Monday, May 25, 2015

Statement Analysis of Anonymous Note: FAKE HATE


                                      I receive many requests for anonymous work.

In the news recently, we have been provided with just such an example for analysis.

In the analysis of an anonymous threat, we seek to learn:

1.  Does the letter pose a tangible risk to the recipient
2.  Can the identity of the writer be known?

Anonymous Threat work is an inexact science.  The more writing one does, the more the author is revealed.  In this case, it is a short letter, but there is enough for us to see a profile of the writer emerge.

This appeared on Facebook with the following introduction:

"Sooooo, I'm checking my mail and when I come across this I can't help but laugh��...wait, it's not funny though. Where they do that at? Oh yeah Lindenhurst. Unbelievable but then it's not...our daily reality, I've just never seen it in this form."


Please note:  the FB poster feels the need to explain why she went to her mailbox.  This makes the statement very sensitive to the FB poster.  (the person who found the note)

In Statement Analysis, when a person explains why they did something without being asked, it is considered "very sensitive" as it shows that they person not only feels a need to explain why they did something, but more importantly:

They anticipate being asked, "Why did you go out to your mailbox?"

When the question is unnecessary, it makes it doubly sensitive to the writer, as she feels a need to explain that which warrants no explanation:  Everyone goes out to check their mailbox for mail.

This is a very strong indication that something is amiss in this story.  When taken with the present tense language, and the lack of need for "Who wrote this?", it becomes even more sensitive.

We expect to hear concern about who wrote it, will the writer be caught, will he be jailed, will I be safe, will my family be safe, and so on.  None of this is evident in the subject's writing.

In Statement Analysis, there are some statistical connections between anonymous threatening letters and subjects, which I will address below.

Also note that it is in the present tense.  This may be her manner of writing, or it may be indicative of story telling, but it reduces the odds of reliability.

Note the cause is to "laugh" and not be afraid.  Note the "laughing face" as part of the message.  Would you feel fear if you lived in a town where such a high percentage of people did not look like you, and because of your race, you were told to move out?  I would experience fear for my family and for myself.  This is my description of "the expected" in a case like this.  It may sound like Charlie Rogers declaring herself to be a "survivor" when she should have been in too much pain from the wounds to even sit up, which is 'scripted language' for a 'show' for media.

Then, note that she does not ask, "Who" did this, but "where" in:
" Where they do that at? " as the location is more important than the identity. 

Ask yourself:  Would you be more concerned with who did such a thing, than announcing the geography?

This is to show more concern with publication than with any threat.  

"Unbelievable":  agreed.


Note she calls it "our daily reality" and not "my" daily reality.

She just has not seen it "in this form", to which I agree.  I have not seen a hateful, racially charged letter demanding one move from out of a white neighborhood in such a polite, friendly form, either.

As to future plans, the FB posted added this recent update.  We look for a strong desire to learn the identity of the racist threat, so he can be arrested and the family made safe.

No such concern noted by the FB poster, Ronica Copes.


Ronica Copes
1 hr · Edited · 

I would like to express my sincere appreciation to EVERYONE that has shown concern and shared kind words on behalf of my family and I. The support and well wishes that we've received here on Long Island and abroad has been overwhelmingly positive. I am a firm believer in everyone and everthing having a purpose, and so I will use this "mess" to convey a "message". Stay tuned.....





ATTN:  AFRICAN-AMERICAN FAMILY,

THIS IS COMING FROM LINDENHURST COMMUNITY

YOU DON'T BELONG HERE !!!

PLEASE LEAVE LINDENHURST AS SOON AS YOU CAN.

IT WILL BE BETTER FOR ALL OF US.

FIND THE TOWN WHERE THERE ARE MORE PEOPLE LIKE YOU.

SORRY IF THIS IS RUDE, BUT IT'S THE TRUTH

We note that it is all in caps, giving us a reference point of all capitalization, reducing elements of emphasis where only certain words are capitalized.  The writer does, however, use some emphasis which allows for analysis.

First Please note some general themes.  These themes follow our

I.  "Expected Versus Unexpected" scenario.  Literally, you should write out what you think a racist letter like this would say.  This is the "expected" list of words.  For me:

"N" word, insult, taunt, demands" are expected.
Politeness, and concern for the family's well being are unexpected.

Statement Analysis sets up an expected and then is 'confronted' by the unexpected.

*There is no linguistic threat made to the intended recipient   (family)
*The language of racism is notably absent.
*The burden of moving is reduced as convenience for the family is noted.
*There is an absence of foul language, insult, or taunts.
*There is a polite theme with "please" and "sorry" used.

