Saturday, July 16, 2016

"Passing the Smell Test"

A common expression in law enforcement is "this doesn't pass the smell test" or
"this does not pass the straight face test."

What it means is that the story is not really adding up.  

In the disappearance of Baby Ayla, Justin DiPietro's story about his mother's home being broken into, tiny house that it was, in the middle of the night, with the kidnapper finding just the right room, avoiding all the other children and adults, and getting in and out without a single piece of trace evidence (tiny DNA) led the spokesman for the investigation to say,

"This doesn't pass the straight face test."

This statement should never be part of a professional analyst's vocabulary or report.  

Here is why:

When something is 'too good to be true', it likely is.  Yet, every so often, odds are defied and even though the "straight face test" may be 90% accurate, 

an analyst who includes this is not exercising statement analysis, but is doing what I call "guess analysis" which could, in just one case, destroy his or her reputation.  

"It is not statement analysis." 

This is the best response in correcting and guiding analysts:  Stay as a 'slave' to the text, and even if you feel certain that 'this is a lie', if the language does not support it, do not assert it.

Every so often, a case arises in which the odds are defied and this is a good reminder for the analyst to keep to the disciplines of the science and avoid making a judgement call. 

Recently, Lenny Dykstra, former major league ballplayer, has been doing public relations work to sell his new book.  In his book, he makes some outrageous claims about other athletes, his own behavior, and what other celebrities have done.  

In response to these claims, some have said that the claims seem too fantastical, and 'don't pass the smell test' for truth. 

Yet, the language tells us otherwise.  Even events that appear shocking, or 'just could not have happened', have been alleged in strong language, and have been denied in weak language. 

Such claims as Mets manager Davey Johnson being drunk all the time were addressed by former players of whom no reliable denial was given.  Dykstra said that he and Robert DeNiro went on a cocaine binge of which DeNiro said, "bull$%!" as his denial.

Other "fantastic" claim was that former Mets' player Kevin Mitchell decapitated his girlfriend's cat in front of two players and his girlfriend.  

In viewing all the statements, the analysis shows that it might not pass the smell or straight face test, but it does pass the scrutiny of scientific analysis:  the former Mets player and former gang member, did, in fact, take a kitchen knife, pick up the cat by the scruff, and slit its throat.  That he was a gang member and was raised in ways of which a person will become desensitized to violence, notwithstanding, the language is the best indicator for truth and deception's discernment. 

Even though the 'straight face' or 'smell' test appeals to common sense, the analyst's reputation is on the line, and the most experienced; that is, those who have survived early struggles, sometimes for years, with the complexity of human nature and human language, know all too well:

instincts can be wrong but the scientific repeated process is the safest and most accurate way to discern truth from deception. 

In the murder of Amanda Blackburn, I wrote that investigators repeatedly asked, "who is this lucky?" when it came to all the coincidental elements of the case.  This is interesting but it is not statement analysis and it cannot be used in an analytical report's finding.  As an article, in the upcoming Part IV conclusion of the case, I address the coincidentals of the case, but within the language that caused investigators to ask this rhetorical question.  

While everything may have pointed to Kevin Fox in the death of his daughter, the investigators ignored the language, and went with statistics and their 'gut instincts' to falsely accuse the innocent father, causing untold damage to him and his family, and millions of dollars to tax payers, along with the damage to the reputation of law enforcement. 

This is why I urge professionals to avoid 'check list' mentality of disengaging the intellect and rushing to a conclusion. 

Bumper sticker slogans may work for lawyers appealing to the lazy minded jury, but the professional analyst has justice to consider first, then his science and then his reputation.  

Some may survive an error here and there, early on, but as they learn, they also learn that fads, short cuts and stupendous claims of "lie detection" can do more damage than they do good, and are best for hollywood and book selling, but not for justice.

It is not enough to know someone is lying, we must be able to report accurately why we know he is lying. 

For professional training opportunities see Hyatt Analysis Services


34 comments:

Nic said...

Peter, what about what is not "said"? i.e., avoidance.

Does this warrant mention somewhere in the analyst's report?



lynda said...

Good reminder Peter

Me2l said...

"This is the best response in correcting and guiding analysts: Stay as a 'slave' to the text, and even if you feel certain that 'this is a lie', if the language does not support it, do not assert it."

