Sunday, October 12, 2014

Missing: Baby Delano Wilson Case Review

Statements and Deception

Fake Reward

911 Call



Now months have passed after a newborn disappeared from a reported kidnapping, the baby's parents spoke out, and Statement Analysis indicated the father for deception, and the mother's statements certainly raised questions as to what she knows from the father, Willie Wilson. 

 Recall that Willie Wilson said that his 'daughter, er, son' was kidnapped and that the kidnappers beat him and left him unconscious. Some came to his defense saying that a hit on the head might confuse the "son versus daughter" statement, yet others said it was his attack on his daughter, earlier, that may have been in his mind at the time of his statement.  

Police said his injuries did not match his description of the 'beating.'  We also saw his words did not match a personal conflict.  

"All we want at the end of the day, is our baby to be found," said Tanaisha Perkins, Delano's mother.

Delano Wilson

When parents are standing (or seated) together, we may hear things such as "our" daughter in an appropriate manner.  Yet, given the age of the child, we are more likely to hear a mother say "my daughter" or "my baby."  The maternal instincts, Solomon showed, are powerful. 

But the parents of missing infant Delano Wilson say they keep calling investigators for updates on the case and no one is calling them back.  They seem to not understand why police isn't given them any information. 

In short, police do not believe Willie Wilson.  

"It's like just leaving us hanging us to drying. Don't nobody knows what's going on," said Willie Wilson, the baby's father.

 Willie Wilson says a white man and a Latino woman robbed him at gunpoint in an alley near his house while he was walking with his infant son. Wilson told investigators the man attacked him, leaving him dazed, and then snatched the baby, taking off in a blue Ford Taurus.  The description is from media, not from him.  From him, we expect up close and personal language.  Anyone who has ever been the victim of an attack knows just how "close" and "personal" the assault is.  Distancing language raises suspicion. 


"I can still recall everything. Everything. That's something you not gonna forget," said Wilson.

There is a clarity in an attack like this.  Expected is close language, not "that", but "this" and mostly:

"This is something I am not going to forget", and not the word "you" which is distancing language. 

That's why Wilson says he's been searching online for a sketch artist to draw the people he says took his son. Police didn't supply a sketch artist because they did not want to waste resources on an obvious lie. 

"I'm pretty sure a sketch artist who's talented enough would be able to draw that out. 'Cause I know exactly how they looked. They'd be actually able to put it on paper so other people can see and look for these people," said Wilson.

He knew "exactly" how they looked but could not recall if it was his son or his daughter that they took.  

Oops.  

Wilson says investigators haven't offered to provide one, and the cheapest he can find costs $100 an hour.

'I think they don't want to because they see me as a suspect still. That's why I haven't gotten a sketch artist. That's why haven't nobody answered my phone calls," said Wilson.

This is true.  Willie Wilson has been indicated for deception in the disappearance of his daughter, er, son.  


Police have said Wilson's story has left them with questions, but have never named him or the baby's mom as suspects. Investigators have questioned both parents and removed items from their home.

"Anything they want us to do, we're not hiding. We're here. They know where we're at. It's not like we're running from anybody. We're looking for our son," said Perkins.

Taniasha Perkins says that's what they're going to keep on doing until they find him.

"I feel in my spirit that my baby's okay. I just need him back with us, with his family," she said.

Next, we saw a reward offered in which there were enough indicators to question the validity of such a reward:  Was it intended to help find the baby, or make the family look as if it was a real kidnapping?


Statement Analysis gets to the truth:


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.  


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.
Was this a drug robbery?

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..."


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."


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.
The hole in the heart:  first family, and then the mother.  This is not expected.

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 account is not believed by police.  He likely killed or sold the child. 


 Crime Stoppers at 262-TIPS.




We are hoping to expand our Statement Analysis services to include audio files, transcription services, and  online courses available via download.

If you would like to help:

 

31 comments:

Anonymous said...

Peter, great analysis! I will be reading through it again to gather more in depth knowledge of SA. I believe the father sold the baby because of the fact when he called 911 he initially said his "daughter" was missing. I believe he may have dressed the baby as a girl to throw off anyone searching for him (the baby).

Layla said...

