Wednesday, March 30, 2016

Analysis Quiz: Blackouts, Recall and Not Remembering in Analysis

Question:   If someone blacks out, can the memory be recovered?

This is a common question and is part of a theme where someone says "I don't remember" in an open statement.

In an open statement, a person should tell us what they remember.  When someone in an open statement, particularly, deep into the statement and free editing process mentions what they do not remember, it can be a signal of suppressing information. 

In a recent assault case, the subject wrote presented with a visible injury to the eye:  

"All of a sudden, I felt somebody yank and grab my hair and I swung a punch around trying to whoever it was off.  I fell to the ground when I got back up the other person hit me in the head with something and I don't remember much of anything after that, everything went to a blur."

We will look at the victim's statement at the conclusion of this article.  

Suppressing information is to conceal information, yet to add more effort.  This is a signal that the person feels tempted to reveal this information, for a variety of reasons, and can be brought to confession.  To suppress information is to not only "will" it concealed, but it is a level that requires more effort, and is often accompanied by emotion. 

Regarding blackouts and memory:

Thus far, all blackouts have been found to be recoverable except alcohol blackouts. 

The alcohol blackouts have to be genuine, so we still analyze, but even heroin seems to have the brain respond better than alcohol.  The stronger the alcohol content, too, seems to have impact.  Those who pass out on beer, for example, have to drink  a great deal of it, which takes time, but high percentage alcohol can be imbibed in a very short time to reach pass out.  This is when rapes occur but the victim doesn't know she was raped, only that she is sore, undressed, or in a place where she could not say how she got there.  

Other blackouts, including injury, have had some degrees of recovery. 

If the victim can sit down, concentrate, turn off other distractions and just try...put pen to paper (more effort used than typing) and just try, sometimes the brain makes the connection and enough words come to put the pieces of the puzzle together.  

Adult victims of childhood sexual abuse often do well with this tactic, but it is especially trying for those who were sexually abused prior to the development of speech and is included in the Advanced Statement Analysis course as part of a chapter on the language of sexual abuse.  It is unique for victims of sexual abuse, even though some elements of post traumatic stress disorder elements are shared with other sufferers.  

To process the trauma remains the key to mitigating suffering.  When someone is sexually assaulted in public, if the context is higher, such as both rape and murder, or it happens in significant numbers, like Cologne, New Year's Eve, 2015, it can be unjustly minimized as to the victim the invasive element can have many years of impact.  

Let's return to the statement.  The victim presented with a black eye and was not interviewed prior to giving the statement.  It is important to know that this was not contaminated. 

I.  The Statement 

This is a portion of the statement where the assault is described, so you are only working from a portion of the statement.  

"All of a sudden, I felt somebody yank and grab my hair and I swung a punch around trying to whoever it was off.  I fell to the ground when I got back up the other person hit me in the head with something and I don't remember much of anything after that, everything went to a blur."

II.  The Analysis 

What can you glean from this subject?  

Post your analysis and the results will be posted in updated entry.  

50 comments:

Anonymous said...

"...the other person hit me in the head with something and I don't remember much of anything after that, everything went to a blur."

When a person loses consciousness, seems the statement would be more like: "...the other person hit me in the head with something, and the next thing I remember is waking up alone, down on the kitchen floor" or something like that.

Anonymous said...

OT
Peter, seems Amanda Knox just cannot stop talking. Would you analyze her latest, written on the anniversary of her "definitive acquittal" (her words)?
http://www.westseattleherald.com/2016/03/26/opinion/amandas-view-anniversary
Boggled

Anonymous said...

"I fell to the ground when I got back up THE other person hit me in the head with something and I don't remember much of anything after that, everything went to a blur.

"All of a sudden= Missing information

"THE"

I belEIve the artIcle THE is inappropriate..If she has not before introduced the second person and the statement is not "contaminated" then it is the wrong way round. she uses the definite article without introduction. DECEPTION INDICATED

Peter Hyatt said...

I'll take a look at Amanda, much to the dismay of a former FBI who used the most hyperbole I think I've ever read. There is some analysis of it (Moore) here at the blog. Take a peek.

I actually use it for profiling in Advanced work.

I am interested in analysis of the statement.

Please choose a name, even if a nickname, so I can answer you, if you wish to participate.

Lisa21222 said...

This person who struck the speaker is genderless.
That seems a bit strange to me. Why would you withhold such basic information?

