Tuesday, April 23, 2013

Hailey Dunn Case: Deception On Nancy Grace Show



This is the second appearance of Hailey Dunn's mother, Billie Dunn, on The Nancy Grace Show.  
This aired live on January 4, 2011.  Statement analysis is in bold type.  Complete transcripts are at cnn.com/transcripts.   January 4, 2011 was a Tuesday.  

On Monday, January 3, 2011, we learned the two most important points of the case:

1.  Hailey is dead
2.  The mother needs an alibi

This came from only two questions:

1.  Nancy Grace:  How far did she have to go to the sleep over?
     Dunn:  "Four or five blocks.  It wasn't usual for Hailey to...she wasn't allowed to..."

Repeatedly, the mother of the missing child referenced Hailey in the past tense, indicating knowledge of death.   Statement analysis following quotes is in bold type. 

2.  Nancy Grace:  "Miss Dunn, tell me what happened?
     Dunn:   "She went missing while I was at work"

By asking "what happened?", she asked a legally sound, open-ended question.  This allows the subject to choose what is most important to her via priority.  

The answer:  "She went missing while I was at work" is the first thing she mentions:  it answers the question, "When did she go missing?" rather than "What happened?" and it is important that everyone know that the mother, was at work.  That this is the first sentence shows it is her priority:  keep her out of the spotlight.  Later the mother would say, "It is important for people to remember not to slander me..."


GRACE: OK, you want to talk about the boyfriend. First, out to Billie Dunn. This is Hailey`s mother joining us tonight live from Colorado City, Texas. She`s there at the home. Ms. Dunn, thank you for being with us. Let`s just address those issues right now. Let`s talk about your boyfriend.

In her first appearance, under one answer, Billie Dunn revealed, from Statement Analysis, the following:

1.  Hailey was dead; other needed an alibi.  

2.  Something in her relationship with Shawn Adkins is troubling (incomplete social introduction).   Nancy Grace appeared to pick up on this. 
3.  Billie Dunn needed to establish an alibi ("she went missing while I was at work")
4.   The story  that Dunn told is deceptive.  In order for the story to be deceptive, it has to come from her.  She has a need to build an alibi and has a need to be deceptive. 

If a person simply repeats a lie, the language will not show a lie because the language of deception is willful.  This indicates that she, Dunn herself, is telling the story. 


We also saw that the story is similar to a story on True Crime library.  This is something to remember as we progress through the appearances on The Nancy Grace Show.


We will see, as Dunn appears on show after show, an unravelling of her account as the very things flagged as deceptive in analysis, are shown to be such through various releases of information. 


The ISI (improper social introduction) indicated a problem with the relationship of Dunn and Shawn Adkins, though she did use the "my" taking ownership, via possessive pronoun.  This was not lost on Nancy Grace: 



BILLIE DUNN: OK.

GRACE: Last night, you told me he was on his way home from work, but now I`m learning he was on his way home from his mother`s home?


The police affidavit said that they had changed their accounts, which is troubling. 
Nancy Grace now feels that she has been lied to, but in fact, Dunn did not lie, by using a certain technique which allowed her to avoid internal stress of direct lying. 

Recall how Dunn used the "either/or" answer the night before, allowing for her to change her mind later.  This leads to the simple, "Why would she feel the need to leave herself an 'out' in her answer if she did not possess information, yesterday, that Adkins was not where he claimed?"  

We are allowing the mother of Hailey Dunn to guide us in revealing what happened to Hailey.  Her "either/or" answer with preparatory hedging is found here in Part One. 

BILLIE DUNN: Yes. He had been at his mother`s house all day Monday. Police have confirmed that he got home about 3:00 o`clock, and Hailey left shortly after.


Here is another example of simply adding a single word to a sentence can give a wealth of information.  

"He had been at his mother's house all day Monday" she said. 
"He had been at his mother's house Monday" would be shorter.   Dunn adds two little words "all day", introducing something that should have caught the attention of investgators:

Learning the whereabouts of Shawn Adkins during this day will lead to Hailey's body.  Note that Billie Dunn has the need to emphasize that he was there on Monday, but adding "all day" to her response.  She needed to emphasize "all day", making it sensitive and drawing our attention to the fact that he may not have been there "all" day but had gone somewhere else. 

