Monday, July 27, 2015

How Many Lies Can You Spot?

A Reliable Denial is only reliable when it is issued in the Free Editing Process.  If it is not issued initially in the investigation, it can be subsequently learned and repeated, throughout the months that follow but it is no longer reliable.

When analysis was published on radio talk shows, two things were included:  The Reliable Denial, and the social introduction.  The analyst carefully explained how each parent related to Jonbenet in context of the sentence including when she was "daughter" and when she was not.

The analyst concluded that the parents were not truthful, and that there was linguistic indication that John Ramsey had sexually molested his daughter, and Patsy Ramsey was likely a victim of early childhood sexual abuse, which is perhaps why she failed to protect Jonbenet.

Shortly after that, John and Patsy Ramsey went on television and said,

"I did not kill my daughter, Jonbenet" using not only the three elements of a Reliable Denial, but also the complete social introduction, in each of their opening statements.

Regarding sexual abuse, the language gave indication that John Ramsey had, in fact, sexually abused his own daughter.  This was via the language only.  Yet we later learned that she had signals that, by themselves, are not conclusive, but when taken in light of the language, and as a whole, paint a picture.  Besides the linguistic indicators,  she was dressed up in a sexualized manner, but then we later learned that she was a constant bed wetter, and had frequent urinary tract infections.

Risk factors for sexual abuse:

1.   Language of the alleged perpetrator towards his daughter
2.  Language of the alleged perpetrator in general ("lights" and "doors")
3.   sexualized environment of the pageantry
4.  Frequent bed wetting
5.  Chronic  urinary tract infections
6.  A mother who may have been molested herself (failure to protect)
7.  The autopsy showed vaginal trauma/insertion

Although (1) and (2), when taken with deception, is a strong indictment, the others strengthened the allegation's posture.

Here, we have the copies of those first televised denials, along with other subsequent interviews.
Yet, we also have some comments, particularly about handwriting, that does not appear to be rehearsed.

The analysis of the 911 call concluded "Guilty Caller Status" and
The analysis of the Ransom Note was "deception indicated", which means, it was not a "ransom note", nor was it written by foreigners,  but was intended to move suspicion as far from the house as possible.  I hope to finish my book on child murder cases and statement analysis and will publish "anonymous threatening letter" profile of the ransom note to see if it yields a strong profile.

When a denial is rehearsed, it is not in the Free Editing Process.  Months afterwards, it is not difficult to parrot what is read, but when someone is brought into that process where they have moved away from the 'script', we are able to glean information.

Yes or No?

Yes or No questions are less stressful to lie to, as the deceptive person can be thinking of anything else while answering.  Yet, they hold great value as well, for we are able to "lock someone into an answer" of yes or no, and then refer back to it.  This is where we point someone to their lie, and ask questions about it, knowing how they will not want to "lie about their lie", and begin to alter their language.

You may recall quite a few deceptive subjects who moved away from "no" responses to other deceptive responses, such as Joey Buttofuouco, who felt the need to "defy" the question, rather than add to it.  This was highlighted as deceptive at the time, only to later be part of his "confession" before the court, as his arm was twisted too far behind his back.

Yes or No questions do have their place.

"Absolutely not!" to a "yes or no" question shows a need to persuade and is a response of deceptive people who also wish to "defy" the question, rather than answer it.

What answers do you find deceptive?

How many can you spot? What about handwriting on your own children's pictures? Would you feel 'comfortable' denying such? The documentary seeks to uncover the 'absurd' via viewer observation where you can compare your answers to those you hear from John and Patsy Ramsey.

68 comments:

Anonymous said...

Patsy nods her head no when she's discussing serious issues, such as finding the random note. She is telling the truth about the person who wrote the mote being the one who killed jonbenet. It was her.

Oakley A said...

Patsy said " I found my daughter missing." Which doesn't make sense..
Patsy said. " It is my belief whoever wrote the random note probably had something to do with her murder," Literally stating the obvious?
John says Jon Benet wanted him to film them opening presents but his batteries were "dead."
John censors what he says with uhs.
John said about checking on Burke " he appeared to be asleep to us". That doesn't sound like memory like We went in his room he was asleep.
John points out and speaks about the window about opening the door and about turning on the light and finding Jon Bonet covered by a blanket.
Patsy only gives 1 part of a reliable denial.
Patsy doesn't answer yes or no questions.

Buckley said...

Yeah, the answers to the handwriting questions were grueling! But you could see on their faces, the stress of preparing to lie then realizing the answer was ultimately opinion, they could state whatever opinion they wanted and it wasn't really a lie.

Juliet said...

I also noticed ,I found my daughter missing' - (not unlike the McCanns saying 'nothing was worse than night we found her', since when they have modified it to 'we found her gone' which still doesn't make sense). One can't find someone who isn't there.

I also found 'My belief is that whoever wrote the ransom note probably had something to do with her murder.' I thought the likelihood of that not being the case very remote, and wondered if the 'probably' was a form of denial, because if it were ever proved beyond doubt that she had written it, there could still be some doubt as to whether she also killed JonBenet.

I don't know if it was a lie, but John Ramsey saying the FBI was putting massive pressure on them 'in hope that one of us would confess, or break or turn the other in.' They could not confess, or break, or turn the other in if they had not committed the crime.

They 'left' the house of their friends, the Whites. Missing information. The lie or commission involves what happened there and continues when they arrive home. John says JonBenet was asleep in the car, and he carried her to bed. Later we learn that JonBenet was awake, ate pineapple, John made a toy with Burke, and read a bedtime story to JonBenet.

Patsy 'not particularly' recognising the handwriting as her own. Evades answering question with yes or no, saying 'I don't remember writing it.'

John Ramsey, on being asked if he recognised the handwriting 'absolutely not'.
'I doubt it very seriously.' He doesn't.

