#relay interrogation

A character claims to have been trained in torture techniques that not only leave no marks (which I think you've called "clean torture"), but also don't require "tools" - no weapons, no devices, no technology, no environmental control (e.g. over lighting or temperature), and so on. If I recall correctly, he says this to threaten someone who is restrained in an otherwise completely bare room, and there's no suggestion of sexual assault being one of the techniques

Is this a thing? Would one person actually be able to torture another if it was just the two of them alone in a room, and not have it leave any kind of physical evidence?

In short: yes, that’s possible. But the devil, as always is in the detail.

 You see from the way this is framed it seems as if the story is implying the character is highly skilled, dangerous and required specialist training. And that is in keeping with how torturers talk and behave. But it isn’t really in keeping with reality.

 Because what he’s talking about is probably a ‘clean’ (ie non-scarring) beating, which essentially amounts to repeated open handed slaps on fleshy areas of the body. It’s very painful. It is still dangerous and it can kill (via kidney failure). But it isn’t… smart or complicated or hard to think up. It doesn’t require training or specialist knowledge.

 It’s probably worth mentioning here that clean torture does sometimes leave temporary marks. But they’re always the sorts of marks that might be explained away by something else.

 The swelling standing stress positions cause in the legs goes down quickly. But even if an independent witness sees this swelling… it can be caused by a whole range of diseases and health conditions. Institutions can and have turned around and said possible evidence of torture was down to underlying health conditions or other factors.

 This is part of why torture trials usually have a lot of survivors giving evidence. It’s about establishing a consistent pattern over dozens or hundreds of victims rather then tearing apart the evidence of one person.

 Clean beatings can leave the skin swollen, inflamed and sometimes visibly reddened. But a wide range of skin conditions can look similar. Some people would get similar looking marks from being restrained on a hard bed in a hospital. I get similar marks from sitting her on my sofa with my laptop on my knees typing asks. I also get them from kneeling on the floor when I use my sewing machine.

 There are a couple of other clean tortures that could fit in this scenario. The British National Style favours standing stress positions without restraints, usually using a wall and enforcing them by beating people who refuse to comply. Forced exercise is another relatively common torture that fits this description.

 And again, these can potentially leave some evidence. It’s just not clear evidence and it’s not obvious evidence. An exhausted, pained prisoner does not mean clear evidence of torture.

 With more torturers sleep deprivation could also fit this scenario. Something like relay interrogation, where the torturers swap out to rest but continue questioning/berating the prisoner and keeping them awake for days at a time.

 Generally I don’t think there’s anything wrong with using this scenario in a story. But I’d advise anyone considering it to be careful how they frame this incident. It would be very easy for the narrative to accidentally back up the torturer’s assertion that they’re skilled/trained or imply that these ‘techniques’ are intelligent, unusual things.

 The scene itself isn’t ‘wrong’. It’s just the sort of scenario that can relies on the reader’s background knowledge to fill in the blanks.

 And unfortunately that’s not something we can do when we’re talking about torture or abuse. Accurate information is difficult to find and not accessible for the majority of people. Misinformation and apologia is everywhere. Until that changes I don’t think we can rely on readers filling in the blanks with anything but apologia.

 Which is why it’s important to try and think through the implications of what we write.

 I hope that helps :)

Available on Wordpress.

Considering other things we see of this culture, it seems likely the victim is restrained and he might well have been beaten or otherwise tortured before the staring described above. Furthermore, there are implications elsewhere that the torturer and the dissident knew each other, possibly very well, before these events. 2/3I’d be interested to hear your take on this, its plausibility and anything that might ‘salvage’ it if it seems very unrealistic. How common is the use of intimidation tactics such as long stretches of silence? What is known of the difference between being tortured by a stranger and by someone you know and possibly trusted? P.S. Thank you for this excellent blog! 3/3

Youknow I think I’ve seen part of this episode.

Fromwhat I can remember there’s a heavy implication throughout that thetorturer-character is an unreliable narrator. Part of that seemed (tome at least) explicitly tied to his role as a torturer.

Andwell, that isrealistic. Torturers are often incredibly unreliable sources when itcomes to both the effectiveness of torture and what they actually didor why something they did was harmful.

