Sunday, August 31, 2014

Fake Reward Offered for Missing Baby Delano Wilson by Marlon Perkins?

Sometimes, a reward can give insight into what he subject (writer) thinks about the case.  

We saw this in a case where suicide was suspected by the family, but this information was kept from the public. 

There are such things as fake rewards being offered (see Baby Lisa) as possible tangents to the investigation, and attempts to make those suspected in the baby's disappearance appear 'concerned' for the child's welfare, and can be deceptive.  

In this case, it is baby Delano, the "daughter, uh, son" of Willie Wilson, who claimed to have been knocked unconscious but his words indicate something else: 

Willie Wilson is deceptive in his statement about what happened.  

This is from a man identified as "Marlon Perkins" a cousin of the mother  

"Anyone in Indianapolis can help out my cousin in her time of need. "This is real, and she needs all the help and assistance possible in the safe return of her son. I'm personally offering $10,000 for any information that leads to his safe return. Contact IMPD immediately with any information!!!!"

Please now see the statement posted, again, but with emphasis and analysis:

"Anyone in Indianapolis can help out my cousin in her time of needThis is real, and she needs all the help and assistance possible in the safe return of her son. I'm personally offering $10,000 for any information that leads to his safe return. Contact IMPD immediately with any information!!!!"

The subject is identified as Marlon Perkins, cousin to the mother, who gave the video plea that has already been analyzed. 

1.  Note that help is sought for "my cousin" and not for the baby. 
2.  Note that the statement does use Delano's name, which is distancing language. 
3.  Note the statement, "this is real", begging the question, "Why would anyone need to claim that a kidnapped baby is "real"?  This may cause police to wonder if the subject knows or believes that the child is not kidnapped, and that the subject is either suspicious or knows that Willie Wilson has not been truthful. That "this is real" gives indication that it may be a fake offer.  
4.  Note the cousin's name is not used, either.  (ISI:  Incomplete Social Introduction) One may then wonder about the quality of the relationship between the subject and the mother. 
5.  "She needs" and not "Delano needs" or "the baby needs..."  The baby's welfare is not mentioned.
6.  Note the word "safe" is repeated, and the reward will be paid, not upon the baby's return, but "safe" return.  We may wonder why the subject has added this word as a condition to payout. 
7.  "I'm personally" is not necessary and when taken with:

a.  "this is real", it leads me to question:

* if this is a genuine reward and the subject actually has the money; 
*if the subject believes or knows the child is not going to be returned "safely"
*the subject may be attempting to self-aggrandize, or even use this as a tangent.  

There are enough indicators within this post to question the validity of the offer.  

Saturday, August 30, 2014

Search for Baby Called Off

Statement Analysis of Willie Wilson shows deception.  Wilson is the father of the missing 2 month old, who called 911 to report that he was robbed and that his daughter, I mean, his son, was "abducted."

Police have now called off the search for now.

INDIANAPOLIS - Indianapolis police say they plan no additional searches for a missing infant whose father told officers a couple knocked him out and abducted the 6-week-old.
Sgt. Kendale Adams said Saturday that additional searches will only be conducted for Delano Wilson if there's a significant tip or development in the case.
Police said they were treating the hunt for a missing Indianapolis infant Saturday as a search-and-rescue mission, with efforts including draining an old underground cistern in a wooded area near where the child disappeared.
An Amber Alert went out for 6-week-old Delano Wilson about 9 p.m. Wednesday, some eight hours after 23-year-old Willie Wilson told police his son had been abducted by a man and woman who knocked him out in an alley near his home just west of downtown Indianapolis. 
Indiana State Police canceled the Amber Alert at the request of IMPD on Friday evening just before 7 p.m. Detectives believe the alert raised sufficient awareness about the missing child and his alleged abduction.
When the alert was first issued, detectives received numerous tips, but over the past six hours, police said they only received two calls.
"The cancelation of the Amber Alert has no barring on the active investigation into Delano's abduction. IMPD will continue to use all necessary resources and techniques to bring Delano back home," police said in a statement.
Police have not said they have any reason to doubt Wilson's statements, though they said Friday they were "checking" his account of what happened.
"We look into every story, and we run down leads, and we verify facts. That's what we do," Police Chief Rick Hite said.
The rattle and clang of passing garbage trucks filled the industrial area adjacent to the dense woods just off Interstate 70 on Friday afternoon. Rain fell as searchers scoured the area and police dogs sniffed for any sign of the missing infant.
The area is crisscrossed with busy streets, railroads and waterways. Police said CSX had agreed to stop rail traffic there during the search.
Indianapolis police Sgt. Kendale Adams said all that the searchers had found while using a grid pattern in the woods so far was trash and the old tank, from which police pumped out some of the water and searched it with a camera but found no signs of the baby.
Adams said police still regarded the case as a search-and-rescue operation. About 45 police recruits were aiding in the search and the FBI is assisting with the investigation, he said.
No leads brought police to the woods, Adams said.
"Obviously, being this close to the house, it is just an investigative area that we naturally would search," he said. "Right now, we're just hopeful that we're able to find this baby, and find him safely."
Adams estimated that about 90 percent of the neighborhood where the baby was reported missing had been searched as of late Friday afternoon.
Family members had posted fliers throughout the area asking for information leading to Delano, and another family member had offered a $10,000 reward. Delano's photo and description were also posted on the website of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children.
The Wednesday Amber Alert said the child is considered in extreme danger and that the infant was last seen with a white man and a Hispanic woman in an early 2000s blue Ford Taurus car.
Wilson told police he was carrying the baby just west of downtown Indianapolis about noon Wednesday when he was approached by the man and woman. He said the man pointed a gun at him and hit him in the head with the weapon, causing him to briefly lose consciousness. When he awoke, he said he saw the woman carrying the baby to the car, according to police.
Adams said Wilson had no visible signs of injury.
Police arrested Wilson on Wednesday night on an unrelated drug charge, and he was released from jail the next day.

Child Abuse Statement

Often, physical injuries to a child are not premeditated but come from an explosion of anger and frustration.  The undisciplined parent will then minimize, linguistically, the impact to the child.  Shaking, cigarette burning, sharp pain, often stops a child from crying, and breathing.

 Note the subject's statement here from the NY Daily News.

