Just 2 Seconds (92 page)

• We are not applying assessment methods to a random sample of people. Far from it, we are assessing identified individuals who have already demonstrated inappropriate ideation or behavior directed toward specific persons. Further, many other relevant factors are usually apparent.
  
• We are rarely applying any intrusive or unreasonable intervention on the person under assessment.
  
• There is no downside to false positives, save whatever work or time we invest in a given case. If we have to assess 500 persons in order to identify and manage one who intended to carry out an attack, the cost is still reasonable.
  
• Some of the more common actions a person must take in order to fall under scrutiny of the police, most notably threats, are in fact, not likely to be predictors of dangerousness in most cases involving public figures. The laws thus identify and proscribe behavior which is not necessarily the most relevant to the safety of the Principal. My office does not require the presence of specific, limited threat statements in order to assess an individual. Without those restrictions on the selection process, the population under assessment might be more likely to include the right people (i.e., people who pose some hazard).
  

Regardless of the methods of prediction or the interventions applied, the first step toward reducing the hazard posed by intrusive or violently-inclined people is to identify those people. The population identified will doubtless include people who will not act dangerously. Still the Principal is wise to avoid all of the people identified in order to avoid those who pose a hazard. Given the criteria used for selection, few of the persons identified though the methods discussed on this paper would merit an encounter anyway. Such encounters would not likely result in any good for the Principal, so avoiding them carries little or no loss.

Summarizing this approach:

1. Criteria is established for the type of behavior or apparent ideation required in order to identify candidates for assessment.
   
2. Those candidates are assessed, and based upon the results, information regarding some of them is developed and maintained.
   
3. Efforts are undertaken to avoid encounters between the Principal and members of this group. The extent of those efforts might be based upon the results of the assessment, for example, the greater the pursuer's action capability and intent to have an encounter, the greater the efforts to avoid that encounter.
   
4. A part of our assessment is comparative. After a case agent in our office identifies and codes important characteristics from each case, MOSAIC compares those characteristics with hundreds of other cases. Based upon what occurred in similar situations, with similar persons, who chose similar targets, and communicated in similar ways, some informative conclusions can be drawn. These conclusions cannot, in themselves, guide a management plan, because each case is unique. Still, the information provides some foundation upon which to base certain assumptions. We can say that a given case is most similar to those that have escalated their behavior, or that it is most similar to those that have not.
   

Such an approach is like considering a weather report that says there will be a 60% chance of rain. What the weather report actually means is that on 60% of similar days, it has rained. Nevertheless, such information can be useful in deciding whether or not to carry an umbrella.

Appendix 7

Ten Agreements for Hired Drivers/Chauffeurs

1. Please stay with the car at all times.
   WHY: We are relying on you to drive in the event of an unscheduled departure. We also rely upon you in the event something is needed from the car.
   
2. When you must leave the car ...
   On those rare occasions that you must leave the car (restroom, etc.), please let us know each time prior.
   
3. Please keep the front seat clear for a passenger.
   
4. Please remain inside the car on arrivals and departures.
   WHY: In case we need to depart quickly.
   
5. We will open and close the doors every time, and our staff will operate the car door locks.
   
6. Please leave the front windows open a few inches while waiting in the car for passengers.
   WHY: So you can hear outside the car.
   
7. Please be certain that two-way radio and cell phone are on at all times, and at a sufficient volume.
   
8. Please be prepared to open the trunk lid at all arrival/departure areas.
   
9. Please report to us anyone or anything that appears that appears unusual.
   WHY: You will be in a position to see many things relevant to safety or logistics that we might not see, and we appreciate your contribution toward that goal.
   
10. If you have routing suggestions, we want to hear them.
    

Our thanks for the contribution you make as an important member of this team.

Appendix 8

Interview with Gavin de Becker, CSO Magazine, July 2004

Called the Slowest Pulse in Hollywood, Gavin de Becker has a cool style that has gained him the trust of Hollywood stars, CEOs and even U.S. presidents. In a rare interview, he talks with Sarah D. Scalet about how CSOs can inspire that kind of confidence too.

De Becker took some time to talk with Senior Editor Sarah D. Scalet about methods for promoting confidence in security.

CSO:
Hollywood stars, CEOs and U.S. presidents have all put their security in your hands. What advice do you have for CSOs about gaining people's trust?

Gavin de Becker:
The product of the CSO's work is not reports and proposals and procedures and methods. The core product is peace of mind. We run an Advanced Threat Assessment and Management Academy twice a year at the UCLA Conference Center, where CSOs and senior government security officials gather for four days. One of the classes that I give there is called "Managing Victim Fear," and the core question is: What can the CSO do to impart more confidence? I call it the four C's: care, confidence, communication and certainty.

CSO:
As in...?

GDB:
Well, first is care. The [client] wants to know, Do you care about me? Am I special, or am I just another case? Do you think I'm crazy? It might be your CEO, or it might be a woman who is victimized by a violent ex-husband, but this is one of the questions they will ask themselves.

Next is confidence. People are asking, in effect, of the CSO: Are you a vessel for my confidence? In general, we
want
to invest our confidence. When we see the pilot of a 747 walking down the aisle, we're looking to see how cool he is. [So to promote confidence,] I recommend that before you meet someone for the first time, you send them a bio. You say, "I look forward to our meeting tomorrow afternoon, and so that you'll be more familiar with my background, I'm sending you some general information." When you arrive, they say, "Oh,
that's
what a security expert looks like." That way, they fit you into their projection instead of the alternative. If a guy shows up and says, "I'm the bomb detection expert," and you judge him based on what he's wearing, how old he is, how tall he is, how he looks, how he speaks -- he now doesn't fit your central casting idea. But if a person is sent a bio first, we will fit [the subject of the bio] into our projection.