Whatthis reminds me of is the way American torturers described usingheavy metal or other Western music against non-Western prisoners.They seemed to consistently put the distress down to the formof music that was being repeatedly played. Rather than the fact itwas constant and at top volume, preventing the prisoners fromsleeping.

Silencecanencourage people to speak but it doesn’t necessarily encourage themtowards confessing or speaking about anything relevant. And I don’tthink staring at someone would have this effect. It’s the ‘HISEYES!’ that underlines the disconnect from reality for me, it justseems so melodramatically implausible if staring was genuinely theonly factor at play here.

It’sone of those strange depictions that can be read as either veryrealistic or hugely unrealistic depending on how much weight you givethe torturer’s account.

Becausethis does seem like a realistic thing fora torturer to claim.But it isn’t a realistic thing to happen.

Whichis another reason why nuance is so important in these stories. We’redealing with unreliable narrators throughout. Torturers, survivorsand even witnesses are all compromised at a neurological level; theirmemories are suspect.

Andtorturers are additionally heavily biased in their accounts. Theytake credit for things that are beyond their control, don’t mentionthings that go against their accounts (sometimes they don’t seem toeven make the connection between them) and bend over backwards tojustify their actions after the fact.

Ican give you an idea of the kind of thing that a torturer mightreport in this way.

Aprisoner is brought in. They’re restrained. They might be beaten.And then they’re ‘sweated’.

Thisis something that used to be common among police forces across quitea few countries. It basically means the victim was tied to a chairwith a bright light shining in their eyes and interrogated for aprolonged period of time. Rooms were usually cramped, so the lightwould make the room unbearably hot. There’s an element of restrainttorture, keeping the victim for a long time in one position. There’ssleep deprivation (because this often went on for over 12 hours).There’s dehydration, because the victim usually wasn’t given foodor water. And they generally weren’t allowed to go to the bathroomeither.

InRussia (and some other countries) they combined this with somethingRejali calls ‘relay interrogation’. Which means they basicallykept switching the torturers. This meant that the torturers wouldalways be pretty well rested but the victim could be kept awake forliterally days at a time.

I’dsuggest that was what happened here.

Ratherthan the victim confessing after ‘four hours’, I’d suggest itwas much more likely he’d been brought in 36-48 hours before andconsistently deprived of water and sleep.

Overthat time frame humans (we shall pretend that aliens work in the sameway) become delirious and often start to hallucinate. Which couldexplain saying something like ‘THE EYES!!!’ It might also explainthe ‘confession’ because in this state some victims aredisconnected from reality to the point that they don’t reallyunderstand they’re confessing.

Torturersare competitive. In a situation like this, with relay interrogation,the firsttorturer gets absolutely no ‘credit’ for a forced confession thathappens five torturers later. All of the ‘credit’, all of thepraise, goes to the last person in the room.

Giventhat there is considerable encouragement for that last torturer toact as though the entire thing was down to them and theirunique/unusual tactics.

Andas torturers are prone to exactlythe same memory problems as survivors,it’s also possible that a torturer in this situation could havegenuinely forgotten that that particular prisoner was brought inseveral days before and had been tortured for that time.

I’venot heard of the use of silence as a tactic by torturers.Intimidation, yes. But it generally seems to come in the form ofthreats.

Howeversilence is commonly used as a tactic by people being interrogated. Atthe very least I know the IRA used this as a consistent organisationwide tactic that members were told to employ if arrested. They wouldturn their back on the interrogators and remain silent. It’sincredibly disquieting and does prompt some people to talk. I thinkthere’s a link to a more detailed discussion of this in the EffectiveInvestigation masterpost.I’m not sure if the Alisons have written any papers on it: their worktends to focus on tactics for interrogators rather than people whoare being interrogated. They’d be a good place to check though.

Fromwhat I know, silence could be an effective tactic in genuineinterrogation but it would have to be part of a broader strategy. Idon’t think it would be effective without the use of other tactics orif it was applied randomly.

Itcould help to get a person to start talking but it couldn’t replacebuilding up a rapport or the ability to steer a conversation to thetopic of interest.