A Connecticut-based Navy sailor left his 2-month-old son with 29 bone fractures, abuse so horrifying that one pediatrician told investigators she was amazed the baby was alive, prosecutors say.
Jordan Rittenhouse, 24, was arraigned Friday and charged with first-degree assault and risk of injury to a minor, The Day of New London reported.
The Groton, Conn. man, a father also to a 2-year-old, is behind bars on a $500,000 cash bond.
The disturbing case was declared by one doctor as the “worst case of serious physical injury she has seen in her career,” court documents obtained by the newspaper reveal.
A blue wreath announcing the arrival of the baby boy from two months ago is still hanging on the front of the Rittenhouse's home in Groton, Conn.EYEWITNESS NEWS 3A blue wreath announcing the arrival of the baby boy from two months ago is still hanging on the front of the Rittenhouse's home in Groton, Conn.
Krishna Rittenhouse, the infant’s mother, took the child to the emergency room Monday after concerns over the tots eating habits. The baby was sent to New Haven for treatment after doctors found several rib fractures “at different stages of healing,” and police were contacted Tuesday about possible child abuse, The Day reported.
During a police interview Wednesday, Krishna Rittenhouse denied hurting the boy, though she said her husband occasionally grew frustrated trying to feed the infant. Jordan, a student at the Naval Submarine School, told investigators he was stressed with school, but wouldn’t hurt his child.
“I may have squeezed him at some point but I am afraid for my career,” the seaman said in an arrest warrant obtained by The Day. I’m just getting started in my career.”
Note minimization and priority.  
Originally from North Carolina, Rittenhouse moved to Groton to attend the Naval Submarine School. He's now arrested for allegedly severely abusing his child.EYEWITNESS NEWS 3Originally from North Carolina, Rittenhouse moved to Groton to attend the Naval Submarine School. He's now arrested for allegedly severely abusing his child.
But Rittenhouse eventually opened up, admitting to cops during a second interview he’d squeezed the baby some 16 times, oftentimes to make the child stop crying.
“Rittenhouse recalled one occasion when he squeezed the victim that he was concerned that he may have punctured a lung,” according to the paper.
On a different occasion, the North Carolina native admitted he made the baby bleed after jamming a bottle into the infant’s mouth.
Groton father, Navy sailor accused of assaulting 2-month-old son
Groton father, Navy sailor accused of assaulting 2-month-old son
Dr. Andrea Asnes, who treated the child, told investigators some fractures likely came from squeezing, while others had not. But based on the severity of the injuries, Asnes “was surprised the victim was alive,” according to the newspaper.

Judicial Watch: Threat Statement

With 9/11 approaching us, and the Obama mandate to no longer defend the borders against illegal immigration, jihadist terrorists are preparing for attacks on United States citizens.  No one, including Congress, has been able to stop Obama.  Laws written to protect the country, and cause non-Americans who wish to immigrate to the United States to do so legally, have been discarded, and on the local front, federal agents are telling local agents that they are no longer stop those flooding the country illegally.  Deputies have been threatened, themselves, with arrests.  We have not seen this type of undermining of our country's security via citizen threats on this scale  in over a century.

 The national-security vulnerability created by the Obama administration’s non-enforcement of the immigration laws, two weeks before September 11, may not surprise many, yet it is still frightening to read.  Here is the Judicial Watch statement:

Islamic terrorist groups are operating in the Mexican border city of Ciudad Juarez and planning to attack the United States with car bombs or other vehicle born improvised explosive devices (VBIED). High-level federal law enforcement, intelligence and other sources have confirmed to Judicial Watch that a warning bulletin for an imminent terrorist attack on the border has been issued.  Agents across a number of Homeland Security, Justice and Defense agencies have all been placed on alert and instructed to aggressively work all possible leads and sources concerning this imminent terrorist threat.
Specifically, Judicial Watch sources reveal that the militant group Islamic State of Iraq and Greater Syria (ISIS) is confirmed to now be operating in Juarez, a famously crime-infested narcotics hotbed situated across from El Paso, Texas. Violent crimes are so rampant in Juarez that the U.S. State Department has issued a number of travel warnings for anyone planning to go there. The last one was issued just a few days ago.
Intelligence officials have picked up radio talk and chatter indicating that the terrorist groups are going to “carry out an attack on the border,” according to one JW source.  “It’s coming very soon,” according to this high-level source, who clearly identified the groups planning the plots as “ISIS and Al Qaeda.” An attack is so imminent that the commanding general at Ft. Bliss, the U.S. Army post in El Paso, is being briefed, another source confirms. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) did not respond to multiple inquiries from Judicial Watch, both telephonic and in writing, about this information.
The disturbing inside intelligence comes on the heels of news reports revealing that U.S. intelligence has picked up increased chatter among Islamist terror networks approaching the 13th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks. While these terrorists reportedly plan their attack just outside the U.S., President Obama admits that “we don’t have a strategy yet” to combat ISIS. “I don’t want to put the cart before the horse,” the commander-in-chief said this week during a White House press briefing. “I think what I’ve seen in some of the news reports suggest that folks are getting a little further ahead of what we’re at than what we currently are.”
The administration has also covered up, or at the very least downplayed, a serious epidemic of crime along the Mexican border even as heavily armed drug cartels have taken over portions of the region. Judicial Watch has reported that the U.S. Border Patrol actually ordered officers to avoid the most crime-infested stretches because they’re “too dangerous” and patrolling them could result in an “international incident” of cross border shooting. In the meantime, who could forget the famous words of Obama’s first Homeland Security Secretary, Janet Napolitano; the southern border is “as secure as it has ever been.”
These new revelations are bound to impact the current debate about the border crisis and immigration policy.

Friday, August 29, 2014

Statement Analysis: Willie Wilson 911 Call

This is the case of a missing baby.  See prior article; it is difficult to understand the crying mother, who may have referenced him, twice, in the past tense.

Here is an example of a 911 call that should be analyzed.

The work of Avinoan Sapir is applied to 911 calls.  Priority is important.  Ask yourself what you would report. Mr. Sapir calls this the "expected" versus the "unexpected."

When we do not hear the expected, we are then confronted with the unexpected.

You would, in making this call about your kidnapped child,  prioritize by saying that your child is kidnapped.

You would ask for help for your child.

You might not even remember being robbed, but if you did, it would come after the information about the baby.  

911:  What is the location of your emergency?  

 Therefore, we expect order to begin with address.  His answer: 

"I'm on Hardy Street, and by chase (?), and I was robbed and someone took my daughter, I mean my son."

Note that being robbed came before reporting his son missing. This is not expected.  When a child is kidnapped, it is likely to be the first thing out of the subject's mouth when asked what has happened. 

Was this a drug robbery?  Why is the robbery more important than the missing child?

Note the error between "daughter" and "son."  It would be interesting to learn if he also has a daughter near the same age, with another woman.

It would also be interesting to learn if he is on drugs.

"I'm laying on the middle of the street off Oliver..."

note the need to give the location of where he is laying.

911:  What's your name?

Subject:  Willie.

"One was a white male who was a man the other person who was a  lady was hispanic. "

Specific description even of the shoes.   "Jordans, red black and blue..."

911:  They took your son?

Subject:   Yes, they abducted my son.

It is interesting to note that he did not enter the language of the 911 operator, but changed "took" to "abducted."

To "abduct" his son shows a deliberate action with a reason to do so.  There are two possibilities here:

1.  abduction for a reason, such as drug non-payment, illegal adoption, custody issue, etc.
2.  The subject is deceptive and has rehearsed his story. 