II.  Statistics of Anonymous Threatening Letters

There is a statistical connection of anonymous letters with:

a.  Location:   The one who finds the letter as a writer.  In the family, the interview should focus upon the one who made the claim to have found the letter.

b.  Sexuality:  There is also a statistical correlation between hetro-homosexuality confusion and anonymous threats.  This is not a moral statement, but a statistical statement. It means that when an anonymous letter with threats has been written, more times than not, the writer is either sexually confused about himself, or collateral contacts revealed that they were uncertain about the author's sexuality.  It is related to concealment and confusion, and, perhaps, some latent anger.

We must first see if a threat exists, that is, is actually communicated.  Remember, decisions must be made similar to triaging medical emergencies, as departments have limited resources and strained budgets, and must decide if it is a real threat, and if so, of what nature.

III.  Here is the statement, section by section, with analysis.  

ATTN:  AFRICAN-AMERICAN FAMILY,

Computers will spell check and even correct our grammar.  It is easier to identify the writer of an anonymous note when it is hand written, as capitalization, for example, takes more effort and grammar can reveal education level.

1.  ATTN:

a.  Note that "ATTN:" is the proper abbreviation for "Attention"
b.  Note that the colon used is the proper mark to follow the proper abbreviation

The writer appears to be familiar with writing for the public, or for a business.  This suggests at least 2 years of college and/or business school.  It is done appropriately, and 'raises' the age of the author beyond teenaged years.  It does not speak to gender, as yet.

2.  "AFRICAN-AMERICAN FAMILY"

a. "African-American" is considered something more likely to be used by white people in an attempt to sound politically correct, as if "black" is offense.

Question:    Would a racist care to be politically correct, since racism, itself, is so 'not' politically correct?

                                         What does this suggest?

It suggests that the writer is either a white person, who does not wish to offend the recipient, even while writing a racist letter, or the writer is someone who would like to be seen as white, increasing the statistical likelihood that the writer is black. (This is "attempt to persuade")

 It is noted that it is not likely a term that a white racist would use.  Therefore, this increases the theme that the writer is black, or a non-black friend of blacks.  The writer does not want to insult the "African American family" that receives the letter.  This is not expected from a racist who wants a family to get out of their neighborhood.

b.  Note next the hyphen between "African" and "American" affirms the opinion that the writer has at least a two year degree or business school training.  It is the proper use of the hyphen.

The profile of a racist often fits the caricature of ignorance.  This does not fit.

c.  "FAMILY" is to address the recipients as a whole, and in a polite term.  This term addresses all of them, and is a polite term.  This increases the connection between the author and the "family", suggesting that once the identity of the writer is known, the family is very much likely to recognize him or her.   The author is close enough to the inhabitants of the house to use the word "family."

It is here that we would expect vulgarity or racially charged language.

It is not expected that the word respectful "family" would be used.

Since "family" has come into the author's language:

This word leads to the question, "Did a member of the family write this note?" or

"Does the family know the author?" or

"Does the writer of the note have a bond with the inhabitants of the house?"

We now consider that the author of the note is someone close to the family and when revealed, will be someone the family recognizes. 

Where one begins a statement is always important.  After the greeting, the subject chose to begin his or her letter here:

THIS IS COMING FROM LINDENHURST COMMUNITY

The location is very important to the author.  The author does not claim to be the writer, nor does the author indicate who "wrote" this, instead, uses passivity, or "passive voice" in the statement.

Statement Analysis Principle:  Passivity in language seeks to conceal identity and/or responsibility.

a.  "THIS" is the word of closeness, versus "that" which is distancing language.  This is to indicate that the author is tying himself or herself closely to the note.

b.  "is coming" is not "is from" which suggests on-going activity.  The writer may have an expectation of 'involvement' in 'this' case that goes beyond writing the note.  Remember, in Statement Analysis, direct lies are very rare.  The author did not say "I am writing for the Lindenhurst Community" with the strong use of the pronoun, "I."  We follow, very carefully, pronouns in language, especially in anonymous letters.

Principle:  Pronouns, themselves,  sometimes reveal the identity of the author. 

c.  "Lindenhurst Community" has no article.  This is an important point of distance.

That "community" is plural in its scope, and that "Lindenhurst" has not article:

The letter is not from a plurality of authors and 

the writer does not assimilate herself or himself with the town or community of Lindenhurst.

This indicates that the writer is one person, and does not consider him or herself to be comfortable or at home with the community of Lindenhurst.  The missing article, "the" suggests distancing language from Lindenhurst.

The writer lives, currently (at the time of the letter), in Lindenhurst.  The writer ties herself to the letter, with "This", but distances herself or himself from Lindenhurst psychologically rather than geographically. 


YOU DON'T BELONG HERE !!!

Here we have the first change in typing, which includes two forms:

a.  Underlining
b.  Exclamation marks

This is something that will 'give away' the author as investigators see other email or electronic notices that includes three exclamation marks.

It shows emphasis and is indicative of the inclusion of emotion for the author.