Juliet said...

'Omission' not 'commission', sorry.

Sus said...

I haven't seen this before. John talking about his shower and the doors...oh my.

Patsy was not going to say those letters looked alike for anything. Or that she labeled her own pictures about her own life in first person.

They are both very stubborn liars. They stick with it no matter how implausible.

Brooke said...

>>Language of the alleged perpetrator in general ("lights" and "doors")

I understand "Doors" but why "Lights"?

Brooke said...

Creepy dad nods his head yes, even while issuing the direct denial. Then he licks his lips! when he talks about taking her upstairs to her bedroom and does an eye-block when asked if it's the last time he saw her alive. I'm not familiar with how this case turned out but I'm going to find out. I hope these people went to prison for the rest of their lives.

John mcgowan said...

Patsy:

"I found a ransom note, i found my daughter missing from her bedroom. And several hours later, our daughter was found dead, in our home

Follow the pronouns.

Note: When she is "found" "missing" she is "My" daughter". We then have a change in language "our daughter". What causes this change? When she is"found missing" she takes ownership "My daughter," it is when she is found" dead" several hours later she then becomes "our daughter"

When parents are speaking together side by side the pronoun "we, our" is accepted. Although, a mothers maternal instincts, bond, is often stronger than the fathers and the possessive pronoun "My" will enter her language. Patsy's use of "our daughter" from "my daughter" pronoun change. Tells us she has a need to share. Seeks to spread out guilt, or 'hide in a crowd' of others .

"Our daughter" may also tell us, that, at the time, or leading up to the death of Jonbenet, they were thinking of separating or divorcing.

John mcgowan said...

OT:

Trump adviser Michael Cohen: 'You cannot rape your spouse'

Washington (CNN)A top adviser to Donald Trump is under fire after comments he made in an explosive interview while defending the Republican presidential candidate from a decades-old rape accusation.

Michael Cohen, special counsel to Trump and an executive vice president at The Trump Organization, asserted in an interview published Monday in the Daily Beast that legally "you cannot rape your spouse."

The rape accusation stems from an accusation Trump's then-wife Ivana Trump leveled at her husband during divorce proceedings in the early 1990s, an accusation she walked back in a statement Tuesday.

Marital rape today is illegal in all 50 states and non-consensual sex between spouses does in fact constitute rape.

Cohen, who is one of Trump's top lawyers, also threatened to sue the Daily Beast reporter and ruin the reporter's life.

"I will make sure that you and I meet one day while we're in the courthouse. And I will take you for every penny you still don't have. And I will come after your Daily Beast and everybody else that you possibly know," Cohen said, according to the Daily Beast. "So I'm warning you, tread very f---ing lightly, because what I'm going to do to you is going to be f---ing disgusting. You understand me?"

Reached on the phone Tuesday morning, Cohen declined to speak with CNN but did say he planned to release a statement later.

"Mr. Trump didn't know of his comments but disagrees with them," Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski told CNN, referring to Cohen's remarks to the Daily Beast.

in a statement obtained by CNN, Ivana Trump said the Daily Beast story "is totally without merit."

"I have recently read some comments attributed to me from nearly 30 years ago at a time of very high tension during my divorce from Donald. The story is totally without merit. Donald and I are the best of friends and together have raised three children that we love and are very proud of. I have nothing but fondness for Donald and wish him the best of luck on his campaign. Incidentally, I think he would make an incredible president," Ivana Trump said in the statement, which was verified by the Trump campaign.

The campaign also distanced itself from Cohen, who has spent weeks appearing on multiple television news shows, including CNN's "New Day," to play up Trump's candidacy for president and defend the campaign from attacks from Trump's primary opponents.

Cont..

John mcgowan said...

"Mr. Trump speaks for Mr. Trump and nobody but Mr. Trump speaks for him," a campaign source told CNN on Tuesday morning.

A second campaign source toed the same line and pushed back against the notion that Cohen is a surrogate for the campaign.

"He is speaking as someone who has great insight into Mr. Trump's skills as an executive," the source said.

RELATED: Donald Trump adviser backs Huckabee 'oven' remark

Both sources emphasized that Cohen is employed by the Trump Organization and not the campaign.

Cohen has not only repeatedly appeared on TV to support Trump's presidential campaign, but he has also provided statements in response to political reporters' inquiries about Trump campaign controversies. Cohen sent CNN a statement via email earlier this month when Trump's official Twitter account posted photo of men in Nazi uniforms.

In a deposition during divorce proceedings, Ivana Trump accused her husband of raping her during a 1989 incident, an accusation that was first revealed in the 1993 book by former Newsweek reporter Harry Hurt III, "Lost Tycoon: The Many Lives of Donald J. Trump."

CNN could not obtain a copy of the deposition.

As the book was about to be published, Ivana Trump wrote a statement that was printed on the first page of that book:

"I felt violated, as the love and tenderness, which he normally exhibited towards me, was absent," she said in the statement. "I referred to this as a 'rape,' but I do not want my words to be interpreted in a literal or criminal sense."

A Trump campaign spokesperson said in a statement that the rape accusation "is old news and it never happened."

"It is a standard lawyer technique, which was used to exploit more money from Mr. Trump especially since he had an ironclad prenuptial agreement," the spokesperson said.

Democrats quickly pounced on Cohen's remarks, with Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman-Schultz calling Cohen's comments "a new low" in a statement Tuesday morning and telling Republicans to take a stand.

"Rape is rape. Full stop. End of story. There is no difference or division between 'forcible', 'legitimate', 'marital' or any other label Republicans slap on before the word 'rape'. All rape is a disgusting violation, and Americans have fought too long and hard for that to be acknowledged to still have it questioned in 2015," Wasserman-Schultz said in the statement. "It's a pattern of outrageous comments that must stop, and Republicans should call it what it is - despicable."