He calls out that he was just "robbed and pistol whipped" but did not mention the baby, to the passerby.  That the child was abducted would be the expected first thing he said.

Later, to another passerby, "I was robbed and they took my two month old son" with "took" and not "abducted"

Being "robbed" came before the taking of his son.

INDIANAPOLIS, Ind. (August 28, 2014)– Freshly released from a night in custody, Willie Wilson made an emotional appeal for information on the whereabouts of his missing child.
All I want is my son. I am begging, please search. I love my son.”
The mother of six week old Delano Anthony Wilson Taniasha Perkins made her own emotional statement in the 500 block of Chase Street earlier in the day.
He means the world to me and his dad and as his parents we work really hard for our child and for you to take him away is tearing a hole in my family and in my heart,” she said.
Wilson told police that he was accosted by a white male and hispanic woman in an alley less than a block from his home Wednesday at noon.
Delano Wilson
Delano Wilson
Wilson said the pair intended to rob him of his cell phones and his wallet but took his baby instead.
He said ‘I don’t care.’ That’s when he hit me knocked me down. I got the baby in my arms. That’s when I knew they were gonna do more because she didn’t do nothing because the man is constantly yelling at me telling me to empty my pockets, grabbing at my pants. All I could do is give him what I had. I didn’t wanna harm the baby.”

The use of the word "because" twice here is not sensible.  Is the lack of sense due to deception, or is it because he was knocked unconscious?  

The 911 call does not show the priority of a kidnapping.  
The father's story is now being questioned:  

Thursday, August 28, 2014

Mother Makes Plea for Child

I am unable to ascertain if she referenced the child in the past tense, as the audio is inconclusive. 

See the video above.

Note the absence of the child's name:  

Please, just please bring my baby back. He’s just one month old. I love my child. I just gave birth to him, he is my one and only son, my first born,” Perkins said. “I just want to know why. Why would you take my baby? Why can’t you just drop them off somewhere safe so I can see him healthy again?

His name is avoided, which indicates distance. 
a.  my baby
b.  my child
c.  my son
d. my first born
e.  my baby

These have the possessive pronoun, "my" attached.  

Please note that she wants to know "why" rather than where her child is.  
Does she know more, or does she suspect the father?
Note that the word, "child" is often associated with abuse/neglect.  

She does not talk about where he might be, if he is being well cared for, and so on.  

"healthy again"   Does she know he was not healthy?  Was he a neglected child?
While missing for 24 hours, she said she had not seen him in "two days."

“I don’t wish this on other parents. I’m too young to be going through this. I just got my job two days ago. I was going to provide for my baby,” she continued. “He means the world to me and his dad. We are good parents. We work hard. We work really hard to provide for a child. And for you to take him away is just tearing a hole in my family and in my heart he doesn’t deserve this. Please, please let my son go.

Note the emphasis of impact is upon her, being young, going through this.  What is her son now going through?  Is he being cared for?
Note that there is emphasis and sensitivity about work.
Note that the child's name is not used. 
Note that no concern is expressed for the child, other than he does not deserve this. 
note that we work hard to provide for "a" child and not her son. 
Note "in my family" comes before the mother's own heart.  
The boy’s father, Willie Wilson, told police he was walking in the alley of the 1400 block of Henry St. around noon when two people approached him, pistol-whipped him and then took the boy.
Police were looking for an unknown white male, 25-30 years old, 5’6”-5’9”, tall/medium build, short brown hair, wearing a black do-rag, red t-shirt, blue jean shorts and red, black and blue tennis shoes. He was accompanied by a Hispanic female, 25-30 years old, thin build with long brown hair, wearing a green shirt and matching green hoop earrings. They were last seen driving a older model blue 2000-2003 four-door Ford Taurus.
Willie Wilson MUG
Willie Wilson
Wilson was arrested Wednesday night on a possession of marijuana charge, police said, although the arrest has no bearing on the Amber Alert case.
Anyone with information should call 911 or contact IMPD at 317-327-6540.

Wednesday, August 27, 2014

Statement Analysis: Josh Shaw: Hero or Liar?

Is football player Josh Shaw a hero or a liar?

Statement Analysis gets to the truth.  

Shaw said he suffered a pair of high ankle sprains Saturday night after jumping from the second story of an apartment complex to save his 7-year-old nephew, who was struggling in the pool. Shaw said his nephew did not know how to swim.

His team received several calls contradicting what Shaw said.  

Some wonder if, perhaps, he was really saving Manti Teo's girlfriend.  

Thus far, we have not been given Shaw's actual statement to his team, but x-rays show both ankles negative for any injury.

TMZ's headline says "USC's Josh Shaw—Named In Burglary Report," but the takeaway is that police talked to Shaw about a report of a guy climbing down the side of a building Saturday night.
Per the report, someone tipped off police that a person was "shimmying" down the side of a building in Los Angeles near the USC campus. Cops talked to a woman who lived in the building, and she turned out to be Shaw's girlfriend. She told police that the description of the "shimmying" dude sounded like Shaw. Cops contacted Shaw by phone; he denied being at the building.

LA Police replied with the following:
We've got no record of us having a run in with him. That's not to say something didn't happen.'
How's that for a prepared statement by police!
USC said that this is how it happened, at least, initially:
While attending a family social function at his cousin's apartment in his hometown of Palmdale, Shaw looked on from a second floor balcony to the pool below and saw his 7-year-old nephew, who cannot swim, in distress without help nearby. Shaw instinctively leaped off the balcony, landing painfully on the concrete below.
He was able to crawl into the pool and ushered his nephew to safety. Despite the intense pain in his legs, he was then able to grab the ladder and lift himself out of the pool with his upper body.

With Statement Analysis, all we would need to read is his original statement about saving his 7 year old nephew, who cannot swim and was alone in the pool,  and we would know if he is truthful or if he is deceptive and possibly a suspect in a robbery.  We don't have that statement but we do have a follow up from him. 

He somehow avoided breaking his legs and ankles and later said

""I would do it again for whatever kid it was, it did not have to be my nephew," Shaw said today. "My ankles really hurt, but I am lucky to be surrounded by the best trainers and doctors in the world. I am taking my rehab one day at a time, and I hope to be back on the field as soon as possible."

Why would he need to tell us that his ankles "really" hurt?  Yet, he uses the word "but" to compare it to his fortune of being surrounded by:  1st, trainers, and 2ndly, doctors.
What's missing in his reply?
What about his almost drowned  nephew?  Is he "really" grateful?  really scared?
How is he doing?
Is he frightened of water?
Is he traumatized?
Did he go under?
Was he unconscious at all?
Is he feeling like uncle Josh is a hero?
Note that his statement is about himself, and not about the life he allegedly saved.  
USC is now investigating the claim.  If you were to interview Mr. Shaw, what 5 questions would you ask?
We do not have his original statement so we cannot conclude deception, but simply looking at his reply to what was alleged, there is enough to doubt his account.  

