Friday, October 24, 2014

Transcript of 911 Call in Melendez Murder

Statement Analysis is in bold type.  This is the 911 call from the Menemdez murder. Thanks to John.

TRANSCRIPT OF 911 EMERGENCY CALL IN MENENDEZ MURDER CASE WITH AM-MANSION MURDERS

AP, Associated Press
May. 24, 1990 9:58 PM ET

 BEVERLY HILLS, Calif. (AP) _ Here is a transcript of the audio tape released by the Police Department Thursday in the Menendez murder case. 
The speakers are two 911 emergency dispatchers and apparently one of the murder victims' two sons, Lyle, who sobs continuously. Sounds of anguished cries heard in the background appear to be the other son, Erik. The tape includes the call to 911 and a call from 911 dispatchers to the house. 

People rarely lie outright.  More than 90% of lying is from withheld information. 


Call to 911 emergency dispatch: 

Woman dispatcher: ''Beverly Hills emergency.'' 
Caller: ''Yes.'' (Yelling in background.) 

Caller: ''Some ...'' (sobbing) 

Woman dispatcher: ''What's the problem? What's the problem? What's the problem?'' 

Caller: ''Somebody killed my parents.'' 

Note that this is a truthful statement. "Somebody" did kill his parents.  Note that "somebody" is singular, and it avoids gender. 

Woman dispatcher: ''Pardon me.'' 

Caller: ''Somebody killed my parents.'

We note that the caller refers to them as "my parents" in reference to being "killed and we will look for any change in language. 

Woman dispatcher: ''What - who? Are they still there?'' 

Caller: ''Yes.'' 

Woman dispatcher: ''The people who killed them?'' 
Caller: ''No, no, no.'' 

Woman dispatcher: ''Were they shot?'' 

Caller: ''Erik 3/8 (garbled) ... Yes.'' 

the caller argues with Erik

Woman dispatcher: ''They were shot.'' 

Caller: ''Yes.'' 

(Muffled sound of dispatcher giving orders on another line; shouting in the background from the caller's end.) 

Caller: ''Erik, shut up 3/8'' 

Woman dispatcher: (to another dispatcher) ''I have a hysterical person on the phone.'' 

Woman dispatcher: ''Is the person still there? 

Caller: ''I don't think so.'' 

Note that "think" reduces commitment.  If someone had just shot your parents, would you only "think" the person is not there?
note the language of the 911 operator:  "person" is gender neutral because the caller avoided identifying the gender of the shooter. 
This is the first indication that the identity of the shooter is being withheld from police. 

Male dispatcher: ''What happened? Have you been able to figure out what happened?'' 

Caller: (sobbing) 

Male dispatcher: ''Who shot who?'' 

Caller: ''I don't know. I came home and found them.'' 

This caller wants police to believe that he was not there for the shooting. 

Male dispatcher: ''You came home and found who shot?'' 

Caller: (muffled) ''My mom and dad.''

They are now "my mom and dad", listing "mom" first, in response to the question.  There is no other language attached to "mom and dad" by the caller, here. 

Male dispatcher: ''You're in bed?'' 

This is a strange question and is not expected.  The Male dispatcher has, for some reason, come to the need of inquiry that the caller is in bed.  This is different from just getting home and finding "them."

Woman dispatcher: ''Are they still in the house, the people that did the shooting?'' 

Caller: (sobbing) 

Male dispatcher: ''Let me talk to Erik.'' 

Caller: (sobbing) 

Male dispatcher: ''Who is the person that was shot?'' 

Caller: ''My mom and my dad.'' 

Male dispatcher: ''Your mom and dad?'' 

Caller: ''My mom and dad.'' 

Male dispatcher: ''It's OK, hold on a second.'' 

Caller: (sobbing) 
Male dispatcher: ''OK, we're on our way over there with an ambulance.'' 
Caller: (sobbing) 
End of call 
--- 
Call from 911 emergency dispatch to Menendez home: 


Answerer: ''Hello.''

This is not to be considered a "greeting" which we flag in other situations. This is the subject answering a call. 
Male dispatcher: ''Hello, this is the Police Department.'' 
Answerer: ''Yes.'' (sobbing) 
Male dispatcher: ''OK, I want you to come outside.''

The suspicious nature of the call has warranted caution on the part of the police.  



Answerer: ''I've got to get my brother.'' 
The subject does not respond positively to the officer calling; indicating his priority.  

This is not lost by the officer calling who then issues another command:  


Male dispatcher: ''You tell your brother come out the front door. Everybody come outside.'' 
End of call.

9 comments:

Jen Ow said...

Does anyone know what 3/8 means?

