Tuesday, May 10, 2022

2022: Nathan Carmen Indicted for Murder of Mother

From 2016:  Nathan Carman: Mother Missing At Sea 



Nathan Carmen is now indicted May 2022, in the murder of his mother. Here is analysis from 2016:


Nathan Carman was found by the US Coast Guard after one week at sea in his life boat.  

His mother was not found and is presumed deceased.   

Analytical Question:

Does Nathan Carman truthfully report what happened?

Several years ago  Nathan Carman was Person of Interest in his grandfather's murder but was not arrested.  Grandfather left a reported $40 million dollars to his four daughters, one of whom was subject's mother.  


Subject:  Nathan Carman is reported to have Aspergers.  In language, this is similar to adult autism and will impact language, particularly in view of emotions.  A lack of emotional language should be considered acceptable.  Analysis looks for possible deception via withheld information.  With Asperger's, there is an intention to be understood in communication, meaning that with deception, there is an intention to deceive.  

Also with Asperger's we often find childhood history of violence, and/or a preoccupation with death, including animals.   Many males diagnosed with Asperger's are above average intelligence.  With analysis, communication is commonly noted in areas of emotion with those diagnosed with Asperger's.  Unlike other developmental delays in adults, Asperger's often reveals very strong intellects with critical thinking while often using avoidance language regarding their own emotions.  The language can 'appear' dry and 'matter of fact', which can belie the emotion beneath.  Statement Analysis is used whenever communication is presupposed by the subject 

This past fall, in  watching interviews of Nathan Carman while filming ABC's "20/20", he showed a strong command of facts and was clear in his motive.  

I.               Transcripts
II.             Transcripts with Analysis
III.           Conclusion 

I.               Transcripts  

NC:  Hello, this is Nathan Carman.  
CG:  Nathan, this is United States Coast Guard Boston

NC:  Hello” (pause due to echo)  “yes I hear you” 

CG:  Uh, yes sir, I, I need to understand uh, what happened.  Over.”


NC:  Mom and I, two people, myself and my mom, were fishing at Block Canyon.  And there was a funny noise in the engine compartment, I looked and saw a lot of water. I was bringing  the line had my mom bring in the reel I brought up the safety stuff forward and I was bringing one of the safety bags forward the boat’s (or just)  dropped out from under my feet.  Uh, when I saw the life raft I did not see my mom. Uh,  have you found her?

CG:  “No, we, uh, we haven’t been able to find her yet.  

NC:  So I got to the life raft after I got my bearings and I was whistling and calling and looking around and I didn’t see her. 

CG:  understood, ok

NC:  We were fishing around block canyon.  

CG:  And when did that happen?

NC:  I don’t have the exact coordinates.

CG:  (echo:  And when did that happen?) 

NC:   yes, It was a week ago today around mid day.

CG:   ok so last Sunday?

NC:   yeah.

II.            Transcripts with Analysis 

For those considering training:  please consider that his is a brief and basis statement analysis of the transcript for a single purpose of discerning truth or deception.  Content Analysis done upon the statement, along with the emerged psycho-linguistic profile is separate.  The analysis is done to answer the Analytical Question  


NC:  Hello, this is Nathan Carman.  
CG:  Nathan, this is United States Coast Guard Boston, Ok

NC:  Hello” (pause due to echo)  “yes I hear you” 

CG:  Uh, yes sir, I, I need to understand uh, what happened.  Over.”

This is our most important question, “What happened?”

We consider that with Asperger’s there may be a reduction in emotional language, but often within the language is logic; sometimes a very strong intellect propelled by logic.  We expect him to tell us immediately, what happened, with only a brief introduction, such as, "My mom and I went fishing, and we had an accident, and..." 

NC:  Mom and I, two people, myself and my mom, 

Here we have an emphasis upon being only two persons present for the event.  With the emphasis, we should consider the possibility of a third person on the mind of the subject.  This could be an eye witness, or someone who may known him well.  His need to emphasize is not due to Asperger’s, as there is no repetitive language following this.  

Note that it is unnecessary for him to clarify that the two “people” were “myself and my mom” here.  “Mom” is “my mom” while going out fishing which shows he viewed her positively at this time (while fishing).  “Mom”, repeated, increases the sensitivity.  

Regardless, he is, in the least, thinking of a third person, whether it be an eye witness, or someone important to him.  

The order changes which means change of priority.  “Mom and I” to “myself and my mom”, changing the order. 


were fishing at Block Canyon. 

He begins with the (1) people, (2) activity and (3) location rather than “My mom fell overboard…” or anything like it.  “We had an accident…” or any direct answer would have been expected, but is not here.  
The introduction is ‘slow’ in pace, which suggests that he does not want to get to ‘what happened’.  The overwhelming number of deceptive statements are heavily weighted in the introduction.  The deceptive part of the ‘story’ is stressful, therefore, the subject often avoids going directly to it.  We measure the ‘pace’ of an account and note that this one, in particularly, is very slow.  


 And there was a funny noise in the engine compartment,

“And” :  There was a pause between sentences.  “And” when at the beginning of a sentence indicates missing information.  The slow pace continues, avoiding getting to the direct information about what happened to the missing person.  This is often associated with psychological guilt; not always guilt meaning remorse, but fear of being caught.  