Yet, just as she did for herself on the first night:  

She is building an alibi for Shawn Adkins.  

When you see the color blue in the SCAN technique, it represents the highest level of sensitivity possible. 
GRACE: OK. Where does he work?


She asked "where" he worked.  

BILLIE DUNN: He`s not working.


Dunn avoided the question, meaning that the location of his work is sensitive to her.  She answered in the present tense.  Hailey's body is between the triangle of the residence, his mother's home and his work address. Somewhere in driving distance of this triangle are her remains. 

GRACE: OK. Last night, didn`t you tell me he was on his way home from work, or did I just get that mistaken?


this is what a deceptive person does and it is aggravating  and NG goes after her words from last night.
BILLIE DUNN: No, I said that. He went in Monday morning, but there was an argument. He was fired or there was just a big blow-up there. He walked out. He left his job by 6:30 in the morning and went to Big Spring (ph) to his mom`s house.


1."There was an argument" is passive; not "Shawn argued with..." 

 Passivity is seen as an attempt to conceal:  here it is concealing something not known until later.  

In building his alibi, either one or both had him drive to his job, allowed himself to be seen, bought a soda, and left, without saying a word to anyone.  

This would allow investigators to pin down his location there, likely with hopes that he was seen, but not seen leaving so police could not tell when he left the office.  It is not very sophisticated but it is an attempt to establish alibi. 

2.  Note another "either/or" which allows for later change in the story.  It was either that he got "fired" or "big blow up":  this is a change of language.  First it was, passivity noted, "an argument" but now it is a "big blow up."  Without justification for the change in language, deception is indicated. 

We later learned the deception confirmed:  there was nothing.  No big blow up, no firing, just Adkins quietly leaving.   

Dunn is not speaking for Adkins, but for herself.  She is deceiving Nancy Grace, in her own answer. 

This is a critical time period for investigators.   

Note the blue "leaving" a place for the highest sensitivity.  For the subject, there is missing information that she is deliberately withholding.  


GRACE: OK. What was the blow-up about?


Nancy Grace asks about the blow up.  She has already noted the mother of a missing child has changed her story and that something related to a "stressor" took place with the boyfriend and his job.  

The coincidence of these two (job and missing child) is not lost on Grace. 

BILLIE DUNN: I don`t even know. I just know he didn`t get along with one or two of the co-workers.


Note "the" co workers is not "his co-workers" as if they have already been identified.  They have not been identified and this is indicated for deception.  

Pronouns and articles do not lie.  Pronouns and articles are instinctive.  When someone is introduced, "a" is used and then "the" is used after the introduction.  When a pronoun or article is "incorrect", we are looking at deception.  


GRACE: OK. I want to go through his story again


She knows something is wrong. 


GRACE: I want to go back to Billie Dunn. I understand police have seized yours and your boyfriend`s cell phones. Why?

BILLIE DUNN: Yes. They`re taking them to check out all the calls that were made on Monday. Hailey did have my cell phone at home and access to it. That would have been the cell phone she was on. She didn`t use Shawn`s cell phone, but they`re checking them both, getting the records off of both of those. And hopefully, we`re going to have answers from the cell phones tonight.


Note that she reports in the negative:  that her daughter did not use Shawn's phone. 

"would" be but not "was on" 

Here is what she did not say:  That when Shawn handed his phone to a police officer, he deleted things first. 


GRACE: OK. So this has nothing to do with you being under any kind of suspicion at all. This has to do with the fact that your little girl and you shared a cell phone, and they`re trying to figure out who she was calling and who was calling her, correct?

BILLIE DUNN: Correct. I left the cell phone at home while I was at work, for the kids.


Even when there is no cause to say anything but "correct", she speaks and indicates sensitivity.  She said "why" she left the phone.  The phone is sensitive.  