CSO:
Once you're hired, the CEO already knows your background. Is there a way to do this on a more ongoing basis?

GDB:
If you know you're going to a meeting about a particular topic, it's great to send a memo that says, "I look forward to our meeting on Tuesday. I have some experience and insight on this topic because of my background in..." and you list the three ways in which you have relevant experience.

CSO:
Might someone misinterpret that as arrogance?

GDB:
Confidence and arrogance are often confused. I don't think you seem arrogant unless you behave in a way that imparts arrogance. So, if you can back up what you say... That's the key. Each of my colleagues in security has the responsibility to be his or her own corporation -- his or her own CEO, marketing division, financial division and service-providing division. The marketing component is one where people are often shy. You need to put your head above the crowd and say, "Hey, I'm the best person for this job. You made a really good choice by inviting me to comment on this, because you may not be aware that I served five years in the Coast Guard, and so I have a lot to say about maritime security." Or, "When I was with the FBI, I used to advise the airlines on profiling, and so I have some insights that I am enthusiastic about offering." If I got that from a member of my firm, I would be nothing but pleased. I would feel that my decision was a wise one inviting that person to that meeting.

CSO:
OK. So back to your four C's.

GDB:
The third one is communication -- which invests in people the knowledge that you care about them. I have a policy in my company to always call clients before they call us, even if we don't yet have the information they're waiting for. I look for excuses to call my clients, whereas most people look for ways to avoid taking calls because we don't yet have the "answer." If I meet with someone -- let's say they had a threat problem -- later I'll force myself to call them and ask one follow-up question at least. I used to wonder if it was a manipulation on my part. But what I learned is that every time I tasked my mind to come up with a question, it had value. If I called the client back at 7 o'clock at night and said I'd just been thinking about their case (which is true, I
had
been thinking about their case) and I had an additional question, that area of inquiry would invariably lead me to important information. At the same time, it demonstrates clearly that I care about this matter -- that it's not just another case to me. Because they see that you're thinking about it after hours.

CSO:
Right.

GDB:
Another thing to always do after a meeting is say to people, "Is there a number I can reach you at after hours, because we may want to call you." That's music to someone's ears when they're afraid. It's a
gift
when they're afraid. One of the worst things you can do is not return someone's calls, because no matter how great your work has been, failing to return a call absolutely invalidates the work.

CSO:
And how about the final C, certainty?

GDB:
Those experiencing anxiety always seek the antidote, which is certainty. We can't always give certainty on the big questions. (For example, will everything be all right? Is there danger on my trip to the Dominican Republic?) But we can express things we do know with certainty. We can describe the actions we will take; we can set forth "rules of engagement" for [what to do] if an unwanted pursuer calls again; we can offer with great certainty details of how to respond to an emergency. If you don't tell people what's going to happen (when you'll get back to them, what steps you'll take) and establish their expectations, their expectations will be established by television shows. What is routine for you and me, dear peer CSO, is not routine for the person who is perhaps a victim of crime for the first time in their lives. They are highly stressed, and they will wonder why you didn't put a 10-man surveillance team on the stalker; why you haven't arrested anybody yet; why the FBI hasn't taken action yet. When a person is anxious, any certainty will hit the spot. And any lack of certainty will worsen matters. So express whatever you can with reassuring certainty.

There's a beautiful quote from Nelson Mandela: "When we are liberated from our fears, that automatically liberates others around us." So you simply
are
a person of confidence, and you communicate things with confidence, and you take the lead in the situation, knowing that you (and not the person that you're assisting) have the most experience in this field. You need to know it; that's the only way they'll come to know it.

The gist of all this is that the very energy that frustrates you -- that victim of fear who is calling you all the time, or that person who's disappointed by the speed with which the case is being resolved, or that CEO who doesn't like the information you're giving him -- the same energy that frustrates you will ultimately benefit you if your relationship stays good.

CSO:
In what way?

GDB:
All that emotion eventually will be channeled into relief and praise if your relationship stays good. We have 1,400 clients, and they tend to call during times of crisis and anxiety -- not typically when they're at their best. That emotion, that anxiety -- we look at it as an opportunity. Most people run from it. We encourage people to move toward it and embrace it and understand that the emotional person is trying to invest his or her confidence in you.

CSO:
How do you keep a client's anxiety from rubbing off on you?

GDB:
People naturally want you to get as excited about things as they are; likewise, they want you to be as anxious as they are." Don't you see how serious this is?" they ask." Don't you see the urgency?" They want to see our anxiety. In truth, they are better served by not seeing it. You don't show people the light by going into the dark with them. If you stay outside the well, you can become the arm reaching down to help.

CSO:
They say you have the slowest pulse in Hollywood. Do you think that's true?

GDB:
I've seen a great deal in my life, and it takes a lot to get me off-center. But I don't think that the universe puts in front of us things that we can't manage. Where we suffer is when we want a specific outcome. Where we thrive is when we accept our ability to flexibly meet the challenges of life.

For example, America's ability to respond to crisis is far stronger than our ability to prevent crisis. Throughout our lives, we've seen our government respond with remarkable effectiveness to unusual and unpredictable occurrences -- earthquakes, floods, hurricanes, fires, bombings, workplace violence incidents, school shootings. And if we've learned anything from these emergencies, it's that our infrastructure is strong and resilient.