Ivana Trump is Donald Trump's first wife and mother to his three oldest children: Ivanka, Eric and Donald, Jr. who are all top officials at The Trump Organization. Trump is now married to his third wife, Melania Trump.

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/07/28/politics/donald-trump-adviser-michael-cohen-rape/index.html?sr=cnnifb

Brooke said...

John,

Why would "our daughter" indicate they were thinking of separating or divorcing?

John mcgowan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
John mcgowan said...

Brooke said...

John,

Why would "our daughter" indicate they were thinking of separating or divorcing?


Hi, Brooke

It is best explained here. By Peter.

Snipped:

Pronouns and Confessions


Pronouns show ownership.

"Mine!"

"My daddy!" "My cookie!"

It is something ingrained within the human mind from the first moments of language. Pronouns are instinctive.

It is something we do not suddenly dismiss in Statement Analysis. We recognize it in 2 year olds, in 10 year olds, and in adults.

If someone does not take ownership of something, we do not ascribe ownership of it to them.

If someone takes ownership of something, we do not argue with them.

When an arguing parent says, "maybe if you controlled your daughter more, we wouldn't be in this situation!", one parent is not owning responsibility for the current crisis, but is casting blame on the other.

"Oh, that's not my clean up. It's your dog, not mine!" It is likely that this subject is not going to clean up after the dog.

"Woke up, made the bed..." is different than "Woke up, made my bed"

What is the difference?

The pronoun "my" tells me that the person is either single, or is about to be single. Couples normally say "the" bed, but do not feel a need to say "my" bed. Singles sometimes do, but married couples when having marital trouble will sometimes say "my" bed, especially if they are headed towards divorce.

"I have to go and pick up our daughter" is different than "I have to go pick up my daughter". For most biological parents, if they are together, they use "my", but if there is step parenting involved, the pronoun "our" is likely to slip in. (Foster children and adopted children's parents often say "our" but when a married person says "our" and there are no step parents involved, it is a sign of marital trouble).

When someone says "I have to take care of the dog" instead of saying "I have to take care of my dog" it tells me that the subject is likely part of a family and the dog is a family pet.

Full article below.

http://statement-analysis.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/pronouns-and-confessions.html

Brooke said...

Thanks John!

Anonymous said...

John, there is more to the Ivana Trump comment than is clarified in your posts above. Ivana told her friends, AND spelled it out in a deposition at the time; "during the negotiations I felt raped by Donald".

This is all just ugly politics, John. There is a vast difference in saying one was raped and in using the terminology I 'felt raped' during some altercation or negotiation. Now it comes out via media that he raped her, snatching out some of her hair and tearing her clothes off. This is NOT what Ivana said happened.

I'm not a Donald Trump fan per'se, but fair is fair; as in the John McCain matter, it was a known fact from years ago that John McCain exaggerated his POW injuries. Not implying that he did not suffer as an imprisoned vet, etc., however; every POW who was there with him at the time said he exagerated his injuries and gave the details. Sarah Palin said it best, that being that both John and Donald were correct. I don't usually agree with her either, but she hit it head on this time.

Ditto for Donald putting out the private cell phone number of Lindsay Graham. This one craked me up! ha ha.... Some wouldn't get off his back so I guess he showed 'em what he was capable of: He published Grahams private ph #! Still laughing about this one. Seems that it worked tho, until now they are accusing him of being a rapist of his wife. Tit for tat. And the beat goes on.

Anonymous said...

Well Peter, you've gone and done it again. Stirred up the Ramsey affair.

You know, I admire your work very much and admire you as a person as well and I really would like to know WITH CERTAINTY that you are correct in your analysis of John & Patsy, but today I do not have time to tear my hair out or get my nerves in a frazzle trying to agree or disagree with you; even tho I have said more than once that I would never change my mind on believing they were innocent, BUT being one who is a truth seeker myself, I'm going to have to put it on the back burner for today.

I will refresh your memory though, in my earlier statements where I said it did not make sense right from the beginning that JonBenet was raped and murdered there in their home BY THEM and left lying there; not when one of them could so easily have removed her body from the home and hid her elsewhere, THEN Patsy wrote up this long ransom letter incriminating herself (and John), causing them to become the suspects and ultimately losing every dollar John had worked for. And it still doesn't make sense. It just doesn't. However, I DO intend to really try to see it your way this time.

Oakley A said...

I was suspicious of the parents when Jon Benet was found dead in the home. The officials in charge of the case were inept. I wanted to believe the Ramsey's were not being deceptive. I read an analysis on the case in a book by FBI profiler John Douglas. I was convinced the parents had been wrongly accused and were totally innocent in the death of their daughter. I recently read Mr. Hyatt's Statement Analysis of the 911 call and I am no longer convinced. I am now convinced a persons own words have the power to exonerate them if they are not guilty. A reliable denial is a very simplistic statement. If a person suspected of a crime wants to convince you they were not involved they must consummate this simplistic statement with their words. When they cannot or will not do that you have to ask why Anom 11:45.
What Mr. Hyatt does is much more complex than just that but if you really put yourself in the subjects position you can discern how easy it would be to issue a reliable denial to a crime you did not commit. Go back and read his though provoking analysis again like me it may change your thinking.

trustmeigetit said...

So you only think they are innocent because you think they would have done a better job with the cover up? No disrespect I am just curious.

So what do you think about the maids statement that she did think it was mom. That it may have been death by abuse.

Then the rest was staged to appear like a murder. Since let's face it, abusing your child resulting in death is a crime. It would be manslaughter.

Then.... the knife that was next to her body had been taken away from Burke that day by the maid and placed behind sheets in the linen closet.