We later learned that pornography was found on the phones.   

GRACE: OK. What about your boyfriend? Why do they have his cell phone?

BILLIE DUNN: They have his cell phone, too. It was around probably just for 15 minutes, and she didn`t use it but they`re looking at his, also.


The phone is sensitive to her, as is her need to portray herself as a good and caring mother, wanting to be seen in the best light.  She felt the need to say why her phone was there; and here, she refers to the incident in the affidavit where the officer only had his phone for a short period of time, in which Shawn Adkins deleted photos.  This deletion, given the volume of porn, would likely have been something worse than the porn they had:  child pornography.  


GRACE: And what else did police tell you?


By this time, the relationship with police has been confrontational as Adkins refused to take a polygraph.  Police were not "sharing" information with either of them and had told Billie Dun to "just tell them" where they could find Hailey.  

BILLIE DUNN: We hear that another lady says she saw Hailey,


Note present tense and the plural "we" after being asked, specifically, what else police told her.  She was not asked what she and Adkins were "hearing":   this was the first indication that her relationship with police was not good.  At this point, Nancy Grace did not know that police demanded confessions from them. 

What did police tell you? is answered with, "we hear", which avoids the question, making the question of what police say, sensitive to her. 


her friend and a boy she didn`t recognize Monday evening -- it was already dark -- walking on the main street by a store. So they`re looking at that video surveillance, too, seeing if that story checks out, see if they can put her somewhere that evening.

I`m just told that there are a ton of tips coming in, and they`re checking out everything. And they say when they hear somebody thinks they`ve seen Hailey an hour or two away, they`re running over there, checking video surveillance at a Burger King.


Note that in continuing to avoid the question, Dunn slips into present tense language.  This is another indication that she is being deceptive to Nancy Grace.  Here we know, however, that police were not sharing information with her and Adkins but insisting that Dunn tell them what they need to know. 

Dunn has the need to present a portrait that favors her, and makes her appear, not as a suspect, but as a parent working with police.  Her language tells us that she was not working with police, but it was something confirmed shortly after this aired.  
Next, the topic of a polygraph came up. 


Polygraphs are routine in missing child cases.  John Walsh advises parents to insist on a polygraph immediately, be cleared, and get going with the search.  

Ray Giudice weighs in next, strictly as a defense attorney.  He heard the inconsistent story:  

RAYMOND GIUDICE, DEFENSE ATTORNEY:  From a defense lawyer`s perspective, and with some of these inconsistencies that I`ve already heard in these facts, I would not advise him to take a poly unless he could pass one in the privacy of my office first.

GRACE: Hold on. Alex Sanchez, it sounded like an inconsistency because last night, the mom says he just got home from work at 3:00 o`clock. Now we find out he was at his mom`s. I asked her that. She had a perfect explanation for that.

ALEX SANCHEZ, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Yes, but I don`t know if he`s refused to take a polygraph test. But if he`s, in fact, refused to take a polygraph test, you know, that raises concerns for me and it raises concerns for the police.

GRACE: OK, let`s go to the source...

SANCHEZ: And they need to concentrate on that boyfriend.

GRACE: You`re right, Alex Sanchez. Billie Dunn, what about your boyfriend? Has he agreed to take a polygraph?


The question:  Has he agreed to take a polygraph?  It is a "yes or no" question. 

"Has he agreed to take a polygraph?"

BILLIE DUNN: He will take a polygraph in the morning. Yes, ma`am. It`s set up for in the -- hopefully, early.


Note that her answer is to avoid the question, making the topic of Shawn Adkins taking a polygraph "sensitive" in analysis, and then she adds in the answer.  

Note also that her answer is  truthful:  he will (future) take a polygraph in the morning.  

This is to avoid talking about his refusal at first and his walking out of the next polygraph.  

But then she repeats it (making it sensitive) and adds in extra emphasis, weakening the answer:  "yes, ma'am. It's set up for in the  hopefully, early."  Broken sentence indicates missing information. 

1.  Yes or No question avoided.
2.  Repetition = sensitivity
3.  Broken sentence = missing information 

GRACE: Well, there you go.