Asfor the last question- I’m afraid I genuinely have no idea. Therereally aren’t enough studies on torturers and the studies I am awareof use a very small sample size. Studies with survivors tend to be alot larger but I’ve never come across a study that talked aboutsurvivors and torturers having a prior relationship of any kind.

Anecdotalaccounts aren’t much better on this front. I’m aware of cases wheresurvivors and torturers came from the same village or small town. I’maware of cases where they knew each other as acquaintances prior tothe victim being tortured. But none of the cases I’m aware ofshowed any indication that the relationship was close. It’s- peoplewho knew each others names, passed on the street, perhapsoccasionally lent the other person a cup of flour. There’s noindication of anything as close as a working or colleaguerelationship in the accounts I’ve seen.

Theaccount Fanon records of a torturer’s daughter who came to him forcounselling doesdescribe a closer relationship with victims. But that’s atorturer’s family member and victims, rather than the torturerhimself.

Becauseit is, by definition, institutional torture doesn’t seem to involvethose sorts of previously strong relationships often.

Nowabusedefinitely does and I suspect that if a prior strong relationshipmakes a difference then you could find that difference by comparingsurvivors of abuse with survivors of torture.  Which is a doctoralthesis I’d very much like to see funded but it’s rather beyondthe scope of the blog.

Inthis case I don’t think I’d advise going through anecdotalaccounts and trying to make the comparison yourself. In order forsomething like that to be significant you’ve got to control for alot of factors, which might not be reported in anecdotal accounts andyou need to go through a lotof accounts. I think it would be very easy to leap to an incorrectconclusion, especially when you don’t have direct access to thesurvivors themselves and can’t ask them.

Forthe purposes of the story I’d suggest assuming that there isn’t asymptomatic difference. Assume the symptoms would be the same whetherthe relationship with the torturer was close before or not.

Butadd to that particular issues around relationships and trust.

Thesecan show up as a normal part of the mental illnesses torture causesbut they don’t always. I think tying this kind of… element ofself-isolation and difficulty around personal interaction to thecharacter would add to a story with this kind of relationship.

Accountsfrom survivors of abuse (especially spousal or familial abuse) cangive you an idea how these sorts of difficulties with trust andrelationships manifest. I’d suggest asking @scripttraumasurvivorsfor a source recommendation there though, it’s outside of my area.

Ihope that helps. :)

I got an ask about my opinion on torture in 1984, the best way to address it seemed to be starting off the media analysis Masterposts. Possibly the most famous dystopian novel in the world, 1984 is set in a fictional ‘future’ where the citizen’s every word and moment is recorded and scrutinised by a brutal totalitarian state.

 Orwell’s story about the ordinary Winston Smith’s desperate struggle for some sort of emotional freedom has informed the Western world’s view of totalitarian states and torture since it was published.

 I first read this as a kid and I remember it feeling incredibly profound at the time. Reading it again knowing what I do now instead of taking Orwell’s word for it…..it doesn’t add up.

 But that isn’t for lack of effort on Orwell’s part. I can see to much larger extent reading this now how Orwell’s journalism fed into the way he wrote this story.

 Unfortunately without anything beyond interviews to go on, without analysis, without statistics, Orwell fell for one of the oldest tricks in the book: he believed the torturers’ hype.

 I’m rating the depiction and use of torture, not the book itself. I’m trying to take into account realism (regardless of fantasy or sci fi elements), presence of any apologist arguments, stereotypes and the narrative treatment of victims and torturers.

 I’m giving it a 3/10

 The Good

 1)      Winston, despite his mental posturing, is neither political activist nor lover. He is not a true believer. He is, in all important respects, an innocent. He hasn’t done anything. He doesn’t know anything. And that makes the ease with which he ‘confesses’ and the information he spouts realistic. Winston has nothing to protect and every reason to believe that making things up will help his case.

 2)      Orwell’s depiction of sleep deprivation, relay interrogation (the Party men shouting at Winston or questioning him for hours at a time until he breaks down in tears), beatings and electrical torture is on point. This especially is where Orwell’s work as a journalist shines through. The descriptions of humiliation during relay interrogation, phantom pain from stress between torture sessions, the searing pain of electricity and losing track of time in a windowless cell. These all read like they could have come from interviews. And on these points, things that were actually happening in Russia while Orwell was reporting, the book is incredibly, shockingly accurate.

