Friday, April 12, 2013

Behavioral and Statement Analysis of Missing Children Cases

Held her own press conference to boost her image 

If we can even enter into, with our imagination, our little one missing, we would care about nothing, including what others think about us, and would be consumed with what the child may be going through.

We picture what we would do and what we would say.  If it is helpful, write it out in a list.  We do this as an exercise in training investigators.

This is the "expected."

Statement Analysis deals with the "unexpected."

If your child was missing, the expectation is:

1.  You react swiftly.  
2.  You do anything asked of you
3.  You are not satisfied with police while your child is not found
4.  You don't care what anyone says about you; you only care about what your child is going through.
5.  You tell the truth
6.  You pester police.   You wake up in the middle of the night, remembering some small detail that you think might help


Let's take a look at these 7 simple Expectations and compare them to cases today and how, in each case, we were confronted by the Unexpected.

1.  You react swiftly.

Like a parent who's child has wandered off at the grocery store, you will call out immediately to your missing child.

When Isabel Celis, 7, went "missing", her parents stalled police for 1 week before calling out to Isabel and attempting to address the kidnapper.
When Baby Ayla was reported "missing", her father said he was "emotionally incapable" of calling out to her and addressing her 'kidnapper.'
When Hailey Dunn went "missing", her mother, Billie Dunn, watched her favorite soap opera while Hailey's father went searching.  A few days later, she hosted a New Year's Eve party.

2.  You do anything asked of you.

Like John Walsh says, the innocent parent immediately clears himself with the polygraph, demanding it to be administered immediately.

When police say that the family is "fully cooperating", the word "fully" makes the topic of "cooperation" sensitive and is a signal that the police are not getting cooperation and are 'courting' the person.  We find this often in cases where police are attempting to get a person to polygraph.

3. Early on in the investigation, you are not satisfied with the police efforts because your child is NOT found.  When a parent begins to "thank" or even "commend" unsuccessful police, it is a signal of trying to make 'nice-nice' when there is no reason to thank them.  This is, in context, early on, when the frustration of the innocent parent is through the roof.  Of course, later on, as sadness and acceptance begin its ugly descent, there is almost a fatalistic thanking of police and searchers, especially as hope fades.

If your child was missing and you are now at the 48 hour mark, you would be angry, frustrated and close to passing out with dissatisfaction and rage.  You would not be attempting to make yourself sound good in the media.

Abusive and neglectful parents have an innate need to persuade others that they are good parents.  It is a signal that they are not.  This is why "I love you" and terms of endearment, found in statements, often indicate a bad relationship.

All parents say "I love you" to their children at night.  It is the need of a parent to have to say this, publicly, or in a police statement, that stands out as a need.  Few feel the need to write it because it is so common.  When it shows up, it must be noted.

4.  You don't care what anyone says about you.  You only care for what your child is going through. 

People like Billie Dunn and Justin DiPietro love to talk about what they are going through, but not about what the child is going through because it is not a concern:  there is no connection in the brain because it did not happen.

Justin did not say "I hope she has her blankie..." or something like that, and BJD...well, when a private investigator said, "I'm hear to find your child" she handed him a list of people she wanted to smear into silence.  They love to have sympathy for themselves, but barely anything about the child.  Innocent parents are torn apart, internally, by the worst feeling of impotency imaginable.

Consider, mothers, the following:

the child cries, you soothe her;
the child is hungry, you nurse her;
the child is cold, you warm her;
the child is afraid, and calls, "Ma ma!" and you enter the room and bring instant comfort, yet now, all of the sudden,

the child needs you, dear mother, more than ever before, and you are utterly and exhaustively impotent because you cannot find her!  What must the frustration be like for the innocent parent!  This is too painful to entertain such thoughts!  I cannot imagine not being able to answer one of my children's cries, it hurts too much to consider.

Early in the case:  When a mother can talk more bout what she, herself is going through, rather than what the child is going through, it is a red flag.  Can you even imagine going on national television while your child is missing and mentioning your tooth ache?  This was the first indication that there was drug abuse.  It is important for Statement Analysis.

A toothache while a child is missing is like the price of tea in China:  something irrelevant.  In Statement Analysis, any information that appears utterly unimportant is to be considered very important.  We often say "this word is unnecessary therefore, it is doubly important to the analyst."