An intruder would not have gone into the linen closest.

Her death was blunt force. She was not raped that night.

They did however state there was evidence of prior sexual abuse. Which typically is the family. Even the family doctor failed SA when asked if he suspected abuse. And recall her excessive trips to her doctor... Not normal and usually is due to sexual abuse. Again, repeated abuse is typically done in the child's own home. Not always, typically.

And it sounds simple enough to just dispose of a body but it's not that simple. Leaving the home with her body is risky. I mean, cadaver scent in the car. Possible blood in the car. Then where. It's a small town where people know you. There's a lot involved in something like this. And they had another child in the home who would be waking up.

This means they had limited time to decide what to do.

And if you just killed someone, I don't imagine your thinking clearly and making mistakes would be likely.

Add in the families connections and power (already proven by the simple fact that the grand jury voted to indict but it was nixed) I think they figured they would be able to walk away no matter what.

trustmeigetit said...

OT

Not a single update on Crystal Rogers. I am very concerned that her boyfriends connection to LE will be in his favor. Especially in a small town.

Annonymous17 said...

I can't get past the constant shaking (as if to say "no') of Patsy Ramsey's head when she's making assertions that is supposed to be truthful. It's hard to even listen to the words she's saying.

Oakley A said...

hey trustmeigetit some of the things you stated I have never heard before. Verry interesting RE: the maid the knife etc. Do you know is there anywhere I can read about it?
I am of the opinion Patsy was trying to cover up something which ultimately resulted in a murder and she was possibly covering it up from her own family. Due to time restraints and as you said creating more forensic evidence taking the body out of the home would not have accomplished anything for her. The fact that she didn't dispose of the body doesn't equate to any proof for me.

trustmeigetit said...

I agree.

And dads response that he's "not mad" just days after his daughter was brutally murdered.

This is not how any man would react if they were innocent.

There would be anger, tears, horror. They had none of this.

I can only imagine how horrible that lil girls short life was.

Oakley A said...

http://m.wlky.com/news/social-media-challenge-created-in-effort-to-find-missing-bardstown-mother/34341884
The family is of course trying to keep the search alive. But there have no official announcements in reference to her disappearance or any leads. Small town law enforcement may be on Mr. Houck's side. Poor Lacy Peterson washed up on shore as did her baby some three to four months after she was murdered. I do not wish that fate upon Crystal Rogers but this bf/fiance may not be as smart as he thinks and things have a way of coming out and revealing the truth.

trustmeigetit said...

Just a recap:

SA has noted deception

A specialist has stated the note was Patsy's handwriting

Initial lie detector tests were failed

The child has suffered prior repeated sexual abuse (typically happens in their own home)

The knife used to cut the rope on her neck had been hidden in the linen closet that day by the maid and it is highly unlikely an intruder found it

The grand jury who saw the full evidence elected to indict.


It's hard to look at full picture and still see innocence


Sus said...

OT I hope Donald Trump is in this campaign for a while longer. I look forward to hearing what he will say next. My favorite so far was going after McCain - about time someone did! John McCain has done more harm to veterans, and Vietnam veterans in particular, than all the lawmakers on Capitol Hill put together. Look into his blocks on the POW situation if you want to know who John McCain really is.

John mcgowan said...

OT: Update

LMPD dive team searching Nelson Co. lake

NELSON CO., Ky. (WHAS11) - The LMPD Search and Recovery team is investigating Melody Lake in southern Nelson County.

The authorities have not given reason for their presence in the area at this time.

The family of Crystal Rogers, a woman who has been missing from Bardstown for nearly a month, is at the scene watching and holding out hope that the investigation could provide some information.

WHAS11's Michaela MacDonald is on the scene and giving live updates via her Twitter account: http://bit.ly/1JPggro

http://www.whas11.com/story/news/2015/07/28/lmpd-dive-team-searching-nelson-county-melody-lake/30785969/

Trigger said...

Hi Peter,

I own property at Melody Lake in Nelson Co. It is in the area near the Ballard Farm where Crystal Rogers was last seen.

I just got back from the search area.

There were divers, dogs, and FBI on the scene. I did see Crystal's father but did not talk to him.

One of my neighbors talked with an agent. The agent said that they think that he...then stopped himself and said that they think that she (Crystal's body) may have been dumped in the lake. The area near the dam and another area where mud was removed two years ago was where divers searched. Those are the two deepest areas of our lake.

I was told by a neighbor who has been to the Ballard Farm many times that there are numerous caves and sink holes on the farm. If Crystal was put into a sink hole there that it would be hard to find her.



The FBI has Nick Houck's police car according to my neighbor.

trustmeigetit said...

What is missing...anything from her boyfriend. He doesn't seem concerned at all.

He's not even trying to fake it.

Anonymous said...

Sus, ref your post @2:45 today, I haven't kept up with John McCains shenanigans over the years and do not know how or what he might have done that interfered with the treatment of our servicemen who came back wounded and dead. I do know that our vets have suffered greatly at the hands of their own country who gave them and their families little aid. On the whole, I try to stay out of political discussions since I can't fix them and don't know all the details, lies vs truth anyhow.

I do know that McCain was a real dirtbag, treating his former wife lower than dirt when he got back on our golden shores, turning his back and cheating on her while she was suffering with the dredges of cancer after she had worried and waited for him all those years, even raising money to help him when she needed help herself; and I know that he lied concerning his war injuries according to the other POWs who were there and under the same grueling torture he was, stipulating how he exaggerated. THEN he married the woman he was cheating with (she had more money)the last time he played around on his sick wife. I figure whatever he gets via payback (his current wife too) he deserves.