We next look to see what emotion caused the author to write:

"YOU" may be singular or plural.  It is not "YOU ALL", but is singular, technically, but it comes after "FAMILY" as the recipients.

With the possibility of singular, there may be one person in the household who has strong emotions about where she or he lives.

The emotion, elevated, is about "belonging."

"Belonging" is a distinctive emotional feeling of a sense of unity and of identification.  The writer lives in Lindenhurst but does not feel a sense of 'belonging' in Lindenhurst.  The author has likely not had good contacts in the town and is elevated emotionally about this sense of belonging.

This is not a racist letter, but a "fake hate", that is, "fake racism" as it is the strongest language found in the letter (emotion) and it is about the feeling of being 'known', 'recognized' in the sense of being a member.

Think:  "community" and "belonging";  the writer is not attacking the family's race, but revealing his or her own feeling of not 'belonging.'  It is a soft, sad emotion and not the rage that we find in racism.

This is not a racial letter of hatred.  The author does not have emotions of hatred towards the family.  

This increases the odds that the author is known by the family and does not have negative feelings towards the family, instead indicates empathy for them.

"HERE" indicates that the author wrote this while in Lindenhurst.

The author has other emails indicating emotion and investigators will likely find "!!!" in his or her writings.



PLEASE LEAVE LINDENHURST AS SOON AS YOU CAN.


1.  "PLEASE"

The word "PLEASE" is a polite term.  It is not the language of hatred, nor of racism.  The politeness affirms that this is not a teenager, and has now increased the odds that the author is female.

This is an indication of gender.

We have thus seen that the author:

*Lives in Lindenhurst but is-
*Not happy about living in Lindenhurst
*Does not feel that she belongs in Lindenhurst as a community
*Does not have racial hatred
*Does not have hatred towards the family
*is female
*is not a racist
*is either black or friendly with blacks.


What we do with this is continue our analysis and see if the language supports or negates the suggested findings to this point. 

The analyst must be willing to change his mind at any time.  

This is how anonymous letter analysis works.  It is a constant changing of the mind, following the language, which can often appear confusing.

This particular note is not as challenging as others, as there have not been many "twists and turns" but is useful for instruction. Had it included racially charged language, it would have been more complicated.

There are often indicators that are conflicting in anonymous letters.  This one lacks the conflicting indicators or elements commonly found.

2.  "Lindenhurst":  The author does not write, "Leave here!" or "GET OUT!"  but has changed the language from not belonging "HERE" to "LINDENHURST"

A change of language should represent a change of reality.

The author lives in Lindenhurst but does not like living in Lindenhurst.  The author, herself or himself, wants to leave Lindenhurst.  This is distancing language from Lindenhurst as the author does not wish to live there.  We have "HERE" representing geographical connection, and "LINDENHURST" AS psychological distancing from the geographical location (Lindenhurst).

3.  "AS SOON AS YOU CAN"

This is unexpected language.  It has no demand, no terrorizing, and shows no urgency.

If the author hated blacks the author would want them out now and the letter, itself, should presuppose a lack of care or concern for the family yet here, it shows a genuine concern for the family and it shows...something else.

Who might be one who would empathize with a family told to move?

Moving is not easy.  It takes time, planning, energy and it takes...

money.

This may be more important that one might realize, initially, at least.

"When you can"

This is to affirm that the burden of moving falls upon the family, of which the author does not want to "impose" upon the family.  The author is telling us about herself here.

This affirms:

a.  politeness
b.  moving is not easy, but is exhausting and expensive.
c.  the author may have a history of moving and knows it is not that easy to do and actually feels sorry for the family having to move.  This is empathy for the family and the topic which produced the empathy is not race, but the act of moving, itself.

d.  does not want to inconvenience the family, reducing the odds of being a 'threat'

This author does not hate the family and makes no racial indications of such hatred.  In fact, this author does not hate black people.

If black, it rules out self-loathing as a possible motive.  This may further increase the sense of financial motive.

The author is known by the family, understands how troublesome moving can be, personally, and makes no demand that would be common in racially charged hate language.

The author has a history of moving and an empathy towards the family.

The soft tone further suggests female author.


IT WILL BE BETTER FOR ALL OF US.

Pronouns are the most important element in Statement Analysis.

Here we have:

1.  "will" is conditional.  This is to say that "if you move, it will be better" but presupposes that the move may not take place.

2. "it will be better"

 It does not say "You will be better off" but it will be better is passive.  The author knows or believes that the family may not move at the time of this writing.

Passivity seeks to conceal responsibility.  This indicates that the writer is not certain that the family will move.

THUS:  Interview each member of the family and seek to learn if any of them needed persuasion by a family member in the home, outside the home, or by a close friend, and move outside the circle from there (family members in the home, outside the home, close friends, acquaintances, co workers, etc)

"BETTER" is regarding quality of life (home life) and the author is concerned about the quality of home life for whom?

