Saturday, January 4, 2014
Statement Analysis: Jackie Presley And NY Jets Quarterback Scandal
A woman has now come forth to report that New York Jets rookie quarterback, Geno Smith, had sent a picture of his penis to her. While this is not unexpected behavior among professional athletes today, her statement is useful for instruction.
Did she know he had a girlfriend?
Was she after his money? Did she want to meet another celebrity and use Smith?
It should be noted that she admitted asking him for a picture of his penis, and then sent it to a website for publication. It has since been taken down. Presley also is alleged to have set up a fake instagram account in Geno Smith's name.
"I logged on to my instagram about a month ago & seen that Geno had followed me. I looked to see who he was & I saw pics of him & Jay Z & saw that he played in the league so I followed back. Immediately he wrote under one of his pictures & asked for my #. I gave it to him & he contacted me asap. So we were talking via facetime for like 2 weeks then He told me to come to Charlotte for his game. Thats when I first actually met him in person. Long story short we had sex at the Marriott. We continued to talk via text & facetime then he told me to come to NYC for Christmas so I did. All this talking & texting, he NEVER mentioned a girlfriend. I went to his house Christmas day, we had sex & I spent the night. I finally found out he had a girlfriend after snooping around on his close friend page. And he didnt officially tell me he had a girlfriend until we fell out recently. So he is a asshole, who has a girlfriend but literally BLOWING me up to come see him. And we had unprotected sex. Smh but he never mentioned a girlfriend not once !These athletes are disgusting & cheaters. I blame myself too! He deleted his Instagram page because of me. He even offered to pay me not to talk but I dont want his money now."
******************************************************************************** Here is her statement again, with emphasis added, and Statement Analysis in bold type.
Did she know he had a girlfriend?
Was she after his money?
"I logged on to my instagram about a month ago & seen that Geno had followed me.
She begins with the strong use of the pronoun, "I" and starts off with "instagram" making it very important for her, and that "Geno" had followed her. With "had" followed, we do not know how long Geno followed her prior to her response, as it is missing information regarding timeframe. Is timeframe something sensitive to her? Overall, it is "about a month ago" according to her statement.
I looked to see who he was & I saw pics of him & Jay Z & saw that he played in the league so I followed back.
She tells us the reason she did something, without being asked, making it very sensitive (hence, the blue coloring showing the highest level of sensitivity in the SCAN system). Here we have "two blues" very close together, making this a very sensitive portion of her statement.
In between these two "blues" we see the name "Jay Z" and the information of being "in the league" (not in the NFL, and not "a football player) which indicates familiarity with the NFL.
Why did she follow him?
She followed him for two reasons:
1. Because he was in a photograph with "Jay Z"
2. Because he was in the league.
Please note that she lists him being photographed with "Jay Z" before him being in the league indicative of priority. Was she hoping to meet "Jay Z" through contact with the quarterback?
The reader should consider that the subject's priority is more "Jay Z" than Geno's status in the league, though both are connected.
Immediately he wrote under one of his pictures & asked for my #.
Jump of time. Here is another sensitive issue about timing. "About a month ago" and "had" followed were the first two ("had followed" may also reference that he no longer followed at the time of the statement). She has an unusual way of measuring time and appears to wish to portray anything regarding herself as great rushing to see her, be with her, and so on...like a sense of urgency.
"He wrote under one of his pictures" indicates that there are other pictures, but "& asked for my #" follows it. The pronoun drop may be simply as part of the sentence but she does want readers to know that it was his idea to get her number.
I gave it to him & he contacted me asap.
She acknowledges that she gave it to him, but notice that timing is again an issue:
This stands for "as soon as possible": one might wonder how she knows that he contacted her as soon as it was possible for him to do so. The timing is an issue for her and she wants readers to think that this was something done very rapidly, as if a high priority. Yet, that is not what she says. She says only as soon as possible, without telling us for whom it was possible.
So we were talking via facetime for like 2 weeks then He told me to come to Charlotte for his game.
Note the pronoun "we" indicates unity and cooperation. At this point in the statement, there is a "we" between them. Yet, there is a change. He did not "ask" her to come to Charlotte, nor did he "say" that she could, or should, come to Charlotte. She wrote:
"He told me" with "He" using the capital "H" for emphasis.
"He" is given emphasis by her, (usually this is saved for Divinity) and she uses the communicative language that is stronger than "said" or "asked"; that he "told" her, in the imperative, as if by directive, to "come" (and not "go") to Charlotte. (where was this statement written?)
Thats when I first actually met him in person.
The word "actually" is used when the subject is comparing two or more things. In this case, she may have "met" him electronically prior to meeting him "in person" and may have felt she knew him.