Not so fast...

BILLIE DUNN: But it is set up for tomorrow.  This was Tuesday so it is set up for Wednesday morning.  Please note this.  


In her short answer, she indicated sensitivity (which may be deception) and missing information.  

We later learned that Adkins had refused, agreed, refused by walking out.  Although, sentence by sentence Billie Dunn is truthful, she withholds the combative relationship with police over the polygraph.  

Nancy Grace spoke to Clint Dunn.   For new readers:  Clint Dunn's statement analysis showed truthfulness in his denial.  He was never a suspect.  

GRACE: OK. Let`s back it up a little bit. Did you see her at all that day?

CLINT DUNN: I didn`t see her at all that day.

GRACE: When did you first learn she was missing?

CLINT DUNN: I seen her the day before. Later on that night, David came over -- my son came over and asked me...


Note the linguistic indication of a good relationship with David via the proper social introduction. 

GRACE: Who first told you that she was missing?

CLINT DUNN: My son, David.


social introduction= very good relationship


GRACE: All right. Because when I grew up it was very common if I was going to spend the night at my little friend`s house, I would just go over there. I didn`t need to take anything. I was coming right back the next morning, right across the street. So why would you pack a big bag? 

So if she was planning a sleepover, you know I don`t really see that she would have dragged a bag along with her, but let`s ask the mom. 

Billie Dunn is with us, joining us from Colorado City, Texas. 

Miss Dunn, when she would typically go for a sleepover, would she take a bag and take a lot of stuff with her? 

B. DUNN: Nothing at all. 


emphasis noted.  It is unusual that a 13 year old girl would go anywhere without her "stuff" 

GRACE: OK. 

B. DUNN: She would -- 

GRACE: Go ahead, dear. 

B. DUNN: She would just go over there with whatever was on her back, and wait until the next day to come home, brush her teeth, take a bath, freshen up. 


not "she went over there with..." because it would be a direct lie according to Marybeth's mother.  
GRACE: Right. Right. That makes perfect sense to me. So the fact that she did not take anything with her, that doesn`t strike you as unusual. 

B. DUNN: Right. 

GRACE: All right. 

B. DUNN: That`s why I`m getting worried that maybe my baby didn`t leave on her own for this long amount of time. 


Note that she has the need to say "why" she is "getting" worried:  because she did not return to brush her teeth the next morning and freshen up. 

Why would a mother only now, 7 days later, begin to get worried over a missing child? This is another reason why defense attorneys keep their clients from speaking:  they spill out ridiculous little things like this that cause people who have no training to scratch their heads and ask, "You're just now getting worried?"


GRACE: OK. Miss Dunn, I want to go back over why the local police said this was a runaway. Why did they classify her as a runaway? 

B. DUNN: All I know is because nobody saw her being abducted. 


"all I know" limits information 

Grace:   I want to go back to Billie Dunn, this is Hailey`s mother. 

How far did they tell you the dogs tracked your little girl to that Western Motel? Did they track her into the lobby? Did they track to a certain room, to the parking lot? How far did the trail go? 


Nancy Grace has not caught on to the fact that police are not sharing information with Dunn.  It gives us opportunity to view communicative language:   

B. DUNN: They didn`t tell me that. They just let me know that to the friends, to the motel, and they`re reviewing the video at the motel, and calling everybody who had been checked in to the motel that day. 


Note the change from "tell" which is spoken, to "just let me know", which is passive.  Deception indicated

GRACE: Now a woman in the community says she spotted Hailey that evening. This would have been Monday evening, with the little neighbor girl and the neighbor girl`s little boyfriend. What would he have been, 12, 13? Is that the little neighbor she was going to visit?

B. DUNN: No. That was the girl she was going to visit. 

GRACE: What did this woman see? 

B. DUNN: She saw Hailey, Mary Beth and a boy that she didn`t recognize. 


Later we learned that this woman was an addict who sought to help out BJD.  
GRACE: Now have you -- have you spoken with Mary Beth? Did that in fact happen? 


