Monday, September 19, 2016

Delaney Robinson and Contamination

Delaney Robinson's attorney provided this photo purportedly taken on the night of the attack showing what the lawyer said was bruising on Robinson's neck. Our words reveal us.  The words we choose, the order in which we place them and even the order of information we disclose can reveal:

Our priority
Our background
Our experiences 
Our personality

Question:  Can we tell if a statement is "contaminated" by another?

We frequently speak of contamination of a statement done by interviewing the subject prior to receiving the written statement, but what about a statement being contaminated by an attorney?


The following is an article from CNN with some quotes.  It is difficult to analyze quotes within articles that are edited, but still can shed some light into the accusation. The article includes a video in which she appears to read her statement.  

She accuses the police of wrong doing in the interview of the alleged rapist.  

Was she raped?
Was this statement her own, or influenced by an attorney?

Some things to consider:  

Alcohol blackouts and Memory Impacting Language 

Memory is impacted by alcohol and this is even more acute than cocaine or heroin.  These memories are, for the most part, not recoverable, even as memory does return, in part, with other substances abused.  This will leave significant holes within an account, yet, we may note these, while separating them (the lapses) from deliberate attempts to deceive or persuade, we may get to the truth.  Then, we look at his statement to see the larger context.  The 'temporal lacunae" (black holes) are only evidenced by linguistic signals of skipping over time.  In alcohol blackout accounts, time passes, but not with strong linguistic signals.  

This is a difference that must be noted.  

Then, we will look within her language for contamination, and in this case, influence of wording that suggests another person's language may be within the statement, and if so, can we know anything about the influencing subject?

Lastly, consider the accusation against police as something distinctly different than an accusation against a prosecuting attorney.   

Police are to investigate and present the results to a prosecutor who makes the decision whether to go forward with charges or not.  At times,  a prosecutor may feel that a crime may have taken place, but is not certain, or feels that the burden of proof will not be met.  

At times, police investigators and prosecutors strongly disagree.  

Let's look at her words:

From CNN:  


A University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill student has gone public about her alleged rape on campus by a football player, claiming prosecutors and the university have been slow to bring justice.

Delaney Robinson, a sophomore at the university, told reporters in Raleigh she was raped on February 14, and that she has tried for months to have formal charges filed. 
A misdemeanor charge was issued Tuesday against linebacker Allen Artis on allegations of sexual battery and assault on a female. 


"The investigation is still ongoing," District Attorney Jim Woodall said. "These are very serious charges and before we go forward we would like to have the investigation completed or close to being completed."

He said for stronger charges to be brought against a suspect, prosecutors look for proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

Robinson said she was 18 years old at the time of the alleged assault at the Ram Village apartments on UNC's campus. She is now 19.

"Yes, I was drinking that night on Valentine's Day.  I'm underage, and I take responsibility for that. But that doesn't give anyone the right to violate me. I did not deserve to be raped. My life has changed forever, while the person who assaulted me remains as a student and a football player on this campus."

1.  "Yes or No"

  We note that the subject is aware of the accusation of intoxication and under-aged drinking.  "Yes" is to answer a "yes or no" question without being asked. 

This indicates that she anticipated being asked, "were you drinking?" and "but weren't you underaged?"

Here, we have our first indication of possible contamination in her language.  

We have the anticipation of a challenge.  This is not something a rape victim is normally concerned with; at least, not in the period of time close to the rape.  With the elapse of time, the potential for verbal processing increases.  With verbal processing there is a process of de-sensitization of the language that occurs.  


2.  Passive Voice 

Next we note that she does not assert the actual rape.  This is our second signal of contamination.  

What is the priority of a rape victim?  It is the rape, itself, and the rapist.  

Here, she began with a defense that suggested the influence of an attorney.  

Question for analysis:  Is the attorney a male or female?

3.  Rapist

She called him a "person" here.  This could be from one or two specific reasons, with the first, again, the passage of time, 'softening the blow' or trauma, within language.  It also could be the word advised by an attorney.  