He only chose Sara Palin as his running mate because he is a man who uses women and hides behind a womans' skirt. Sara had made something of a name for herself and she was very attractive. But she proved how dim-witted she was too if for no other reason; she had all those beautiful clothes that McCains campaign headquarters bought for her and her family to the tune of in excess of $150K left lying in a pile on the floor of the plane that carried them back to Alaska after he lost the election. Sheesh! Now, that right there was one dumb move if nothing else was. It was a small thing, yet shows her utter stupidity.

As for The Donald, if he doesn't calm himself down he could have a massive stroke or drop dead of a heart attack. Right or wrong, it is very dangerous staying in a rant all the time.

Anonymous said...

In rethinking it for a moment Sus, it may have been a debilitating accident McCains' former wife was involved in. Not so sure now that I think of it, if it was the accident or cancer or both. I do know that she suffered for a very long time and at great expense and a physically debilitating handicap. Poor thing.

A low-life rotten husband who had no regard for her physical condition after he had supposedly loved her, and she certainly DID love him; now she was too much trouble, expense and baggage. I do recall from long ago that a stranger came forth and paid a large sum on her medical costs after McCain abandoned her. He was (IS) a dirty dog. How he ever got his toehold in politics and kept it there I do not know.

jenny said...

I had to stop at the 1:30 mark to make this comment. Sorry if it has already been noted.
The first few statements in the first few minutes are given by Patsy Ramsey while she shakes her head no.
She does not believe what she is saying?

Anonymous said...

Here's the latest blurb against Donald Trump today: He yelled at a female attorney in the middle of a deposition in 2011 when she stopped the deposition and announced to all in attendance that she wanted to take a break to breastfeed her three month old daughter, pulling out her breast pump for emphasis; "you're disgusting."

Of course, there's more to the story, there always is, but this is the gest of it. I have to agree, this would be pretty damned disgusting in the middle of a business meeting of any kind; particularly for an attorney whose supposed to be a professional in the middle of questioning the opponent in a tense deposition.

Anonymous said...

Here's the thing about all those who are giving Trump hell now, that they haven't stopped to consider; should he be elected president, they are all going to have to bow and scrape under his command and he is not a forgiving person.

I wouldn't want to be in their shoes. Hell hath no fury like Donald Trump scorned.

Anonymous said...

OT: Tom Brady's response to NFL hokding up the suspension.
I am very disappointed by the NFL’s decision to uphold the 4 game suspension against me. I did nothing wrong, and no one in the Patriots organization did either.
Despite submitting to hours of testimony over the past 6 months, it is disappointing that the Commissioner upheld my suspension based upon a standard that it was “probable” that I was “generally aware” of misconduct. The fact is that neither I, nor any equipment person, did anything of which we have been accused. He dismissed my hours of testimony and it is disappointing that he found it unreliable.
I also disagree with yesterdays narrative surrounding my cellphone. I replaced my broken Samsung phone with a new iPhone 6 AFTER my attorneys made it clear to the NFL that my actual phone device would not be subjected to investigation under ANY circumstances. As a member of a union, I was under no obligation to set a new precedent going forward, nor was I made aware at any time during Mr. Wells investigation, that failing to subject my cell phone to investigation would result in ANY discipline.
Most importantly, I have never written, texted, emailed to anybody at anytime, anything related to football air pressure before this issue was raised at the AFC Championship game in January. To suggest that I destroyed a phone to avoid giving the NFL information it requested is completely wrong.
To try and reconcile the record and fully cooperate with the investigation after I was disciplined in May, we turned over detailed pages of cell phone records and all of the emails that Mr. Wells requested. We even contacted the phone company to see if there was any possible way we could retrieve any/all of the actual text messages from my old phone. In short, we exhausted every possibility to give the NFL everything we could and offered to go thru the identity for every text and phone call during the relevant time. Regardless, the NFL knows that Mr. Wells already had ALL relevant communications with Patriots personnel that either Mr. Wells saw or that I was questioned about in my appeal hearing. There is no “smoking gun” and this controversy is manufactured to distract from the fact they have zero evidence of wrongdoing.
I authorized the NFLPA to make a settlement offer to the NFL so that we could avoid going to court and put this inconsequential issue behind us as we move forward into this season. The discipline was upheld without any counter offer. I respect the Commissioners authority, but he also has to respect the CBA and my rights as a private citizen. I will not allow my unfair discipline to become a precedent for other NFL players without a fight.
Lastly, I am overwhelmed and humbled by the support of family, friends and our fans who have supported me since the false accusations were made after the AFC Championship game. I look forward to the opportunity to resume playing with my teammates and winning more games for the New England Patriots.

John mcgowan said...

Minnesota dentist 'deeply' regrets 'taking' Cecil the lion

Snipped:

Zimbabwean authorities say that a Minnesota dentist is responsible for slaying one of the country's most beloved lions.

On Tuesday, The Zimbabwe Conservation Task Force said in a statement that Walter James Palmer of Eden Prairie, Minn., paid at least $50,000 to track and kill the animal.

On Tuesday, Palmer said in a statement, "I relied on the expertise of my local professional guides to ensure a legal hunt," CBS reported.

"I relied on the expertise of my local professional guides to ensure a legal hunt," CBS reported.

This is to cast blame onto others. After the atrocity of ethnic cleansing of Jews in WW2. The German officers whom were responsible for carrying out the gassing. Minimized their actions by saying they were just following orders. This is an extreme example. But, is an example of how people cast blame onto others, without taking responsibility

"I had no idea that the lion I took was a known, local favorite, was collared and part of a study until the end of the hunt," Palmer said, according to CBS. "I deeply regret that my pursuit of an activity I love and practice responsibly and legally resulted in the taking of this lion."

"I had no idea that the lion I took was a known"

It is very difficult to believe anyone who says that they have no idea, since we all have plenty of ideas about everything.