This is absolutely excellent and a very timely reminder. After so much of the "gut feeling" analysis, this is such a good reality check.

SA is fascinating, but I'm such a novice, and there is so much to learn! Because of that, to see it applied professionally and properly is eye-opening.

Anonymous said...

Are the authorities in twin falls Idaho trying to do the right thing?,considering the ages of the victim and rapists. Or are they trying to protect the rapists?

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

In linking to an archived analysis on "to, so, because, etc." , I came across Karen Gough's analysis on BJD; specifically this:

Note the scripted plan: She called David to call Hailey, instead of calling Hailey directly. This is avoidance.

What is the difference between distancing and avoidance in SA? When I think about avoidance I think of, i.e., DB not even mentioning his son upon discovering his wife lying in a pool of blood on the living room floor, dying, from a gsw to the head.

Would an analyst even regard this glaring omission (unexpected) at the end of his/her report, or just leave it up to LE?

Anonymous said...

Hello. Would someone kindly offer some analysis on the following transcription taken from a tv interview. Appreciation in advance.

KAREN RISTEVSKI – MISSING WOMAN - MELBOURNE AUSTRALIA SINCE 29 JUNE 2016
 

Borce Ristevski (Karen’s husband)

You know without the knowing, ahh, is the hardest part.

We had a ahh b ahh bit of ahh an argument ahh in regards to, um, the store figures, and um,  how she was going to you know improve them, and, she had had a bad day the day before at the store, um, and on the Wednesday morning, um, she just went upstairs, um, and then came downstairs and just went out through the garage, ahh, she might have just walked down the street or just to clear her head because that was the last thing she said to me, um, I’m gonna to go and clear my head, um, can’t do it here.

Just give us a call or give the police a call or y y you know give anyone a call ah just to know you know that you’re safe um, d doesn’t matter what, how you know just get a message back to us.

 

Borce Ristevski’s brother (Karen’s brother-in-law)

I think think it’s a dream.  I wake up 2, 3 o’clock in the morning. Nup it’s real.

She was happy on the 21st.  That’s the last time I seen her.  We had a good dance.  It’s not like her.

tania cadogan said...

Off topic

The family of missing Melbourne mum Karen Ristevski cut a press conference short after a reporter asked her husband if he had killed her.

Borce Ristevski refused to answer when a Seven News journalist asked him the confronting question on Thursday.

'Did you kill Karen, Borce?' the reporter said.

The couple's daughter Sarah, 21, burst into tears as the missing woman's aunt, Patrice, shut the press conference down.

This comes as police revealed CCTV cameras at the 47-year-old boutique owner's family home in Avondale Heights did not show her leaving the property on June 29, the day she disappeared, the Herald Sun reported.

Mr Ristevski told police the last time he saw his wife was at around 10am that day, when she left the family home on foot to 'clear her head' after the couple had an argument about finances.

Her neighbours also said they didn't see her on that morning.

Mr Ristevski has already been questioned by police over the disappearance but was released pending further inquiries.

Police have not suggested that Mr Ristevski has had anything to do with his wife's disappearance.

Police also said they will be focussing on a second location in the search for Mrs Ristevski on Friday.

SES crews, water police and police on motorbikes searched the Maribyrnong River and surrounding areas on Thursday for clues.

Police are searching for a gold purse and handbag as well as the missing mother's mobile phone and have combed the Maribyrnong River and bushland behind the family’s Oakley Drive home without success.

Mrs Ristevski's phone has been switched off and her bank accounts left untouched since her disappearance.Two cars have been seized from the family during the course of the investigation and have not yet been returned.

On Thursday, Mr Ristevski was pictured linking arms with his daughter as they walked away from cameras following the abrupt end to the family's press conference.

'I really think that is inappropriate ... This is about Karen, it's not about anyone else,' aunt Patrice said.

Before the press conference ended in tears Patrice told the media the mum's disappearance was a 'nightmare' for the family.

'It is quite distressing we take every day as it comes... It is difficult for the family.

'Someone doesn't just disappear like this. It's not Karen, she would not leave us,' she said.

She also told media she didn't know anyone who would want to harm the missing mother.

Sarah Ristevski said her mother wouldn't leave her 'because she is an only child'.