“There was a funny noise”  

This is reported in passive voice.  Passivity is used appropriately when one does not know the source, but it is also used to conceal responsibility.  What is concerning here is the combination of the passivity with the descriptive term:  “funny noise.”

He describes the noise as “funny” while using passivity.  This will cause us to ask if he caused this “funny” noise.  He does not report an emergency, nor something out of control.  The passivity would be expected with an explosion, not a “funny noise.”

He is likely telling the truth about hearing the noise, but he may have caused what happened to make the noise, while avoiding telling us the source of the noise, or what made it "funny" to him.  


 I looked and saw a lot of water. 

He does not say “I saw a lot of water”, but he “looked” first.  This is akin to story telling and it continues to slow down the pace.  He does not tell us where he looked, or what he looked at.  This, too, is akin to story telling and indicates he is withholding information.  He did not say “I looked at the noise”, but that he “looked” and saw “a lot of water”, not an engine issue.  

This is two separate actions in his description.  It also avoids telling us what caused him to see a lot of water (note the passivity previously).  This separate action (in writing) further suggests that he caused the “funny noise” to have happened.  If so, we should expect more passivity in his language, which would remove him from the responsibility.    

He does not say that the noise caused water to fill up.  A “lot of water” may be his mother overboard.  Why was the noise “funny”?  Was it the sound of ‘gurgling’ or drowning?

This appears to be when he was looking outside the boat, where there is a lot of water.  Did he watch her drown or struggle? 


I was bringing  the line had my mom bring in the reel 

Self censoring is when one stops himself, mid sentence.  The audio is difficult but he may have stopped himself here. 
He does not say “I brought”,  but “I was bringing” which shows ongoing action, (lengthening time)  rather than a single, ended action.   He soon will use the complete past tense, “I brought” below, so it is not his pattern or habit.  

Note “the reel” is not “a reel” and since he has not introduced a reel, it may be that they did not actually fish as this point, but something else took place.  

We may consider that his mother may have been impacted by the line; controlled by him, her neck, etc.  


I brought the safety stuff forward and I was bringing one of the safety bags forward the boat just dropped out from under my feet.

These are two separate actions. One is complete while the other is ‘on going’ or lengthening of time.  This is another indicator of missing information in his answer. 

I brought the safety stuff forward” is a complete action.  This, while there was “a lot of water”; yet, he then goes to another activity in which there is no completion, but an elongation of time with “I was bringing…”  In this part of his statement, his mother is missing.  He does not mention her here, and it is likely that she was already in the water.  


The focus:  He only brought “one” of the safety bags.  This may show intention to save his own life knowing there was no intention on saving two lives; the “two people” he began his statement with.   He did not bring “safety bags” but only one

Regarding the “boat just dropped out from my feet” the audio is not clear, but it is, also, passive voice.  
  We must consider that he knew the cause of the event. 


 Uhwhen I saw the life raft I did not see my mom.


Here, he speaks to time, not an event. He does not say “I saw the life raft” but “when”, which focuses upon time, not action.  This, too, suggests missing information.   
He reports not when he got to the life raft, but when he ‘saw’ it.  He reports what he did not see. 

Negation:  Truthful people tell us what happened, what they saw, what they heard, etc.  In an open statement, when one tells us what they did not see, we must be on alert for deception.  He does not say he looked for her, only that he did not see her.  


 Uh,  have you found her?

CG:  “No, we, uh, we haven’t been able to find her yet.  

He offers no concern for her safety.  Even with Asperger’s there should be an element of concern, perhaps with low emotional wording.  Instead, the focus is upon “I” and he continues about himself:  


NC:  So I got to the life raft after I got my bearings and I was whistling and calling and looking around and I didn’t see her.  

Here we have deception.  He addresses the element of time, which speaks to planning: “after” he got his “bearings.”  He wants us to believe he did not have his bearings, but this is not what he said.  “After I got my bearings” presupposes the loss thereof, but this is akin to story telling, not reliving a traumatic event from experiential memory. 

“Bearings” speaks to disorientation, and its location in the account is “logical”, which, in analysis, is likely to be artificial placement of emotions for the purpose of story telling.  It takes time to process emotions and here, even with Asperger’s, it appears to be edited into his account.  

He did not look for her.  He looked “around.”  Consider also the size of the boat with this expression.  

He wishes to be seen as someone who did “search” with “whistling, calling, and looking around” specifically, but it is not accurately stated.  

This, too, suggests that he has a need to be seen in a favorable light; something associated with guilt.  


CG:  understood, ok

NC:  We were fishing around block canyon.  

CG:  And when did that happen?

NC:  I don’t have the exact coordinates.

This indicates he has the coordinates, just not the “exact” coordinates. 

CG:  (echo:  And when did that happen?) 

NC:   yes, It was a week ago today around mid day.

CG:   ok so last Sunday?

NC:   yeah.


III.          Analysis Conclusion

                               Deception Indicated

Nathan Carman is deliberately withholding information about what happened to his mother.  

He does not truthfully report events, skips over time, and shows a focus upon himself, rather than his mother.  