Mark McClish uses the exploration of the moon to highlight this saying that he is not a rocket scientist and doesn't know how to get to the moon but has an idea that a rocket will be needed. It is difficult to believe someone who says this. Sometimes it is just a lazy mind that needs prompting.

He added, according to the statement, that he had not been contacted by authorities but would work with them.

"Would"

This is future tense. "I will" work alongside them, is the expected.

"With"

Distance noted.

"Again, I deeply regret that my pursuit of an activity I love and practice responsibly and legally resulted in the taking of this lion." I love and practice responsibly and legally resulted in the taking of this lion."

Note again the minimizing of the killing. And the passivity in his language.

He "regrets", yet, does not say he is sorry.

This guy knew exactly what he was doing!!

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2015/07/28/minnesota-dentist-walter-james-palmer-cecil-lion-africa/30785881/

trustmeigetit said...

OT Myra Lewis

Check out moms Mother's Day post on Facebook

Name is Ericka Sanders Lewis

Wishes herself a happy Mother's Day and is thankful for her blessings. I could not say that with a missing child.

And she doesn't mention Myra's name in the long happy post. Just mentions her missing daughter.


Apple said...

OT
Tom Brady's statement. Oh boy..
https://m.facebook.com/TomBrady/posts/956989441008873

Anonymous said...

This stalker dentist loves and practices hunting down and killing wild animals. Maybe he can be stopped now.

This is horrible, killing animals that aren't bothering him. $50K fee just to kill this one animal! One would think he could think of better ways to throw down his money than the killing of wild animals who are just trying to survive. Sickening.

John mcgowan said...

OT:

My first SA on the fly, dropped pronoun "I" :-)


A about ten days ago. I was having a beer in my local pub, and chatting away to an acquaintance, George, a regular patron, whom has drank there for many many years, 50yrs+). There was a half a beer on the bar when i arrived. I didn't know whom it belonged to? About 5 or so minutes later, another acquaintance (although not so much as George) came in from another part of the pub (it was his half of beer) we were chatting, when the barmaid notice his hand was swollen around the knuckle area. It didn't look to healthy. She asked him how he had done it. He replied, and i quote. "fell off a bouncy castle" (an inflatable castle the kids have at party's.) My SA antenna alarm picked up on this, hehehe.

I went outside for a smoke. He came out a minute or two later. He asked me for a light. This is when i notice how severe the swelling was, as he lit his cigarette. I said, so, "what really happened to your hand" (I was comfortable asking him this, as we have traded beers before, in said bar) He began. "Well, I was having an argument with (i will with hold the name ) and i punched the wall, i didn't want to punch" (with held name). He asked me "how did you know it wasn't an accident. I said. "You know i study SA as a hobby, well". I was just about to explain, but he knew about it, because i can't help but eulogize how much i love it.

I explained to him the Principle" of pronouns. He looked at me and said, "John, (note at this point he uses my name) i'm not talking to you anymore" This was said in jest however. I noted it all the same. :-)

......................

Don't yeah just love SA? Hehehe

John mcgowan said...

My apologies for another OT.


Lawyer: Cosby to be deposed by Sept. 30

Bill Cosby will soon speak on at least one old allegation of sexual misconduct, according to attorney Gloria Allred.

The celebrity lawyer represents plaintiff Judy Huth, who has accused Cosby of molesting her when she was 15. Allred says on Tuesday, a judge in Santa Monica, Calif., stated he will set a date by the end of the week for Cosby to give a deposition in the civil suit filed by Huth.

Allred, who represents 17 Cosby accusers, says the judge ordered that Cosby's deposition, to be given under oath, will come no later than Sept. 30. Huth will also be deposed.

Read More:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/people/2015/07/28/judge-bill-cosby-to-give-a-deposition-by-september-30/30811883/

Juliet said...

Bloody dentists! :)

Annonymous17 said...

Some examples of deceptive behaviors in the video I caught:

1) Tons of self-censoring and long pauses (e.g. when JR is asked about Patsy's handwriting, he says, "It's, it's, it's [not her handwriting].” He also says often what they were “going to do,” but not what they did. Another example: referred to Officer French as “French” first (a sign of negative relationship) then corrected himself “Officer French.” JR catches himself almost admitting to Fleet the broken window: “Explained to him that I….might have broken it myself…months ago.”
2) When JR is asked why he doesn't believe that Patsy killed Jon Benet, he says, "She did not murder HER CHILD." (Evidence of abuse ("child"), distancing from Jon Benet by calling her Patsy's child. Also, “murder” does not rule out an accident.
3) (Behavioral analysis): PR's incessant shaking of her head for the entire time she is saying things that she should be asserting as truth. JR also shakes his head when saying that the empirical evidence supports his belief that PR didn’t murder Jon Benet.
4) PR answering "not particularly" about whether the handwriting matches. (A simple no would suffice here, but "not particularly" gives her an out to later say that she didn't completely deny it the first time around).
5) JR constantly says “I remember _____ happening.” This is not to say that it happened, but that he remembers it. I think Peter talked about this at some point that it is indicative of storytelling.
6) Extraneous language: JR says Burke “appeared to be asleep, to us” when they checked on him. Was he asleep or not?


Aside from all of this, how can someone who found his daughter dead say, “I realized that she wasn’t just sleeping…that this was not good”? How can you find your kid dead and say to yourself, “this is not good.” That's a disturbing understatement.

tania cadogan said...

Hi John.
Isn't SA wonderful?
The downside is that once you have learned the basics and practiced it in here and in real life listening to interviews, adverts etc it becomes second nature and we cannot turn it off.

Using it on the fly is fascinating as well as hard work.