Anonymous said...

anon @ 11:07

Name chosen

paul123

Nic said...

"All of a sudden, I felt somebody yank and grab my hair and I swung a punch around trying to whoever it was off. I fell to the ground when I got back up the other person hit me in the head with something and I don't remember much of anything after that, everything went to a blur.”


"All of a sudden”

temporal lacunae - part of the event is being skipped over

“felt”somebody yank and grab my hair

“yank” and “grab” are verbs.

“Felt” minimizes the act of what was done to provoke.

“somebody” conceals identity


“and I swung a punch around”

“and” missing information

“swung a punch around”

Not working from experiential memory. Typically one swings around to punch. Action is out of order.

Deception indicated.

“trying to whoever it was off”

(get?) missing word

“whoever” conceals identity

At this point, the assailant wasn’t “on” them.

Story telling. Deception indicated.

I fell to the ground when I got back up

“when” temporal lacunae When is a bridging word. There is something the victim is not revealing about after he fell to the ground and got “back” up. “Back” up implies a period of time of up and down, or down for a period of time.

the other person hit me in the head with something

"the other person" - change in reality. First there is somebody, then there is “there other person”.

"hit me in the head"

You get hit ON the head. You get punched (leaked prior,) “in” the eye.

“something” — Concealing.

Deception indicated

and I don’t remember much of anything after that,

Not a reliable denial.

“and” - missing information

“I don’t remember” - telling us what they don’t remember, not what they do. Sensitive

They further weaken not remembering with the word “much of anything”. The word, much, actually means a large amount, but this victim is using the word to minimize. Deception indicated.

“after that” - the word, that, is distancing. The words after that represent a period of time that something significant happened.

“everything went to a blur”

Blur - memory is impaired but not black. Extra wording weakens their claim of “everything” (hyperbole)
“went to a blur” - miss use of grammar (went blurry)

Deception indicated.

_________

I’m gleaning that this victim was actually the provocateur.

John mcgowan said...

OT:

I would like to see some analysis applied here "Anonymous letters" Is there enough to conclude whom the author could be?

Male / female

Age

Social status

Education etc..

CREEPY ‘WATCHER’ HOUSE, FAMOUS FOR SCARY ANONYMOUS MESSAGES, BACK ON THE MARKET

The Watcher also claimed to have been “put in charge of watching and waiting for [the house’s] second coming,” and allegedly mentioned the couple’s young kids, writing: “I am pleased to know your names now, and the name of the young blood you have brought to me…Have they found out what’s in the walls yet?”

Other terrifying snippets of The Watcher’s letters, as found in the full lawsuit:

“I asked the Woods to bring me young blood.”
“Will the young bloods play in the basement?”
“Who has the bedrooms facing the street? … It will help me to know … then I can plan better.”
“Who am I? I am the Watcher and I have been in control of 657 Boulevard for the better part of two decades now.”
“I am in charge…Let the young blood play again like I once did.”

http://crimefeed.com/2016/03/creepwatcher/

John mcgowan said...

Snipped^^^

Anonymous said...

On topic of post above

Published on Mar 29, 2016

#NeverTrump Activist Punches Trump Supporter, Gets Instant Pepper Spray

https://youtu.be/XuBMWgMn52I

Via www.RebelPundit.com
Video courtesy YouTube derek94gt
Produced by Jeremy Segal & Andrew Marcus, Use of this video must contain proper attribution to RebelPundit.com

John mcgowan said...

At first glance.

"All of a sudden, I felt somebody yank and grab my hair and I swung a punch around trying to whoever it was off. I fell to the ground when I got back up the other person hit me in the head with something and I don't remember much of anything after that, everything went to a blur."

"All of a sudden

What happened before?
What lead up to this?
Missing information?

I felt somebody yank and grab my hair and I swung a punch around trying to whoever it was off



We note that "somebody" "whoever" are gender neutral. What is interesting it is assumed that the "alleged assault" occurred from behind, yet she does not say that. This means that she is hiding, on purpose the gender of the alleged attacker, if at all any.

Deceptive

"I fell to the ground when I got back up the other person hit me in the head with something and I don't remember much of anything after that, everything went to a blur."

"I fell to the ground

Passive language. What caused her to "fall to the ground"

when I got back up "

Temporal lacunae.

the other person"

Again we have the suppressing of identity. She must know by now whom (Gender) her attackers are.

Deceptive.