This would have been a great spotting!  A live Hailey!  

Certainly any mother would have known that the police have asked Mary Beth, or she, mother, herself asked!

B. DUNN: I hadn`t asked her about that. I`m letting the police handle Mary Beth. I do call her to ask her hey, what did Hailey say to you on Monday, did she call you Monday, did you guys text, did she say she was going somewhere else Monday, or with another friend Monday, and she tells me no. 


Deception indicated.

Here we have her reporting what she did not ask, in the negative.  

1.  She did not ask the most important question in the world:  were you walking with Hailey and a male child; the single most important question that would have, incidentally, either cleared Dunn of suspicion, or cast further suspicion upon her.  She avoided it entirely. 

Next we have the passivity of "letting police handle Mary Beth."  

Does Billie Dunn want us to believe that she has authority over police and decides what to investigate on her own and what to let police handle?

Could ANY mother be silenced if you heard that your missing child was walking, alive, with someone else?

Mary Beth needs handling?  Is she uncooperative?  

 This is an attempt to portray her as someone who is "cooperating" with the investigation. 

 By this point, she had already stormed out of the police station, but struggled to say away as she desired to control information. 

Note "I do call" slips into the present tense.  She did not call, but if she said, "I called..." it would be a direct lie, which causes stress.  This is how BJD consistently avoids telling the direct lie. 

Deception indicated.  

GRACE: Did she say she even saw Hailey on Monday? 


Think of how important this question is!  
B. DUNN: She hasn`t told me that she did. No. 


It is a "yes or no" question which is avoided in the first sentence.  Note this as a pattern for BJD.  It means the question is sensitive and she feels it warrants explanation. 

Did she say she even saw Hailey on Monday?  It is answered with "hasn't told me", which is to say that, perhaps, someone else might tell her so, but just not Mary Beth.  This is an attempt to deceive, via the use of additional words. 


GRACE: OK. So to your knowledge, Hailey never went to Mary Beth`s? 


Although the suspicion is growing in Nancy Grace, she still seeks clarity from the mother. 
B. DUNN: Right. That`s what she says. 

GRACE: To Dr. Leslie Austin, psychotherapist out of New York. 

Dr. Austin, it says a lot to me that this mother has been saying from the get-go, please polygraph me. The boyfriend, her live-in, whether we agree with that or not, he has agreed to take a polygraph first thing in the morning. 

DR. LESLIE AUSTIN, PSYCHOTHERAPIST: These people seem very credible to me and also this seems like a really good little girl who may have just had a heartbeat of bad judgment or met somebody somewhere. 


The sensitivity about being a "really" good little girl is followed with blaming Hailey with a "heartbeat of bad judgement"... she joins in Bille Dunn's insult in also blaming the victim. 

I wonder if her patients watched this and wondered what they were paying a fortune per hour for. 

To this psychotherapist, "these people" seem very credible.

  It would be interesting to inquire about her training, and her ability to spot deception and how well she does with patients who are in desperate need of the truth, or who lie to themselves or to her.  


35 comments:

GetThem said...

The more I read about BD the more scared I feel for H. That mother is like from a horror movie. I can't believe what a terrifying life poor Hailey had living with that witch and her beyond-pervy boyfriend. He's gross and she's pure evil.

Skeptical said...

From her resume, it appears Leslie Austin did much the same kind of work as Dr. Phil did in his former career, selecting juries and coaching attorneys.

http://www.leslieaustin.com/

ima.grandma said...

I am submitting some links that I was surprised to find. I thought I knew much about Billie as I am a faithful daily reader since May 2008. I was not aware she was a practicing LVN.

http://lf.hpc.texas.gov/THP/View.ashx?d=n&DID=613255

http://lf.hpc.texas.gov/THP/View.ashx?d=n&DID=1290798

Please notice the second Order containing glowing recommendations from several medical professionals in August 2011. 