His wording reveals specific delay, associated with guilty knowledge, and it reveals intent.  

The form of his answer shows a lengthy introduction, statistically linked with deception.  

In order to be categorized as "deception indicated", intent must be seen.  Simply being in error, or mixed up, due to dehydration, health, trauma, etc, will not reveal "intent to deceive" in language.  In order to deceive, one must intentionally seek to mislead the interviewer/audience.  It is within this intention that we discern truth from deception.  


If Mr. Carman is offered a polygraph and the polygraph is conducted using his own language, he is not likely to pass.  

The interview strategy should consist of his own wording, and focus upon the gaps of time; not heavily upon the relationship with his mother, due to Asperger's.  He should be asked only general questions about her but if permitted opportunity to speak, will likely address her.  The interviewer must carefully listen for subtle disparagement of his mother.  This is something that guilty parties use to justify their actions.  This may even include a subtle blaming of the mother for her death.  

Nathan Carman is judicially innocent in this case, and in the unsolved murder of his grandfather.   

Several years ago, his wealthy grandmother died of cancer.  Shortly after this, his grandfather was murdered, leaving an estimated $40,000,000 to his four daughters; one of whom is Nathan's now deceased mother.  

Nathan was suspected but not charged in his grandfather's murder.  

Was this classification justified?

Did Nathan Carman commit murder against his grandfather and now his mother? 

He spoke to media about his grandfather's death; denying involvement.  

For Statement Analysis:  What is the classification of his denial?

When one speaks publicly, there is a presupposition that the audience is free to believe him, or not to believe him.   

Up next:  Did Nathan Carman reliably deny killing his grandfather?

For training in detecting deception, contact us for

                           Detecting Deception here.   

We offer training for law enforcement, human resources, journalists, social workers and all those interested in detecting deception at a high level.  

It is, for investigators, a most necessary element that saves time and procures justice, while bringing traction to the law enforcement professional's career.  

Monday, January 31, 2022

Ellen Greenburg Death: 911 Call Analysis Sam Goldberg

 

Ellen and her Dad

This case has been ruled as a suicide.  Ellen was found with 20 stab wounds.  


I. The 911 Call

II. The Call with Analysis Notes 

III. Analysis Conclusion



Sam Goldberg:              Help! I've got, I need, I need, uh, [inaudible]. I just, I just walked into my apartment, my fiance's on the floor with blood everywhere.


911 Receptionis...:        What is the address? 


Sam Goldberg:              46-0-1 Flat Rock Road. Please come! Help! 

911 Receptionis...:        46-0-1-


Sam Goldberg:              Now!


911 Receptionis...:        Flat Rock-

Sam Goldberg:              Flat Rock Road. 


911 Receptionis...:        Is this a house or apartment? 

Sam Goldberg:              Oh, no! Oh, no! 


911 Receptionis...:        Is this a house or an apartment? 

Sam Goldberg:              It's an apartment.


911 Receptionis...:        What apartment number? 


Sam Goldberg:              [inaudible]. Please, hurry! Please. 


911 Receptionis...:        Where is she bleeding from? 

Sam Goldberg:              She, I don't know, I can't tell. She's-


911 Receptionis...:        Now, sir, you have to calm yourself down in order to get you some help.


Sam Goldberg:              I'm sorry, I'm sorry. She-


911 Receptionis...:        Okay.


Sam Goldberg:              I don't know. I, I'm looking at her right now. She, I don't know, I can't see anything. She doesn't, there's nothing broken. She's bleeding. Ellie!


911 Receptionis...:        You don't know where she's bleeding from? 


Sam Goldberg:              Ellie!


911 Receptionis...:        You can't see where the blood's coming from? 

Sam Goldberg:              It's I think her head. I think she hit her head, I think, but [crosstalk]-


911 Receptionis...:        [crosstalk] might have fallen? 


Sam Goldberg:              Everywhere. 


911 Receptionis...:        [crosstalk]-

Sam Goldberg:              It's everywhere.


911 Receptionis...:        Do you think she might have fallen? 

Sam Goldberg:              Uh, yeah.


911 Receptionis...:        Do you know what happened to her? 

Sam Goldberg:              Uh, she, she, she may have slipped. There's blood on the, on the table. Her, her face is a little purple.


911 Receptionis...:        Okay, hold on for rescue for her. Stay on the phone. 


Philadelphia Fi...:          Philadelphia Fire Department 8-4-2. What's the address? [inaudible]-


Sam Goldberg:              Uh, 46-0-1 Flat Rock Road. Please hurry.

Philadelphia Fi...:          46-0-1 Flat Rock? 

Sam Goldberg:              Yes.


Philadelphia Fi...:          What's wrong? 


Sam Goldberg:              My, like I just, my, I went downstairs to go workout, I came back up, the door was latched, my fiances inside, she wasn't, she wasn't answering, so after about a half hour I decided to break it down, and I see her now just on the floor b- bloody. She's not, she's not responding. 


Philadelphia Fi...:          Okay. Is she breathing? 

Sam Goldberg:              She, I can't-


Philadelphia Fi...:          Look at her chest. I need you to calm down and I need you to look at her chest. It's really-


Sam Goldberg:              I don't think she, I really don't think she is.