We also have the definite article. "the"

Articles like pronouns are reliable.

If she had an accomplice this would explain the use of "the", she knows whom it is.

"went to a blur."


This is not to say "blacked out"

Peter Hyatt said...

Lisa21222 said...
This person who struck the speaker is genderless.
That seems a bit strange to me. Why would you withhold such basic information?
March 30, 2016 at 11:23 AM


Maybe the attacker identifies as gender free?

Peter

Hey Jude said...

'Yank' and 'grab' is in the wrong order, too - the 'yank' would not be felt before the 'grab'.

Peter Hyatt said...

Hey Jude,

you never yanked something you had not yet grabbed? You know, like a clutch in a vehicle?

It is similar to the decomposition odor in Casey Anthony's car with one of my all time favorite quotes:

"Dead squirrels climbed up into the engine."

:)

You missed my Irish humor about weight earlier, and I hope Lisa21222 knows I was also being sarcastic.

There is something within her words that is critical to discern.

John mcgowan said...

"I don't remember much of anything after that, everything went to a blur."

The shortest sentence is always the best.

"I don't remember after that, everything went to a blur."

What is the "anything" she doesn't remember.

"I don't remember much

This suggests there is more information and she is witholding. It is also a stop sign. Don't ask any more i don't remember.

Jo said...

"the other person hit me in the head with something"

"the other person" seems like additional unnecessary information. Other than if she hit herself in the head, saying "I was hit in the head" would imply the other person hit her in the head. It seems like she needs to make sure to mention "the other person" hit her when it may in fact be that the injury was self inflicted.

Anonymous said...

Peter - was this statement about a "cat fight" between a wife and girlfriend perhaps?

1. "all of a sudden" = story telling
2. "somebody" changed to "whoever it was" and is now "the other person"
3. "yank and grab" is out of order. One cannot yank on something before grabbing or otherwise taking physical possession of it.
4. "I don't remember much of anything after that, everything went to a blur." - Contradicting his/herself. If s/he doesn't remember much of anything, that means s/he remembers something, even if it is the smallest, most insignificant piece of information. So, for everything to be a blur, aforementioned piece of information couldn't be remembered. Deception indicated.

-KC

Lisa21222 said...

Peter,

LOL. I get the sarcasm.

If the victim has no idea who the person is attacking them, they would not KNOW they identify as "gender free". :)

I actually have a daughter who considers gender a fluid condition. For a while she identified as a drag queen. Go figure. Though biologically FEMALE, she "self-identified" as a MALE playing a FEMALE role.

Huh? I must be old.

As for Casey Anthony... About a year ago I had a maintenance person come to our office to remove some old furniture. He picked up a chair and said "Ew. It smells like a dead mouse crawled up in here".

I had NEVER heard anyone but CA say something like that and was floored by his words.

Peter Hyatt said...

You're all contributing to different points. This lets me gauge how readers are doing, and where discipline is needed.

Here is something worth considering twice: It is a very basic grammar issue that is SCREAMING at you. Jo came closest to uncovering it.

we respect laws and we let the subject tell us and whenever possible, we believe her!

Kudos to all, with a special nod to Jo.

Peter Hyatt said...

Lisa, you were correct about the gender neutral.


In her statement, is a confession.



Nic said...

I fell to the ground when I got back up the other person hit me in the head with something and I don't remember much of anything after that, everything went to a blur.”

Punctuation changes the meaning of the statement.

I fell to ground. When I got back up the other person hit me in the head with something and I don't remember much of anything after that. ....

Nic said...

^^ It sounds like there was a third person who hit them "in the head" (as opposed to over or on, the head)

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

" I felt somebody yank and grab my hair and I swung a punch around trying to whoever it was off "

They punched themselves. They “swung the punch around”. They didn’t swing around to punch, they (I) swung "a" punch around.

John mcgowan said...

"I swung a punch around trying to whoever it was off"

She misses out "hit" between "To" and "whoever". she wasn't "Trying" to punch anyone.

The expected would be. "I swung a punch around trying to (hit) whoever was attacking me.

The sentence is disjointed. Suggesting self infliction?

John mcgowan said...

There is no sensory recall, too. No mention of cuts, bruises etc, and no after event emotion.

Boggled said...

OT re Amanda

Thanks, Peter. "Boggled" is my screen name, and state of mind re the whole Amanda fan club, which I know includes the delusional former FBI agent. Look forward to your analysis/thoughts.

