Saturday, April 11, 2015

Statement Analysis of NY Mets Jenrry Mejia



Jenrry Mejia, pitcher, tested positive for a banned substance.  He said:

"I know the rules are the rules and I will accept my punishment, but I can honestly say I have no idea how a banned substance ended up in my system. I have been through a lot in my young career and missed time due to injury.  I have worked way too hard to come back and get to where I am, so I would never knowingly put anything in my body that I thought could hold me out further.  I am sorry to the Mets organization, my teammates and the fans, as well as my family.  In life, I know God put certain obstacles in your path and this is something else I know I will overcome."

Deception indicated.

The subject fails to issue a reliable denial. 

A reliable denial consists of three components.  If there are more than three, or less than three, it is unreliable.  

"I did not take PEDs" would be reliable.  

I.  The pronoun "I"
II.  The past tense "didn't" or "did not"
III  The allegation specifically answered.  

Common unreliable denials include:

"I would never take steroids"
"I never took steroids"
"I never took anything"

Next, we see component three altered:  

"I did not take anything"  "I did not take f***ing drugs" which changes drugs to "f***ing drugs" violating component number 3.  Some will even say "Didn't do it.  Didn't take steroids" while dropping the pronoun "I", violating component number I.  Many will use the future conditional "would never" along with "never" as this is vague in specific time reference.  

Note that not only does the subject unable or unwilling to issue a reliable denial, he has signals of deception, and the NY Mets should carefully consider the possibility of recreational use, or self-medication.  

In innocent subjects, we find that the subject's own language will show a strength in short sentences.  "I did not take steroids" and will also refuse to accept the test result.  The problem is someone else's,  whether it be major league baseball, an investigator, or the tester, but the subject that is truly innocent (de facto innocence, not simply judicial innocence, as guilty parties will say "I am innocent" when not convicted) puts the burden upon someone else.  

The guilty will often:

1.  Avoid the simple reliable denial
2.  Find a way to say "I am sorry" or "I apologize"
3.  Will accept that the test result is accurate
4.  Will use passive language, as if the banned substance was able to sneak into his body on its own, similar to "the gun went off" rather than saying "I shot..."
5.  Reference divinity as a signal of guilt
6.  Will avow innocence, with "truly" or "honestly" or even with "honest to God", or swearing upon relatives
7.  Will seek to blame someone else for causing them to take drugs. 

Let's view his statement with analysis:  

"I know the rules are the rules and I will accept my punishment, but I can honestly say I have no idea how a banned substance ended up in my system. 

a.  note that "but" is used to minimize or negate, via comparison, that which preceded it.  That which preceded it here is knowing the rules.  This tells us that the subject was aware of the risk he took.  It may be that he obtained the banned substances while in Central America, where it is readily available in pharmacies. 

b.  Note the inclusion of "honestly" which is to suggest that he is generally a deceptive person who feels the need to be believed here.  It is a signal of deception.  

c.  "I have no idea" is not to be accepted.  We all have ideas about everything in life.  

d.  "ended up in my system" is passive voice language.  This is to hide the identity of the person who put the drugs in his system, which in this case, is the subject, himself.  Passivity in language is used to conceal identity and/or responsibility.  

I have been through a lot in my young career and missed time due to injury.  

d.  Here is an indication that the subject may use either recreationally, or illegally in the form of self medication.  Remember the context is illegal use of banned substances.  

e.  Note the word "and" means to connect two or more thoughts.  Injury and being through "a lot" are separate issues. 

I have worked way too hard to come back and get to where I am, so I would never knowingly put anything in my body that I thought could hold me out further. 

f.  Note "would never" is a commonly used denial by guilty subjects and it avoids "did not" or "didn't" as future/conditional tense.  Please note that the subject is allowing for the test to be accurate, only that he "would never" (and not "did") knowingly take drugs. 