To you and me the mentioning of a toothache while our child is missing seems so irrelevant, but to the mother, it is her "blue marble" slipping out of the cabinet, as she thinks about going out and buying drugs.  Her toothache was not only very important to her, but to the case:  narcotics played a role in the death of Hailey Dunn, one way or another.

For Billie Dunn, there is not only the threatening of others, it is done by her followers. What does this tell you?  Justin DiPietro supporters have done the same.  What does it tell you?

It tells us that they know.

It tells us that they know Billie Dunn needs lying and smearing issues into silence.
It tells us that they know Justin DiPietro is involved and that they cannot answer the allegation, so they seek to silence the critic.

They know that their 'hero' is guilty and are willing to behave inappropriately to protect.

Insults, taunts and threats, rather than answering the evidence, is a sign of not only weakness, but knowledge.  It is an admission of the subject's guilt.

The innocent parent cares only for what the missing child is going through and does not care what anyone says or thinks.

5.  You tell the truth

The innocent parent tells the truth, takes and passes the polygraph and doesn't care if someone doesn't believe her.  "I didn't cause her disapperance. I told the truth", which, when said, puts doubts to rest.  Even journalists can hear the confidence in these words, given so plainly and without any attempt to persuade. There may be some embarrassing chapters of your life about to come out, including drug use, divorce, custody battle, accusations, and so on, but they all fade away in the worry for the child, herself. Nothing else matters and you tell the truth.  You interview truthfully and you pass the polygraph.  You don't "smoke" the polygraph, you passed it because you told the truth.

Justin DiPietro was courted into taking the polygraph and promptly failed it, as did his sister, Elisha DiPietro, in the disappearance of his daughter, Ayla Reynolds.

Mark Redwine said, "we're gonna take the polygraph" while standing alone.  He would not take the polygraph, and blamed the polygrapher.  He has done whatever he could to hinder the recovery of Dylan.  See analysis by searching here on "Dylan Redwine", the 13 year old boy who met his fate at the hands of his lying perverted father.
Would not polygraph for Dylan 

6. You pester police.  

This means lots of calls to police when you think of this, or that, and don't even care if you insult friends you now suspect:  all you care about is your missing child.

Here are some signals of guilt:

"I told police everything I know."

Police report trouble getting in contact with parent.  Parent changes phone, address, doesn't return calls, etc)

Parent demands lawyer present.  (I don't care what attorneys on NG say.  See Josh Duckett)

Parent makes demands over interview details  (John and Patsy Ramsey)

Parent demands interview with other parent present (Deborah Bradley)

Innocent parents make a nuisance of themselves by constantly remembering this or that, in the middle of the night, which might help find their child.  Guilty people want the flow of information to stop:

"That's all I know."
"That's all I can say"
"I've done everything I can to help" (showing limitation).  Early in the investigation:  The innocent parent has not done "everything" as long as there is no success in finding the child.

"I have no idea what happened to her" is another.  The parent has lots of ideas, with an imagination that Stephen King says is brutal as a parent conjures up things to worry about with their kids, far more than he could ever do on his best novel.

The innocent parent, early in the investigation, will not say that he has told "everything."  Why?  Because while the child is still missing, the parent has hope that something will be remembered that will help. This is the natural hope.

Mark Redwine, Melinda Duckett, Baby Sabrina's parents, Billie Dunn, Shawn Adkins, Deborah Bradley, Sergio and Becky Celis, and so many others, all have these "unexpected" behaviors and words, in common.

John Walsh, Elaine Redwine, Desiree Young, Kaine Horman, Clint Dunn, Josh Duckett, and others, all have consistent behavior and wording in their cases.

We set up our expectation by attempting to put ourselves in the shoes of those in these situations.

In Statement Analysis, we are confronted by the Unexpected.


8 comments:

Skeptical said...

I have a question. Does it make a difference if a person says I'm innocent or I'm not guilty? In reading "Defending Jacob" by William Landay, a former district attorney, he said that a jury can only say that a person is not guilty. It cannot say they are innocent. Does this nuance of language show up in Statement Analysis?