Philadelphia Fi...:          Sir, listen. Listen to me. Someone's on the way. Look at her chest. Is she flat on her back? 


Sam Goldberg:              She's on her back. Do I bring her-


Philadelphia Fi...:          Okay, look at her chest and tell me if it's going up and down, up and down? 


Sam Goldberg:              I don't see her moving.


Philadelphia Fi...:          Okay. Do you know how to do CPR? 


Sam Goldberg:              I don't.


Philadelphia Fi...:          Okay, I can tell you what to do, okay, until they get there. I want you to keep her flat [crosstalk]-

Sam Goldberg:              Oh, God.


Philadelphia Fi...:          Hello? 

Sam Goldberg:              Yeah, hi. Okay. 


Philadelphia Fi...:          Are you willing to do CPR with me over the phone until they get there? 

Sam Goldberg:              I guess I, I have to, right? 


Philadelphia Fi...:          Okay. So get her flat on her back, bare her chest, okay? You want to rip her shirt off.


Sam Goldberg:              Gosh. [inaudible].


Philadelphia Fi...:          Okay? Feel down by her side.

Sam Goldberg:              Oh my god. Ellie, please.


Philadelphia Fi...:          Listen, listen, you can't freak out, sir, because you've got to-


Sam Goldberg:              Okay, I'm trying not to.

Philadelphia Fi...:          [crosstalk].

Sam Goldberg:              I'm trying not to. Her shirt won't come off, it's a zipper. 


Philadelphia Fi...:          Rip it off.


Sam Goldberg:              Oh my god, she stabbed herself! 

Philadelphia Fi...:          Where? 


Sam Goldberg:              She fell on a knife. Oh, no, her knife's sticking out.


Philadelphia Fi...:          Her what? 

Sam Goldberg:              There's a knife sticking out of her heart.


Philadelphia Fi...:          Oh, she stabbed herself? 

Sam Goldberg:              I guess, I guess so, I don't know, or she fell on it, I don't know. 


Philadelphia Fi...:          Okay, well don't touch it.

Sam Goldberg:              Okay, so I just, I just let her [inaudible] now? 


Philadelphia Fi...:          Somebody-

Sam Goldberg:              I mean, what do I do?


Philadelphia Fi...:          Oh, I mean, you can't, if the knife is in her chest it's going to be kind of hard for you to do CPR at this time.

Sam Goldberg:              Oh, no. Oh my goodness. Okay. 


Philadelphia Fi...:          Police, which operator? 

Speaker 4:                    2-7-7. 

Philadelphia Fi...:          All right, [inaudible]-


Sam Goldberg:              Is someone coming here? 

Philadelphia Fi...:          Yes, they are. You said 46-0-1 Flat Rock, right? 

Sam Goldberg:              Yes. 

Philadelphia Fi...:          Okay, someone's on the way. And the knife is still inside?


Sam Goldberg:              Is there what? 

Philadelphia Fi...:          The knife is still inside of her? 


Sam Goldberg:              Yes, I didn't take it out.


Philadelphia Fi...:          Is it her chest or what area does it [crosstalk]-

Sam Goldberg:              It's in her chest. It's like, it looks like it's-

Philadelphia Fi...:          [crosstalk]. 


Sam Goldberg:              It looks like it's right in her heart.


Philadelphia Fi...:          Oh, okay. Someone's on the way out there, okay? Just get the door open.


Sam Goldberg:              Oh my god. Oh my god. Okay, thank you.

Philadelphia Fi...:          How old is she? 


Sam Goldberg:              She's 27. 

Philadelphia Fi...:          27. There's no sign of life at all? 

Sam Goldberg:              No. 


Philadelphia Fi...:          All right, pinch under her arm.


Sam Goldberg:              No, no, please, don't be. What? 


Philadelphia Fi...:          Pinch her under her arm and tell me if she responds to pain? 


Sam Goldberg:              She's ... Ellie! She's not, it's not, her arm, her hands are still warm. I don't know what that means, but there's blood everywhere. I mean-


Philadelphia Fi...:          I know, but you can't. And the knife is still inside of her. How far? Can you see how far it went in?

Sam Goldberg:              It looks pretty deep. 

Philadelphia Fi...:          Oh, okay. 

Sam Goldberg:              It looks three-

Philadelphia Fi...:          All right. 

Sam Goldberg:              I mean, it's a long knife.

Speaker 4:                    Don't touch anything, sir.

Philadelphia Fi...:          Yeah, don't touch anything, okay? 

Sam Goldberg:              I'm not touching anything. [crosstalk]-

Philadelphia Fi...:          [crosstalk]-

Sam Goldberg:              I can't believe this. Uh-

Philadelphia Fi...:          So, what, it was just you there with her? 

Sam Goldberg:              We, yeah, we're the only ones here. 

Philadelphia Fi...:          And she ran in the door, you said, and latched it shut? 

Sam Goldberg:              No, no. I, I, I went downstairs to workout and I, when I came back up the door was latched.


Philadelphia Fi...:          Oh.


Sam Goldberg:              Like it wasn't, you know, it wasn't like it was, you know, it was like locked from the inside, and I'm yelling, and, uh, so I was-


Philadelphia Fi...:          Well-

Sam Goldberg:              So I'm here yelling, and I guess-

Philadelphia Fi...:          Was the house broken into?