I remember watching Dateline/48hrs type reruns of this case, and I could swear that Lyle yelled 'Erik get away', or 'Erik get away from them'.

I remember thinking it was weird. As why/how would he even notice , (or care) what his brother was doing if he was as hysterical as he was acting. I also remember thinking the entire tape of him crying sounded fake/forced.

Buckley said...

The CNN version has some definite differences from the one above. No 3/8, Jen, but the "get away" is there.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

911 OPERATOR: Hello (UNINTELLIGIBLE) emergency.

LYLE MENENDEZ: Yes, police...

911 OPERATOR: What's the problem?

LYLE MENENDEZ: We're the sons of...

911 OPERATOR: What's the problem? What's the problem?

LYLE MENENDEZ: Someone killed my parents!

911 OPERATOR: Pardon me? LYLE MENENDEZ: Someone killed my parents!

911 OPERATOR: Were they shot?

LYLE MENENDEZ: Yes!

911 OPERATOR: They were shot?

LYLE MENENDEZ: Yes! (UNINTELLIGIBLE)

911 OPERATOR: What happened?

LYLE MENENDEZ: Shut up! Erik, shut up!

911 OPERATOR: What happened? We have units en route. What happened?

LYLE MENENDEZ: I don't know!

911 OPERATOR: Who shot who?

LYLE MENENDEZ: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) I just came home!

911 OPERATOR: You came home and found who shot?

LYLE MENENDEZ: My mom and dad!

911 OPERATOR: Do you know if they're still in the house, the people that did the shooting?

LYLE MENENDEZ: Erik, get away from them!

(END VIDEO CLIP)

Anonymous said...

Defense team files second motion for evidence in Heather Elvis case
Posted: Oct 23, 2014 5:09 PM PDT
Updated: Oct 23, 2014 5:20 PM PDT
By Brooke HoldenCONNECT

Kirk Truslow defends Sidney Moorer for the murder of Heather Elvis.
Kirk Truslow defends Sidney Moorer for the murder of Heather Elvis.

HORRY COUNTY, SC (WMBF) - The defense team for Sidney Moorer filed a second motion for prosecutors to come forth with evidence in the murder trial of Heather Elvis. Moorer and wife, Tammy, are accused of murdering Elvis.

The motion compelling the state to “produce certain evidence” was filed October 20. The first motion was filed by the defense team on September 2.

Horry County Solicitor Jimmy Richardson said the office will provide the defense with its request.

“Usually, [the defense] is asking for stuff that police didn't collect,” Richardson said. He said the office has provided a “truckload of stuff” at the request of the defense.

Richardson said he doesn't expect a hearing will be needed for the motion.

Copyright 2014 WMBF News. All rights reserved.

Buckley said...

Further, Los Angeles Times reorts this from the 911 call which isn't exactly the same in either transcript and shows Lyle not answering the question. Above it implies he says "I don't know" to "Who shot who?" but LA Times says he said "I didn't hear anything. I just came home":

"Who shot who?" the young man on the line was asked.

"I didn't hear anything; I just came home," he sobbed.

Anonymous said...

“Usually, [the defense] is asking for stuff that police didn't collect,” Richardson said. He said the office has provided a “truckload of stuff” at the request of the defense.

this statement makes me think the prosecution still lacks vital evidence to convict. it's the exageration that they have a "truckload" that makes me think this.

john said...

Caller: ''Somebody killed my parents.

'Woman dispatcher: ''What - who? Are they still there?''

Caller: ''Yes.''


Is this not a confessional slip up ?


Woman dispatcher: ''The people who killed them?''

Caller: ''No, no, no.''


Repetition of "No" x 3 showing high Sensitivity to the question. Has he realized what he has said above ?

stop it said...

NO Thanks JOhn. This shit is old as fuck. Anyone can get this old ass transcript. If your purpose for mentioning John's name is to fuck with me, then guess what? I don't give a fuck. If you want to give JOhn a 'shout out' then give JOhn a fucking shout out. Tracy said and I quote, " John is stupid for fucking with that trash in Maine. His dumb ass is going to end up in jail or prison for trusting AshleyP and Jeff Hanson.

jen ow 3/8 means 'ambiquity'.

Anonymous said...

I think he was just attempting to correct which "they" they were discussing.

I think he did it because he said "some" to open.

instead of help or my mom and dad or bleeding -- or anything more concrete and knowable. "someone" is not really knowable even if he were innocent --- it could me a group of killers or a murder suicide, etc - unless he suspect he knows who did it and is affraid to say. that would be the only innocent explanation for starting with "some".

talk about SA said...

stop it..what is your major malfunction?