Inspector Stephen Dennis said Mrs Ristevski's disappearance was still being treated as a missing persons investigation but they had grave concerns for her welfare.

tania cadogan said...

cont.

Earlier Australian television star Samuel Johnson begged Mrs Ristevski, who is his close friend, to return home.

Johnson, known for his lead role in TV series The Secret Life of Us, described Mrs Ristevski as a 'sensitive, generous, intelligent and kind woman,' Herald Sun reported.

'She is the last person in the world you would expect something like this to happen to ... she never puts a foot wrong. Our hearts are bleeding for her daughter,' he added.

Johnson's sister Connie, whose public fight with terminal cancer has been documented through the family-run charity foundation 'Love Your Sister', echoed her brothers sentiments.

'Sam and I are thinking of Karen’s family and praying for the safe return of this beautiful, gentle and loving woman,' she wrote online.

She said that when Johnson was unicycling across the country - in an attempt to break the Guinness World Record and raise money for breast cancer awareness - Ms Ristevski was a huge support.

'While Sam was unicycling around Australia in 2013 doing events nearly every night, Karen kindly donated mastectomy-friendly frocks from her own designer range so I could feel good at all the fundraisers,' she shared to the foundations 300,000-strong 'village' of supporters online.

'We’ve laughed together, dressed and undressed together, and shared our highs and lows.'

Karen Ristevski's disappearance has been described by police as 'highly irregular' and they now have grave concerns for her safety, news.com.au reported.

The 47-year-old mother was last seen by her family after she walked out of their luxury Avondale Heights home in Oakley Drive, in Melbourne's north-west, about 10am on Wednesday June 29.

Ms Ristevski has since failed to turn up for work at the family business Bella Bleu boutique in Taylors Lakes.

A police spokesperson told Daily Mail Australia: 'As part of the investigation, Karen's house and the surrounding area has been searched.'

Speaking last week before he was interviewed by police Mr Ristevski said this had happened before but noted his wife had never left for more than a few hours, the publication reported.

'That was the last thing she said to me: 'I'm going to go and clear my head',' Mr Ristevski said.

'She has always walked back in the door after calming down.'

Mrs Ristevski reportedly had $850 in cash when she disappeared. She was last seen wearing a black jacket and jeans and is known to frequent Taylors Lakes.

She is described as 160cm tall with a slim build and has shoulder length brown hair.

Anyone with information on Ms Ristevski's disappearance is urged to contact Avondale Heights police on 9337 6777.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3689880/Reporter-asks-husband-missing-Melbourne-woman-Karen-Ristevski-murdered-her.html

Anonymous said...

Thanks Tania. The transcript is from -

https://www.9now.com.au/a-current-affair/2016/clip-ciqk3yo1t002g0inw18rnnstw

Cheers

John mcgowan said...

Anons OT:


We had a ahh b ahh bit of ahh an argument ahh in regards to, um, the store figures, and um, how she was going to you know improve them

Note here the plural "we" in regards to the "argument" about "store figures" and "how she (singular) was going to you know improve them" Not that they (plural) were going to improve them. Was this "argument" more one sided, him more forceful.
Note the minimising of the "argument, "a bit". Note too the stuttering when it comes the "argument" making it sensitive. If he is not a stutterer it is all the more sensitive.

"and, she had had a bad day the day before at the store",

Do they work together at "the store" what constitutes a "bad day"
Is it financial?
Did she argue with someone?
Was a delivery late?
etc.. What caused her to have a "bad day" according to her husband.
Would one call this "subtle disparagement" Does he blame her for "store figures" and it's why he says it's only her who is "going to improve them" A guilty person will often find a way to justify their behavior by blaming the victim, but in a subtle, manner. If it is the case that the husband is involved in her disappearance and possible homicide, will he blame the victim, his wife, for the "store figures" In other words, it (whatever it maybe) is all her fault, i wouldn't have reacted like that if she had not done xyz.

"um, and on the Wednesday morning, um, she just went upstairs, um, and then came downstairs and just went out through the garage, ahh, she might have just walked down the street or just to clear her head because that was the last thing she said to me, um, I’m gonna to go and clear my head, um, can’t do it here."

"Um" "Ahh" and derivatives of are often used to pause and give oneself time to think. This comes about as we see above, at the mention of going up the stairs and coming down, making this part of his statement sensitive.