She does not make us wait long to find out:

3.  "Us" is the most important element here:

It links the writer of the note with the family.  It is similar to seeing the word "we" connecting a criminal with a victim:  it does not happen after the crime.

"Us" shows a direct link, or connection, unifying the author with the family.

This affirms that the author will be someone the family already knows.

"Us" shows concern of results for both the "Lindenhurst Community" and the "family" that received the letter.

Would a hateful racist care about how the family's wellbeing turns out?

This is not likely.

This is to affirm that this is not a racially charged hate letter.

This affirms "Fake Hate"; that is, the author is not a racist and does not hate the family.

The author has empathy for moving, does not want to inconvenience the family and is known to the family.

We continue to see if the words affirm these elements, or move us to a different opinion.



FIND THE TOWN WHERE THERE ARE MORE PEOPLE LIKE YOU.

This is a critical mistake for the author.

This is to strongly suggest that the author has a particular town in mind:  "the" town and not "Find a town where..."

The writer has moved around enough to have empathy over moving, knowing it is not easy and cannot be done right away.
The writer cares for the welfare of the family.
The writer's own language suggests female with at least two (2) years of community college and/or business/training school.

This suggests that the writer has moved from a town where she was more comfortable.  The move history of the family should be examined, particularly in towns where the black population was higher OR that she lived near black people near by.



SORRY IF THIS IS RUDE, BUT IT'S THE TRUTH

Here we have the politeness of someone who cares for the family and is concerned with being "rude", further suggesting that the author is female.

"SORRY" has no pronoun, making the pronoun "us" to be even more important.  The absence of a pronoun before "sorry" suggests reduced commitment.

In statemnet analysis, the dropped pronoun is said to reduce commitment, therefore, we ask, "To what commitment?"

In this context, the subject is reducing commitment to being "sorry" for "not belonging."

This may very well be true:  the subject feels sorrow for either:
a.  not having the feeling of belonging;
b.  that one or more of the family members does not feel content, or "belonging" to the community.  This suggests discontentment.

The lack of sorrow is to recognize that "not belonging" is not such a powerful emotion.

"It's the truth":

The family has likely heard this before.

This specific term, "but its the truth" has likely been heard by them before, by the author herself, in making arguments about wanting to move, while meeting resistance.

It may be that this is an expression of the author in one where she feels that she has a better handle on reality that others, particularly in the family.

I venture a guess here:  co workers of the author have heard her use this expression.

The author appears to be:

Female
Black
Adult, not teen
Known to the family
2 years college, minimum, or business school--minimum of late 20's, likely older, but not retirement age; (well below, active)
History of moving around, dissatisfaction
has lived in other towns
is not a racist hating blacks,
may have history of civil rights interest,
financial struggles leading her to seek to capitalize on the current racial tensions in our country
Up on current events
*Has a strong connection to the family
Computer history searches similar interests

Sexuality Statistic:   Since there is no threat, no 'concealed identity' is indicated. It should be explored, as all statistical indicators should be, however, even with no threat to the family.

The author cares for this family but is seeking attention by a 'fake hate' letter.  The author is not a "racist" in that the author does not hate black people.

Location Statistic:  the one who found it, statistically, could be the writer.

The writer does not hate black people, therefore, what is the motive?

It appears that the writer, who is either black, or is white, but does not hate blacks, wishes to capitalize on the current racial environment.

The author seeks recognition and may be looking to capitalize not only for fame's sake, but financially.

While masquerading as a racist, she struggles to even use the vile, hateful language needed to persuade us.

We all give ourselves away in our speech.

This writer holds no contempt for black people, but is likely fame seeking, selfish, and uncaring about what impact this may have upon others who may be victims of racism.

This is often the case of "fake hate":

The false rape claims, for example, hurt actual victims, just as fake racism claims will make the public more skeptical of such claims in the future.

I would also look for someone who may have attempted to "game the system" in other ways, as well as one who may have lost her job recently, felt under appreciated and certainly, under-paid.

The author thinks she knows how to get attention, so she may have experience in media and is young enough to risk this, while old enough to know what the current racial climate in America has become.

It comes on the heels of Baltimore riots, which not only suggests awareness, but that the author has timed it as such.  She is aware of current events and may have even:

commented on cases in which money was raised;

Opened a "go fund me" type account, or her computer will show searches upon such accounts, including pay pal, and others.

May have had a search history on racial discrimination.

May be one who is a proponent or advocator for black or civil rights. The author is not anti-black people exposing herself in an attempt to sound anti-black.  This suggests some connection with being proud of her race.  She may have joined societies or social media groups or celebrated black history, or has black idols she looks up to.  She does not hate black people.