Anonymous said...

OT - Soldier mom orders angel pictures of the toddler she is accused of murdering. Peter - if you find any statements about this, can you analyze? I am assuming that because she is military, the rules for prosecution and statements to media are quite different than civilian?

http://pix11.com/2016/03/30/north-carolina-mom-creates-photos-with-dead-daughter-shes-accused-of-killing/

-KC

Skeptical said...

Did this woman go to the Charlie Rogers School of Conniving?

Lis said...

"All of a sudden"

I'm assuming nothing led up to this statement so we don't know the scenario it happened in. That makes a big difference. It seems like it should start with where they were, what they were doing and who was around.

"I felt somebody yank and grab my hair"

This could happen in a crowd but as Hey Jude pointed out, they are in backwards order. Grab should come before yank.

"and I swung a punch around"

Unexpected and missing information- most people would have instantly turned to see who was grabbing their hair before swinging a punch. Secondly, a person can't swing a punch behind themselves, so the writer must have turned around and had to have seen the person.

"trying to whoever it was off."

A word is missing here, not sure if it's just a typo, but it doesn't make sense. Trying to think of the missing word all I can assume is it was "punch" the person off.

"I fell to the ground when I got back up"

Missing the word "and"?

Missing information between falling to the ground and getting back up.

"the other person hit me in the head with something"

"The other person" - either there were 2 attackers or the writer is describing a 2-person fight - the writer and "the other person." In that case, they were not an innocent victim but a participant.

The "something" they were hit in the head with is not described at all, seems like the person should have some description of what it might have been and how it felt.

"and I don't remember much of anything after that, everything went to a blur."

They remember something just not "much."
If a person blacked out, it would not be "a blur" it would be a missing chunk of time.

Lis said...

One other thing- in the midst of a fight, they may have had their hair yanked and grabbed. They might just be leaving a lot of the rest out.

Hey Jude said...

Peter - sorry if I don't always get humour and sarcasm, sometimes they are lost on me - though I expect my own to be obvious.

The dead squirrels were the best, I agree.

She presented with a black eye, yet says she was hit on the head - I would expect her to have said she was hit in the eye or face. She fell to the ground when she got back up...it makes no sense without a comma. I think it was either self-inflicted or an accident as there is no 'he' or 'she' only - 'somebody', 'whoever it was', and 'the other person' - if she was hit in the head, how did she get the black eye, and why does she not describe being hit in the eye/face? Also, if it was an assault why did she not say what she did remember 'after that' even if it was not much? Did 'whoever it was' leave or stay, or was she blacked out on the floor, and there was no other person. Maybe a story to cover up embarrassment of an accident while drunk?

Anonymous said...

OT
News reports say attack on Jewish kids in Turkey imminent.

Anonymous said...

Is there a distinction between alcohol-induced black-out (no memory of it later) while still awake and doing stuff, and alcohol-induced passed-out unconscious?

lynda said...

What jumped out at me was not identifying gender, injuries not matching story, and missing information.

I think this person made up the story and the "person" she never identifies as her attacker is herself and she made up the story based on her viewpoint/perspective as a woman. In her mind, the attacker is a woman. Women yank and pull hair from behind, men don't (at least not regularly) So either the unknown person is a female that she does not want to identify or she made it up

lynda said...

Ugh..just read Amanda Knox's anniversary blog post. Poor, poor, Amanda. She should be careful, her post is riddled with language that could be used to describe a murder, is she confessing? It's sickening. She's sickening.

rjb said...

What stands out to me is that the supposed victim has what is described as an eye injury, yet she gives no identifying details about her supposed attacker, including their gender. That's not to say that the eye injury couldn't have been inflicted after the hit "in" the head which allegedly caused the "blur."

I would say that I was hit "on" the head but hit "in" the eye.

Not remembering much of anything is quite different from "the next thing I knew, I was waking up on the floor" or what have you.

Everything being a blur and losing consciousness are completely different things. I have events in my life that are a blur, but I still have a general idea as to what happened.

C5H11ONO said...

I swung a punch around
-- her confession

trying to whoever it was off.
-- bad grammar because he/she couldn't say trying to ge whoever was hitting me to get off me. Trying is attempted but failed.

Jo said...

Is it that she uses "person", a singular reference when she can't even identify if her attacker is male or female? How does she know if it was a single person attacking her?

Anonymous said...