Statement of Denial Of Ordman Alley Sexual Abuse Allegations

What do you make of the following prepared denial?

Remember, we are not analyzing the person, but the statement. What does the statement reveal about Ordman Alley's actions? 
 Is there an admission present? 

Leave your thoughts in the comments section. 

Monday, August 25, 2014

"A Letter From Jim"

"Dear Family and Friends,

I remember going to the Mall with Dad, a very long bike ride with Mom. I remember so many great family times that take me away from this prison. Dreams of family and friends take me away and happiness fills my heart.

I know you are thinking of me and praying for me. And I am so thankful. I feel you all especially when I pray. I pray for you to stay strong and to believe. I really feel I can touch you even in this darkness when I pray.

Eighteen of us have been held together in one cell, which has helped me. We have had each other to have endless long conversations about movies, trivia, sports. We have played games made up of scraps found in our cell…we have found ways to play checkers, Chess, and Risk… and have had tournaments of competition, spending some days preparing strategies for the next day’s game or lecture. The games and teaching each other have helped the time pass. They have been a huge help. We repeat stories and laugh to break the tension.

I have had weak and strong days. We are so grateful when anyone is freed; but of course, yearn for our own freedom. We try to encourage each other and share strength. We are being fed better now and daily. We have tea, occasional coffee. I have regained most of my weight lost last year.

I think a lot about my brothers and sister. I remember playing Werewolf in the dark with Michael and so many other adventures. I think of chasing Mattie and T around the kitchen counter. It makes me happy to think of them. If there is any money left in my bank account, I want it to go to Michael and Matthew. I am so proud of you, Michael and thankful to you for happy childhood memories and to you and Kristie for happy adult ones.

And big John, how I enjoyed visiting you and Cress in Germany. Thank you for welcoming me. I think a lot about RoRo and try to imagine what Jack is like. I hope he has RoRo’s personality!

And Mark… so proud of you too Bro. I think of you on the West coast and hope you are doing some snowboarding and camping, I especially remember us going to the Comedy Club in Boston together and our big hug after. The special moments keep me hopeful.

Katie, so very proud of you. You are the strongest and best of us all!! I think of you working so hard, helping people as a nurse. I am so glad we texted just before I was captured. I pray I can come to your wedding…. now I am sounding like Grammy!!

Grammy, please take your medicine, take walks and keep dancing. I plan to take you out to Margarita’s when I get home. Stay strong because I am going to need your help to reclaim my life.


Sunday, August 24, 2014

The Case of Katelyn Markham and John Carter

Recently, police have requested tests on the bones believed to be the remains of Katelyn Markham, as it has been 3 years since she went missing.

The answer to what happened to Katelyn lies within John Carter, her former fiancé.  

Statement Analysis has indicated Deception on the part of her fiancé, John Carter, particularly on what took place between them at her house, the night he was last with her.

Here is analysis from his interview and his 911 call which cause me to conclude that John Carter is deceptive about what happened to Katelyn Markham.

I.  His Interview 6 Days after reporting her missing

II.  Statement Analysis of his 911 Call.

I.  In the disappearance of Katelyn Markham, John Carter is indicated for deception. Here is an interview he gave on radio 6 days after calling 911.  

The interviewers do a very poor job interviewing him as they are more prone to making statements and asking compound questions instead of seeking information, yet analysis of his answers show deception.  This is consistent with other statements he has made. 

Statement Analysis shows that he is withholding information about what happened the night he left Katelyn Markham's apartment.  Please see prior analysis. 

Statement Analysis is in bold type. 

JC:  Um... Not - not too good. 
TJ:  John, let me ask you, when was the last time you saw Katelyn?

JC:  Um, I uh, saw her at her house, at uh... on Saturday night.

SS:  Last Saturday night.  And you thought nothing of it, it's like, "Love ya, see ya later."  What was the last communication you had with her?  Did you speak to her on the phone?

Compound questions should be avoided.  Here the interviewer suggests a response for him.  He should have asked, "What happened?" and is why journalists must be trained in legally sound interviewing.  

Regardless, the question is about what it was like when they were together: 
JC:  No, I, uh... she had sent me a, a few text messages after left her house.

1.  Pronouns are never wrong.  Pronouns are instinctive.  We use them millions of times, and since childhood.  

2.  He avoids telling us what was said or what happened between them when he last saw her.  This indicates that the question, itself, is sensitive.  He does not want to tell us what happened when he las saw her.

3.  "Left" Sensitive in Statement Analysis. 

Leaving of her house is very sensitive to the subject.  At this point in his language, he is not home, but is "leaving" her house:  Missing Information.  For the subject, it is not where he went, as accounts move forward in the brain.  Here, he is stalled at the house.  This is why there is missing information precisely here.  Something happened between them before he left her house.  

TJ:  Mmm.

JC:  Um, just, just a few things about, uh, some things she wanted me to do for her.  She, she was consistently busy, so I had to help her do a lot of things.

1.  Things "she wanted me" to do.  Note the lack of unity.  Note the missing pronoun "we" between them. 

2.  Here we have the explanation as to why he did something, upon leaving.  Here is the area of missing information from John Carter that is directly related to the disappearance of Katelyn Markham.  These are two sensitivity indicators very close together. 

3.  "She was consistently busy..." is to reference her, missing, in the past tense.  Is she no longer busy?

When one references another in the past tense while missing, police should seek to learn why the subject believes the missing person is dead. 

SS:  And all of a sudden you don't hear from her.  When - at what point did you think, maybe there's a problem?

The interviewer should avoid making assumptions as well as compound questions.  The interviewer is feeding information that is likely untrue.  We should be careful how we word our questions as we may teach the subject how to lie. 

JC:  Um... well uh, after I went home, I sent her a good morning text message.  And then I woke up the next day, and normally she sends me a good morning text message... um, but at - you know, like - she sends me something back saying thank you, and all that stuff, but - um, she didn't, uh, send anything.  But that - that didn't entirely worry me, I just thought maybe she was busy or something, or she just woke up late for work or something.  But then uh... you know, there was just, uh... I sent - she sent me, uh - or then I sent her a few more text messages, no response, and all that stuff, and uh...

Note the pronouns, "I sent, she sent me, or then I sent..."
Note the greeting text message sent which may be used to appear as if he expected a response, yet he uses the word "normal", a linguistic signal that it was anything but normal.  

Note he reports what he did not "entirely" worry about, in the negative (it "didn't) making it sensitive. 

Pronouns don't lie.  Note "I sent, she sent me, or then I sent..." as a confusion of pronouns.  
Note "no response" has dropped pronoun. 
"All that stuff" shows that there were more things going on in the mind of the subject other than just "no response."  This is a critical time for him; one that he reports in the negative.  