Note that he could have said, "I did not knowingly put..." but instead avoids it and goes to the more naturally deceptive future/conditional tense. 

This indicates that he knowingly did this, in knowledge of the rules, and may have believed that either the passing of time, or masking agents, would have protected him.  There are many steroid "experts" who sell or advocate for masking agents and the science of testing is constantly being updated to keep up with masking techniques. 


 I am sorry to the Mets organization, my teammates and the fans, as well as my family.  

We look for apologies in any form, for any reason, within the language of the guilty.  The brain "knows what it knows" and this is something that leaks out in language of the guilty.  

Note the order indicating priority:

a.  Mets, who pay him
b.  my team mates
c.  fans
d.  family is last.  

They should explore if personal problems within his family are at the heart of possible self medication.  


In life, I know God put certain obstacles in your path and this is something else I know I will overcome."

The element of Divinity is also in his statement; another signal of deception. 

Note the distancing language of "your" life and not "my life." That it is an "obstacle" should cause the Mets to get him into counseling and learn what else he is doing.  

I put "deception indicated" before the analysis to highlight that not only does the subject avoid to issue a reliable denial, but he has specific indicators of deception in his statement.  We do not conclude deception on just one indicator, but in this case, he has given us a number of them.  

Jenrry Mejia knowingly took "banned substances" and legitimately failed his drug test.  He knew the risks and the potential consequences, but took them, knowingly, just the same.  He excused his behavior due to some difficulties in life, which is a strong signal that there are other issues going on in his life at this point.  

3 comments:

john said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
john said...

OT:

DEATH AFTER MIDNIGHT 48 Hours

A young Colorado mother is shot in the head with her own gun after a New Year's Eve party gone wrong - but who pulled the trigger?


In the early morning hours of New Years Day 2012, officers from the Evans Police Department responded quickly to the call from the Fallis home. It's a small department, with 36 officers.

Evans is a peaceful, low-crime community, says Police Chief Rick Brandt.

"I don't think we've had an armed -- maybe one or two armed robberies here since I've been her in almost eight years," said Chief Brandt.

Even though Tom Fallis had called in the shooting as a suicide, police brought him in for questioning early that morning, while his parents watched the children. Investigators were suspicious right away, because neighbors said they heard yelling. Fallis was questioned by Detective Rita Wolf:

Det. Wolf: Then she's telling you to get off of her.

Tom Fallis: I wasn't on her.

Det. Wolf: Why do you think someone said that? They could hear her vividly saying, "get off me, get off me."

Tom Fallis: I wasn't on her.

Det. Wolf: So somebody's just making that up, Tom?

Tom Fallis: My wife never told me to get off of her.

Det. Wolf: When you went upstairs and you were arguing with her. The wound on the back of her head isn't where she could do it herself, Tom. It's not.

Tom Fallis [pounding table]: Oh bulls---! Bulls--- Bulls--- Bulls---! I didn't shoot my wife!

Investigators also searched his body and noticed scratches on his chest. Fallis says he scratched himself:

Tom Fallis to police: Because I just shaved my chest. I just shaved it, because I've never done it before ... I'm sitting there going like this with my shirt. Because it itches, it scratches.
Fallis gets increasingly agitated as Wolf continues her questioning:

Tom Fallis: You're accusing me of killing my wife. I'm not supposed to get upset? That doesn't make sense...

Det. Wolf: You were upset before this.

Tom Fallis: Yeah, 'cause I've been here the whole time.

Det. Wolf: You are known to blow off the handle, is what they're saying.

Tom Fallis: I didn't shoot Ashley. I did not shoot my wife. I didn't shoot the mother of my kids.

Full Transcript below:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-death-of-ashley-fallis-suicide-murder-or-accident/

john said...

I should add. Full program transcript.

I wondering if this is a reliable denial? In the above and i guess it isn't the full interrogation transcript. Would if further bolster his denial if he said "I did not kill my wife" instead of "i did not shoot my wife"?