Statement Analysis of rape victims' statements shows veracity or deception. In a simple search of this blog, you will find both.
There are some general principles that we follow.
For example, the rape victim does not have linguistic unity with the rapist. We often note that the pronoun "we", should it enter a rape victim's statement after the assault, is a strong signal that no rape took place. Over the years, this has proven to be a most reliable indictor. In the same sense, we note how the rape victim linguistically connects herself to the rapist as important indicators for justice.
In the allegations against Bill Cosby, in particular, we observed the language of the victim towards the accused before and after the assault.
Introduction: "Mr. Cosby"
Regarding connection with fame: "Bill Cosby"
Personal, before assault: "Bill"
Once the assault has taken place, he was "Cosby" often. ("Mr. Cosby" and "he", "him", as, at times, the subject further distanced herself from him by not even using his name.)
In false accusations, (Jameis Winston) we often see the pronoun "we" after the alleged assault, and the word "left" in the statement in a specific reference: 'he left' which increased bitterness and could provide motive for false accusation.
Often the victim cannot even say the rapist's name. We sometimes see heroic forgiveness granted but this takes time to enter the language (often years) but we do not find empathy. This brings us to an utterly unnecessary statement:
"There is no excuse for rape."
This is a foolish statement, on its own, but has become, bizarrely, necessary in the environment where rape is slowly being accepted, victims blamed, and politicians seek to change women's behavior and life patterns, instead of punishing rapists.
In Europe, rapists are frequently let go, sometimes without even a summons or fine. Few are prosecuted and those who are receive short sentences. In Sweden, any immigrant who "looks younger than 40" is permitted to claim to be 16 years old, which contributes to the lighter sentences, (or no sentence) while giving them more free money than if they were 18.
When a father tells his daughter she cannot go out in the street at night it is cautionary and protective.
When politicians say the same thing, it is empowering to the rapists.
Many have wondered what can cause a man to have even the ability to rape a woman. What early childhood exposure would allow a man, for example, to become physically aroused while crouching behind a bush, ready to draw blood by hitting the victim with a rock? How is this romantic? How is this sexually exciting?
This is what criminal psychologists often study, and what language helps us in granting insight.
Not only is there the element of intrusion, and the element of violence, but it is specifically in the body parts where 'privacy' and 'tenderness', life creating affirmation, and unity of "one flesh" in marriage, all exist.
Rape is an attack in the most vulnerable places, both physically and psychologically.
In language, is one's agenda more powerful than the intrusive sexual violence, and the post trauma suffering, than one's political view?
This is the question for Statement Analysis in this article.
What about agenda?
Could agenda trump the language of a rape victim? In this article from the Daily, we find quotes from an interview, including the assertion,
"I am a heterosexual man" which is crucial for analysis.
By stating this, the subject wishes to have the audience understand,
"I am not homosexual."
Does this mean that he wants to negate "consensual" sex? Or, does he think that being homosexual negates rape, itself?
In Statement Analysis, all unnecessary information becomes very important to our work.
In the case of rape, that is, a perpetrator raping a victim, the victim's sexual preference or identity is of no consequence. It is an assault that is violent and sexual.
The elements of "violence" and "sex" are linked together. Those who deny rape is sexual do so against science or common sense. They are as foolish as those who claim women ask to be raped.
Homosexuals do not ask to be raped by virtue of being homosexual.
I once had a victim (friend) of whom I could not recognize his face, it was so disfigured from the blows after being gang raped. Even in his setting where he was at a bar that men went to to have sex behind curtains, his intention was not to be raped.
Those who drank to intoxication, foolish as this is, do not ask to be raped. The alcoholic blackout memories are generally not recoverable, so the victim's body is often relied upon for evidence to "speak" on her behalf. She, too, in spite of memory blackout, will suffer as "the brain knows what it knows."
Rape is coercive. The physical fear as an element, itself, can create lifelong repercussions. It is intrusive, far more than one who has hands put upon her, as even this, is intrusive and will be reflected in the language.
In Cologne, one woman had fingers inserted in her front and back, but this may be viewed as a lesser crime than rape, but it is rape, and the hands on her, alone, would be severe; but to literally enter into her body often shows itself in even more intense language of invasion.
Has this victim's political belief overcome the language of rape?
Or, do you believe something else is going on here.
Begin with the unnecessary declaration of "I am a heterosexual man", and continue through his words.
Italics and underlining have been added to assist.
A reader recently asked if the possessive pronoun "my" would ever be attached to a criminal...
Note the quotes, in spite of their scattering throughout the article.
What is your conclusion?
Leftist Norwegian Politician Gets Raped By Somalian, Questions Whether Man Should Be Deported
Leftist Norway politician Karsten Nordal Hauken was brutally raped by a Somali and felt so incredibly guilty in the aftermath he subsequently questioned whether authorities should even deport the man.
Hauken has finally come out to tell the public his story of his rape and forgiveness, Norway’s public broadcasting channel NRK reports.
Immediately after the rape first occurred, Hauken was taken to the hospital in Oslo where nurses collected samples for DNA evidence. About six months after the rape, police completed their investigation. They secured the DNA and fingerprint evidence necessary to move the case forward.
In court, the Somali claimed the interaction was consensual, but Norwegian authorities begged to differ. The Somali went to prison for four and a half years.
The story doesn’t end there. Shortly before the sentence was over, Hauken learned the man was about to be deported from Norway and sent back to Somalia.
“I got a strong feeling of guilt and responsibility,” Hauken wrote. “I was the reason he wouldn’t be in Norway, and instead be sent to an unknown future in Somalia. He had already done his time in prison. Would he get punished again, and this time much harder?”
Hauken fell into a deep depression. He started drinking heavily and lost years doing little else but smoking marijuana to dodge feelings of self-loathing.
He’s since apparently turned his life around and has come to some important realizations, which may strike other observers as completely bizarre.
“In his culture, sexual abuse is about power, not lust,” Hauken said. “And it’s not considered a gay action to be the one who engages in power and violence.”
“I don’t feel anger against my rapist, because I look at him as a product of an unjust world. A product of an upbringing full of war,” Hauken said.
What this all means, according to Hauken, is that refugees need our help more than ever.