"um, she just went upstairs, um, and then came downstairs"

Note, he is yet to use her name.

The word "Just" is often used to compare, minimise (downwards) and time, "i just received a call ten minutes ago. We know it is not about time as he is talking after the event. So why in this part of his statement does he minimise. Something more went on than going up and downstairs.

"um, she just went upstairs, um, and then came downstairs"

"and then"

Note here we have a skip in time (temporal lacunai) between going up and coming downstairs. What occurred while she was upstairs "and then" came down?"

cont..

John mcgowan said...

Cont..

He doesn't tell us why she went up and downstairs? Making it needles information but important to the analyst.

"she might have just walked down the street or just to clear her head because that was the last thing she said to me, um, I’m gonna to go and clear my head, um, can’t do it here."

Here he shows doubt with the qualifier "might" giving others to think differently and for him to, later, change his statement.

Again we see minimising ("Just") when she "walked" (body posture noted. When body posture enters a statement, it often shows an increase in tension) down the street"

My boss, Tony said xyt
My boss (dropping his name, incomplete social introduction) said xyz.
The boss (dropping the personal "my")
The boss told me (told being more forceful)
The boss "stood" (body posture) and told me xyz.

Note the increase in tension becoming stronger.

"or just to clear her head"

Minimising. Why does she want to clear her head.?

"because that was the last thing she said to me, um, I’m gonna to go and clear my head, um, can’t do it here."

Note he gives us the reason why ("because") why she "might" have "just walked down the street" When some has a need to explain (because, to...) without being asked it is colour coded blue as the highest form of sensitivity (SCAN) along with the word "left". He is anticipating being asked why she "might have just walked down the street"

"just to clear her head because that was the last thing she said to me, um, I’m gonna to go and clear my head, um, can’t do it here."

Note the repetition to clear here head making it sensitive. He introduces her "head" will she have injuries to her head "if" she is found dead?

"that was the last thing she said to me"

Here he wants the communication to stop.

The time between going "upstairs" and "coming down" is where i would focus my attention first.

John mcgowan said...

Oops. :/

I should've started off by asking, was all this said in the free editing stage? Choosing his own words and not the language of others?
Is he answering question?
Is the statement edited?

If any of the above apply my analysis will adjust accordingly.




Jenny said...

Off topic. This is a local case where a woman has been missing for 2 years.
http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/2016/07/07/new-clues-missing-ste-genevieve-woman/

This last line seems to tell all: “I have zero optimism of potentially finding Lynn alive,” Messer said.

He talks about another woman that Lynn "sanctioned". So messed up!

lynda said...

"We" he starts of with them close, or partners, "we" got into an argument. They were both active participants. Then the pronoun changes to "she", while "we" are arguing about the figures, "she" is the only one responsible for them, to "fix" them. Created distance with the pronoun change and does not use her name. "How she was going to improve them, AND, she had a bad day. "And" missing information. He brings up yesterday being a "bad" day for her. This was unnecessary information. She didn't disappear the day before. Is he instilling this to make people think she's been suffering because of this bad day and she would just walk away? Or that she is responsible for arguing because she had a bad day? Because there's missing information from she had a bad day yesterday to arguing today, had they been arguing since the previous evening? Though he does state that the bad day was "at the store." Did they argument continue from the store to home?
"At the store AND, UM, on THE Wednesday morning. More missing information with the "and" He jumped from having a bad day yesterday in the store directly to Wednesday morning. What happened all night long? When did the argument take place on Wed?

"she JUST went upstairs, um, and then came downstairs and JUST went out through the garage,

Still does not use her name, distancing. JUST is used twice, when describing going up the stairs, and coming down the stairs. JUST is a word used for comparison. Using the word "just" before she "went upstairs" means he is comparing that she just went upstairs with another time she went upstairs? Or is it making "going upstairs sensitive? Did something happen on the stairs that day to make it different from any other day she went up the stairs?

Is that a correct SA usage on the word "just" to the more knowing of SA then I am? I concur with John that something happened on the stairs or the stairs are sensitive. Did she fall down the stairs? Was she pushed? Did they argue standing on the stairs? Did she run up the stairs?

lynda said...

continued..