4.  Status

He is a "student" before he is a "football player", which reduces the priority of football fame and exploitation.  Rape victims want justice and many want, initially, revenge.  Here, he is "student" (ordinary) before he is "football player" where we have seen in false claims the priority of exploiting the accused's status.  This is not evident here. 


Robinson said following the incident she went to the hospital and gave an account of what she could remember to the sexual assault nurse. She was then questioned by the university's department of public safety investigators, who she said asked "demeaning and accusatory questions."

She characterized the interview as "demeaning and accusatory questions":


"Did I lead him on? Have I hooked up with him before? Do I often have one-night stands? Did I even say no? What is my sexual history? How many men have I slept with? I was treated like a suspect," she said.

This is not any form of embedded admission; she is using the language of investigators.  

She has accused investigators of inappropriate questions.  

Please consider:  This may not have been the case.  

Investigations must be thorough, including pre and post crime behavior.  As much as they have the responsibility to obtain justice for a rape victim, they must also discern any false allegation of rape and protect an innocent victim from such. 

Rape victims often show a willingness to answer anything when the questions are posed very close in time to the rape.  They care for little other than either closing the entire issue (saying little) or going full force against the rapist (answering everything).  Few are 'in the middle' or 'on the fence.'  Those that are indecisive, sometimes riddled with guilt (for drinking, going where risk was increased, etc), are often later persuaded by family or friends to come forward and the language shows an "increase" in volume and description over time, as she becomes emboldened and confident.  

Investigators may have been sifting out any possible false rape claim.  

I am curious to learn if she felt this way when they questioned her, or if this was something that an attorney gave to her later.  If it is the latter, the attorney is female. 

Professional Viewpoint:  

By asking tough questions, investigators are actually preparing a solid report, knowing that if she was raped, these are the accusations that will be made against her.  This is a professional vantage point shared by both investigators and attorneys. 

They question her patterns in life, and although it inflames some, it is due diligence to protect the innocent and punish the guilty.  They need truthful answers.  These same patterns are sought in investigations against rapists; they seek to learn if the accused has a history of stalking, violent sex, and so on.  We would not say "you have no right to pry" in defense of a rapist.  

Investigators are responsible for discerning the truth.  

Those who feel these questions are inappropriate would feel differently if their son or husband was falsely accused; then they will demand a thorough investigation.  

If she was raped (she has not told us she was; Statement Analysis 101), these words are likely contamination from a female attorney seeking to enlist feministic  agenda as a politically correct move and may speak to future actions.  It does not sound like the wording of a rape victim.  

I think if her original statement is released, no element of complaint will be found.    


An incident report from the UNC Department of Public Safety was taken at just before 5:30 a.m. on Valentine's Day, according to the document obtained by CNN. 

Robinson said her "humiliation turned to rage when I  listened to the recorded interviews of my rapist by DPS investigators.

"rage" is something rape victims feel, but here it is directed towards the investigators, not the rapist.  

*Did an attorney play this recording for her, with much time having elapsed from the alleged rape?

This, too, may be a linguistic signal of contamination. 

My Rapist 

Here, she calls him, "my rapist" which is to use the pronoun "my" to take ownership of him, specifically as rapist.  If this is her own wording, and if she was, indeed, raped, please note the following:

1.  That a significant amount of time has elapsed since the rape;

2.  That she has processed the rape in such a way that if, indeed, a significant amount of time has elapsed between the rape and this term, the subject's life has likely been dominated by the event. 

3.  That the subject believes that she was raped, in spite of alcohol.  This does not mean she was raped, or that it reached the legal threshold of rape, but that she believes she was raped.  

It is not the norm for one to take linguistic possession of a rapist; he is despised and often classified beneath human dignity  like a vile animal or creature.  Here, if it is her words, we should not conclude deception because the brain has had time to process and 'depersonalize' the rape and the rapist to a level of lessened intensity.  