Off Topic: Sorry for the off topic but I have been wondering what Peter or anyone else here thinks about Amanda Bynes twitter statements about her father's abuse of her. It seems what she wrote about her father was discounted. by almost everyone as the rantings of a lunatic and she was even committed to a mental institution by her parents right after she posted the accusations on Twitter. Using SA on her statements, though, I found them to be truthful with no indicators of deception. Just wondering if anyone else saw her Twitter statements and if anyone else found tgem to be truthful. Again, sorry for the off topic, my curiosity got the best of me about what Peter or others here would think if they are truthful or not.

tania cadogan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
tania cadogan said...

All I could do is give him what I had. I didn’t wanna harm the baby.

There we have it, right out of his own mouth.

Not he didn't want the abductor to harm the baby or even i didn't wanthim/them to harm the baby, rather, he personally didn't want to harm the baby I didn’t wanna harm the baby.

Was this abuse gone too far, neglect gone too far, discipline gone too far?

Note THE BABY and not MY/OUR BABY

Anonymous said...

Peter, you must be in need of a chuckle by now. Enjoy:

I go to bed with an Arab in European clothes. Several days later… I meet an Arab in native dress, and we repair to a Turkish bath. Now I am almost (but not quite) sure it is the same Arab. In any case I have not seen no.1 again... It's like I been to bed with 3 Arabs since arrival, but I wonder if it isn't the same character in different clothes, and every time better behaved, cheaper, more respectful… I really don't know for sure."

Full article:
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-29566539


Anonymous said...

O/T I need help analysing a statement. Someone agreed to help me do something for someone, and when they didn't come through, they sent this message to me, "I am sorry I disappointed you :( didn't mean to make you look untrustworthy please blame me"

In this context, is "you look untrustworthy" an embedded statement?

tania cadogan said...

They dropped the pronoun when they said they didn't mean to make you look untrustworthy, thus they don't take ownership of that part of the statement.

john said...


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



He says "the other person who was a lady" "Person" is gender neutral, but then tells us she is a "Lady" He uses the more polite word "Lady". This is not expected. If somebody stole my child, i certainly would not be calling them a "lady".

Is there a female involved that he is close to, hence the use of the word "lady".

Layla said...

911: They took your son?

Subject: Yes, they abducted my son.

Peter noted that the father changed the 911 operator's choice of word "took" to the word "abducted".

This caused me to think about this word change, and I believe that his use of the word "abducted" straying from the word "took" that was offered to him, indicates rehearsed language. This feeds into my theory that he, in fact, sold the baby. Had he actually killed the baby, I doubt he would have had the composure to rehearse language.

Also, I think it is quite odd how he comments that the people who took the baby were "A white male who was a man the other person who was a lady was hispanic."
I wonder even if he is fabricating this, why does he need to clarify (to himself really) that the "white male" "was a man" and then "the other person" was a lady"?

I believe the "white male" was actually a "white male" but he very quickly thinks about changing the "white male's" identity and in a split second decides against it sticks with his original thought "was a man". He realizes he's already said too much. The "other person" who was a lady: Do you see what he did? His brain planned more carefully in this second sentence. He didn't make the mistake of revealing her true description as he did in the 1st sentence with "white male", rather he uses the nondescript "the other person" so he has more wiggle room to fabricate and describes this other person as "was a lady was hispanic". I believe there was a "white male", however I believe the second person either did not exist and there was only one person or he falsified the description of the second person.

ima.grandma said...

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. 

This reminds me of a similar worded reward offered in the tragedy of the lady that hanged herself. Now I'm doubting myself on the instance but I'm sure the topic was discussed. I don't remember your previous analysis. You know the memory is the first to go. I struggle a bit. Lol

Also, when the father spoke about how

...he feels in his spirit that the baby is okay...

It made me feel the baby is dead.

tania cadogan said...

I always note the wording in rewards, often it is for the arrest and conviction of the perp, others will pay out on the safe return, and, since it is invariably the case in missing persons, that the victim is dead, and the reward is offered by family member, the safe return clause means the reward won't be paid out.

it sound slike a huge reward till you see the small print and even should it be paid out ( a LE offered one) there can be disputes as to who did what and helped LE catch the perp.

