This book provides police investigators and homicide detectives with a practical method of analyzing 911 homicide calls to uncover the truth. A structured analysis of 911 homicide calls can directly aid in developing investigative leads, planning interviews and solving cases. Case examples present proven, reliable methods as to when a caller is telling the truth or not. This book lays out a framework to analyze the call to determine truth from fiction. Every member of the investigative team, from call-taker to first responder, investigator, coroner’s investigators, and prosecutor, can contribute to the success of investigations through their knowledge of 911 call analysis.
This book is junk science authored by a guy who enjoys posting racist memes and looking to make a name for himself. It's been used to ruin the lives of many people. He literally wants you to believe people are guilt of murder for saying "thank you" to a 911 dispatcher. The methodology is very similar to what the Inquisition used during the Middle Ages to "identify" witches. It's utter bunkum, and the author knows it is because he evades any attempt to view his "data" or be held accountable. It's good fodder as a cultural artifact and propaganda of misuse of police power. It should be used as a case study in critical thinking courses as an example of confirmation bias and how people try to disguise quackery as science.
The reason why this book has defenders is because no one likes to admit to being a sucker, least of all a cop. Cops stake their reputations on their competence, but this circus came to town and conned them all. It did so because it offers shortcuts to doing something most cops are loath to do: think. It holds out the possibility that a cop need not think, examine evidence, test theories, or perform any of the tedious tasks that comprise real police work. No Huckster Harpster has a system ! If someone coughs twice, they must be guilty! Wow, that was easy. No thinking (or working) required.
Not only does this lazy bullshit re-victimize victims and allow perps to go free, if it actually became popular, no sane person would ever call 911 again to report a homicide, for fear they will be accused of murder. But it does allow egotistical cops and prosecutors to pretend that all they have to do is point their finger at the accused and, wallah! Thanks to Huckster Harpster's magical wish-making process ANYONE can be as guilty as you need them to be.
Stalin and Hitler had useful idiots like this, who supplied ready, false, state-sponsored accusations to keep their kangaroo courts running smoothly. Maybe with a fiend like trump in power, this guilt-manufacturing gimmick will get a second life. Oh, if lazy cops could ever be so lucky!
This book is an incredible wealth of knowledge based on research conducted by an earned Ph.D who spent 30 years in the FBI and a police officer with 30 years of experience.
Those who have rated it low and called it "junk science" have obviously not read the book, but are instead parroting the words of a reporter with a clear bias against law enforcement. This reporter chose to write a story slanted to denigrate police officers in general and the author specifically instead of printing the other 1,000 pages of evidence in his possession.
Google John Jarvis, 2010 and check out the published research. Look into the cases that were appealed and ultimately substantiated the original charges. Do your own research.
I attended the class, bought the book, and they are both phenomenal.
This book is, of course and obviously, bullshit disguised as "science." Other than page numbers, nothing in this book is correct--- much of it is absurd, idiotic, and demonstrably false. The writer belongs in prison for this fraud, then in Hell from where he came.
The lies in this fraudulent book are protected by the USA First Amendment, but the crimes people who believe this crap have committed against people who called 911 for help should be prosecuted, and the guilty punished.
The perpetrator has charged as much as US$4,000 per person to "learn" how to detect guilty called from the not guilty, even though there is no evidence that shows the techniques actually detect guilt, and only evidence that they do not.