If she was raped, not only has a significant amount of time passed since the rape, but more importantly, this phrase suggests that she has talked about him, the alleged rapist, enough to lessen the psychological sting to a point or level, where she can talk about him, specifically, without a significant physiological reaction such as "my stomach in knots" or increase in anxiety.  

"Rather than accusing him of anything, the investigators spoke to him with a tone of camaraderie. They provided reassurances to him when he became upset. They even laughed with him when he told them how many girls' phone numbers he had managed to get on the same night that he raped me. They told him, 'don't sweat it, just keep on living your life and keep on playing football,' " Robinson said.

She just described police investigators literally prying open the accused by specific technique of lowering his defensiveness in order to get to the truth.  It may be difficult to hear, but it was likely intentional.  

By allowing him to feel that he is "one of the boys", he may talk more. If he talks more, he reveals more.  This is universal.  

When we talk, we reveal the truth.  

This is not the language of a rape victim, but of an attorney.  

It suggests that her attorney did not explain this interview tactic to her, instead opting to turn it into a form of propaganda.




Analysis Conclusion:

There is not enough sample from which to draw a conclusion on whether or not she was raped.  She did not tell us that she was raped.   Also, there is nothing in her language that indicates deception, but there are strong signals of contamination.  

The contamination suggests a very strong personality, female, and legally trained, behind her wording.  This statement is likely not her own, whether strongly influenced, or actually worded, even with the time to process rape, the priority holds to shifts from rape to press conference appearance and manipulation.  I do not believe that these are her words.  

In her original interview/statement, there is the truth.  If she was raped, even with alcohol blackouts, it is in the statement.  

This statement is contaminated and  cannot be used to discern truth or deception regarding the allegation.  

We believe what one tells us unless they give us strong reason not to.  She has not told us she was raped, and the priority of this statement is not to state that she was raped, but to attempt to influence the criminal justice system, to push for an arrest warrant, and to indict investigators of wrong doing in the investigatory process.  

A rape victim will show a priority of indicting the criminal justice system but generally only after either wrongful adjudication or a wrongfully closed case.  

This is an open investigation in which the complaint against progress and intensity is raised.  This, too, shows the priority of an attorney more than a rape victim.  

I also think it is one attorney (female) that is the principle influencer, rather than a team of attorneys where it the team has both sexes.  We find completing priorities in contaminated statements where different attorneys have different interests.  

This is not evidenced here.  

If Delaney Robinson was raped on Valentine's Day, and she spoke to the press without an attorney, the statement would likely have been very different.  




5 comments:

Anonymous said...

Our colleges are filled with immature spoiled goof offs. Alcohol drugs immorality. They act like Animal House and Ferris Buhler is an American right. Students make fools of Admin and LE & always prevail in the end. Thats our society now. Our leadership and future. Everyone does not deserve university education.

Anonymous said...

"1. "Yes or No"

We note that the subject is aware of the accusation of intoxication and under-aged drinking. "Yes" is to answer a "yes or no" question without being asked."


How do we no the subject wasn't asked a "yes" or "no question"? If she was, then what follows "yes or No" is important. Though the former is not known, makimng it an assumption, and an SA no no?

Elizabeth said...

"..he had managed to get on the same night that HE RAPED ME.."

Peter Hyatt said...

Anonymous said...
"1. "Yes or No"

We note that the subject is aware of the accusation of intoxication and under-aged drinking. "Yes" is to answer a "yes or no" question without being asked."

How do we no the subject wasn't asked a "yes" or "no question"? If she was, then what follows "yes or No" is important. Though the former is not known, makimng it an assumption, and an SA no no?
September 19, 2016 at 10:01 AM


It's an open statement.

Peter

Anonymous said...

Thanks for your reply Peter

"It's an open statement."

is't it that an "open statement," is spoken freely, "free editing stage"?

Yet

"she appears to read her statement"

You qualify "appears" and then "to read her statement".

this is where i'm confused. If an "open staement" is in the "FES" then a written statement is not, it is prepared, and not spoken "freely"