Amanda Knox Blog about the one year anniversary of her acquittal. Oh my, how she mentions drowning, friends "crying out" in relief, the end of pain, the jagged edge, etc. It's as if she takes her real memories of the murder and uses them to make a different point in her blog.

If someone would SA this, that would be great!

http://www.amandaknox.com/blog/

A memory can be visceral. It can feel heavy, like the lead capes dentists drape over you when they’re taking X-rays. It can make your tongue feel thick and pasty, like you could choke on it. It can make your neck feel constricted, like you’re drowning. It can feel like a thunderstorm in your brain—sluggish and angry cumulonimbus dragging through each other, lightning striking.

That’s how I feel. On the first anniversary of my definitive acquittal, what first comes to mind isn’t the moment of watching the tiny live-streaming window on my laptop and hearing the incredulous correspondent report the good news from immediately outside the Italian Supreme Court. It isn’t the way my family and friends cried out in relief and surprise and joy for the end of persecution, the end of pain.

What comes to mind, instead, is the memory of one of my cellmates, we’ll call her Bernadette, sitting on her bunk across from me, tearing out page after page of my journal and shredding them, until there was nothing left.

Bernadette, who spent most of her time in a depressant-induced half-sleep, had convinced herself that I had been observing her movements and was writing them down for some nefarious purpose, like snitching maybe. I tried, and failed, to reason with her, but she had made up her mind and all I could do was sit there, struck dumb, numb.

I didn’t have much, but I had that journal. Because I have a terrible memory, my journal was where I documented the memories I wanted to keep. Because I best access my thoughts by writing them down, my journal was where my mental processing coalesced. My journal was an extension of myself, like so much that had already been taken away from me—my family, my friends, my future.

Curious, the way your brain can draw connections unconsciously. Bernadette’s action felt very much like what I experienced at the hands of the justice system. My journal was my freedom. Bernadette—well, Bernadette herself wasn’t necessarily bad. She was just wrong. Motivated by self-preservation and paranoia, she punished, she destroyed, all for nothing.

Curious, that I remain so immediately sensitive to that feeling of subjugation. I had thought that, with the anniversary happening to land on Easter—when my family gathers together to drink mimosas, snarf down fried potato hash and fruit salad with baked coconut shavings, and hunt for eggs in the backyard—, I would feel joy, I would feel grounded in a celebratory memory. Then again, is it really a surprise that, with only a year between me and an extended period of my life when self-determination was almost utterly denied me, I find that when I check in and think about it, I’m still processing the raw facts and the raw feelings of what happened?

At the same time, this sensitivity is not a feeling I would throw away. I do hope and work to feel peace, a wearing down of that jagged edge, a healing of the wound. But I can also celebrate, if not in the sense of joy then in the sense of acknowledgement, because sensitivity informs and hones my concern with the selfhood of myself and others. I feel peace—and joy!—at the being of human beings, at our intelligence and individuality, at our belonging absolutely and utterly to ourselves in all the ways that can never be ripped apart and taken away. The self remains, and even when the words are gone, this visceral weight means the body never forgets.

Hey Jude said...

Sounds as if Amanda hangs out with 'we as a planet' boy, from her last paragraph. And yes, 'what happened'?

Lis said...

Ok statement analysts:
Ted Cruz refuses to say he has never been unfaithful to his wife.
He can't say it.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3513200/Ted-Cruz-dodges-question-s-faithful-wife-endorser-Carly-Fiorina-leaps-insist-declaration-s-not-adulterer-dance-Donald-trump-s-tune.html

Lis said...

"my journal was where I documented the memories I wanted to keep"

as opposed to those she'd like to jettison, I've no doubt.

Katprint said...

One of the things I have noticed about real, bona fide memory loss is that the vast majority of it happens to people who aren't being criminally prosecuted. I have seen it in motorcycle riders who suffered brain damage in horrific crashes (in fact, a childhood friend of mine can't remember the three days before his motorcycle crash and then was in a coma for about six weeks), and people with Alzheimers, and as Peter pointed out earlier, crime victims who were raped or robbed while they were passed out due to alcohol intoxication. When a criminal defendant suddenly can't remember the details of their crime (for example, Jodi Arias) it is almost always simple faking.

Hey Jude said...

'I have a terrible memory.' I bet she does.

I'll wait on Peter!s analysis, though it's very tempting to write more. :)

tania cadogan said...

"All of a sudden, I felt somebody yank and grab my hair and I swung a punch around trying to whoever it was off.