GeekRad said...

ima.grandma, the woman you are thinking about was Leanne Beardon. Yes, Peter did an analysis of the reward and the husband's statements and they indicated deception- but he clarified, not guilt. The deception being the fears the family were not expressing.

OT, and this made me happy, Michele Williams was convicted of murdering her husband Greg and sentenced to 60 years in prison. Some of you may recall this case. I think John originally posted the link and I became obsessed after watching the 48 hours show on it. You can find it by searching for "48 hours-Temptation in Texas". There are several interviews with Michele and she is definitely deceptive. Bloggers here will enjoy analyzing her statements, especially now that we know she was found guilty. If you want more on the case and the treachery of the woman search "Claire St. Amant". She is a very good investigative journalist who followed the case in depth.

ima.grandma said...

Thanks GeekRad. I'm so happy to hear from you. I've wondered why we haven't heard much from you lately. I'm glad you clarified the issue. I remember it was touchy and now I'm sorry I brought it up.

Anonymous said...

OT: Missing 7 yo girl in Wisconsin

http://whbl.com/news/articles/2014/oct/14/search-underway-for-missing-child/

Anonymous said...

Layla, I think Amanda Bynes was telling the truth. I believe she was abused and I think she has mental illness. I think someone convinced her the mental illness caused her to think she'd been abused. The games pedophiles play with people, especially the emotional and mental games, are unfathomable.

trustmeigetit said...





Also

the man is constantly”

Present tense. Making story up at that point….

Anonymous said...

Is the "I didn't wanna harm the baby" an embedded confession that he did harm the baby?

john said...

OT Update:

Holly Bobo was allegedly gang raped before she was murdered

http://www.examiner.com/article/holly-bobo-was-allegedly-gang-raped-before-she-was-murdered

Layla said...

Anon 8:55,

Thank you for your response on Amanda Bynes. I agree with you! I actually spoke out on a comment forum stating I thought she was telling the truth, as well as something similar to what you wrote in regards to her being taught she was "crazy" when she says she was abused, and I got bashed!! I appreciate you affirming my thoughts and sharing your own. Her statements about the abuse seemed truthful.

Marilyn said...

John said:
He says "the other person who was a lady" "Person" is gender neutral, but then tells us she is a "Lady" He uses the more polite word "Lady". This is not expected. If somebody stole my child, i certainly would not be calling them a "lady"

Exactly, And the father of a murdered daughter would not call the accused/arrested a gentleman.

Anonymous said...

Amanda Bynes is another victim of psychobabble media. The chip implant in her head story is enough evidence of that! In my area it's in the teeth. There they can perform brain surgery to stalk and harass. Here it is much more simple and easier to track pain meds and medical lists for hawking.

Peter Hyatt said...

Marilyn:

very good!

It is refreshing to know that material is being well absorbed.

Peter

Peter Hyatt said...

Layla,

do you have the statements of Byrnes for analysis?

Peter

Layla said...

Peter, I found this link containing the Amanda Bynes tweets. She has made some serious allegations against her father, and was promptly institutionalized by her parents the day after the tweets came out. I would be very interested to hear your analysis of them.

http://www.ibtimes.com/amanda-bynes-twitter-actress-tweets-dad-allegedly-sexually-verbally-abused-her-child-1702943

Peter Hyatt said...

Layla

the texts appear reliable.

Peter

Saint Theresa said...

Peter, including the part about the dad havig a microchip implanted in her brain?

Layla said...

Peter, thank you very much for looking at the texts. I was very curious what you would make of them. Using the SA I learned here, I too felt they were reliable and I got absolutely blasted for saying so on a comment forum. However, they do seem reliable. Thanks again.

Layla said...

"My dad never did any of those things The microchip in my brain made me say those things but he’s the one that ordered them to microchip me.” -Amanda Bynes

St Theresa, the above quote is the one I think you (as well as many others on the internet) are asking about! It certainly is an odd statement, whereby she retracts her other tweets. However, if you look closely at it, there are some markers of deception within this statement.