Carter is unconvincing about his own emotions above.  This suggests that his past tense reference, indicating knowledge or belief that she was dead, is accurate. 

SS:  And when she didn't show up for work to her job, then, then - then you knew something clearly was going on.

The interviewer does not ask questions, but leads him with information.  This impacts the response.  It allows the subject to enter the Interviewer's language, and can actually teach a subject how to lie.  This is an important interview and it is bungled due to lack of training. 

JC:  Um, actually I had a feeling something was going on when I, uh, saw her car in the parking lot.  And, and I went up to her room, and her purse and keys were still there.

TJ:  Wow.

SS:  Wow.

TJ:  John, what do you think happened?  Do you suspect foul play?

The first question was best.  

JC:  I - I really don't know.  Um, I've been asked this question a lot, and I really, I just have no idea.  I, I couldn't tell you.  Um.  I have the strongest, uh, thought that she would not run away. I mean there's no reason for her to go anywhere.  But other than that, I have no idea what could have possibly happened to her.

1.  The one pronoun that we in the English language are most proficient using is the pronoun "I" as we use it millions of times.  We are so good at it that LSI calls the stutter on the pronoun "I", by a non-stuttering person as scale of anxiety. 

Note the stutter on the pronoun, "I", one of the most practiced words in the English language. This shows an increase in tension.  Note that he stutters on it twice, indicating anxiety. 

2.  Note that he does not say, "I don't know" but that the "really" don't know; indicating that he does know "really" something. 

3.  He has "no idea" but then says he has the "strongest thought" that she did not run away, making "no idea" untrue.  
Note the sentence:  "I have not idea what could have possibly happened to her" has the additional word "possibly" added.  

TJ:  Mm.  It's kinda strange that Katelyn would leave without her keys, right?  Did she leave her cell phone as well?

Better to ask if anything else was there

JC:  Uh, yeah.  She had her cell phone on her, apparently. 

 Um, to this day I still call it, just hoping that maybe she'll answer at some point in time, or something like that.

Additional words are those which may be removed from a sentence while allowing the sentence to remain being complete.  These are added words in which additional information is gleaned. 

"To this day I call it hoping she'll answer" is the shortest sentence.  Short sentences are best for truth. 

a.  "still" is to show exasperation 
b.  It has only been 6 days since he reported her missing.  The word "just" is used in comparison and reduction.  
c.  "maybe" is reducing commitment to hope
d.  "at some point" 
e.  "in time"
f.  "or something"
g.  "that"

All these words (particularly points c through g) reduce commitment.  It shows that he knows that there is no hope that she will answer.  (See the similarity in the deception of the statement of major league baseball player Ryan Braun.  He shows how adding words in an attempt to persuade have the opposite effect). 

Like the person who says they are "very, very, very, very happily married" is headed for divorce, the need to persuade within a single sentence can belie the persuasion and indicate deception. 

SS:  What's really unusual about this too, John, is that the car, keys, that's unusual - but the purse!

JC:  Yeah.

The journalist made a point that the subject agreed with.  What is the cause?  
SS:  I don't know any woman who doesn't take their purse with them.  When women go to the bathroom - when women are - wherever they are, they have their purse with them at all times.  For her just to take her cellphone may indicate to me, and possibly the police as well, that there was some foul play here, because certainly she's not going to you know, go somewhere.  Even if she decided, you know, "I want to leave and start another life," usually you're going to take something with you that's personal in nature.

Interviewer's speech allows Carter to simply agree and enter into SS' language.  

JC:  Yeah.  Exactly.  And the thing is, is um... she had sent me a picture of a picture of her, that her boss took of her from her internship.  I mean she had two jobs and her internship, and went to school full time.  So I mean, she was consistently busy, but that stress made her stronger.  I mean, she loved the fact that she was being so strong, and, and she was proud of herself.  I mean, there was no, there was no anger [ laugh], at all, when it came to, to high stress.  Um...

Here is a past tense reference by Carter indicating belief or knowledge that she is dead.  At the time of this interview, she was only missing for 6 days and police had not revealed any details to cause anyone to conclude that she was dead.  

Since he claims to the contrary, this is a significant point in his answer that should lead police to ask how he knows she is dead. 

SS:  Right.  John Carter's with us, John Carter the fiance of Katelyn Markham.  Katelyn's been missing from Fairfield now for, um, it'll be a week tomorrow. And you're encouraged if you have any information to call Fairfield police as they continue to investigate this. I believe from what I understand, she was going to graduate from the Art Institute of Cincinnati sometime in the next 30 days, 45 days... September... she works at David's Bridal, so she has the two jobs there... You guys were planning to move out of state, in the late fall, early winter of this year and get married, right?

JC:  Well, uh, we weren't going to get married until way after we moved out.  Um, I mean, I wasn't rushing anything. I mean neither one of us wanted to.  The original plan was to actually leave in October, but then my brother was coming into town, so she and I suggested to just wait until after he came in town, so we decided to postpone it till November; and she could have easily have said, "I just don't want to go," and I would have been totally fine with that. There was no - you know, we weren't forcing it.  You know, we weren't trying to do anything we couldn't handle.

Note critical points:

"We weren't going to get married" instead of "We're not going...." then we have a change from the important pronoun, "we" to the "I" about himself:  This is an indicator of stress and tension.  He mentions that he wasn't rushing anything, dropping the "we" that existed about not getting married. 

Note "we" weren't getting married also changes to "she and I"

Then he said that this was only "suggested" and that "she could have easily have said" giving a strong indication that they had a disagreement about getting married.  This is another indicator (see previous analysis) that the night that Katelyn was last with him, there was a blow out between them.  Here he tells us what she "could have" said and he would have been "totally fine" with it.  He does not say that this is what she said. 

This is a clear point of contention.  

Note that he reports what they "weren't" trying to do.  Most people report what they try to do.  This is very important information related to Katelyn's disappearance. 

TJ:  John, how long have you guys, uh, been together?

JC:  We've been together for six years.

TJ:  Oh, that's a solid relationship right there.

Volatile relationships do go on for years.  
It is foolish for interviewers to make such statements, rather than ask questions.  
Training needed. 

SS:  How - where did you guys meet?

JC:  Actually, my sister had met her on MySpace when I was in high school and she was in high school, and she called me and told me, "Hey, I met this pretty girl, you want to come over and meet her too?"  And I was like, "Oh sure, yeah, why not," and I wound up meeting her, and you know, I guess... as they say, the rest is history.

"Actually" means a comparison of two or more thoughts.  We don't know what he is comparing in his mind, but it is something, to meeting on Myspace.  Perhaps in contrast to Katelyn meeting someone at work, like her boss, in the picture, that is mentioned above.  Was this a point of contention?