Those close to the author will likely affirm that she is not a racist, but will likely, with lengthy interviews, reveal how selfish she can be, unless, of course, they agreed to this before hand.  In this case, it will be neighbors, friends, or co-workers who will begin with, "I never would have thought she would do something like this!" initially, but upon further reflection (time to process), the same people will say how they saw elements of real selfishness and ambition that went "too far" within her.

I think she may have "gamed the system" or knows those who have, including the welfare system, or any other fraudulent claim, including "falling", or being "harassed" and so on.

When exposed, the family will affirm that they know who she is.

This is not a racist threat against anyone; therefore, it is "Fake Hate."

As to the actual identity, it may be the woman who not only found the note, but who has spoken to the press, or someone she knows and may have put up to this.  If it is the woman, herself, the motive is not mental illness.

This is seen in the lack of self-loathing. The author does not hate black people.

If it is someone she put up to doing this, who partnered, the person who wrote it for her does not hate black people.

Computer history will help uncover the details leading up to this deceptive letter.

While examining motive, mental illness is evidenced often by self loathing. Its absence (there are no angry words in the statement) often leads to examining financial gain, even through fame.

The procedure is to :

Post on social media;

Make contact with local media

Seek national media and exposure.

Investigators should seek to learn, specifically, if the author is behind on her mortgage or rent, in Lindenhurst, or is having other financial difficulties, including recent loss of income, decrease of income, being passed over for a promotion, etc.  They should also seek to learn if the author has recently seen someone close to her "come into" money in any way, possibly provoking envy.

The use of the statistic of race indicates an understanding of computers and research, which is why the author's search history will yield much information.


Regarding self loathing:  This is not to say that the author does not have a history of depression, anxiety, or social phobias, etc.  It is to say that mental health, as seen in self-loathing, is not the motive for the letter.

One can be so  delusional that it becomes obvious that the anonymous letter was written from a very disturbed mind.

This is not an example of such.

This writer is self-contained.  She may have issues of 'not belonging' or social isolation, but it is not the reason for writing the letter, nor is the reason for writing to scare anyone, or exhibit hate.



UPDATE:

The family has made several statements that I have added here:

"Copes' mother chalked the racist letter up to ignorance.

"Sometimes you have a preconceived idea of how a person is just because you don't know them, you don't know how they live, you don't know what they believe," Darcell Copes told CNN affiliate WABC.

"I would just like to say that I'll continue to pray for you, and you need to get out and meet people."


Please note:  "you need to get out and meet people" is spoken to the author of the note, letting us know that the subject believes that the author of the note may not be "out" among the community and may not feel as if the author "belongs" in the community.  

Ronica Copes said the family isn't moving.

"You don't have a right to force us to go anywhere," she told WPIX. "And we have every right to stay.


Please note that the anonymous letter does not use the words the subject used, including "force", or "right."

Also note that the anonymous letter has no demanding, or even strong language suggesting that the family is "forced" to move.  
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/05/25/us/long-island-racist-letter/

.........................


The anger was there, the hurt was there,” husband Darcell Copes told WABC, and then, of course, fear.”


Please note the order, as order speaks to priority:

1.  anger
2.  hurt
3.  fear

"Fear" is last, yet "fear" is given the unnecessary words, "of course" which means to accept without questioning. 

The letter has no forceful nor angry language, and in Statement Analysis, we do not accept anything unless the subject tells us, "I am afraid."

Note next the past tense:  "anger was there", and "hurt was there", which is not present tense (this just happened) yet when it comes to fear, the subject avoids telling us "I am afraid" or even "I was afraid", instead using passive voice. 

This is not a verbal commitment to anger, hurt, nor fear.   This is to distance himself from these emotions.  


http://gawker.com/you-dont-belong-here-black-long-island-family-receiv-1706574454

..........................

Darcell Copes lives in the home with her three grown children and five young grandchildren. 


"I went from being fearful, protecting my family, to being totally confused, and wanted to know who and why," she told NBC 4 New York Friday. "Today, it becomes even deeper: is it someone in the school district, is it the guy at the corner store, is it my neighbor down the street? Where?"

This particular family member also references fear in the past tense.  Is he no longer afraid for his family?


Note the move or shift in language from "who" to locations: 

"School district"
"corner store"
"down the street" 

Then, he asks, "Where?" 

Readership Analysis: Racist Note Left for Homeowner

Well Ronica Copes certainly has lived in many places in America in her 37 years.  



IS This a Genuine Racist Threat?
 
pollcode.com free polls
The poll question is repaired.  The readers' analysis thus far concludes "FAKE HATE"; that the writer is the one who found the letter.

There is a statistical connection between those who find an anonymous letter and authorship.

Thus far, readers have been doing a "group analysis" and consistently citing principle.  Today will be the final day to submit your own analysis, on any given point of the letter.