He says she went up and then came down. Missing information. What happened between the time she went up the stairs and then came down? It would be unexpected for someone to walk upstairs and then immediately at the top, turn around and come back down.

"AND JUST went out through the garage,"

missing information from the time she came downstairs until the time she "went out" through the garage. She did not walk out thru the garage. JUST being said right before "went out thru garage" is comparing this "went out through garage to another time so this time is different? He drops a pronoun by not saying and SHE just went out through the garage, or using her proper name. She didn't "walk" "run" or crawl through the garage, so how did she get out through the garage? Did he drag her? Carry her?

"she might have just walked down the street or just to clear her head because that was the last thing she said to me, um, I’m gonna to go and clear my head, um, can’t do it here."

"she", distancing, has not spoken her name yet, "might have JUST WALKED" down the street, or JUST to clear her head. "Might is telling us what he thinks may have happened, not what did happen. Non-committal. "JUST walked." Again, using the word "JUST" before the word walked. Another comparison between THiS time walking down the street, to other times she may have walked down the street. THIS time was different. Why would she just walk down the street? For the exercise? Because she was mad?

" or JUST to clear her head" Now he gives us an alternative, she might have just walked down the street for some unknown reason, or JUST to clear her head. JUST being used before "clear her head" making this a comparison also.

"because that was the last thing she said to me, um, I’m gonna to go and clear my head, um, can’t do it here.

the word "because" is sensitive since this was a free editing stage. He feels the need to explain WHY she "went out thru the garage and/or walked down the street, or to clear her head. He explaining why she did something, she did it to "clear her head".

"um, can't do it here." Um, missing info or slowing down to think of something to say, then he DROPS a pronoun "can't do it here." Who can't do what here? What can't they do?

I think he shows deception and possible knowledge of what happened to her really. There is much distance as he doesn't use her name once, nor call her his wife.

When the reporter asked if he killed her, while taking him by surprise no doubt, it would have been an excellent time for his to issue a reliable denial instead of turning his back and walking away. He does not even attempt to issue denial.

John mcgowan said...

Hi, Jenny

i covered that case when it first broke. I will try to find his first press conference, it is not long after she was reported missing, about a week, i think. He praises LE search and rescue and others (Vernal Kunz) before he mentions his wife. I think he begins with apologising about his glasses or sun glasses. There are other red flags in his statement, if memory serves.

John mcgowan said...

Re Jenny's OT:

Lynn Messer's husband asks area residents to search their properties

Jul 18, 2014

She was last seen on July the 8th


"I need to apologise first off. I have to have my prescription glasses to read my notes, and iv'e got tinting in them so forgive me for that".

Messer Press Conference

Vt
http://dailyjournalonline.com/gallery/messer-press-conference/youtube_941b0a5b-a49a-5de6-a43e-a2d4fd2761f5.html


http://dailyjournalonline.com/news/local/missing-and-crimes/lynn-messer-s-husband-asks-area-residents-to-search-their/article_ffe8882c-6ab5-525f-9154-ba5a89edc55d.html

"I" "we" shift

“I want to start by thanking everybody involved. First off, the press and news agencies, I want to thank you for showing up. We need your help,” said Kerry. “I want to thank Sheriff Gary Stolzer for tremendous job that he and his staff have been doing and all the law enforcement he has enlisted that have been so responsive. The literally hundreds of search and rescue people with their dogs and with their expertise that has helped through a very difficult process of elimination. To go through property that is very difficult to search, we wouldn’t be where we are today if it weren’t for their help.”

He continued to thank his family who stood with him during the press conference. He also thanked the countless number of people who have been helping with searching and the thousands who have joined them in praying they could find her.

Kerry then addressed his wife directly.

“If you can see this: We love you. I love you. I love you to the bottom of my heart,” said Kerry

“We are looking, we’re searching. We’re not going to quit until we find you. If you can respond in any way to let us know something, do so. If you’re in a situation where you can’t respond, don’t despair, we are not going to stop looking.”

Kerry made a plea to the public stating they have worked very actively and have covered about 1,200 to 1,300 acres of woodland, several hundred homes, and hundreds and hundreds of barns and buildings.