I just finished writing the details and explaining some of the terms of these Orders but lost the information when my Ipad had to reboot. My fingers are stinging from my Osteoarthritis so I can't type it again so soon. I am happy to answer any questions about the Board Orders as I am a retired Special Investigator for a State Medical Board of Examiners in charge of disciplinary actions.

ima.grandma said...

If those links don't work for you, try this one. Just click on the document links.

http://lf.hpc.texas.gov/THP/Default.aspx?d=n&q={[Nurse%20Board%20Orders]:[license%20number]=%22192287%22}

Anonymous said...

Her nursing career was briefly discussed years ago

Summed up-

- Billie Jean's LVN license was revoked for failure to appear at a hearing

- The charges against her, dumbed down: practising without a valid licence; the licence had been expired for a year

Anonymous said...

Billie is no longer an LVN she never followed the few simple instructions to get them back, if you notice one of those instructions was she would have to pass a drug test. Guess we know the drugs were more important to her then getting her LVN back

WOJ admin

dlammo said...

BD's LVN license is current; it is verifiable on the Texas Board of Nursing website.

Anonymous said...

Good for her for finally getting off the couch and doing something, now maybe David won't have to support her anymore! But I highly doubt that she has always needed a man to support her just ask Ken lmao!

WOJ admin

smarter than woj said...

hey woj admin get your fat azz off the net& do something with your life.bahahahahahahahah loser

Dawn said...

Dllamo, you are correct. I sent the results to Peter yesterday. She petitioned the board in 2011, received her license back with stipulations. My question was why isn't she working as a nurse? David shouldn't have to support her. I would surmise employers know her name,check potential employees social network posts or if she is hired, she opens her mouth or a coworker knows about Hailey.

Anonymous said...

Billie should never have gotten her license back after admitting to stealing from the hospital

WOJ admin

ima.grandma said...

I believe the recommendations from all the medical professionals swayed Board members. A possibility may have been that one or more of the Board members may have been doctors that knew some of the doctors or nurses that wrote the letters and that played a factor in reinstating her license. It is not uncommon.

6 out of 6 DRs recomend Billie said...

she is such a good mom she was teaching new moms to be moms.

~ABC said...

Hi Peter

I understand that Clint Dunn is considered clear in terms of deceptive responses. At the same time I have a question about this response:

GRACE: OK. Let`s back it up a little bit. Did you see her at all that day?

CLINT DUNN: I didn`t see her at all that day.


Is this an echoing response that could be considered sensitive or deceptive?

elf said...

"We hear that another lady says she saw Hailey, her friend, & a boy she didn't recognize Monday evening-it was already dark-walking on the main street by a store. So they're looking at that video surveillance ,too, seeing if that story checks out, see if they can put her somewhere that evening.
*the part of this statement that jumps out at me is the language 'see if they can put her somewhere'. Is Billie trying to sound official (using cop lingo) or is that leakage?

Anonymous said...


Anonymous 6 out of 6 DRs recomend Billie said...
she is such a good mom she was teaching new moms to be moms.


These lying gossips think they know more about BD than doctors.


Anonymous said...

John Young may have played a role in reinstating her license. I do believe he made reference to this goal in an interview with the media.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
Good for her for finally getting off the couch and doing something, now maybe David won't have to support her anymore! But I highly doubt that she has always needed a man to support her just ask Ken lmao!

WOJ admin


Thank you WOJ Admin. I told my ladies group about your page and we laugh and laugh. We had no idea that adults act like grade school kids on facebook.

lane said...

HAILEY DUNN: UNFOLDING A STORY OF A MISSING TEENAGER AND HER FAMILY

By Brian Bethel
Published Saturday, January 8, 2011

(snip)
In 2008, Billie Jean Dunn’s license to practice nursing in the state was revoked by the Texas Board of Nursing. According to the group’s formal charges, Dunn practiced as a vocational nurse without a license from June 1, 2007, to April 20, 2008, while employed at Cogdell Memorial Hospital in Snyder. Board records indicate her license expired May 31, 2007.

Dunn’s conduct “deceived residents, their families, fellow caregivers and the public,” who believed that her practice of nursing was in compliance with the board’s rules and regulations, according to the board’s findings. Dunn was, according to the board, given an opportunity to show compliance with state law to retain her license.