 3)      The way Winston loses track of time is completely true to life. And it ties in with the tortures he’s shown to go through early on. His disorientation makes his account difficult to decipher in places. It makes it difficult to tell what happened when, which tortures he was subjected to when and what was real versus what was in his head. And that is true to life. Winston’s disorientation, confusion and memory problems are exactly the sort of thing that makes prosecuting torture difficult: victims rarely know how long they were held or what they went through when.

 4)      The rats, according to Rejali, were based on an actual method of execution by torture. Which is a level of research I appreciate.

 The Bad

 The fundamental problem is that Orwell seems to have taken what torturers say as fact. The book shows torture working and it shows torture achieving things that it is incapable of doing. I don’t think this is exactly Orwell’s fault, the statistical studies and research on pain I’m drawing from weren’t done until decades after he died.

 But he believes the hype; he shows it as if it’s fact. Particularly-

 1)      Torture does not change hearts and minds.

 2)      Personalities can not be rebuilt using torture

 3)      Torture does not ‘break’ people in the way torturers seem to imagine it does. It does not have predictable results and it does not have the same effect on everyone. The systematic way the Ministry of Love ‘breaks’ everyone who comes through their doors is fundamentally impossible

 4)      The extent to which the torturers know about Winston’s life is impossible and absurd. Even if they somehow had the manpower to watch and listen to every second of his life and intently scrutinise every moment they would not be able to judge his thoughts at any given moment with the accuracy that they do.

 5)      Winston’s torturers are supremely good at detecting when he lies. And human beings are terrible at detecting lies. The degree to which the torturers seem to be able to read Winston’s mind is really more at home in an X-men comic than anywhere else. Because without telepathy what the book shows is impossible.

 6)      A lot of the torture that goes on in the Ministry of Love appears to be high tech, drugs, complicated machinery and the like. Doctors usually seem to be on hand and assisting. This rarely happens in real life. If something is complicated enough that it requires a specialist to operate than it generally isn’t used in torture.

 7)      The ordering of Winston’s torture doesn’t match the general pattern I see in accounts and analysis. Torturers don’t tend to wait around. They generally use as many of the worst things they can think of in the first 24-48 hours. They may keep torturing beyond that point but they generally repeat themselves after that point and after a while lose interest. In contrast Winston is left alone, possibly for days, before he’s even beaten. Then he progresses from beatings to relay interrogation to drugs to electricity to ‘Room 101’, going to progressively worse and worse tortures.

 8)      Torture destroys Winston’s affection for his lover. I’m not convinced by the narrative that the affection was all that deep to begin with but- that isn’t something torture can do. The idea that wounded people are somehow incapable of affection seems particularly horrible to me: it’s something torturers tell victims but it is not true. And it seems to perpetuate stereotypes about the mentally ill.

 Overall

 It’s difficult to blame Orwell for the glaring mistakes in this book when he was working with the best information he had at the time.

 But looking back over this book I can’t help wondering how much this has fed into the stereotypes about torture we see in fiction today. Because most of the usual suspects are here:

 The idea that everyone ‘breaks’. The idea that torture is high tech. The idea that it’s scientific. The idea that torture can fundamentally change a person’s beliefs, thoughts and feelings. The idea that torturers can recognise lies easily. The idea that victims are forever defined by their torture.

 I don’t think these all started with Orwell, but he seems to have codified them and popularised them.

 They’re made to look more plausible by being interspersed with descriptions that are accurate. They’re woven together so seamlessly that the two are difficult to pick apart. It’s jarring to see such vivid, accurate portrayals of Soviet torture techniques next to things that are flat out impossible.

 In the end I think it’s a shame. 1984 is a book that gets a fair amount really, really right but it’s outweighed by the sheer scale of the things it gets so wrong.

Brainwashing doesn’t work.

 But people do tryto do it anyway.

 If you want to write this kind of ‘brainwashing’ scenario andkeep the audience in suspense about whose side the character is on a realisticscenario is having the character pretend the brainwashing is working.