“We have got thousands of acres of woodland that is undeveloped that we need to get searched and we are going to need help doing that,” said Kerry. “If you live in Ste. Genevieve, Jefferson, St. Francois County region or anywhere else in the state of Missouri or this nation, I ask that you please search all your outbuildings, search your vehicles. If you own property in St. Louis that you hunt on, don’t wait until deer season, please come to your property this week and search your property. My family and I are pleading that you help us find Lynn.”

Lynn Messer was last seen July 8. Her husband woke at 4 a.m. discovering she was missing. He searched the home and property unable to find her. Authorities were then dispatched at 7:56 a.m. to their farm off Route DD.

John mcgowan said...

OT:

PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR ISSUES LENGTHY REPORT ON DEORR KUNZ CASE

http://www.eastidahonews.com/2016/07/private-investigator-issues-lengthy-report-deorr-kunz-case/

Hey Jude said...

Thanks, John.

So, camo jacket and four 'missing' matchbox cars were at Jessica and DeOrr's abandoned residence.

----

Investigators searched by permission in the 900 block of Ada, Idaho Falls, Id, which is the former residence of Vernal Kunz and Jessica Mitchell. Both had been evicted for not paying rent and had left in the apartment furniture and clothing. In such, the landlord had cleaned out the apartment and move all of the articles to near the dumpster for removal as the property had been declared “abandoned” by the landlord. Investigators were given permission to search the abandoned waste by the landlord. During the search we will report investigators found the following :

1. Four matchbox cars described previously by the parents as “missing and they did not know where they were.”
2. A camo child’s jacket similar to being described by both parents as being worn on the day of the event and suggested to be missing with the child.
3. A credit card used by a family friend with seemingly purchases of items unknown to investigators in testimony.
4. An insurance tracking device box and instruction package.

All evidence was turned over to Lemhi County SO for further testing with the USDOJ

Hey Jude said...

They were said to be living with Grandfather DeOrr (Denis) at the time DeOrr disappeared, and had been there for six months, as I recall - maybe longer.. It seems likely they moved in with him after they were evicted from their apartment, in which case the parents would have presumed the jacket and toy cars would have been disposed of from the abandoned residence long before DeOrr disappeared.

Alternatively, they could mean the place they all lived before Grandfather DeOrr and DeOrr Sr (Vernal) upped stakes and moved to another state. Can't imagine those items would have been left there - besides, that was a house rather than an apartment, and as they moved in with him, he was most likely the rent payer, or owner.

JB said...

Thankyou John & Lynda. Great analysis. It has been reported that there is nothing to be seen on neighbours CCTV footage to support his claim that Karen went for a walk. They have searched areas behind their home... it won't be long until the police gather enough evidence to make an arrest. Thankyou again for sharing your great knowledge of statement analysis!!

lynda said...

JB..

Thanks for the praise but I dont know how good my SA is, I'm just a beginner.

John on the other hand is excellent.

The plot thickens with no video of her leaving home.Why are so many women being murdered or going missing?? Is it just me or does it seem to be on the rise? What also seems to be on the rise is the number of people getting away with it!

Nic said...

John said:
"um, and on the Wednesday morning, um, she just went upstairs, um, and then came downstairs and just went out through the garage, ahh, she might have just walked down the street or just to clear her head because that was the last thing she said to me, um, I’m gonna to go and clear my head, um, can’t do it here."

"Um" "Ahh" and derivatives of are often used to pause and give oneself time to think. This comes about as we see above, at the mention of going up the stairs and coming down, making this part of his statement sensitive.

"um, she just went upstairs, um, and then came downstairs"

Note, he is yet to use her name.

The word "Just" is often used to compare, minimise (downwards) and time, "i just received a call ten minutes ago. We know it is not about time as he is talking after the event. So why in this part of his statement does he minimize. Something more went on than going up and downstairs.


Note the dropped pronouns.

She went up, but "she" did not come down,
"she" did not walk out/
"she did not "leave",
"she" did not "leave" not through,

No pronoun just "went" out through the garage.

Think about what Peter said about the need to persuade the assailant's daughter being in bed, just like BJD felt the need to persuade that Hailey was in bed. If she's in bed asleep, why the need to persuade she was there.

Head is sensitive. "Clearing her head".

What lives in the head? Human consciousness.

jmo

Nic said...

