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:  

18 comments:

Anonymous said...

http://tinyurl.com/mcugt5o

Peter, what do you think of this warning. Is it credible? Is the denial credible?

Anonymous said...

Peter, the father slipping up and calling his son "my daughter" is striking. After watching the mother's plea, I wondered if the baby might have been sold. I wonder if the father may have sold his "son" but possibly may have had him dressed as a girl to try to throw off the public when they learned of the missing baby boy as police and the public would then be keeping their eyes out looking for the baby boy. The mother also emphasizes the gender of the baby in a way I found odd and perhaps sensitive saying he is her "firstborn son" and "only son". Anyway, just my thoughts, there seems to be sensitivity surrounding gender. Could the baby have been dressed in girl clothes and sold?

Peter said...

No.Shut up.

john said...

O/T she used a pronoun in an uncooperative verb situation when underlying active sensory fake visualisation sequin tramp.

tania cadogan said...

I didn’t wanna harm the baby.”

An interesting choice of words.

First, he tells us I didn't want to harm the baby.
Anything in the negative is sensitive

I would ask if you didn't want to harm the baby what did you do?

What would cause you to not want to harm the baby?

Was the baby doing something he shouldn't have been doing?
Was he crying or being noisy?
Did his diaper need changing?

Note the article he uses, he doesn't say MY baby, he says THE baby which is distancing.

Is he the bio father?
Is paternity in doubt?

Second, Why would he say I didn't want to harm the baby when the logical response would be i didn't want THEM to harm MY baby.

Is this leakage?

He didn't want to harm (minimising) the baby but something happened which caused harm to the baby or more likely death.

Was it a physical punishment that went to far?
Was he crying and wouldn't shut up and he lashed out in a temper, beating the baby to death ?
it would explain him saying he fell on the baby when he was hit,pistol whipped and knocked unconscious.

I didn't beat him, he got the injuries from the abductor or from when i fell on him (justin dipietro excuse when he broke baby Ayla's arm)

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.
Because is used to explain why something happened, here we have it repeated twice making a cluster of blues.
Yhis is highly sensitive.
How did he know they were going to do more?
note the tense he uses, he goes from past tense She DIDN'T do nothing to the man IS constantly yelling at me
IS not WAS?

He tells us SHE didn't do nothing but it is the MAN who is doing the shouting and grabbing his pants.

We have the man constantly YELLING at him TELLING him to empty his pockets.
Why does he have the man YELLING which is very strong then minimising it down to TELLING?

Expected would be the man was yelling at him to empty his pockets.

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

Oops, open mouth insert feet.
He was a white MALE who was a MAN
The other PERSON was a LADY
A male would be a man, notice though he uses male and man but then changes to person and lady.
Why the change in language?
was it a change in reality?
Why not a man and a woman or male and female.
Referring to someone as a lady is polite.
he uses the word person in relation to the woman, which makes me wonder if he was trying to hide the identity of the woman, especially since he uses a complimentary term in relation to her.

This leads me to wonder if he had help from a woman at some point be it during the crime (i suspect physical abuse) or during the subsequent disposal.

How did he have time to notice all the specific items of clothing given he was allegedly being robbed, had been hit, pistol whipped and was being constantly yelled at plus he would have been trying to protect his son from harm?
It was a stressful pressurised situation, how did he have time to notice things like sneaker make and jewellry?

tania cadogan said...

Too much attention to detail can indicate deception (casey anthony decribing the nanny springs to mind)

Order is important, he was robbed first and then his son was abducted.

I wonder if he is owing anyone money?
Drug debt perhaps?
Did he 'lose' someones stock?

A possible excuse, 'i wuz robbed and they took my son, it was them that took the money/drugs i wuz bringing you'

He got high and baby was crying, disturbing his me time and he lashed out?

Baby is killed by accident or design and he sees a way of making money out of it and conveniently 'losing money/drugs/ by blaming the abductors.

from what i have heard, cctv has not recorded anyone fitting the decription of the couple or their car at the time claimed,

I wonder if they have used cadaver dogs in the house and also luminol

bullet said...

"I've been robbed"

Alibi building from the start.

bullit said...

He doesn't ask for help for his son.

There is a lack of urgency for the safety of his son.

Anonymous said...

Most of his supposed recount is in present tense.

"All I could do is give him what I had." Is that supposed to mean the baby?