In anonymous letter work, we have a context, which is racial hatred.  Therefore, we are able to set up Analysis Questions and "The Expected", that is, what we expect to hear.

I.  Analysis Questions

II.  The Expected versus The Unexpected 

I.  Analysis Questions.

1.  Is the family under threat?
2.  Who is the author?

These are the two most important questions.  I listed questions previously that readers should seek to answer.  This parallels the "Expected versus the Unexpected" in Statement Analysis.

As you work you way down, you ask yourself, "Who wrote this word?" seeking to learn:
male or female, young or old, black or white, educated or non-educated, etc.  You may change your mind repeatedly before you feel you have a conclusion.

This is a compilation of analysis comments by readers. I have added in some guide points.

 I ask that it continue and I will add them in for a final "Readership Analysis"

II.  The Expected

In Statement Analysis, we set up the "expected"; that is, what we would expect to hear from a racist note.  This can be listed as questions.  When what we "expect" to find is not found, we then are confronted with words that were not expected.  This is how deception is uncovered.

Let's look at what readers' comments have been regarding "The Expected Versus The Unexpected" here:

Readers have done some interesting work on the note with more thinking it is FAKE HATE than not, with most believing:

Once the identity of the writer is known, it will be someone that is known to the family.

Readers have pointed out:

1.  The Racist Note contains no threat.  This is not expected.
2.  The Racist Note contains no racist hate language.  This is not expected.
3.  The Racist Note is polite, using "please" and "sorry"; this is not expected.
4.  The Racist Note has no urgency.  This is not expected.

The Racist note also uses "African American" which readers pointed out:

is "politically correct" often used by non-black to avoid any offense, and is also used by African-Americans when speaking or writing publicly.

Meaning...it could be written by a black person wishing to conceal her  racial identity.

5.  Soft language:  not expected.

"YOU DON'T BELONG HERE" speaks to the sense of community; that is, "belonging" and is not "you have no right to be here", which is where racial taunts are expected.  To "belong" is, in deed, more emotional, having to do with contentment.  This contains no threatening language and indicates that the writer is dealing with an emotion of belonging, rather than any problems with the family.

This is not expected.

6.  There is no cursing.  A racist who is going to leave a letter for a family is not likely to be someone of a higher education and will likely express anger in foul language.  The polite tone is unexpected as is the absence of racial taunts, threats, and cursing.

7.  Racial breakdown pointed out is not expected in a mathematical percentage.  The breakdown is about "LINDENHURST IS 84% WHITE POPULATION" and not the smaller amount of black or African American families.

The writer may not like living where there is such a large white population. The writer does not focus upon what the other races are that live there.

Readers pointed out that the percentage sounded more like a quick perusal of online records than any representation of the community.

8. The pronoun, "US" is not expected.

"IT WILL BE BETTER FOR ALL OF US", uses the pronoun "us", linking the writer of the note to the family.  "US" shows unity, similar to "we" in Statement Analysis.

The use of "us" shows concern for both parties:  the citizens and the family.   Would a racist express concern for the family?

Commentators seemed to understand that the opening sentence after the directive strongly suggests the writer is one person.  It indicates an attempt to persuade that this is coming from a "community", but fails to make the black family into a plural situation:  "attention African American families in Lindenhurst", instead, the entire "community" is writing to just one family?  This suggests that the writer is one person seeking to sound like more than one.

9.  Article "THE"

Readers recognized the unusual use of the word "the" in the note referring to the town.

"Find the town where there are more people like you" in all caps, is not "find a town..." but speaks to a specific town.  It is important to ask if this family has lived somewhere else where they may have been more comfortable, in attempting to rule out a family member writing this.  We learn that the family is reported to have moved around a great deal, particularly the list showing towns that have much different racial population numbers.

10.  "Sorry if this is rude" was pointed out that this is polite, and female sounding.

11.  Inconvenience.   The writer of the letter does not want to inconvenience the family but wants them to move "when they can"; that is, when it is more convenient for them.

Did you notice that the impetus of moving is upon the family; "when you can", and not upon the writer saying "MOVE OUT NOW!" because the racist does not want them to stay any longer.

The writer does not demand any date or even any rush.  The writer puts the onus of moving upon the family.  This is not expected.

12.  Statement Analysis deals with what is said; Statement Analysis also deals with what one has not said.

The writer uses no racial slurs; this is not expected.

Racists are not known for their sensitivities.  This one is concerned about the family feeling insulted and does not want them to feel rushed, either.

The writer uses "ATTN", with the proper abbreviation, colon, and double space at least, which shows understanding of how a business letter might be written.  This suggests some level of education and/or business/writing experience.  It is not likely a teen.

Questions for Readers:

What other points do you wish to add to your analysis?

Have I missed any important comments?  If so, please put them in the comments section here.  For now, avoid OT issues in this post.