Sam Goldberg:              No, no, no, no.


Philadelphia Fi...:          So there's no sign of a break in? 

Sam Goldberg:              No, no sign of a break in at all. I mean, there will be when you get here, because I had to break the latch, but, to get in.


Philadelphia Fi...:          Okay, 46-0-1 Flat Rock, and this is a house, right? 

Sam Goldberg:              It's an apartment. Flat Rock Road, Apartment [inaudible].

Philadelphia Fi...:          Okay, that'll help [crosstalk]-


Sam Goldberg:              Oh my god. Oh my god. All right, thank you.


Philadelphia Fi...:          Okay. Mm-hmm (affirmative).

Sam Goldberg:              Bye. 


II. The Call With Analysis Notes: 


Sam Goldberg:            Help! I've got, I need, I need, uh, [inaudible]. I just, I just walked into my apartment, my fiancé’s on the floor with blood everywhere.

The call begins with “help”--- for whom does he ask for help.  Our expectation (and presumption of truthfulness) is that the caller will ask for help for the victim. The exception to this is when the caller asks for help on how to perform CPR or administer first aid.  

 

Q. Does the caller, himself, need “help”?  We let the subject (caller) guide our answer.  He next says, “I’ve got” followed by, “I need, I need” and self censoring or inaudible. 

Here, believing his words to guide us, he tells us that he has a need (twice) without identifying what that need is, or how it relates to the victim (“my fiancé needs help, she is bleeding”, etc) 

 

We note that he did not ask for help for the victim. 

We note that he did not ask for help for himself to save the victim.

We note he repeated, “I need”, which increases its importance. 

We believe the subject has a “need.” 

We note that he asks for help--- is this for himself?  Is he in need of help?  Or is he asking for help for another? We look to the rest of the transcript (statement) to guide us. 

This is sometimes found in guilty callers in Emergency Calls, particularly in domestic assaults and domestic homicides. 

 

Priority:  The order of words (information) speaks to the caller’s priority. 

1.     Help 

2.     I’ve got. What does he “got”?  His own troubles? Did he get “her”? 

3.     I need, I need. What does he need?  We expect him to tell us what he needs. 

4.     I just

5.     I just walked in to my apartment

He has not yet addressed the needs, nor the need for assistance for the victim. 

Expectation of innocence--- the first thing to say is about the victim. 

Instead, he gives a non specific call for help, expresses with heavy pronoun usage (“I”) regarding himself, that he “got, need, need” and the timing (“just”) and location. 

 

A conversation should flow in one direction. Here it is out of sequence. the word "just" repeated takes him back and could be similar to the word "left" as it interrupts his train of thought or natural flow. it's repetition increases the sensitivity and could seek to provide him with a linguistic alibi which should be unnecessary in context. The priority should be to get help yet he prioritizes himself and stops the flow of information

“my apartment” --- he takes ownership of the apartment while his fiancé is in an emergency setting.  

 

I just, I just walked into my apartment, my fiancé’s on the floor with blood everywhere.

a.     “just” speaks to timing.  It is not expected that he would have a need to repeat (emphasis) this point, unless he has a need.   

b.     Q. With the repetition, was he there earlier than this call?

c.     “walked” is slow, deliberate method of entry. It portrays a casualness about entry. This is incongruent with his description of breaking into his apartment.

d.     By telling us his body posture, we note that he is slowing down the pace of the statement and indicating tension for him, at this point, in the recall process. 

 

He began with “help” and we expect him to continue this, as a call to help his fiancé.  Instead, he turns the focus upon himself; his arrival timing (2x), his walking, his apartment.  Thus far, he is the priority. He wishes to communicate that he was not home. This is a priority before getting to the victim. 

 

my fiancé’s on the floor with blood everywhere.

a.     “my fiancé” shows ownership which often indicates at the time and setting of the statement, that at this point, it is a good relationship.  Please note that this is his perception of reality and that it comes while she is on the floor, with blood everywhere. 

b.     We sometimes find, in the subject’ verbalized perception of reality in domestic homicides that the relationship was volatile until the victim’s death. 

c.     “on the floor” (location) to which he is standing (“walked in”).  His information prior to telling police that his fiancé is bleeding is unnecessary and slows down the pace of the statement.  He is standing, she is down, she is his. 

d.     blood everywhere” is as to be startled, by one who “just” (repeated) “walked” (slow, casual, not alarmed).

e.     This also avoids telling us that “she is bleeding”, or assigning the ownership of the blood to her. This passivity is often used to conceal responsibility for the one who caused her blood to be “everywhere.”

f.      Also by not saying (in any manner) that “my fiancé is bleeding” (followed by “how do I stop the blood?” in any wording, he may be subtly depersonalizing her.  This is done while she is “my fiancé.”

g.     With his use of passivity, rather than ascribe the blood to her, does he know she is beyond help? (He has not yet asked for help for her, nor has he has asked for help for himself to stop the bleeding) 

h.     with” between her and “blood everywhere” is a psychological distancing or separation of her from her own blood.  

i.      To this point, we do not see anything in his words about her breathing, still bleeding, crying, screaming, whimpering, etc.  The subject is distancing himself from her in what is absent. 

j.      Since he began his call with “help”, we remaining looking for him to tell them what help he needs; such as in CPR or a tourniquet. 

k.     What happened to her should be his priority; not self. 

l.      Does the subject exhibit or is known for narcissistic tendencies?

m.   Going out of order (and slowing down the pace) may indicate that he is not speaking from experiential memory, but of memory rehearsed as to what to say.  