I love to people watch especially when i am out shopping for the day with mom.
She knows when i am switched on and listening to a conversation using SA.
It amazes me just how much people leak when they are talking especially if i can watch them as well, all the little tells.
It is harder if you hear only one side of the conversation such as if they are talking loudly on their cellphone, they still leak though as they gesticulate and physically respond as if the person they are talking to is in front of them and can see them.

I also love to hear snatched pieces of conversation as people walk past me, whether it is serious, funny or plain strange.

People are fascinating and it keeps me entertained :)

trustmeigetit said...

I too love it! The more I read (I rarely skip a day on Peters blog) the more I start to pick up little things.

It's like seeing the world through a different lens. Things used to sound off to me before but now a lot of those things make sense.

It amazes me how few people really seem interested. I used to talk about it a lot but most people seem bored listening to me so I have stopped.

Now I find myself more frustrated at the questions or lack of follow up when questions are ignored.


John mcgowan said...

Hi, Tania

I have picked up "articles" on the "fly" (i think it is more obvious, for me) Picking up on "pronouns", on the fly, i find challenging.

If, it wasn't someone i know. I wouldn't of addressed it. Some people, do not like, being called out on their deception.

Once learned. It is not easy to switch off. I am careful though, when, and when not, to apply it. :)

I do however, take note. mmmwwaahahah lol :)

tania cadogan said...

I pick up on the dropped pronouns on the fly, it stands out probably because i am expecting it.
it is as if i am doing the talking and where i would insert a pronoun there is a little space of silence and it gets my attention causing me to focus further as to why it was dropped.

Ads are the worst for me the dropped pronouns or inappropriate pronouns, the qualifier words, the stating the obvious and worse of all making claims which sound wonderful yet, after even a moments thought make no sense whatsoever.

One of my favorites is when they say Made with real ingredients
This is guaranteed to make me roll my eyes and mutter to myself and, if i am doing a survey or testing a product, to let rip with my SA and point out every problem i have with the blurb relating to the product.
It makes for some very interesting reports, although, i am nice and make suggestions as to how to correct the blurb so it makes sense and doesn't annoy the heck out of me should they then advertise the self same product (i will email the relevant company if they persist with blurb that sets my mental teeth on edge which usually results in freebies or vouchers. I am always nice and polite and will write it as an ode if i am feeling benevolent to them, if i am not happy with a response then i get polite, if that fails then i let rip politely and bluntly and this will always work. (The taxman learned the hard way as did the former CEO of the company where i used to work)

John mcgowan said...

One of my favorites is when they say "Made with real ingredients"

As apposed to what?

Classic. Lol

trustmeigetit said...

"Real ingredients" lol

Recruiting is part of my job. The thing that stands out to me is pronouns or lack of.

Like if I ask someone "do you have experience with..."

And they respond with "we" or drop the pronoun...I always then ask for them to give me an example of a time they personally use it.

Usually it means the company or the dept may do or use that product but not the person themselves.


Really speeds up my process.



tania cadogan said...

You see why i roll my eyes and mutter as well as having bouts of sarcasmitis when doing a report about a product i am testing.

Anonymous said...

Will you analyze the statement by Walter Palmer, the man who killed Cecil the Lion? I read online that they only use bow and arrow when hunting in Africa so not to get caught illegally poaching (because the blast of a gun gets attention).

Apricot Smash said...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3179380/We-need-rest-plane-really-Wife-malaysia-airlines-flight-370-victim-says-sad-debris-confirmed-mystery-jet-kids-finally-grieve.html

Peter, I am confused by this woman's pronouns. She distances and projects. Obv she did not crash the plane but why would it only be sad and depressing for her family and friends? They, and you. etc ?

Anonymous said...

Apricot Smash,

I found it sad and depressing last night watching Bruce Jenners' elderly aged and frail mother crying on his 'coming out as Caitlyn'(sp?) show; sitting there trying to figure out how she can stop calling him Bruce. Makes me wonder if the poor thing has just now had to realize head on that her son who is a senior citizen himself at sixty-five years old has a mental problem.

How very thoughtless, selfish and cruel to inflict this heart wrenching pain on his own mother at her advanced age. His facial expressions did not reveal one ounce of compassion for his own mother. She sat beside him and pitifully cried alone.

I felt sorry for her; a son trying to be a woman, a feat that is not humanly possible and that he will never be able to accomplish. I noticed that he either has a slight speech impediment or an almost insignificant mental retardation, but something is definitely 'off' with this man.

Juliet said...

I'm getting a pop-up on this site which won't close unless it is clicked on, and which then takes me to a competition to win a voucher to a supermarket. It happens four or five times, each time it is when I try to click on the comments, so it's difficult to get past the blog articles as I keep getting taken off site. It has been happening since early yesterday, and only on this site, all my other browsing is fine. Is anyone else having this problem?

Anonymous said...

Juliet,
I don't get any pop-ups. go to your tools link on your browser, then to internet options and clear your cookies. some ad from this site may have attached a cookie that generates a pop up on your computer.

elf said...

I've read 4 books written about Jon Benet's murder, including the one john and Patsy Ramsey wrote , and I can't believe that john Ramsey is still not in prison. Patsy helped to cover it up but john violated and murdered Jon Benet. All through the book the Ramsey's wrote all I could think of was how little they actually talked about their murdered baby girl :( it was less about the case and more like an homage to Patsy's battle with cancer, Johns business success, and how the loss of Beth (John's oldest daughter lost to a car accident) affected john and how it all helped to build the Ramsey's faith in God.
I'm an avid reader and could barely make it through the narcissistic narrative.
I still don't understand how such a preponderance of evidence could be ignored by the Boulder police.

Juliet said...

Anon at 9.22 - thanks, so far, so good. :)

Brooke said...

Juliet,

I am having the same problem with the cover ad.

Peter,

Have you considered using Amazon's affiliate program, LinkShare, or Commission Junction for your ads? They all offer deep linking, banner ads, etc. It will give you precise control over the ads that get displayed and allow you to link to individual items or books that you mention in your articles.