1) the use of the word "never" is questionable here whether it is a marker for deception or not

2)However in the second part of her statement "The microchip in my brain made me say those things" you see a repetition of the phrase "those things" which makes it sensitive (possible deception)

3) but he's the one who ordered THEM to microchip me
1. the word "but" works to negate the statement that comes before it which is "the microchip in my brain made me say those things"
2. he's the one that ordered "THEM" to microchip me (the veracity of this statement is further minimized by this introduction of the word "them". WE have not been told who "them" is. For example, let's say someone stole something and says "I didn't do it. They made me do it." (However I never tell you who "them" is.) You can see from this simple statement, this type of use of the word "they" disassociated from any actual people, casts doubt on the truthfulness of the statement.

The other interesting thing is that when people with schizophrenia start saying things like "there's a microchip in my brain" or "someone implanted a microphone in my mind" and many other bizarre statements like that, it is actually a way the person has come up with an explanation to themselves that makes some type of sense to explain how some very bizarre things could be going on inside their mind. They actually come up with these thoughts to help explain to themselves why they are having such disordered thoughts, hearing voices which are normally tormenting towards the individual insulting them, sometimes having conversations with each other, as well as the individual typically has very bizarre delusions (believing a parent has abused them would not qualify as "bizarre" it would need to be something that really could not happen to a person like aliens are out to kidnap them, the CIA is tracking them, stalking them and trying to kill them, etc., So, with Amanda Bynes, my personal gut instinct is that she is in some sense "playing ill", almost like as a protective thing where she can say things that are truthful but then when she feels anxious about that, she can say something to get others to say "oh she's just sick". Also, she may have been taught that when she brings up abuse, she is being "crazy". In schizophrenic thought, it simply would not make sense an individual would say they were abused (in ways that could have happened) and then account for that by saying a microchip was implanted in their brain. Schizophrenics who are experiencing bizarre delusions need to come up with these types of explanations (microchips in brain, implantations in their body sometimes) to explain to themselves why are such bizarre things happening to them. How are aliens tracking them? Talking to them? Experimenting on them? They then will come up with an explanation such as a microchip etc. A parent abusing a person, however terrible it is, is not a bizarre delusion that would cause the schizophrenic to need to explain it by saying, of there is a microchip, a microphone in my brain. In other words, Amanda Bynes' brain did not need to come up with that type of explanation because there was nothing that bizzarre happening inside her brain/mind. Amanda Bynes, in my opinion, is deceptive in that one statement about the microchip.

Saint Theresa said...

Thanks but I still don't believe her. Look at her statements about her being engaged and going to be put on the cover of people. I don't believe her for second. I have a bipolar schitzo sister who told many people my father and mother beat her and used drugs with her. Which never happened. She said things like that to get sympathy from whoever she was using and taking advantage of.
So I don't buy it.

Jen Ow said...

Hi Layla,

I think it's important to take into account the context surrounding the texts of allegations against her father. She sent the texts directly after she was arrested for DUI, and while her parents were trying to have her commited and take conservatorship over her. (due to her erratic behavior and repeated run-ins with the law)

In my opinion she was trying to back her parents off. She likely made threats that she would allege some kind of abuse if they didn't stop pursuing conservatorship, and when they continued with the proceedings she issued these statements.

Interestingly, the judge granted her parents the conservatorship, (which is rare!) It takes ALOT for a person's rights to be stripped, like testimony from medical professionals, and clear evidence that the person cannot provide for their best interests. Also, to have someone involuntarily commited they must be found to be a danger to themselves/others.

AND...

The psychiatric hospital where she was admitted on a 51/50 hold (72 hrs) extended her stay to 30 days. (Also hard to accomplish, as even in cases of suicidal/drug addicted, or consenting patients who are seeking treatment, the hospital is often unable to establish grounds to keep the patient.)

So basically, all evidence suggests that Bynes is profoundly mentally ill.

*Let's also consider if what she said could even be true! She gives no date for the alleged innappropriate behavior, that she supposedly 'started' to record...but if she is referring to her childhood, then camera phones with the ability to record video were nonexistant. In fact, even the most basic camera phones didn't exist until the mid 2000's, and the best I can tell the ability to record video wasn't available until around/after 2007. (Even the first iphone didn't have the ability to record video in 2007!)

In 2007, Bynes was 23 years old! I find it very unlikely that she was involuntarily subjected to her father fondling himself in front of her at 23 years old! (Or anytime after 18 for that matter!)

http://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/camera-phone-history/

Saint Theresa said...

Bravo Jen ow!