 

911                              What is the address? 

Sam Goldberg:            46-0-1 Flat Rock Road. Please come! Help!

911                              46-0-1-

Sam Goldberg:            Now!

What now?  

We continue to wait for him to ask for help for the victim.

We continue to wait for him to give police a description of what she needs. 

911                              Flat Rock-

Sam Goldberg:            Flat Rock Road.

911                              Is this a house or apartment? 

Sam Goldberg:            Oh, no! Oh, no!

For whom is he concerned?  Himself or the victim?  We do not know from his words. 

This is something people commonly say when they have made a mistake or been caught at something. 

911                              Is this a house or an apartment? 

Sam Goldberg:            It's an apartment.

911                              What apartment number? 

Sam Goldberg:            [inaudible]. Please, hurry! Please.

Ingratiation---- this is when politeness is used in an attempt to be perceived as helpful and aligned with police.  It often indicates to the contrary.  Here, he repeats the word please, urges them to “hurry”, but he does not say why, nor does he ask for help to administer aid to the victim.  Ingratiation is used to appear to be the “good guy” when one may be seeking to hide guilt. He wishes to be perceived as friendly, on the same team, but not as one to be investigated by police. 

911                              Where is she bleeding from?

This is an unexpected question.  The 911 operator must ask this question because the subject has not given any indication of the victim’s current status beyond location. Callers in distress are in earnest to obtain help for the victim. He has not expressed what “need” she has, or what “help” she specifically needs. This caused the operator to have to inquire. 

 

Sam Goldberg:            She, I don't know, I can't tell. She's-

Why can’t he tell?  Why hasn’t he looked?  Why hasn’t he tried to save her?  To stop the blood that is “everywhere”?  

911                              Now, sir, you have to calm yourself down in order to get you some help.

Sam Goldberg:            I'm sorryI'm sorry. She-

We highlight the words, “I’m sorry” in an emergency call in all settings.  It is sometimes found in guilty callers. Here, it is repeated.  Those truly in earnest to save the victim do not care to be polite; they care only about saving the life. When there are other points of analysis that concern us, we seek to learn if the subject, himself, has something to be “sorry” for in this specific context. Here, while calling about her, does he have regrets? 

911                              Okay.

Sam Goldberg:            I don't know. I, I'm looking at her right now. She, I don't know, I can't see anything. She doesn't, there's nothing broken. She's bleeding. Ellie!

 

The question is where is she bleeding from.  His answer is “I don’t know.”  This is to answer the question and he could have stopped there.  He gives us a “hina clause” which I used to explain why, even though he was not asked.  This is very sensitive information to him and it yields much for us to understand. 

“looking at her” is very concerning.  Besides unnecessarily attempting to show that he wasn’t previously 

 

“I, I’m” is a slight halt on the pronoun “I”--- the pronoun “I” is something we all use millions of times with proficiency.  Halting on it indicates that there is an increase in stress/anxiety found in these words:  “looking at her right now.”

Please note that it is only “right now” that he is “looking at her.”  He wants police to know that he may not have been looking at her previously.  This is impossible, yet within his words, it was not her blood, but “blood everywhere.”  

 

This is a strong indication that he was looking at her prior to this call and knows more than what he is revealing.  He wants police to believe he did not see anything.  This need, itself, is what he highlight.  It is a need to persuade police that he is ignorant of wounds. 

 

He is indicating a time gap.  He did early with the repeating of “just” 

He now assigns the blood to her, as “bleeding”, while he is looking at her. 

 

He does not question if someone did this to her.  There is no open wondering of who did this to the victim. 

He’s looking at her now, but not offering her any help, nor asking for help for her, nor for himself in first aid applied to her.  

 

Nothing. 

 

This may have surprised the operator into asking this: 

 

911                              You don't know where she's bleeding from?

Sam Goldberg:            Ellie!

The “unintended recipient” is often more important than the intended.  In this context, (911) the intended recipient is the operator, but the unintended recipient may be the 911 recording (see ingratiation) 

911.:                            You can't see where the blood's coming from? 

He said he was “looking” at her “right now.” 

Sam Goldberg:            It's I think her head. I think she hit her head, I think, but [crosstalk]-

Repetition of “I think” , along with the self rebuttal (“but”) may indicate, at this point, that he knows exactly where she is bleeding from. 

 

911                              [crosstalk] might have fallen?

Sam Goldberg:            Everywhere

911 ...:                         [crosstalk]-

Sam Goldberg:            It's everywhere.

911 ...:                         Do you think she might have fallen? 

This is difficult because we do not wish to give answers to a subject, but the operator may have been trying to focus how to guide for first aid, since the caller has given no indication of how she should be treated. 