 People lie under torture a lot. Sometimes they do it deliberately and consistently in waysthat are supposed to undermine the enemy. An example would be Algerian armedrebels telling French torturers the names of people who supported the Frenchinstead of people from their organisation.

 Your character would have a really difficult and dangeroustask ahead. But this could be a very interesting way to get a double agent inwith the baddies. Especially if thischaracter’s friends think he has actuallybeen brainwashed.

 The regimes people use vary quite a bit. If this is what youwant to do I’d suggest something a little like the techniques the Chicagopolice force used to force confessions: beating, sleep deprivation, relay interrogation (changingthe interrogators so the prisoner is forced to stay awake for days at a time)and possibly (if it fits your setting) electric shocks.

 The main thing would be sleep deprivation and relayinterrogation. Relay interrogation is basically changing the interrogators regularly so that the victim is constantly being ‘interrogated’ for literally days on end without rest. Changing the interrogators allows them to rest. In this case the ‘interrogators’ would probably be repeating thecore beliefs of their group over and over again. They’d be ‘arguing’ and tryingto force the character to defend his beliefs for days on end without rest, when he hasn’tslept or eaten. This is often done while the victim is in a stress position, sothey’re in considerable physical pain.

 Fooling the guards come down to acting as though he’s in worse pain than he actuallyis and telling them what they want to hear. Which is that he agrees with them.

 Sleep deprivation will make it difficult for him to keep acoherent train of thought. It also causes head aches, grogginess and malcoordination, slow reaction times, poor memory and a host of other effects. Astress position (could be as simple as tying him to a chair) would cause severepain in his muscles and joints.

 The routine would probably be something along the lines of36-48 hours relay interrogation, sleep deprivation and stress position,followed by periods of rest (perhaps 10-12 hours), food and water. This wouldbe repeated several times over weeks or months.

 The character would have to convince his torturers that he’sa) in a lot of pain and b) sincere. B) is generally harder than a).

 You’ll have to give some thought to whether this sort ofhard-headed, risky decision fits with your character or not. If you don’t mindme making a comic book reference to illustrate the point- it’s not the kind ofthing an upstanding, idealistic and highly principled character like CaptainAmerica or Superman would do, it would require them to compromise theirprincipals too much. But it is thekind of thing a more crafty character like Iron man or Batman might try in order to take down the badguys in the long term.

 If it doesn’t fitwith your character then you can still have them go through the ‘brainwashing’torture regime. But be aware that it isn’t going to change the victim’s idealsat all.

 I hope that helps. :)

-an alternate universe, in the equivalent of the medieval era. The area the captives are located is based on South America, it's tropical and sweltering. The group that handles this torture is one that prioritizes tradition over reason. Can you please tell me if there is a method that would accomplish this, and what effects the character would sustain?Thank you! (2/2)

Thisbeing an alternate universe I’m assuming historical accuracy is a secondaryconcern.

 Which isgood because there aren’t a lot of good written sources I can access on1200-1500 tropical regions of South America. (And I will take any excuse to read about Brazil-)

 I hope I’ve got the right idea with thescenario but I’ll summarise what I’ve understood of it in case I haven’t.

 Thecharacter is born in a compound to parents who were presumably accused of being extremists/criminals.And he’s being tortured because he’s seen as being potentially part of this extremistgroup.

 That’s apretty realistic motivation for torture.

 Buttorture isn’t going to work the way these torturers intend it to.

 If thetorturers think that by torturingthis character they’ll stop him becoming an extremist that is perfectly realistic. That’s a mistake torturers make all thetime.

 Howeverif you actually want the torture tostop this character from becoming an extremist then torture doesn’t work that way.

 Growingup in this compound and being tortured, especially when he’s so young, isreally likely to turn this character againstthe guards. In an environment where the guards are constantly telling him theseextremists are the enemy- well to a kid like that that makes these extremists look like heroes.

 Theydon’t actually have to be heroes. Andif he ever meets them later he might be thoroughly disillusioned. But the waythese guards are acting? That’s the kind of thing that will drive peopletowards this extremist group and this young man is a prime candidate for recruitment.

 Essentially,the guards will end up indoctrinating this kid with their enemy’s ideas.