"the rest is history" is a strange phrase to use while a fiancé is missing.  "history"

SS:  Yeah, and you've been an item ever since.  What are the reaction, because they've been rather tight-tipped, of her family... How close is she to her mom and/or dad, if either one - 

If there was domestic violence, this interviewer is not going to ask, instead concluding how "solid" an "item" they were.  Unfortunate. 

JC:  She - she was very close to both of them.  Um, she really, like, she really loved her parents very much and, um, they loved her back.  I mean, they, they - actually she's adopted, and they had adopted her, and I mean... they, they really loved her.  Very mu -  Er, they still love her.  Of course.

Past Tense Reference. 

John Carter shows knowledge that Katelyn is dead, and even changes his language as he became aware of what he has just said. 

TJ:  John, Katelyn sounds like such a nice girl.  Did she have any enemies, uh, ex-boyfriends, anything like that?

JC:  No.  I mean, she had an ex-boyfriend, but I mean, he was - you know, six years.  We've been together for six years.  I mean, that's - that's high school stuff, you know?

SS:  Yeah, okay.  And, and as far as police go, I'm sure they have talked to you extensively, as other family members have.  No suspects have been - they're obviously still treating this as a missing person - do they have any suspicions one way or the other if it's foul play, or she left on her own volition?

JC:  Um, well I, uh I mean the news has really been getting - the media has been getting more information than I'm getting, um, uh.  And they, they, I've heard that they were saying that, the police were saying that it was foul play, and then I'm hearing that's there's no signs of foul play.  So I really, I, I don't know.  I mean, I was the one who called in the police, and I was the one who was the first one to realize that she was gone.  Um, and I was in her room, I, I saw - like, I immediately went to her room when I was thinking, you know, "Oh my God, she might be gone" - and it didn't - it looked like she literally had disappeared.  Like just, like nothing seemed messed up, nothing seemed awry, really, and -

Please note, that even without the understanding of Statement Analysis, that John Carter has a reason, only 6 days from her "disappearance" to justify himself.  
Note that he did not "call police" but "call in police", as in to a situation.  Here he attempts to portray himself as not having "done it", yet he never says he did not cause her disappearance. 
Note "immediately" as an additional and unnecessary word.  
Note his change of sentence:  he begins with the negative, "it didn't", but stops himself and reports in the positive.  
*He did not say "she disappeared" but only that it "looked like she literally had disappeared"; as there is a difference.  Lying causes internal stress and it is avoided whenever possible. 

SS:  Where was she the last time - I know you said you had texted each other, you had texted her, there was no response, you had talked the night before.  Um, the last time anyone saw her physically was when?

JC:  Uh, I saw her at 11 o'clock.  Or between 11 and and 11:30 last night.  Or, last night, I'm sorry - um, Saturday night.

We note the appearance of "I'm sorry" in any form as a possible indicator of guilt.  That it should come in to his language, given the deception, may be due to the internal guilt he feels over what happened, or possibly his deception to the interviewer.  

SS:  Last Saturday night.

JC:  Yeah.

TJ:  That Saturday night, did she seem distracted, did she seem like something was on her mind?

JC:  Not at all.

TJ:  Nothing?

JC:  Totally normal night.

When someone uses the word "normal" it is a strong indicator that the night was anything but normal.  Not only was it not "normal" it was "totally" a unique night.  

SS:  And you had plans, and said "Hey, I'll see you tomorrow, or I'll talk to you tomorrow, hey, good luck at work tomorrow..."

JC:  Absolutely.

SS:  That whole thing, and sometime in that point ... I know, and we'll play the 911 call here in a little bit here, you had mentioned that I think the Sacred Heart festival's going on up the street, and you seemed to indicate to the dispatcher that maybe something was go - I mean, had she planned to go to that festival, or - ?

JC:  No, she wasn't planning on going.  I mean, she was pretty much exhausted every night.  We had actually went Friday, and she didn't even really want to go Friday, but I, uh, I just was like, "Let's just go ahead and go, because it's not going to be every day that we have this festival"... and we used, we went every year, I mean since we first started dating we've gone every year.  And I don't know, I just kinda... the only reason why I brought it up when I called the police was because, I mean, there's so many different kinds of people there, it's not just you know, Catholics and things like that, it's all walks of life that go to that festival.

Recall that he has "no idea" yet he did have an idea, which he defends, when he attempted to blame someone attending the festival.  This debunks the statement of having "no idea" what happened to Katelyn. 
Note the disagreement as she did not "really" want to go Friday.  

SS:  Well, if you're from Cincinnati, you know you go to church festivals, even if you're not Catholic - it's just what people, what Cincinnatians do in the summer... and yeah, I think that's probably true to a degree... you just, when you have a large group of people, you certainly - you know, it draws a mixed crowd.

JC:  Yeah.  It's gotta be one out of however many people is a bad person, you know?

TJ:  John, you think something happened with that festival, huh.  That maybe someone saw her at the festival?

JC:  Honestly, at the time I did, but maybe it had nothing to do with it.  Maybe this person had been monitor-... or, or, you know - if - if she was taken, maybe this person had been watching for a long time.  I mean, they had to have known that she was going to be home alone, they had to have known, um, you know, when she was going to be home alone, and when I was going to leave, or, or what have you.  

Note "honestly" as a signal that he may not have been "honest" in the interview, and what he is going to say, he really wants believed.  What is it that he really wants believed? The "person".
Note "this" shows closeness
Note "person" is gender neutral.  Would he think a female did this?  Not likely.  Using gender neutral is more likely related to wanting to hide the gender of the guilty.  
Note "if she was taken" contradicts the "no idea"
Note that having "no idea" is also debunked by the repetitive (sensitive) "they had to have known"

This gives the appearance of a deliberate tangent. 

SS:  Yeah.  And you said you last saw her maybe 11, 11:30 Saturday and she was tired, she's going to go to bed -

JC:  Mmhmm.

SS:  Did the bed look like it was slept in at all, when you went over?

JC:  Yeah, I mean - she doesn't typically make her bed, so it was just - it always looks a little messy.

SS:  Eh, who does.  Yeah.  So she may have - so, all right, something obviously happened - if she had slept in the bed - something - someone may have knocked at the door, she may have gone somewhere, um -

JC:  Yeah.

SS:  And this is just such an interesting - obviously in a sad way, but very interesting circumstances in how, how she disappeared.  Uh, Fairfield police, how've they been working with?

JC:  Um, the Fairfield police have actually been pretty good.  Um, they, they've - they're getting less sleep than I am, I feel like.  Um, they, you know, I - they called me at 10 o'clock last night to come in and help them out, and I'm just, I'm willing to do whatever I can, and give them whatever I can to, to help them.  Um, they've been really great, they've brought in other investigators, um, federal investigators even, and it's just been - they've been really helpful.

Note complimentary attitude towards Fairfield police uses the word "actually", indicating that he is comparing them to something else. 
He is sleeping better than police. 
Note the unnecessary "I'm willing to do whatever I can" with "whatever" repeated, making his cooperation to police something sensitive to him. 
Note "whatever I "can" indicates limitation. He is limited in what he can give them. 