"All of a sudden

Here we have a temporal lacuna.
Nothing happens all of a sudden, there is always something that preempts something happen.
If this is done during the process of free editing and she starts off with this phrase, she is concealing something.
She is concealing what caused this to happen.
Why would she need to do that?
If she was asked "What happened and starts with "All of a suddenI felt somebody yank and grab my hair
This is out of chronological order.
In order to yank someones hair you first have to grab it.
We now have the presence of a second person apart from herself.
However, she does not give a gender or identity to this new person.
The identity of the person is concealed, why?
Is this because she did not see the other person at all?
Is this because there is a reason to conceal the gender or identity of the person?
If this was a sudden, unprovoked attack, why the need to conceal the gender or identity of the attacker?
Based on the alleged type of attack, i suspect the attacker to be a female.
In street fights, women always grab the hair as it is often long and stops the other person from running away.
Also as hair is considered one part of a woman's beauty and women spend a long time doing their hair, their pride and glory and even identity in some cases, grabbing and pulling hair of results in chunks being pulled out or, if wearing a wig, hair extensions or a weave, particularly if black, it reveals the lie of the hair, it exposes her real hair, that which she didn't want seen, in effect shaming her, akin to when a woman is seen as a traitor or sleeping with someone she shouldn't have.
Head shaving is seen as a humiliation.

and I swung a punch around trying to whoever it was off.
She misses a vital word here, between to and whoever
She doesn't tell us what she was trying to do.
Is this because it didn't happen??
Is this because she is being deceptive about what really happened?
She still hasn't told us the gender or identity of the person allegedly attacked her.
At this point, we have an invisible someone allegedly attacking her.
Unless she is sight impaired and couldn't see anything or kept her eyes closed the whole time, there should be at least some kind of description.
Also it is worth noting that nothing has been said, either before the alleged attack,during or after.
If this was cat fight, where is the shouting ans screaming?
Where are the insults?
Where are the other people?

I swung a punch around
Around and not AT?
She is swinging a punch at an invisible attacker.
Is her injury perhaps self inflicted?
If so, why the need for this charade?
What benefit to her if she is being deceptive?

trying to whoever it was off.
She still doesn't give a gender or identity to the alleged attacker.
Why?
At the least we should be able to know if the alleged attacker is male or female, either by the alleged victim seeing or hearing them.
The alleged style of attack is female, yet she doesn't tell us this.
is the attacker a female, ie herself?
this would explain the need to conceal the gender and identity of the alleged attacker.

tania cadogan said...

Cont.

I felt somebody yank and grab my hair and I swung a punch around trying to whoever it was off.
Off what?
She is being grabbed by the hair, the expected would be to get them to let go as opposed to off.
I have an image in my head of a woman flailing around at nothing.
Think of someone flailing around to fight off wasps.
She is still withholding the gender and identity of her alleged assailant, Why?
Why is there a need to conceal the gender and identity of whoever is allegedly attacking her?

I fell to the ground when I got back up
This is out of chronological order.
This also shows why punctuation and grammar is so important.
Look at what she has written I fell to the ground when I got back up
She has herself falling down after she got back up.
To get back up, you have to have first fallen down
What happened between her falling to the ground and getting up and falling down again?
She doesn't tell us what caused her to fall to the ground, except she does.
I swung a punch around trying to whoever it was off. I fell to the ground when I got back up
Her falling down is linked to her swinging a punch at the invisible whoever

the other person hit me in the head with something
Once again she is concealing the gender or identity.
There is a deliberate attempt to conceal the gender and identity of the alleged attacker.
Why would this be?
Guilty knowledge?
There was no attacker
Fear of the consequences?
In which case why mention being attacked at all when a fall could have explained it away?


hit me in the head with something
IN not ON?
Is this the way she normally speaks?
is this perhaps leakage that what allegedly happened was in her head not in reality?
Why the need to conceal what she was allegedly hit with?
it would be fairly easy to have a reasonable idea of what she was it with.
Hit with a fist, a bag, something heavy, something sharp.
There would be a sensory description at least, how it felt when it hit her head.
Was it a hard hit, a gentle hit?
How did it feel?
Did it make a sound?
We now have an unidentified (invisible?)person hitting her with an unidentified (invisible) object.
We still have an alleged attack being carried out in complete silence.
Unless the victim was deaf, there should and would be sounds, voices.
There would have been at least one voice saying why the victim was being attacked, a reason, there should also be insults and threats, screams and cries.
Throughout all this drama, the alleged victim herself is saying nothing.
No question as to why she is being attacked, no denials, no threats or insults back, no cries or screams.
I now have a visual of a a female Marcel Marceau flailing wildly around acting out a scene of being bothered by a wasp or being caught up in a web with a big spider in it and scared of spiders.

and I don't remember much of anything after that, everything went to a blur."
She is telling us what she doesn't remember as to what she does remember.
Why is there a continuing need to conceal and withhold information?

tania cadogan said...

cont.