Like most everyone else, I'm not buying this. Like someone else pointed out in the last article, where was all the baby supplies; bag, carrier, stroller, etc.? No one walks around with a 6 week old, in their arms, not in a carrier or stroller, unless you're in your house.

This is so sad. If people don't want, or can't care for their babies/kids, why don't they give them up, at least give the baby/kid a chance at life?

Anonymous said...

I just saw this on NG: http://www.hlntv.com/video/2014/08/28/911-call-seconds-after-mom-crushed-rock-overpass

The first thing the husband says to 911 is "hi". Obviously, he had nothing to do with this accident though. The 911 call is upsetting, as you can hear the daughter telling her Mom she is doing ok. Very sad. I'm glad they caught the guys that threw the rock.

Anonymous said...

The baby's father said

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

He's obviously fabricating the existence of this "male" "who was a man" as well as the woman.
It is interesting how he keeps confusing or needing to clarify genders including the gender of his son who he refers to as "my daughter" before correcting himself.
I am wondering what he was thinking of when he initially made the slip of saying "my daughter". I feel that he realized he screwed up making that slip and that is why he is careful to say that the kidnapper was a "white male" who was a "man". It is as if his mind is telling him don't make that mistake again of confusing genders.
It just seems that when he mistakenly calls the baby his "daughter" he is either (as Peter suggested) thinking of another child who he is the father of who is actually a baby girl of approximately the same age or I do think there is a possibility he may have dressed the baby son in girl clothes and sold her.
OK, and one more idea: Is there any possibility that the baby was actually a girl but that the father wanted a boy very badly and the mother had dressed the baby as a boy and told that father that the baby was a boy and then the father discovered the baby was not a boy and harmed the baby or "got rid of" the baby?????
This may seem farfetched but there is a lot of sensitivity surrounding gender of the baby in the mother's speech: calling him her "firstborn son" her "only son".

MissT said...

Willie Nelson has a two year old daughter that was abused when she was two months old. His girlfriend was convicted and is serving time. http://www.theindychannel.com/news/call-6-investigators/willie-wilson-questioned-in-2012-child-abuse-case

john said...

Police call off Amber Alert for missing 6-week-old Delano Wilson

http://www.wthr.com/story/26407561/2014/08/29/indianapolis-baby-still-missing-after-third-day-of-search

Anonymous said...

They have cancelled the Amber Alert. Indy police have this guy's number. They knew the story was fishy from the start, as did anyone with even a passing acquaintance with SA.

I live in the Indy area, and these are good police who are searching for the truth in this case.

Peter Hyatt said...

Anonymous said...
I just saw this on NG: http://www.hlntv.com/video/2014/08/28/911-call-seconds-after-mom-crushed-rock-overpass

The first thing the husband says to 911 is "hi". Obviously, he had nothing to do with this accident though. The 911 call is upsetting, as you can hear the daughter telling her Mom she is doing ok. Very sad. I'm glad they caught the guys that threw the rock.
August 30, 2014 at 12:19 AM


some will say it out of nervousness, shock, or even resignation.

This is a good reminder that we do not conclude deception on a single indicator of sensitivity.

thank you,

Peter

Jen Ow said...

Hi Peter and Anon,

According to the 911 call, (and the husbands interview w/NG, at the point when he greets the 911 operator, he has not yet seen his wife's injuries.

Listening to the call, you can hear the moment he see's her gruesome injuries. He cries out, and then horrifically describes her injuries in a panic as the operator tries to obtain his location, what type of vehicle, etc...which he appears unable to hear or comprehend due to the shock of her injuries.

I saw the husband's interview, and what he described was SO disturbing! He said his daughter was driving, when suddenly the car 'exploded'. His daughter screamed to him for directions what to do, and he helped her get off the road, and called 911. THEN his daughter turned on the light in the car to see her mother's horrific injuries, and ran screaming from the car. He jumped out and opened the passenger door to find out what she had seen, and melted down. Then he said that he and his daughter held her hands, to keep her from further injuring herself, and assuming she was taking her last breathes.

(He describes much more graphically her struggle to breathe, but it is SO disturbing that I won't include it here...you should be able to read it on NG transcript.)

What makes me furious is apparently these 4 teens were on a crime spree that night, vandalizing homes, and eventually hurling the rock that nearly killed this woman, and altered her life permanently. Yet according to NG, some/possibly all, are being charged as juveniles. One has turned states evidence, and is basically walking on his charges, by claiming he was in the car when the rock was thrown.

Johanna Narvaez said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

I pray that the people in the blue car come forward.