The case was heard in an open meeting in Austin on Nov. 12, 2008. Dunn did not appear, the record says.

lane said...

http://m.reporternews.com/news/2011/jan/08/xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/

~mj said...

@lane

This article is chilling and informative. I felt as though I had followed this case fairly well, but I had no idea there are character witnesses for Hailey. To me, this further proves foul play and further DIS-proves stranger abduction.

If only a fraction of this article is correct about local LE, then it looks like they were doing all they could from the get-go.

Thank-you for this link.

And now I suspect I may know more anon's real names that frequent these threads.

Anonymous said...

Somebody please enlighten me. How could Billie's license be reinstated if it had been revoked? To be suspended means Billie's license was being held until she met certain board requirements, which is the first step prior to revocation and can be reinstated IF one meets the 'suspension' requirements and becomes eligible to be reinstated within the time limit allowed. The second step is revocation of the license if one fails to meet the suspension requirements.

To be REVOKED means that the license is dead. Kaput. History. Over and done with. The act of revocation is the same as if it never existed. When ones license is REVOKED it cannot be reinstated. To gain a new license, the applicant is required to start all over just like any other student is required to do; take their state required courses, reapply, sit for and pass the board exams, THEN they are granted a NEW license; not reinstatement of the old one that no longer exists.

Are these laws different in the State of Texas as to the meaning of revocation? Please inform.

Anon 1

Anonymous said...

"These lying gossips think they know more about BD than doctors."

One of the doctors is family of BJD and defended her job when she stole from the hospital in Snyder, he succeeded in getting her re-assigned to a new position....he also subscribed pills to her.....

Ummmm...No said...

"he also subscribed pills to her....."

subscribe = magazine

PRESCRIBE = "pills"

Anonymous said...

Six out of six doctors recommended BJD for reinstatement, saying she is such a good mom she was training new mothers how to be a good mom??? Surely, that's some kind of a joke??

Doctors don't give a crap about anyones' personal life, why would they care about Billies'? Or even KNOW anything about her personal life? Com'on now.

Furthermore, how could Billie's license even be reinstated in 2011 if it had already been REVOKED in 2008? Somebody needs to dig deeper into this.

As to Clint Dunn: I wouldn't believe a word that comes out of his deceitful mouth. Maybe true, maybe not. Not only did he not support, or provide a bed for his daughter to sleep on, or even provide her food or lunch money for school; he is a lying pot-smoking dopehead. ANY pot addict whose pot is not prescribed by a physician for medicinal purposes is a liar and a thief as they will do ANYTHING to get their dope, including allowing their own child to go hungry. Clint Dunn is lower than dirt.

Clint Dunn is a welfare fraud thief, hunkered down in Naomi's HUD approved apartment with the both of them lying to HUD. He should be prosecuted and serving time for his welfare fraud and ordered to reimburse HUD.

However, somebody would have to report him (and Naomi) to HUD as they can't file a complaint if they don't have one. I've actually thought of doing it myself. These govm't thieves need to be in jail AND reimbursing our govm't for their thefts by fraud. Anon 1

Anonymous said...

Clint Dunn works on an oil rig and does not live in HUD housing, he lives out of Texas

Anonymous said...

And you KNOW, Anon @ 8:54, that Clint is working on an oil rig? You've SEEN him there working? Why couldn't he do that when Hailey needed his care, which he had none to give her and didn't even try? BTW, I did NOT say that Clint PRESENTLY squats in HUD housing. I said that he DID steal HUD housing along with Naomi, and he DID.

Fact still remains, he is a low-life piece of stinking dog doo-doo by not supporting and providing food, lunch money, a bed and protection for his OWN daughter. You would defend him in that? Then you are as low as he is, and likely a dopehead pot smoker yourself, neglecting your own kids. It is always another low-life pot smoker who defends another one. Anon 1

Anonymous said...

Anon @ 8:57? Another dopehead pot smoker, clearly unable to comprehend reality with your false allegations.