I don't remember much of anything
She doesn't tell us she doesn't remember anything at all, only that she doesn't remember much
There is information she does remember after the alleged attack.
I would ask what she does remember.
remembering something be it an image, a sound, a smell, can prompt other memories to come up.
It is akin to her saying that's all i know or all i remember
It is an attempt to avoid saying anything else, to end the questions perhaps?
Don't ask me anything else, i want this to stop here/finish here?
It indicates sensitivity.
For there to be a that, there has to be a this.

everything went to a blur."
Define everything.
Went not Was?
Is this part of her normal speech style?
Depending on education, social class, even location, certain words and tenses are the norm.
I seen as opposed to I saw as a common example.
Even if it was a blur, there should still be some memories, even if vague, a sight a sound.
What happened after she was allegedly hit in the head?
there is no conclusion.

In this short statement there is no beginning, there is a middle which is the event itself and no conclusion.
No mention is made of any pain caused by being hit in the head or having her hair yanked and grabbed, no sore areas caused by falling to the ground after she got up.
No blood, no clumps of hair, no mention of what she did such as go home, go to hospital, no mention of anyone being there to help her, no mention of her assailant leaving.

She doesn't give any form of identity to her alleged attacker, i would question if there was ever an attacker and that she caused the injuries to herself either to gain a reaction such as sympathy, or to get attention for a cause, if she was drunk or stoned, if she was a victim of domestic violence even and is in denial or if she simply fell over and face planted or she started the fight and got trounced by her victim and is now spinning a story to save face.

GeekRad said...

Lis, Ted Cruz has not made a reliable denial, even when prompted to do so in language that is a reliable denial. If he can't say I have never been unfaithful to my wife we can't say it for him. And neither can Carly Fiorina.

Nanaof4 said...

"all of a sudden"

This is sensitive. The person feels the need to pursuade the audience that something happened suddenly to her that she was not expecting. I suspect the opposite.

"felt someone yank and grab my hair"
Does not mention gender (a man, a woman, etc) The order tells me the person is telling a story not relaying experiental knowledge. Someone is never identified so the person telling the story is trying to conceal the identity so their version of events can be told.

"and I swung a punch around trying to whoever it was off"

"and" indicates a lapse in time beforee swinging a punch. Again, if you are going to swing a punch you would at least know who and why you were swinging that punch. "...trying to whoever it was off" This statement implies the attacker is now on the person. Much more happened between the "yanking and grabbing of hair and the punch. The person telling the story is concealing their culpability in the fight.

This also implies that by this time the person telling the story would at least know if it was male or female and I would expect to see "the" man and/or woman...when describing the attacker(s).

"I fell to the ground when I got back up"

I would say this is out of order. When did the person fall to the ground? Was it when the punch was thrown? Since the punch was thrown to get the attacker off, I would say the person was maybe on the ground with the alledged attacker on top.

"the other person hit me in the head with something"

At this point I would expect to know how many and the gender of the attacker(s). I would also be interestd to know if the person goes on in the statement to claim three attackers.

Falling to the ground and when I got back up, again shows a lapse of time or events. I suspect if the person fell to the ground at all it was during a physical altercation, not getting their hair yanked. Getting hit in the head is passive. The other person, means the story teller knows it was a different person hitting them in the head because "somebody, whoever" turns into "the" other person when hit on the head.

Not remembering "much of anything" says the person did remember some things, but doesn't want to be asked further questions. The info that comes after the alleged attack is very sensitive.

This story is riddled with truths, but the actual events are not in order and critical information is being withheld.

I would ask the person about the punch. How it was thrown. I would also ask about how they got their injuries. The position of each person, etc.

I suspect the person was involved in an altercation of their own making and/or possibly has an agenda. I would want to ask questions to find out if there was an agenda, or if the altercation was instigated by the story teller.