 Which brings me to actual methods-

 So I alwaysmention beating, because it happens everywhere and fits every setting.

 I’m notsure if you want scarring tortures as well as ‘clean’ non-scarring ones. Theones I’m listing don’t leave marks.

 Becauseof the tropical climate stress positions outside would be particularly nasty.This would also give the torture/punishment a public element. A popular onefrom the British army in army circa 1700s was ‘the crucifixion’. The victim wastied to a ‘fixed object’ usually a large artillery wheel, with their hands andfeet spread out like a X. Sometimes weights were put on their arms but usuallythey were left in the heat. This was usually done for several hours a day overseveral days. So the victim would be kept in the stress position for perhaps6-10 hours a day, released and then the torture was repeated the next day.

 Becausethey were often attached to metal objects,this was particularly brutal in tropical climates where the object heated up inthe sun.

 A stressposition that was actually used in Brazil (much later than your setting, whenit came under Portuguese control) was bucking.

 Thevictim’s legs are bent in front of them and their feet are tied together, thearms go around their knees and the hands are tied together. The torturer thenputs a stick under their knees and over their elbows and lifts them off theground. The stick digs in to the tendons at the knees and elbows and it becomesexcruciating in minutes.

 Victimsare often beaten while in this position.

 GenerallyI think using temperature would certainly make sense (because I have been thereand passed out from dehydration and it’s not fun). There’s a method that usedto be used in America, prisoners were put in a cell near the furnace thatheated the whole building. These cells were always uncomfortably hot but tomake it worse they’d throw old rubber tires into the fire, making a thick blacksmoke that went into the cell next door. You could use something similar, witha furnace made just for the purpose of torment, and smoky unpleasant woods usedin place of rubber.

 Thatcould also be added to by forcing prisoners to collect, chop and carry the woodused to punish other prisoners.

 So far Ithink these are falling more into the range of ‘camp punishment’ tortures thensomething aimed at an ideology.

 I thinkfor that a mixture of relay interrogations ala the Chicago police force andgroup recriminations ala Mao’s China.

 Relayinterrogations involve changing the interrogator/guard regularly. The aim ofthis is to keep the victim sleep deprived and (often) in a stress position (ietied to a chair). The cell this takes place in is often made deliberatelyuncomfortable for the victim, with bright lights and by manipulating thetemperature (in this case it would be too hot and the victim would probably notbe allowed to drink). Usually this is in the context of trying to force aconfession.

 In this case it would probably be more inthe form of lectures on the guards’ ideology and traditions with shouting,slapping and verbal abuse when he starts to fall asleep or when it looks likehe’s not listening. He’d probably be made to memorise passages of their coretexts and told to recite them over and over again.

 Thiswould go one for perhaps 2-2 ½ days straight before he’s allowed to sleep.

 Grouprecriminations are basically a bullying tactic that’s aimed to make peoplebetray each other, throwing others under the bus in a desperate attempt toescape blame. You gather a group (this could include prisoners as well asguards) around the victim in a circle and take it in turns to criticise them.

 Itessential amounts to having a group of people take turns to yell abuse atsomeone, who is then expected to defend their actions and grovelingly apologisefor their ‘mistakes’.

 It canalso include beatings, sleep deprivation and a standing stress position.

 Timeframes can be up to about 24 hours at once or over several days with breaks (morefor the guards benefit than the victim’s).

 Thesetechniques might well make him afraid of being labelled an extremist however they’re no more likely to make himagree with the guards than any other torture. He might tell them he agrees to make them stop, but that’s not the same asactually agreeing.

 I thinkif you want him to actually agree with the guards’ ideas then the smart thing to do would have been toremove him from the camp as a baby and place him with a ‘loyal’ family. Thishappened in Argentina and there’s a group called ‘The Grandmother’s of thePlaza de Mayo’ dedicated to finding children who were stolen from their parentsand raised by other families. The children usually don’t know they wereadopted.

 However not doing that fits with the idea of agroup that prizes tradition over everything else. It sounds like a newinnovation they might not trust.

 The endresult is I think your character would probably end up sympathising verystrongly with the extremists, even if he regularly has to curse their names andspit on their portraits.

 I hopethat helps. :)