John mcgowan said...

I use "AdBlock" It doesn't block all, but it's a good bit of kit. :)


https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/adblock/gighmmpiobklfepjocnamgkkbiglidom?hl=en

Juliet said...

Brooke - I responded to you on the wrong comment page - it's on the most recent DeOrr comments. :)

John - I am still on my tablet and I don't think AdBlock is compatible. I have the available pop-up blocks on, but this blighter is immune! Hopefully I will have more luck with my laptop - it arrived a few days ago, but i keep putting off setting it up - maybe get round to it over the weekend.

Kellie said...

OT

Hef said at the time, “I would never tolerate this kind of behavior, regardless of who was involved.”

Future tense statement, not reliable. Right?

Juliet said...

Tip for iPad users where the page won't load due to an aggressive pop-up - if you just want to read, then the AppStore has an AdBlock browser which fixes the problem.Thanks, John - I didn't know there was an AdBlock for iPad, but your post nudged me to check. I'm not usually bothered by ads but that one has been making it very difficult to load the pages and comments. AdBlock gets rid of the ad but also blocks the 'I'm not a robot' pop-up, so I can't post comments whilst using AdBlock

I've just found how to prevent the pop-up on my normal browser - to the right there is an Adsense box which for me brings up Fox News - below that, in the same box, is a link to the pesky pop-up ad, and just above that there's the option to 'close'. If you can close that before the pop-up appears, it will prevent it from appearing.

Anonymous said...

Elf, re your post on 7/30; Peter implies that Patsy may have been thinking of divorcing John prior to JonBenets' murder. If this is true, why would she cover up for John? A wife whose husband had just raped and murdered their daughter whom she loved dearly, would hide it for him; why,? It would seem to me that this would be the perfect time to slam John once and for all, accuse and get him convicted for JonBenet's murder and walk away scott-free with everything. Further, why would Patsy carry their guilt with her to the grave when she had nothing more left to lose?

I'm not saying she/they aren't guilty, as I honestly don't know, just wondering.

Anonymous said...

Kellie, it was a known fact that Quaaludes (sp?) were very popular back in the day. "Just slip her a Quaalude", it was actually laughed about as being a way to get control of a woman for sexual purposes. Common knowledge. Easy pickings. I've been in the presence of some who have laughed and joked about Quaaludes and their affect. IMO, it would have been no different with Hef and the Playboy Mansion parties.

Anonymous said...

Actually, I've known someone who carried these Quaaludes around in his pocket and laughed about it. We knew; most of us laughed and joked with him at the time. This was back in the days of the highly popular Dallas/JR TV shows. We had a little tight knit group, mostly all married couples, that we had a Friday night Dallas Party with every week, taking turns in our different homes. Skip the Quaalude buddy and his girlfriend were members of our group, a mild-mannered but funny guy.

Now, thinking back, seeing as how Cosby used Quaaludes to rape so many unsuspecting women, it isn't so funny. It wouldn't have been funny if I'd ever have been one of them either. It was known, many men were running around with these Quaaludes.

This is probably how Cosby got away with it for so long with so many women, many others were doing it too so what man was going to take their stand or get involved if any of Cosbys' women complained? They were probably doing it themselves. NOW the big rooster comes home to roost. It's about time!

foodnerd said...

From the start I've always thought it was Burke, with Patsy leading the coverup. First, an adult likely wouldn't need a garrotte on that tiny neck; a nine-year-old child's hands probably would. That idiotic ransom note is exactly her arrogant, sociopathic, master manipulator personality, and its very stupidity shows a lifetime of batsh!t crazy, entitlement.
Reading here the likelihood of John sexually abusing JonBenet previously would support Burke's having significant mental health problems more than it would distance him from it.
Protecting Burke is also the one thing of which they would never be on opposite sides or risk his safety and freedom by betraying each other. United front and all.

Anonymous said...

Foodnerd, you could be as right as rain, I'm not saying you aren't, but I 've never thought it was Burke. Little JonBenet showed signs of having been raped prior to her death and I don't think Burke would have been physically capable of doing this. According to her medical records, JonBenet had been having vaginal problems for sometime. He was just a child himself. Besides, we've never heard any ripples about Burke's teenage, high school and college years years since JonBenet died. I realize that some youthful boys are capable of committing a rape at Burkes' tender young age, but there was never any evidence that Burke was.

HOWEVER, I have always wondered who JonBenet ate fresh pineapple with later that evening AFTER John had supposedly carried her upstairs to her bed, saying she had fallen asleep in the car on the way home from their party. According to the undigested contents in her stomach, someone certainly fed this child pineapple from the dining room table after she was already supposedly asleep.

foodnerd said...

Anonymous, I've never thought Burke sexually assaulted, or even molested JonBenet. If he is guilty, from what we know about that family I would be supportive of a mental health defense even if he had been older at the time. He may have done it out of rage, confusion,a desire to spare her being utterly destroyed by being a devalued sex object literally her entire childhood, but something gave that night

The fact we've heard zero about him – good, bad or neutral – is another testament to how the Ramseys' money buried the truth (even if my theory is flat wrong) of what happened that night and what she endured in her few years leading up to it.

The pineapple has always tripped off my creepmeter. I'm not sure if there has been stories of her being punished for it, knowingly breaking a rule, if it was a known favorite treat they were withholding for whatever reason and she defied that?
My father hated kids, was severely physically abusive by being overly strict, controlling, raging temper and a bully.
Whenever I read anything about JonBenet and pineapple, that same sick knot that never left my gut as a kid slams back like a punch and I haven't a clue why.

Sorry for delayed reply;it's hard to follow where all we've posted in here about which creep. :^D