In the ongoing investigation into the disappearance of Ayla Reynolds, police said that they do not want psychics to even call anymore.
This tells us something important:
It tells us that they have been forced to waste valuable resources following up the deceptive tips from the fakes who claim 'psychic' power, yet fear not following up every tip due to media scrutiny. This is often the case with law enforcement: Rather than simply take the call and throw the notes in the trash, they do not want people claiming to have psychic power to even call them.
Psychics are deceivers and those who say "I work pro bono for law enforcement" take their deception even further, attempting to convince others that they actually "work" for law enforcement, giving themselves credibility. The need for such underlies the deceptive nature of claiming to access information outside the human senses.
Q. Are all psychics liars?
Their language does not come from memory, and shows the intent to deceive, no different than any other liar.
Q. Objection: sometimes they are right!
A. Even a broken clock is right twice a day. People even win the lottery sometimes.
As covered previously, parents, for example, are plagued with thousands of worrisome thoughts over their children each day. Once in a while, the odds hit, and something happens and the parent thinks that they had a 'psychic' experience. Not so. Of their thousands of negative thoughts, one passed when the child experienced an accident. 999 thoughts passed without an accident.
As reported previously, in all the well known missing persons cases, thousands of people claiming to be 'special' or 'intuitive' or 'psychic' have weighed in on these cases and have not found a single missing person.
Q. Objection: They get their own TV shows!
A. So does an obese bratty child guzzle sugar for breakfast. It is part of the dumbing down of America.
Enough on psychics. If you believe in psychic power, you need not read Statement Analysis, which is based upon principle. Statement Analysis concludes that those who make psychic claims are deceptive. The science and the claims do not agree. I would not invest my time with a system that was 50% successful and 50% failure. With success rates lower than the odds of winning a national lottery, there are better ways to waste time than giving a deceptive and narcissistic person a listen. This is at best. At worst, is the broken hearted and vulnerable parent falling prey to the deception. Statement Analysis is to get to the truth via principle, while 'psychics' are for the Elvis sightings. It has no place in science, nor in the quest to obtain justice for a murdered child.
Regarding the meeting police had with the DiPietros in November, this can be viewed as an olive branch of sorts, allowing for them to come 'clean' about what happened, that is, so that they can say something accidental happened that night. It reveals weakness on the part of either police, or prosecutors, just as the passage of time reveals weakness.
The DNA found may or may not be blood, police said yesterday, but it belongs to Ayla, which means it would have been in liquid form (stain) which leaves the same conclusion that Ayla is dead. The DiPietros and their attorney can talk about "hope" as a defense technique, but it does not change reality.
By having a "frank" talk, police are actually showing the standstill caused by the three "withholding information" that did not "pass the straight face test" when originally made.
The circumstantial evidence against DiPietro remains strong, yet by reaching out to him, they may signal a willingness to allow him to make a deal.
The issue of three liars all keeping to the same story makes prosecution difficult, but it is not impossible. They are attendant charges that could be brought and this may be where the police investigators are in frustration with the prosecutors:
Police say, 'we have brought you enough to prosecute, so let's go!' whereas prosecutors say, 'we want more, and get one of the three to crack.'
This has not happened.
As far as public information goes, it appears that the two women present (and deceptively withholding information about a child's demise) continue to have custody of their own children. It is not known why Ayla's mother has not followed through with her threatened lawsuit.
This is beyond imagination.
The public is steadily losing confidence in Maine law enforcement and ability to solve crimes, and this may put investigators squarely against lawyers (prosecutors) when it comes to casting blame.
Comments show a deep frustration and this past fall when crime rate solving was posted for the State, the public frustration was justified.
From what we know about the case, including the failed polygraphs, DNA (or blood) evidence in the basement, the implausible story, the life insurance policy and the history of violence, it is difficult to imagine why arrests were not effected last year.
The lack of confidence in the police statement is evident.
Police Spokesman Steve McCausland:
Note the change from "frank" to "very frank"; as well as "frank conversation" to "very frank in the information we shared with them"; not "frank" nor "very frank" in the information the DiPietros gave to police.
This does not bode well for those hoping for justice for Ayla Reynolds.
This may have spoken to the DiPietros that their stonewalling of "withholding information" is a successful tactic. The DiPietro's attorney's statement about "hope" that Ayla is alive also highlights the failure of the case as police have told the public that Ayla is dead having met foul play in the home.
Maine residents have not forgotten Ayla.
Trista Reynolds could consider a "wrongful death" civil lawsuit (there are other suits she could bring, including those involving child abuse) which could, a la the Goldmans against OJ, bring some answers. When the OJ jury decided to acquit the killer because of the pigment of his skin, the Goldmans did not give up.
Perhaps Trista Reynolds, in her own time of healing, should consider contacting Ron Goldman's family to seek advice.
Ayla deserves this much.
Who is to blame, police or prosecutors?
Here is another statement by McCausland:
“The investigation is not going to close until we get the answers necessary. The big answer is, where is Ayla?
We will work as long as it takes to get the answer to that question,”
The investigation goes on until they get the "answers", not find Ayla.
This is a critical difference and does show the commitment by police in the investigation, more than the search.
McCausland said. “We will never close this case until we get the answers. It will take as long as it takes to get those answers. We have a committed team. They’re in it for the long haul. We’re in it for Ayla.
Again, for police, it is about getting answers; that is, solving the case, and not finding Ayla. Finding Ayla is only a part of closing the case.
It may be that police believe that they do have enough for trial, but that prosecutors feel otherwise.