Long story short we had sex at the Marriott.
"Long story short" is a temporal lacunae; that is, a jump or skip in time. Due to the time sensitivity, the "long story" is a month or so in length, at most.
Note the pronoun "we" here, regarding having sex.
We continued to talk via text & facetime then he told me to come to NYC for Christmas so I did.
The "we" continues, showing that at this point of the short relationship, she considered herself unified with him, yet using strong communicative language, she says he "told me", and not "asked me" to come to NYC for Christmas, and then gives the reason she went: because he "told" her to. This should be also considered a sensitive part of the account. She portrays herself as subordinate, taking 'orders' or directives from him.
All this talking & texting, he NEVER mentioned a girlfriend.
Question: Did Jackie Presley think he had a girlfriend when she had sex with him?
In context of "never" mentioning a girlfriend, the pronoun "we" is not used. This may be a break in the relationship.
Note that this spanned only about a month in time in which she had sex with him, and she does not say that he "did not mention..." but "never" is used.
Is this something surprising and upsetting to her? Please note the change in communicative language:
he "told" her to go to Charlotte;
he "told" her to go to NYC, but when it comes to a committed relationship, that is, a girlfriend, she only uses the word "mentioned", as if it is something in passing to be mentioned and not "told."
For her, it is not the uninformed status, but that she only expected a "mentioning" of having a girlfriend. This should not be missed by the analyst in understanding Jackie Presley, and what it reveals about her expectations and her morals.
I went to his house Christmas day, we had sex & I spent the night.
She wants the audience to know that she was at his house and she spent the night, sandwiching in between that "we" (united by sex) had sex.
"We" did not spend Christmas together;
"We" did not spend the night together, but "we" had sex.
This is to show distance from him during the day of Christmas, and distance of spending the night. The only unity between them is sexual.
I finally found out he had a girlfriend after snooping around on his close friend page. And he didnt officially tell me he had a girlfriend until we fell out recently.
Note that he never "mentioned" having a girlfriend, but she "finally" found out. This is an inconsistency in language. "Mentioning" is casual yet she employs "finally" as if she had been trying to get the truth out of him, but this is not what she says. We let her words guide us. She does not say that she asked him if he had a girlfriend. Now she "finally" "found out" because she had been "snooping around" (soft language...did she hack his account? Did she read his private information?)
This was on his "close friend page."
Does this indicate that the woman who had sex with him after knowing him a short time was not a "close friend"?
Note now she says "officially tell me" which indicates that he may have "told" her, though not "mentioning" it, but in telling her, it was not "official."
The reader should now question if the subject, Jackie Presley is deceptive in her attempt to persuade that she did not know he had a girlfriend and went ahead to meet him for sex anyway. He only officially told her after (skip in time) "we" had a "falling out", and not a break up. This is likely chosen language that she knows he did not consider her a "close friend" or even a "girl friend."
So he is a asshole, who has a girlfriend but literally BLOWING me up to come see him.
She labels him a body part "because" (so, therefore) because he only "officially" told her after they had a falling out.
It is likely, from her language, that she is deceptive and always knew he had a girlfriend.
I do not know what "BLOWING me up" indicates but its capitalization is important. Perhaps this is an internet term I am unfamiliar with. Readers?
And we had unprotected sex. Smh but he never mentioned a girlfriend not once !
Sentences beginning with the word "And" indicate missing information between sentences.
Note that "we had unprotected sex" may be out of chronological order, as this comes after the "falling out", and she continues to use the word "we" in regard to sex.
Smh ("shaking my heard") "but he never mentioned a girlfriend" is not to say that he did not tell her he had "a girlfriend" but again uses only "mentioned" and then weakens this assertion with "not once!"
It is likely that Smith would claim otherwise.
These athletes are disgusting & cheaters.
Note that "these" athletes, using "these" (close) and "athletes" (plural) indicate more than just Geno Smith.
Note that the order is being "disgusting" before being "cheaters."
One should wonder if she feels that her behavior of having sex with someone in a relationship, and that in such a short time period has caused her to think of herself as both "disgusting" and as a "cheater."
I blame myself too!
This indicates that the blame is upon him, but then she adds some blame for herself with the word "too." This is not to own her own moral decisions.
He deleted his Instagram page because of me.
Here she takes credit for him deleting his Instagram page. She is the focus.
He even offered to pay me not to talk but I dont want his money now."
Interesting that he "offered" and not "told her" that he would give her money. For one who seems to want to persuade the audience that she took orders for traveling, here it is an "offer" and it is for her to "not" (negative) talk. She is doing that very thing here.
The additional word "now" indicates that she did want his money at another time. This is not something she likely intended her audience to know.