He doesn't say who or how. His wife went up the stairs of her own accord, but "she" didn't come down, "she" didn't "went" out through the garage.

Why the need to say she went out the garage? Why the need to say what part of the house she "went out" at all. MO, this is sensitive especially since he says she "might have just walked down the street".

The word "just" puts an alternative action in play. If she didn't walk out the garage ("walk" down the street), how else could she have come down the stairs, gone into and out the garage?

jmo

Nic said...

I really enjoy your analysis, John.

Note, too, "can't do it here", there is another dropped pronoun.

Also, note the negation, what is said in the negative is sensitive.

He doesn't say she said "she" couldn't do it here.

imo, her "head" was likely cleared "here".

jmo

John mcgowan said...

Karen Ristevski: Family of missing Melbourne mum dogged by debt

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/karen-ristevski-family-of-missing-melbourne-mum-dogged-by-debt/news-story/7b0d23acfbce06c11b31e022a7b7161e

John mcgowan said...

Thanks for your kind words. I'm still a rookie with a lot to learn.

Iv'e just noticed this from Tania's post.

'That was the last thing she said to me: 'I'm going to go and clear my head',' Mr Ristevski said.

'She has always walked back in the door after calming down.'

Body posture noted, this maybe due to an argument. "Calming down"

"door

Possible childhood sexual abuse or current abuse.

"After calming down"

Is this again subtle disparagement once more?

From another article:

The Herald Sun reports Ms Ristevski’s brother-in-law, Vic Ristevski, made another call to the public to help find her on Tuesday.

It’s terrible ... we are all shocked,” he told media. “If you are still alive talk to us.

If you don’t want to talk to your husband, give me a call or my wife.”

http://www.news.com.au/national/victoria/news/police-believe-missing-melbourne-woman-karen-ristevski-could-have-been-murdered/news-story/cde39d2fb8120ae9484ac5217c1a3edf

Nic said...

Tanya said:
'She has always walked back in the door after calming down.'

"After calming down"

Is this again subtle disparagement once more?


I would agree. She was the one who needed to calm down, not him.

Walked back in the door is interesting considering she "went out the garage".

She has always walked back in the door after calming down.

Was this a tenuous marriage? "always" (at all times, on all occasions) implies continuous, multi. Did they fight a lot? He implies she was emotional on many occasions.

He is not saying he is expecting her to walk back in the door. "has always" is passive. He doesn't say that he keeps expecting her to walk back in the door. Just that it was something she has always done (before).


she might have just walked down the street

Why does he point people down the street? Is he avoiding "up" the street? What is "up" the street?


Nic said...

John, unfortunately, the link you provided is for subscribers, only. :0( Can you copy anything salient for us? :0)

tania cadogan said...

'She has always walked back in the door after calming down.'

Why does he feel the need to tell us she walked back in the door?
How else is she supposed to have walked in, through the window?
Why also does he need to tell us she walked back?
Why not she walked through the door?

He also added unnecessary information by telling us she walked back
The easiest and expected would be to say she came back after calming down
No need to say walk, door, or anything else.


This makes walking and door sensitive to him as it is extra unnecessary language.
This would cause me to wonder if she did not walk through the door as he claimed.
Was she perhaps carried?

JB said...

These are 2 separate statements from Karen's brother in law (Husbands brother)

"It’s terrible ... we are all shocked,” he told media. “If you are still alive talk to us.
“If you don’t want to talk to your husband, give me a call or my wife.”

“It’s not like her. I don’t talk to her much but when we get together she is happy. He (Borce) is feeling awful, he can hardly talk,” he said.
“It is heartbreaking. I can hardly sleep at night. I wake up at 2am it’s a nightmare.”

John mcgowan said...

Hi, Nic

Try this one

http://www.news.com.au/national/victoria/news/karen-ristevski-was-at-risk-of-losing-her-home-as-her-financial-troubles-are-revealed/news-story/8158ea55ce8b910f29697cefdda00d76

Or this

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/karen-ristevski-family-of-missing-melbourne-mum-dogged-by-debt/news-story/7b0d23acfbce06c11b31e022a7b7161e

Anonymous said...

Hi Nic, John and Linda. Sadly, Karen's body was located yesterday in Macedon in Victoria Australia. It appears her body was located by a bushwalker under a large log.