Sam Goldberg:            Uh, yeah.

He agrees with her rather than offering his own info, since he is “looking at her right now” 

What else was he looking at? (prior to this moment in the call) 

911 ...:                         Do you know what happened to her?

Yes or no question; operator may have grown suspicious by now.  

Sam Goldberg:            Uh, she, she, she may have slipped. There's blood on the, on the table. Her, her face is a littlepurple.

a.     He does not answer the question. 

b.     He offers that she may have slipped; no concern that she was murdered and that the killer could still be in the apartment.  

c.     “a little purple” should cause him to ask, “What do I do?” to save her life.  He does not. 

911:                             Okay, hold on for rescue for her. Stay on the phone

Philadelphia FD:         Philadelphia Fire Department 8-4-2. What's the address? [inaudible]-

Sam Goldberg:            Uh, 46-0-1 Flat Rock Road. Please hurry.

He has not sought help to apply first aid, stop the bleeding, etc.  

He uses the polite, “please” with the FD.  

Philadelphia Fi...:       46-0-1 Flat Rock? 

Sam Goldberg:            Yes.

Philadelphia Fi...:       What's wrong? 

Good question

Sam Goldberg:            My, like I just, my, I went downstairs to go workout, I came back up, the door was latched, my fiancé’s inside, she wasn't, she wasn't answering, so after about a half hour I decided to break it down, and I see her now just on the floor b- bloody. She's not, she's not responding.

The subject is withholding information at this point in the statement. 

The subject has a need to explain why he went downstairs. 

The subject has the need to elongate time.  (“half hour”)

The subject needed time to “decide” to break in.  

Did she lock him out and wouldn't respond to him wanting to get back in so he broke back in and killed her

How did he know she was inside?  If he was gone and needed “30 minutes”, could she have not left? Gone for a walk? 

He states that she was inside; we believe him.  He knew.  

 

Philadelphia Fi...:       Okay. Is she breathing?

Sam Goldberg:            She, I can't-

Philadelphia Fi...:       Look at her chest. I need you to calm down and I need you to look at her chest. It's really-

Sam Goldberg:            I don't think she, I really don't think she is.

Philadelphia Fi...:       Sir, listen. Listen to me. Someone's on the way. Look at her chest. Is she flat on her back?

Sam Goldberg:            She's on her back. Do I bring her-

Philadelphia Fi...:       Okay, look at her chest and tell me if it's going up and down, up and down?

Sam Goldberg:            I don't see her moving.

Philadelphia Fi...:       Okay. Do you know how to do CPR?

Sam Goldberg:            I don't.

Philadelphia Fi...:       Okay, I can tell you what to do, okay, until they get there. I want you to keep her flat [crosstalk]-

Sam Goldberg:            Oh, God.

Note use of Deity in the emergency call 

Philadelphia Fi...:       Hello? 

Sam Goldberg:            Yeah, hi. Okay.

He uses language of ingratiation, likely instinctively.  He wants to be perceived as helpful. Yet, the FD had to ask him if he was “willing”--

Philadelphia Fi...:       Are you willing to do CPR with me over the phone until they get there

Sam Goldberg:            I guess I, I have to, right?

The subject did not ask for help for the victim.

The subject did not ask help for himself to tend to the victim.

The subject openly states his reluctance. 

The victim was likely dead by this point and the subject may not have wanted to be close to the body.  This may help us understand the need to say “I am looking at her right now…”

The subject knew she was dead.  

He was previously “looking at her.” 

He knew. 

Philadelphia Fi...:       Okay. So get her flat on her back, bare her chest, okay? You want to rip her shirt off.

Sam Goldberg:            Gosh. [inaudible].

Philadelphia Fi...:       Okay? Feel down by her side.

Sam Goldberg:            Oh my God. Ellie, please.

Philadelphia Fi...:       Listen, listen, you can't freak out, sir, because you've got to-

Sam Goldberg:            Okay, I'm trying not to.

Philadelphia Fi...:       [crosstalk].

Sam Goldberg:            I'm trying not to. Her shirt won't come off, it's a zipper.

Philadelphia Fi...:       Rip it off.

Sam Goldberg:            Oh My god, she stabbed herself!

What caused him to think and say this? Why would this be the first thing on his mind upon seeing a knife to the chest?

He has jumped to the conclusion of the matter.  

He blames the victim.  

Negative LD.  

He went slowly through this rather than going directly to her to save her---he is likely lengthening time again. 

 

Philadelphia Fi...:       Where? 

Sam Goldberg:            She fell on a knife. Oh, no, her knife's sticking out.

Philadelphia Fi...:       Her what?

Sam Goldberg:            There's a knife sticking out of her heart.

Philadelphia Fi...:       Oh, she stabbed herself?

FD is surprised at this conclusion. 

Sam Goldberg:            I guess, I guess so, I don't know, or she fell on it, I don't know. 

He now backs away from his earlier commitment with “guess” and repetition of “I don’t know.” It is likely he wishes this to be seen as a suicide. 

Philadelphia Fi...:       Okay, well don't touch it.

Sam Goldberg:            Okay, so I just, I just let her [inaudible] now

Philadelphia Fi...:       Somebody-

Sam Goldberg:            I mean, what do I do?