I most assuredly DO speak out against one of the lowest forms of humanity that walks the face of this earth; one who does NOT support or protect his own child, who has to go crying and begging to others to help her, while her daddy wallows in la la land buying and using dope, and she is left at the mercy of drug addicted sex deviate maniacs to fend for herself.

It's no wonder she's dead, and just as much Clint Dunns fault as it is theirs whether he is the one who actually killed her or not. In his own way, he did.

Anon 1

Anonymous said...

I think CD stopped working on an oil rig a long time ago.

Peter Hyatt said...

~ABC said...
Hi Peter

I understand that Clint Dunn is considered clear in terms of deceptive responses. At the same time I have a question about this response:

GRACE: OK. Let`s back it up a little bit. Did you see her at all that day?

CLINT DUNN: I didn`t see her at all that day.

Is this an echoing response that could be considered sensitive or deceptive?

April 23, 2013 at 11:53 PM >>


Yes and No.

How's that?

It is reflective language, which means he entered into the language of Nancy Grace.

The sensitivity is "at all" added, which may be sensitive to him from what he told me:

BJD attempted to blame him.

Peter

Reevaluate said...

NANCY GRACE
Texas Police Search for Missing 13-Year-Old Cheerleader
Aired January 4, 2011
CLINT DUNN: "I didn`t see her at all that day."

Peter says....
It is reflective language, which means he entered into the language of Nancy Grace.
The sensitivity is "at all" added, which may be sensitive to him from what he told me:
BJD attempted to blame him.


----------------
that was aired on Jan 4th. on Jan 3rd, LE had fubarred the cell phone ping information and had discussed with Clint and Billie (and others) their version of what the ping timestamps led them to believe. so in the same manner as Clint, Billie had been accused by LE. that is why i have been trying to tell you, you cannot analyze Billie's words on NG shows, because by that time, she was reflecting LE speak, NG speak, and had been falsely accused by LE on so many levels, and she was answering to confrontations made by LE, not knowing how much NG knew about, but was attempting to answer questions fully and was being forthwith the information.

Justice Seeking Anon. said...

Reevaluate said...
" (skip to)..... that is why i have been trying to tell you, you cannot analyze Billie's words on NG shows, because by that time, she was reflecting LE speak, NG speak, and had been falsely accused by LE on so many levels, and she was answering to confrontations made by LE, not knowing how much NG knew about, but was attempting to answer questions fully and was being forthwith the information."

***********************************

I call BS, Reevaluate! BD may have been attempting to answer q's fully (although I doubt it, as she is best at dodging & DE-flecting), I do not believe for one second that she was reflecting anyone. She's attempted to here in the last year or so, but "BJD speak" was always what she did back in the early days. She always lied, changed stories, and couldn't keep "her (cough) facts" straight.

BJD is evil to the core and we've all seen it since day ONE! I don't get why you and others still try to defend her. My goodness her very own daughter has been dead almost 2 years and STILL has not been reportedly found or properly laid to rest... at the hands of her so called mother & mother's boyfriend!

Praying that justice comes SOON, so Hailey can rest in peace!

~ABC said...

Peter Hyatt said...

"Yes and No.

How's that?

It is reflective language, which means he entered into the language of Nancy Grace.

The sensitivity is "at all" added, which may be sensitive to him from what he told me:

BJD attempted to blame him. "


Thanks Peter. I said echoing but the word is reflective. Still working on the lingo too! So reflective language may ONLY indicate sensitivity, not necessarily deception.

Deflect said...

@ Justice Seeking Anon
"BJD speak" was always what she did back in the early days. She always lied, changed stories, and couldn't keep "her (cough) facts" straight

exactly, she goes with w/e the latest bull was that LE came up with. why? because she dont know.

Justice Seeking Anon. said...

No, Deflect, it's not. It's because she's a LIAR. With as many lies as BD has told, there's way in heck she could possibly remember each one, much less every single detail of them.

Deflect is a good name, and you may do it to your heart's content. I'm not convinced & can't wait to see justice for Hailey be served!