under oath, would your kind of testimony your kind of expertise? Could it be used to convict him of perjury, or would you need other information as well to convict him of perjury
Susan Constantine:
Statement analysis and voice stress analysis can be used. Behavioral analysis is a art as well as a science, but combine the three together. I do believe if we were brought into, as a team, that we would have a voice in, in the court trial, but moreover that what we shared with them could be used as a report that we give to the attorney actually to both sides. And they will decide, is it worth, is it worth going to court over when you’ve got all this other evidence for other people, because they’d have to suppress it, they’d have to go through all kinds of, uh, hearings to emotions to get that information extracted so that the jury wouldn’t hear it. You know, there’s a lot of gamesmanship and trial consulting what’s being heard and what’s not being heard. And unfortunately, you know, right now with so much censorship and cancellation of what we say, I mean, you got the LGBTQ is just very, very, very strong. Um, I think it would be a real, it would be a mess, an absolute mess just would be, would it be worth it? I think the bigger, uh, side of this is just exposing that he’s being deceptive, um, where his being deceptive and hopefully that people will shy away from him and he no longer will have the income stream from passing along this fake story. So,
Dr. Morse:
Susan, have you ever shared this information before in public, besides our, our event there in lake Charles earlier this summer, and now today, you’ve never shared this publicly. What motivated you to dig into this so much?
Susan Constantine:
What motivated me is because when I went to a conference, as I talked to earlier about it, they were talking about this guy who has been a real problem. Um, they felt because he was telling the story about that. He had gone through conversion therapy, which had something to do with a, uh, a band, a band for therapists to be able to provide counseling for those that have same sex on wanted same sex attraction. And there was a, I guess there was an equality act bill or something that was out of pain. So apparently this group was very interested in knowing more about it and are, they’re concerned about this ban. And then this person came up. This thing, like, for example, this guy named Sam Brinton. And of course me the work that I do, I go, well, I said, do you have video tapes? Do you have any transcripts? Do you have anything that I could look, as I know he’s all over the place, we’ll send it to you.
Dr. Morse:
And so this interview is really the introduction to the public, uh, of this whole body of research that you and your team have done.
Susan Constantine:
It is if you want it to use it. I think it’s, um, I think that people need to know.
Dr. Morse:
I think so too. And that’s why when I heard about you and your research, that’s why I invited you to our conference. And that’s why I wanted to talk with you about it. More look, people you can make up your mind about this. We’re going to have some of the resources that, uh, that she’s described some of her reports and so on, right? You’re going to give us the, the videos and the, you know, the different sub reports. So of these three areas, the three-pronged analysis, you can look at it for yourself. You can make up your mind. We have no intention of leading a lawsuit against San Brenton or anything like that. We just want the information out there so that people can make an informed judgment about how much weight to give this story. Does that fair to say, Susan, that’s what, that’s what got you into it.
Susan Constantine:
Yeah, that’s what got me into
Dr. Morse:
It. Yes. And, and we hear the Ruth Institute have been very concerned about the cancel culture, about the propaganda, about the censorship and the kind of one-sided information that’s allowed to be presented to the public. And so it’s part of our mission to provide a, what shall we say, a record to try to build a record of information that you will not hear any place else so that you can have a more balanced picture and make up your mind for yourselves, Susan, your work is fascinating and you are fascinating. And I’m really just so tickled that we have the opportunity to introduce you to the public in this, in this manner. Of course you have your big public. You’ve been on Dr. Phil for crying out loud and all the other shows. Um, but on this topic, it’s, it’s, I’m really pleased to bring you to the public. Do you have any last thing that you would like to say in summary about the Sam Brinton case in situation?
Susan Constantine:
Well, I think that if there is conversion therapy, that’s going on out there, I think that that’s something that needs to be addressed and stopped. On the other hand, I think that this conversion therapy, um, information is going out there and is based on false information, that those laws should not pass, um, to disallow any person in my personal opinion, that has unwanted same-sex attraction or chooses to go see a counselor or a pastor, and they want to do it on their own. And it is in a therapeutic environment. Then the person should not be withheld from doing that. And unfortunately, the big problem with this one is they’re using this case and, uh, this primarily this big case here, We’re using the Sam Brinton story to really bolster their, their agenda. And to me, I, the way I lived there just literally prostituting him for their own agenda. And, um, and that’s right. It’s, you know, what’s fair is fair. If it, if it happened, it happened. If it didn’t, it didn’t either way the truth needs to be told.