(Two cases came immediately to mind.

1. Casey Anthony was declared not guilty. The jury did not say she was innocent.
2. One of the books premises is the "warrior gene". Some people may be genetically predisposed to kill. Jodie Arias came to mind.)

Coughing said...

Hey, good question, Skeptical. I think I'm not guilty is unreliable because guilty is an emotion or a state of being rather than a report of whether or not you did something, not a verb. One could commit murders, say in the name of a cause, and truly believe they are not guilty. They also may feel they are right and justified, not guilty. I think 'I'm innocent' is unreliable to. They both refer to how you View your actions rather than whether or not you actually physically did something.
Really good question, looking forward to Peter's response.

JerseyJane said...

Here is an example of Billie Dunn's followers making excuses for Billie's "WAYS" as Peter listed above....

2 earrings accounted forApril 10, 2013 at 9:02 AM
yes jersey, it was comments like yours that caused BD to go beyond the answer "no" and explain further. comments like yours is why she feels she needs to point out that she is a good mom.

I GUESS WE ALL ARE SUPPOSED TO ABSORB BILLIE'S GUILT AND BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE THAT WOE-IS-ME-BILLIE-MOMMY-DEAREST FORGOT TO TRY TO LOOK FOR HER DAUGHTER, HAILEY.

Red Ryder said...

Hi Skeptical! Neither "i'm innocent " nor "I'm not guilty" are reliable denials as they do not meet the 3 criteria of first person, present tense and event specific e.g. "i did not steal the company car." I'm not sure if that's what you were getting at but there you go:) Also, a person could say they were innocent even while on trial as legally they are until found liable.

Lemon said...

Red Ryder-
er, I think you meant "past tense"? :)

Hobnob said...

Hi Skeptical.

Anything the subject says is worthy of analysis, they are telling us what is on the forefront of their mind at that moment.

Often we see the subject saying i'm innocent of all these charges, i'm not guilty of doing what they said.

They are technically speaking the truth but not for the reason we think or rather they want us to think.

Until they are found guilty in a court of law, they are technically innocent of said charges.
What we look for is the first person, past tense , event specific denial. I didn't/did not do whatever is alleged.

If they can't say it, i can't say it for them.
Another ppopular claim is my lawyers have advised to say nothing, i will have my say in court, the police have advised not to talk or any other version of delaying the reliable denial.

Innocent people will shout their innocence from the roof tops, they have no fear of retribution, they did nothing and will lose nothing by declaring their innocence. Their innocence will have no comeback on them.

Guilty people however don't want to answer the allegations, they won't or can't make a reliable denial, they say nothing because their lawyers know the truth and want to stop anything incriminating or bad to come out. Depending on the crime, other victims may come forward or witnesses may say hang on, i know different.

A recent case here in the UK was stuart hall was facing child sex charges, he did the whole i'm innocent, they are lying etc blurb. The media said he was vehemently denying it, i was saying no he isn't he's guilty as charged. Come the trial he admiited the victims were right and he was guilty. Since then they left one rape charge on file and he now faces further rape charges. The same with jimmy saville, no strong denial and blaming the victim and now we know he was a paedophile and rapist. Max clifford has also gone down the i'm innocent road, he too is guilty or will be found guilty.

With the mccanns we have them telling us Maddie is dead with kate saying all togeather, if Maddie was alive they couldn't all be togeather, kate talking about a murder not an abduction , gerry talking about the night we found her and their involvement in her death ( not disappearance then?) listen to what they say not, what you think they are saying. it can be a huge difference :)

Anonymous said...

What does it denote of parents and extended family when they absolutely refuse to address the public through media and only use members of their family ie aunt, cousin. There is a missing child in the area I live in. His parents and grandparents ( the maternal grandmother was the last to see her 2 yr old grandson). Theynonly allow msgs of their gratitude toward the volunteer sesrchers and authorities through facebook post on different pages. This behavior has caused extreme back lash from the community at large. The general consensus is they ( mom and grandmother) know more than they are telling.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous @ 10:15PM , it has been over 2 years since anyone commented on this page. I know you are speaking of little Noah; my advice would be to ask your question on Peter's latest blog--the one he wrote today. It is more likely to be seen there.