Please note:  He is praising police and federal investigators while they are unsuccessful.  This is not expected. 

TJ:  John, have they questioned anybody else besides yourself?

JC:  Yeah.  Um, they've actually called all known associates, um, as far as I know, um.  I have a lot of support from  friends and family, and they've been coming over and telling me that the police called them, the police called them, and so on - 

Note that he has a lot of support from "friends and family" but not from the police, who are "losing sleep"
This is an uncomfortable part for him, as he is admitting here that police have been asking questions about his background, personality, etc, of his friends, who are calling him and telling him that the police are asking about him.  This is completely lost on the interviewer who could have asked him what they were asking his friends but did not: 

SS:  Right.  And they're talking to neighbors, because you said she lives in an apartment, so everyone there has been questioned when they did their canvassing through the neighborhood too, and - and as far that concern - they have not ruled - they haven't basically ruled anyone out as a suspect, I'm assuming.

JC:  No, not at all.

SS:  Now did they tell you that while you are not being considered as a suspect, you haven't been ruled out?  Because you were the last one to see her.

JC:  Yeah.  I mean yeah, yeah.  I mean, and I - I - when I - even before - like, as soon as I - I don't know. As soon as the police were involved, I knew that I was going to be considered a suspect.  It's always going to be, you know, the, the last person to see her, and/or the closest person to her.  So, I mean, I'm the one who sees her every day.  I mean, you can't just rule out anybody, you know?

Note the stuttering "I" indicating tension and anxiety.  Note the stutters are close together on the one word in which a non-stuttering person should have no trouble with, since it is used by us, millions of times.  

Is he the last person to see her?  What about the kidnapper?, the "person"?

SS:  Right.  On that note, John, because we've seen cases like this, um - do you have an attorney?  Did you decide to get a lawyer?

JC:  Um, I don't need a lawyer, because I did not do anything. 

Please note that this is a very sensitive statement.  Here, he explains why he does not need a lawyer, but is not able to bring himself to say he did not "do it"; only that he did not do "anything", which is vague. 

TJ:  Good for you, John.  Good for you.  You've got nothing to hide, right?

SS:  And I'm not insin- John, I'm not, believe me, I'm not insinuating you are, but I'm just saying that -

In spite of the two hosts tripping on each other, here is another place for Carter to say "I didn't cause Katelyn's disappearance", using her name, his own pronoun, "I" (without stuttering) and specifically address her disappearance. 

JC:  Oh, no no no, I - and I understand that.  But I had a lot of family members come to me and say, "You should get a lawyer, you should get a lawyer," and I'm like, "No, there's no reason for me to, I didn't do anything."

Note the repeated "no", as well as the "I", stuttered with the word "and"
Note that he only repeats his unreliable denial; quoting himself with "I'm like..." rather than issuing a reliable denial. 

TJ:  Good for you.  John, I appreciate your courage doing something like that and coming on these airwaves, I mean, it's, uh -

JC:  Yeah, I'm just trying to do everything I can to make sure that Katelyn's name gets out there, and that more people hear her name and see her face, and so on.

Note the lack of stuttering "I"
Note everything "I can" indicates limitation.  Would you feel "limited"?  What limits him?  Time?  Ability? Consequence?

SS:  Sure.  We're as you know a pretty big radio station, we've got a lot of people listening.  And John, I just want to pass out, to pass on the, you know, if you were at the festival last weekend, if you're in Fairfield or in that neighborhood, go online to our website at, take a good look at Katelyn's picture, maybe you saw her, maybe you - you know, help police, help them fill in the blanks.  And if you know anything whatsoever, just give Fairfield police a call, and I'm sure that information will come in a lot, uh, very helpful.

TJ:  And John, I'd keep trying that cellphone.

JC:  Yeah, I, I, I will.  And I also wanted to announce that um, tonight at uh, 7 pm we're going to do a vigil, um, and, and, uh, and it's going to be at Fairfield West Baptist Church on Muskopf Road, and anyone's invited.  At 7 pm.

The stuttering "I" is repeated and it is heavy, indicating acute anxiety for Carter. 

SS:  Okay, Fairfield Baptist.  Got it.  We'll pass that on too.  Hey John, I really appreciate you coming on, though it's difficult under these circumstances and our thoughts and prayers are with you.  If you need anything or need to get some info out, I know you've got Pauly's number here, our producer, and we'll get you right on, buddy. 

JC:  Yeah, thank you very much.

SS:  Give our best to the family too.  We're thinking of them.

TJ:  Thanks John.

JC:  Thank you.

SS:  All right, there you go.

TJ:  It's tough.

SS:  All right, you heard John Carter the fiance of Katelyn Markham, she's been missing for 6 days now out of Fairfield. And as far as what may have happened, there's a lot of speculation out there - you know, when a woman disappears, oranyone disappears, but a woman - she leaves behind her keys, she leaves behind her purse - 

TJ:  That's foul play right there.

SS:  The only thing she had with her was her cellphone and she's not answering that right now, and simply walks away or disappears from a life that everyone around her seemed - uh, where she seemed to be happy, comfortable, and very pragmatic - clearly something's going on here that doesn't add up to someone maybe just leaving; or, maybe it does.

note that the interviewer uses the present tense, but did not catch John Carter's past tense references. 

II.  Katelyn Markham was reported missing  by her fiance, John Carter.  The following is his 911 call with analysis. 

John Carter: Hi, my name is John Carter, I am calling - I know that you're not supposed to report a missing person after - before 24 hours, but my fiancee is missing, I can't find her anywhere.

1.  "hi"   Please note the that call begins with a greeting. 

 In Analysis, we deal with the unexpected.  

Put yourself in the caller's shoes and presuppose innocence.  Would you begin with a greeting as such?  This is not expected in an emergency.  It may be an attempt by the caller to be in a 'friendly' position with law enforcement. 

If your fiancé was missing: 

You would be upset, fearful, that your fiancé is in danger.  Let's note some of the red flags in the call: 

2.  Note the Incomplete Social Introduction.  

  Please note that there is no use of her name indicating a problem in the relationship. He says "my fiance" without using her name.  We expect him to be frantic, not casually, meaning that his words will be in a 'hurry' to get to the specific issues.  Instead, it begins with a casual greeting and here he does not give Katelyn's name. 

This may be considered a form of distancing language, and an ISI (Incomplete Social Introduction) indicating possible difficulty in the relationship.  The analyst should now question if there was a problem in the relationship that is related to Katelyn's disappearance. 

3. "I can't find her anywhere" should lead to the question, "Where, specifically, have you been looking for her?"