Dr. Morse:
And for the people who want to go to a legitimate counselor and deal with their unwanted same-sex attraction, um, there’s nothing in the Sam Brinton story that should dissuade anyone from, from choosing to do that, or that should persuade, uh, lawmakers to have a blanket ban
Susan Constantine:
On so-called conversion therapy. And that, that’s why we like to use the term sexual orientation change efforts, uh, to make it clear that we’re talking about therapeutic efforts and we’re not talking about whatever this thing is that has been invented for, for the sake of an agenda. We’re talking about something different. And you know, it’s really interesting now that you mentioned that, cause I’ve got what I’ve replayed in my mind here is I received a call from a, uh, I don’t know if she was a producer or she was a writer for some that was fairly large, but I can’t remember what it was or at the top of my head up, it was a, maybe it was a documentary of some sort anyway. Um, she was, I was telling her about the same word that she had heard about me because of the work that I did with, uh, within this organism other organization.
Susan Constantine:
And I mentioned about the San Brinton case. And she goes, yeah, I really heard about that too. And yeah, there were so many discrepancies, you know, and then the other thing is that we couldn’t find anywhere where this conversion therapy was actually happening. And she says, do you know where they’re doing this? I says, no, it’s this because it doesn’t exist. Yeah. It just doesn’t exist. It’s something they’ve made up. And that’s where they’ve grabbed onto something. That’s very sticky. Um, the LGBTQ to say that anybody that, um, has unwanted same-sex attraction or has left the LGBTQ, um, that they can’t possibly do it. It’s not possible that doesn’t match. So there’s, it’s okay if it’s one way, but if they go the other way, uh, it is totally discarded. So for example, let’s just use this for an example. If somebody had same sex attraction, then they have every right to go to a therapist this past or whatever to say, Hey, I have same-sex attraction and that’s it not to talk them out of it, but just to talk them through it.
Susan Constantine:
But if somebody doesn’t have an unwanted same-sex attraction, they should also have the same, right. That saying, Hey, work with me on this, because what you’ll find is, uh, unfortunately, cause I’ve done a lot of reading and researching about this topic. It’s I find it to be fascinating is unfortunately these, a lot of these, um, the same sex attraction has come from somewhere in their lives. Um, and you, and you start to unravel what’s happening in their lives, growing up. And the stories are, are sad. You know, there’s abuse, there’s been molestation. There’s been, uh, you know, uh, uh, PR didn’t have the right mom and dad, you know, support. There has always been something that was off. And, you know, we are living in a time where there’s a lot of dysfunctional families, but in this, in this particular arena, in, in same-sex attraction, it seems to be very commonplace if you’ve talked to him and I’ve talked to a lot of Huntersville and every time almost every time, they’ll tell you I was molested when I was a kid, it was my uncle that I was molested with. My first sexual encounter was with the same sex or I was abused by my father there or vice versa, or they, a woman was abused a girl was abused by their fathers. So therefore, you know, that’s where sometimes some, some transgender, um, things come from because maybe they want to emasculate themselves because they’ve been overpowered by a male. There’s all kinds.
Dr. Morse:
That’s right. There’s all kinds of reasons that yes. Yes. And, and the, the grand gain narrative is that you’re born that way. Once gay, always gay and it’s normal, it’s perfectly normal. Right? And so when some, every person who comes forward and says, I used to be gay, but I’m not anymore. Uh, I I’ve been married to a person of the opposite sex for 14 years. Every person like that is a threat to their agenda. And so cutting off the therapy, cutting off the counseling, that’s cutting off the lifeline for the people who want to leave the lifestyle. And, and it’s an important part of the, of securing the ideological agenda, you know, to make sure there are no, no escapees. It’s like the Berlin wall, uh, around the gay community. Keep them in.
Susan Constantine:
It really is. And I don’t know why it’s crazy, crazy out there.
Dr. Morse:
Yeah. Well, you know, crazy is what we do, Susan is what we deal with all day long. You know, that’s our bread and butter, but as Susan, once again, I want to thank you so very much for, for your time, your expertise, your passion. This has been very interesting and I’m sure that many of our followers are going to be very blessed by what you’ve had to say today.
Susan Constantine:
Thank you, Dr.