I will add in the comments of readers to a new analysis.  Today is the last day to submit analysis for the new posting.

The subject may have moved around a great deal.  Does this strengthen or weaken the assertion about the use of the article, "the" regarding the town?  The writer did not suggest to find "A Town" but it was "THE TOWN" where one could "belong", and not flee for safety.

Please note that this information is outside of the letter, itself, and is not verified.

Davenport Ave, Lindenhurst.
258 Westview Avenue Deer Park NY  11729 
View & Remove
Henrico VA  23233 
View & Remove
96 Birch Rd Amityville NY  11701 
View & Remove
258 Westview Ave Deer Park NY  11729 
View & Remove
291 Plantation Centre Dr N Apt 805 Macon GA  31210 
View & Remove
475 New Hwy Copiague NY  11726 
View & Remove
6300 Wilson Mills Rd Cleveland OH  44143 
View & Remove
185 Davenport St Lindenhurst NY  11757 
View & Remove
16015 Euclid Ave Apt 203 Cleveland OH  44112 
View & Remove
37 Overland Ave Amityville NY  11701 
View & Remove
711 E 99th St Cleveland OH  44108 
View & Remove
155 Parkside Ct Copiague NY  11726 
View & Remove
16 Grant Ave Amityville NY  11701 
View & Remove
291 Plantation Centre Dr N # 8 Macon GA  31210 
View & Remove
42 Nathalie Ave Amityville NY  11701 
View & Remove
16 W 16th St Deer Park NY  11729 
View & Remove
16015 Euclid Ave Cleveland OH  44112 
View & Remove
New Highway Copiague NY  11726 
View & Remove
Nathalie Avenue Amityville NY  11701 
View & Remove
Cleveland OH  44112 
View & Remove
Cleveland OH  
View & Remove
Amityville NY  11701 
View & Remove
Farmingdale NY  11735 
View & Remove
Amityville NY  
View & Remove
Parkside Court Copiague NY  11726 
View & Remove
OH  
View & Remove
Deer Park NY  11729 
View & Remove
E 99th Street Cleveland OH  44108 
View & Remove
Macon GA  31210 
View & Remove
Macon GA  
View & Remove
96 Birch Road Amityville NY  11701 
View & Remove
Copiague NY  11726 

Sunday, May 24, 2015

Statement Analysis of Racist Long Island Letter

Is This a Genuine Racist Threat?


pollcode.com free polls
Before voting, please read the rest of the article, and seek to answer the questions.  



The following anonymous note was left for a resident in Lindenhurst, Long Island.



“ATTN: AFRICAN-AMERICAN FAMILY

THIS IS COMING FROM LINDENHURST COMMUNITY.

LINDENHURST IS 84% WHITE POPULATION. 

YOU DON’T BELONG HERE!!! 

PLEASE LEAVE LINDENHURST AS SOON AS YOU CAN. 



IT WILL BE BETTER FOR ALL OF US.

FIND THE TOWN WHERE THERE ARE MORE PEOPLE 

LIKE YOU,

SORRY IF THIS IS RUDE, BUT IT’S THE TRUTH.”

Anonymous profiling begins with Analytical Questions.


A word about our at home Statement Analysis Advanced Techniques course:

The Advanced course is almost ready for shipping. It includes Analytical Interviewing and Report Writing.  It also includes profiling and anonymous work.

We will be offering the course for sale but not to those who are not trained.  This is for a multitude of reasons, but here is the most pressing:  

The course covers advanced principles of Statement Analysis, including anonymous threat work, and profiling, itself.  

Profiling is a very powerful tool in Statement Analysis but it is also very difficult work.  Many good analysts have memorized principle and can discern truth from deception and have had successes in their careers, yet...

something is lacking. 

The lack is predominant:  too many good analysts do not understand the psychology behind the principle.  They do not understand why "such and such" is sensitive.  They know that it is, and they flag it accordingly, but without the understanding, they cannot move on to the deeper elements of analysis.  They should understand it so well that they could explain it's basics appropriately to a 12 year old.  

The example I use in seminars is the "narrative" example:

I instruct them early in the seminar to please memorize the following:  "The queen died.  After, the king died."

It is two sentences and there are a total of 7 words to memorize. This means the brain has to store just these 7 words for recall at the end of Day Two.    

7 words. 

It is not likely that given the large volume of technical and challenging information that at the end of the 2nd day, should I ask, "What was the first thing I asked you to commit to memory?" that many will be able to answer it correctly.  Having done this in various small groups, nonchalantly, lets me avoid doing it in the formal setting.  I therefore, 'move on' to getting to the point.  

 I ask them to memorize the following:  

"The queen died.  The king died shortly after, from a broken heart."

This is also 2 sentences, but instead of 7 words to memorize, it is 12 words, a significant increase for the brain to remember. 