Philadelphia Fi...:       Oh, I mean, you can't, if the knife is in her chest it's going to be kind of hard for you to do CPR at this time.

Sam Goldberg:            Oh, no. Oh my goodness. Okay.

Philadelphia Fi...:       Police, which operator? 

Speaker 4:                   2-7-7. 

Philadelphia Fi...:       All right, [inaudible]-

Sam Goldberg:            Is someone coming here?

Philadelphia Fi...:       Yes, they are. You said 46-0-1 Flat Rock, right? 

Sam Goldberg:            Yes. 

Philadelphia Fi...:       Okay, someone's on the way. And the knife is still inside?

Sam Goldberg:            Is there what?

Philadelphia Fi...:       The knife is still inside of her? 

Sam Goldberg:            Yes, I didn't take it out.

Philadelphia Fi...:       Is it her chest or what area does it [crosstalk]-

Sam Goldberg:            It's in her chest. It's like, it looks like it's-

Philadelphia Fi...:       [crosstalk]. 

Sam Goldberg:            It looks like it's right in her heart.

Philadelphia Fi...:       Oh, okay. Someone's on the way out there, okay? Just get the door open.

Sam Goldberg:            Oh my God. Oh my God. Okay, thank you.

He retains the presence of mind to be polite to authorities.  

Philadelphia Fi...:       How old is she? 

Sam Goldberg:            She's 27. 

Philadelphia Fi...:       27. There's no sign of life at all? 

Sam Goldberg:            No.

Philadelphia Fi...:       All right, pinch under her arm.

Sam Goldberg:            No, no, please, don't be. What?

Philadelphia Fi...:       Pinch her under her arm and tell me if she responds to pain? 

Sam Goldberg:            She's ... Ellie! She's not, it's not, her arm, her hands are still warm. I don't know what that means, but there's blood everywhere. I mean-

Philadelphia Fi...:       I know, but you can't. And the knife is still inside of her. How far? Can you see how far it went in?

Sam Goldberg:            It looks pretty deep.

Philadelphia Fi...:       Oh, okay. 

Sam Goldberg:            It looks three-

Philadelphia Fi...:       All right. 

Sam Goldberg:            I mean, it's a long knife.

Speaker 4:                   Don't touch anything, sir.

Philadelphia Fi...:       Yeah, don't touch anything, okay? 

Sam Goldberg:            I'm not touching anything. [crosstalk]-

Philadelphia Fi...:       [crosstalk]-

Sam Goldberg:            I can't believe this. Uh-

Philadelphia Fi...:       So, what, it was just you there with her? 

Sam Goldberg:            We, yeah, we're the only ones here. 

Philadelphia Fi...:       And she ran in the door, you said, and latched it shut? 

This question caused him anxiety.  

Sam Goldberg:            No, no. I, I, I went downstairs to workout and I, when I came back up the door was latched.

He stated that she was inside, but here he uses passivity regarding the latching of the door.  This removes responsibility from the person who latched it. 

Philadelphia Fi...:       Oh.

Sam Goldberg:            Like it wasn't, you know, it wasn't like it was, you know, it was like locked from the inside, and I'm yelling, and, uh, so I was-

He refuses to commit to this account.  He reports what it was “like”, three times.  “You know” also follows his anxiety, indicating an increased awareness of the person he is talking to (who asked the question) and his need to get the FD to believe/agree with him. 

Philadelphia Fi...:       Well-

Sam Goldberg:            So I'm here yelling, and I guess-

Philadelphia Fi...:       Was the house broken into? 

Sam Goldberg:            No, no, no, no.

Philadelphia Fi...:       So there's no sign of a break in? 

Sam Goldberg:            No, no sign of a break in at all. I mean, there will be when you get here, because I had to break the latch, but, to get in.

Philadelphia Fi...:       Okay, 46-0-1 Flat Rock, and this is a house, right? 

Sam Goldberg:            It's an apartment. Flat Rock Road, Apartment [inaudible].

Philadelphia Fi...:       Okay, that'll help [crosstalk]-

Sam Goldberg:            Oh my god. Oh my god. All right, thank you.

Philadelphia Fi...:       Okay. Mm-hmm (affirmative).

Sam Goldberg:            Bye. 

 

      III.  Analysis Conclusion: 


1.     The subject (caller) should be investigated as  a suspect in the death of Ellen Greenburg. This indicates that an investigation should not only include the possibility of directly causing her death, but should also examine any possible destabilizing of Ellen in the hours/days prior to this call. 


2.     The subject is withholding information about what happened to Ellen.


3.     The subject did not ask for help for the victim.


4.     The subject did not ask for guidance to administer first aid to the victim.  The subject expressed reluctance in providing aid to the victim. 


5.     The subject’s priority is himself; not the victim. 



6.     The subject likely was at the scene longer than he offered.


7.     The subject indicates that during the call, he knew Ellen was beyond help. 


8.     Despite finding his fiancé is this state, he did not show fear nor concern of an intruder.


9.  The subject knew his fiancé was inside. 


10.  The subject did not always  speak from experiential memory, but from rehearsed or scripted responses.


11.  The subject wants police to be convinced that this was suicide.