911 Dispatcher: Okay, where'd you see her last?

J: Um, I saw her at like 12 o' clock last night. She stays in a house by herself, um, so, she - I'm just, I'm really nervous. Her car's still there, her purse is still -

Note "um" is a pause to think, indicating sensitivity.  Why the need to pause to think?  He was asked a direct question:  Where did you see her last?  He was not asked, what time, nor where she stays, nor about his own emotional state.  He was asked to tell police where he had seen her last. 

In his answer, he avoided saying where he saw her.  The location of where he saw her, therefore, is to be considered very sensitive to John Carter.  

"She stays" is present tense.  This is outside the boundary of the question, "where did you last see her?"  He avoided answering the question, instead choosing to report where she normally is.  This is a strong indication that she was somewhere else when he last saw her. 

Note that "so" is highlighted as very sensitive since it shows a need to explain ("so, since, therefore, because, to...") Yet, he broke his sentence (self censoring) so we do not know what explanation he was going to give.  There should be no need to explain why his emotional state would be such.  This then suggests that the emotions may be in question:

Is he nervous for her, or is he nervous for himself?

"I saw her at like 12' o' clock last night" is only slightly weakened by "like";  investigators should focus upon this time period as it is introduced by the subject along with the pronoun "I" and the past tense verb "saw" connecting him to her at this time.  This time period is likely very important to the story. It sometime near midnight, is likely truthful. 

Please note the phrase, "I'm really nervous"; not just "nervous" but "really" nervous.  This is a focus upon the caller himself, not the victim.  Innocent callers focus upon the victim and ask for help, specifically, for the victim.  This is a focus upon himself.  We have already seen that

The focus is upon the caller, not the victim.  He is the one who is "really nervous" but she is the one alleged to be missing.   Note also the context of being really nervous:   it is around midnight and he reports she is alone.  This is suspicious. 

D: Is there an address?

J: Yeah, 5214 Dorshire Drive.

D: 5214?

J: Dorshire, yes.

D: Okay. And you're out there now?

J: Um, I'm heading out there now, I, like, have been trying to get ahold of her and I decided to go by her house to see if she's okay, and her car's still there - she would be at work right now with her car. Which is why I'm like really freaking out.

1.  Note that the question, "you're there now?" is sensitive to John Carter who did not say "no", but avoiding answering it directly.  
2.  He is only going to "go by her house" and reports being in transit, rather than simply stating he is going there.  
3.  "to see" is the same as "because", indicating the need to tell why he is doing something rather than report what he is doing. 
4.  "and her car's still there";  is he there now, and can see that her car is still there, or is he just "heading out there" now?
5.  "I'm like really freaking out" now uses two words to modify "freaking out", making it very sensitive.  This should question if he really is "freaking out".  Again, note focus upon himself and his wellbeing. 
6. She "would" be at work right now instead of she "should" be at work
7.  Note the inclusion of "decided" to...What made him "decide" to?  Why the need to add this?  

Has he "like trying to get a hold of her" or has he "searched everywhere" for her?

D: What's her name?

He had to be asked before he gave her name.  This is indicative of something amiss in the relationship.  Police should seek to learn if they fought this night.   Were there any ongoing disagreements between them?  Were there tough issues in what otherwise may have been a functional relationship?

J: Katelyn Helene Markham.

full name given, which is appropriate. 

  We look to see what he calls her next: 

D: Have you called the hospitals or jails or anything?

J: Um -

D: Where was she at midnight last night when you last saw her?

J: She was at her house. She was going to bed. She wasn't going out to do anything, so she would've been in her bed. And I mean, I've been with her for 6 years - she's not deceiving, you know, she doesn't -

He did not use Katelyn's name here.

1.  She was at her house.  
2.  She was going to bed. 

These are two things he states and it is likely true.  He has brought us to a very critical point of the night she went missing.  He should continue to tell us what was happening, or about to happen.  She was at her house and was going to go to bed when something happened.  Now notice the sequence is broken:

"She wasn't going out to do anything"

What someone tells us in the negative is important information.  Here he has three things to tell us what she was not doing:  not going out "to do anything"; not deceiving, and doesn't, but stops himself or is interrupted. 

He not only tells us that she wasn't going out, but adds "to do anything."  This is critical.

Police need to learn what he does when he goes out at night.  

Did she refuse to go out?

He has known her 6 years.  He does not say she went to bed, or was in her bed.  

D: Okay, and you guys didn't have an argument or anything?

This is a "yes or no" question.

J: Not at all.

"Not at all" is not the simple "no" and should lead to follow up questions such as, "What did you discuss last night?"

This is an indication that they had an argument.  

D: Okay. Is she on any medications or anything?

J: Not at all.

He now repeats his previous denial.  Repetition becomes weaker as it goes on, because it gets easier and easier (less stressful) to use.  She may not have been on any meds but she may have been on "anything", such as marijuana.  Compound questions are always to be avoided as they let the subject pick and choose, by concentrating on one aspect over the other, reducing stress over deception. 

D: Has she had thoughts of suicide or anything like that?

J: No. Never. I... never.

Broken sentence means missing information. This is self-censoring. 

  He begins with a strong, "no", but weakens it with "never"; but then makes this about himself with "I"

Why would her suicide thoughts be linked to him?  What was he going to say?

This is concerning. 

He still does not use Katelyn's name yet, nor express concern about what state she may be in.  We expect to hear concern for the victim and not the caller. 

D: All right. And have you talked to her mom or anybody like that, to see if maybe she's out shopping, or - ?

J: I called her father. The only thing that's not there is her cell phone, which is positive, but she's not answering it. So... and the Sacred Heart Festival is going on right up the street, and there's a lot of questionable people there, and it's just kind of. I'm sorry.

The question is answered, but then he goes beyond the question to talk about the Festival, casting suspicion towards those at it. 

This is important:  he was asked if he spoke to Kaitlyn's mother, instead, he introduces the "cell phone" in the negative (that's not there).  Does this mean he searched the apartment and knew that everything else she owns was there except her cell phone?

The cell phone can 'ping' to locations.  

Often the addition of "phone" connects a perpetrator to a crime.  

Note "I'm sorry" is often found in the language of the guilty, no matter what its usage is.  See Casey Anthony.  It is a red flag for possible guilt.  

 We look to see if the words "I'm sorry" enter the vocabulary of the caller for any reason as it is a red flag, as it is not expected.  This may be an example of guilt leaking out.  We look for its inclusion for any reason, even as if used as 'pardon me' type of pause.  

He has not used her name yet. 

D: Okay, well, we'll go ahead and have somebody meet you there. What kind of vehicle are you going to be in?

J: A 2008 Ford Docus. It's red.

D: Okay, we'll have somebody come out and speak with you, okay?

J: Okay, thank you.

D: Mmmhmm. Bye.

J: Okay. Bye.

He did not use her name except to give the full, formal name.  This, itself should be considered distancing language.  Why would he distance himself from his fiance?
It is concerning. 

Analysis Conclusion:

The caller has not told all that he knows about what happened to Katelyn Markham.