"Which do you think attendees will remember, in greater percentage, the longer or shorter?" 

 Or, should I asked, 

"Which do you think attendees will remember in greater percentage, the shorter or the longer?"

Long term readers would have seen the embedded answer in the first question, which is key to Analytical Interviewing:  Avoid teaching subjects how to lie in your questions.  

(This is why the Interviewer does 20% or less of the total speaking, while the subject does 80% or more.  )

The attendees do not need this as an actual exercise.  They recognize that the latter had an emotional attachment to the words.  *(Do you recall the number one impact that causes change of language in analysis?)

Gifted teachers know how to use the narrative to effectively instruct. Many do this naturally, through story telling.   They know what helps memory, and they can anticipate where their students will have questions, and often answer them before hand.  They often build 3 building blocks on top of each other, then, back down to 2, reaffirm the 2, add the 3rd and then place the 4th in place, with students' comfort level stretched, but not broken.  

Gifted teachers are precious and rare. 

There are many analysts who are brilliant analysts, but not necessarily gifted teachers. 

There are brilliant guitarists, but the talent does not necessarily mean that they are gifted teachers.  
There are brilliant mathematicians who are utterly incapable of breaking down the material in easy to follow steps. 

When I teach Statement Analysis, I emphasize the psychological reality behind the principle.  I get the attendee to understand why the subject included, for example, something that appears to be unnecessary.  This creates an emotional connection to the memorization of principle:  they understand.  

Without understanding what impacts language, the analyst, through memorization of principle, will still have solid success, but is not able to move into anonymous work, or profiling.  

In the Advanced Course, the analyst will learn profiling and there is nothing that will discredit our work than error in profiling.  

For law enforcement, it will erode confidence in all Statement Analysis, and in employment hiring, it can lead to missing out on the best and brightest, (which impact is difficult to gauge) but could lead to hiring the very individuals you sought to avoid, bringing not only skepticism to the company, but the importation of trouble, including promoting those who's specific profile showed the elements of a bully.  

This work cannot be done by memorization of principle alone.  There must be understanding.  

But there is so much more...

It is best done over the course of many hours, with multiple analysts, it must have both genders, and it is, perhaps, the most politically incorrect and offensive exercise imaginable.  

To simply state that men and women just might speak differently raises anger in the hyper sensitive.  Try moving on to even more sensitive areas and it is a recipe for disaster. 

So not only is profiling to learn the identity of the writer something fraught with enough challenges to scare even experienced analysts away, we now have the added pressure of all forms of "phobia" to label the truth seeker with.  

On the other hand (if I can find a free hand that does not have to juggle incessantly, everyone's 'feelings' (jazz hands, jazz hands here, don't give me that paternal and scary hand clapping here!), identifying the identity of the writer is powerfully rewarding. 

It is exhilarating.  

It also means that the appropriate level of safety is afforded to the recipient of the threat.  

Here is the anonymous letter.  

My assertion is this:  The author is giving us insight into his or her identity by the words chosen, even if aided by a computer's spell checker or grammar correction.  

It is true that a hand written letter is more revelatory, but we work with what we have. 

Anonymous Letter Threats begin with Analyst Questions.  The two first questions are the most obvious:  

1.  Is this a legitimate threat against the family?  (poll question) 

2.  Who is the author of the letter?

If the analyst is able to answer question number one, alone, it is of great value. 

Objection:  "Every threat should be considered dangerous; better safe than sorry."

Answer:  Agreed, yet resources can give a different response, in reality.  

For instance, some threats are of such a nature as to have law enforcement  immediate remove the  family while analysis continues.  Other threats, while not publicly admitting such, will not require law enforcement to move limited resources from one threat to another.  Many departments are forced to make decisions, every day, based upon overall need.  This is similar to a medical professional triaging what patients are seen first and which ones can be delayed.  

Other questions should be answered based upon the context and will help you answer the overall, main question:  

3.  Is the writer a racist?  

4.  Is the writer male or female?  (this presupposes that we might know the gender of an individual)

5.  Does the writer intend personal harm?

6.  Has the writer acted alone, or in concert with others?

7.  Is the writer young or old?

8.  What level of education does the writer display?

9.  Is the writer white?   Is the writer black?

10.  Does the writer know the family?

11.  Does the writer know the geographical location?  

12. To whom has the author written to?  In other words, is the intended audience the recipient, or someone else?

13.  Is there 'scripting' evident?  This is related to question 12.  

14.  What has the writer revealed about himself or herself, in general terms?

15.  Is there regionalism involved?

16.  HERE is a very important question for you to consider and one that will make for interesting discussion:

When the writer's identity is finally known, will the family KNOW the person?

By using this guide, take one or more of the questions above, specific to principle and language, and answer it in the comments section.  This may help you answer the poll question.  

There is much more to be done, and this is best done through intensive training.