Thursday, April 9, 2015
Wesley Hadsell: Statement Analysis; AJ's Remains May Be Found
There is a link to the jail house interview below the news report. As I am listening to this now, I am posting and updating analysis.
"Honest to God, I didn't have anything to do with my daughter's disappearance." Note that divinity within a statement is often found in deception. This was towards the end of the interview.
The step father said police accused him of sexual interest in AJ, going back to when she was a 12 or 13 year old child: he does not deny this but only reports it.
Regarding the step father, Wesley Hadsell:
"I don't know where she's at..." is not a reliable denial. The jail house interview was not reliable and he did not say, "I didn't cause her disappearance. I am telling the truth." He did not say, "I didn't cause AJ's disappearance."
More analysis after the news report, below, on the original jailhouse interview.
ABC Breaking US News | US News Videos
From his jail house video, my notes follow the video.
I posted the jailhouse video to allow others for analysis. In listening to it, he avoided issuing a reliable denial and often changed the topic, moving away from sensitive areas. Here are some of my notes:
We look for someone to say, "I didn't cause AJ's disappearance. I don't know what happened to her. I am telling you the truth."
He does not.
He reports that police said some "pretty messed up things" and then goes on to give the allegations of police, but does not deny them, including being attracted to AJ.
"Everyone who knows me, I would pray they know better than that" rather than deny it to be true.
"They asked me where she was at." He does not deny it. When one is unable or unwilling to say so, we cannot say it for him. This may cause some to believe he knows her location. Where she is "at" and "where she is" may be two very different things to him.
"Yes sir, I can say it with 100% confidence" and "I was speaking of her in past tense" and "I just look at things they saying..."
The interviewer asked leading questions, perhaps out of frustration of the rambling like answers that seek to move the topics off from AJ.
A significant point is that he said he was accused of, 5 year ago, marrying his wife to get to AJ, who would have been about 13 years old at the time. When this was raised, it would be the time for him to say "I was not attracted to AJ."
"They were not happy when I said I had nothing to tell" is not to say he had no information for them.
He reported that the police were consistently saying they were looking for a body, yet he does not bring himself to condemn them for it. He seemed like he wanted to sound like he was condemning or disapproving of them, but does not choose words in order to communicate this.
Deceptive people are counting on others to interpret their words, rather than listen to the words chosen. We listen to the actual words chosen, even in jest, sarcasm, or accompanied by any emotions. The words themselves, are important for us to understand that in less than a micro second, the brain chose the words used.
He explains that since they, the police, don't share information with him, he does not share information with them, showing no regard for AJ's wellbeing. He is deceptive about his activities, and uses both distancing and minimizing language regarding his own past.
He blames police. He does not seek to help police.
He also sets up a scenario in which "those kids", AJ's friends, would give up information about him, to police. "I've never threatened anybody" yet he told police he would "handle it his own way" and that there is a house "may or may not have been broken into" and "verified information that evidence was there..."
Did you break into a house?
They say I did.
Avoidance of the question, Number 1.
Did you break into a house?
It is questionable the information they put out.
Avoidance number 2. This indicates the question, itself, was sensitive.
Did you break into a house that you believe had evidence?
yes, I did
Did you plant evidence?
No, sir, I didn't.
We had a lot of information, he said. "We" not, "I"
Did you punch a dog?
Did you punch a dog?
Yes. He was a big dog.
Did you find anything?
"Found my daughters jacket, rolled up, behind a cushion."
Note the dropped pronoun. In yes or no questions, he denied planting it there; another, "no, sir" response.
Remember, yes or no questions do not cause the type of internal stress that open statement deception does.
Even about "brining the evidence to light" he employs passivity.
"I basically wanted to take care of it myself" is likely a truthful statement.
How long were you in the house?
18, maybe 19 minutes.
"Some people are going to say I planted evidence."
This may be embedded, as he does not attribute these words to any specific person, only "people" in general.
"We honest to God felt that the cops weren't doing anything."
The interview contains deception. His use of "we" comes in times of sensitivity and may indicate a desire to share guilt.
"We called the police..." uses the pronoun "we" when he then said that someone else called police.
He wants to be seen as a crusader, fighting for his daughter, against corrupt police who just are not doing their job, yet he is not truthful.
"Our hearts dropped" is to avoid his own emotion.
"I called him, I called him, I called him" three times when asked if he had called the detective "right away" after finding "evidence."
Even with all the time to say, over and over, to issue a simple reliable denial, he does not. He speaks in a cryptic manner, as if he cannot give out information due to the integrity of the case. Police likely know how he attempted to not only obstruct justice, but has sought to cast doubt on others, including AJ's friends.
Regarding what he would like to do:
"Get a gun. Discharge a gun. End of story. That's what I thought. Thats what I wanted to do. That's what I felt like doing. "
This may have been presented 'as if' it was directed to the guilty party, but his words do not say such. It is likely suicide talk. To remove doubt, he then said;
"I'd give up my life for my daughter."
"Police think that I hurt her. They can say what they want, they can badger all they want. "
"I didn't hurt my daughter. I don't know where she's at. "
They offered no hope. They wanted to know where she's at. I shut down. I had no emotion. I was paralyzed. :
Please note that when one kills, one did not "hurt"; which is minimizing language.
If he did not kill her, he has impeded the investigation and police should seek to learn if he molested her.