Here, we have a police officer's wife Facebook posting of a home invasion.
As you consider the language, note that a "home" is where one sleeps. Linguistically, the location of sleep is always important. This is seen in two ways:
The first is the use of "home" versus "house" when it comes to the location of both sleeping and eating; two requirements to sustain life.
The second is when a subject specifies the location of sleep in a statement. This should be "unnecessary" due to the expectation that one sleeps in one's own bed, in one's own bedroom. When the specific location of where one slept is in a statement, it must be flagged.
For example, a home invasion is just that, an "invasion" which should produce "invasive" elements in language. It is very personal and very intrusive. It is where you sleep, you eat, and where your privacy is maintained. Home invasions have a tremendous psychological impact upon us.
As a separate issue in statement analysis , if one gives the specific location of where one slept, it is a signal of missing information regarding what displaced the person from their usual location of sleep. This is often seen in domestic homicide cases as well as domestic violence cases.
"Last night, I was asleep on the couch when..." This location is not expected and it is indicative of something that caused the subject to sleep somewhere besides his own bed. There is a 'story' here that must be discovered.
Even men who go to the couch due to back pain (men over 40 sometimes report this) do not feel the need to mention the location of their sleep. They simply 'skip' it because, as they edit their account, it is not relevant.
When a person mentions the specific location of where he slept, there is a reason for its inclusion and a reason for where he slept. We look for the answer in the statement itself, and if not there, in the subsequent interview.
Overall, a "home" is where one sleeps, which is necessary for life, and where one "eats", which is also necessary for life.
This is why home invasions can be trauma producing in language.
Maria Daly is a police officer's wife. She now faces charges of false reporting. She wrote:
“We woke up to not only our house being robbed while we were sleeping but to see this hatred for no reason. If you would have asked me yesterday about this blue lives and black lives matter issue my response would have been very positive. Today on the other hand I have so much anger and hate that I don’t like myself.”
There are many signals of deception in her post.
a. Follow her pronouns. A home invasion will produce very personal language and the pronoun "I" is expected. She begins her post with the need to "not be alone" with her statement. This is a very strong signal that something is amiss. By itself, it is not enough to conclude deception, but something posted this so soon after a home invasion should begin with the pronoun "I"
b. Note the need to 'share' (guilt) with "we" were sleeping after we awoke. Generally, one wakes up a bit differently than the other and this is expected in language from "I work up" to "my husband and I woke up..." because it is often at different times, even if only momentarily.
c. Note "not only" begins in the negative;
d. Note "house" and not "home" as "home" is the safety place. This would be something consistent with a home invasion but the context is introduced and surrounded by the activity of sleeping. We "sleep" in our homes. "Home" is where safety, sleep and food sustain life. That she began with "wake" and followed "our house" with "sleep", it is not expected.
e. "our house" continues the sharing theme in something frightening, especially from a female subject. In context of this statement the need to not be alone is already evidenced in the statement. Other times it is indicative of a possible divorce, or the inclusion of others living in the home, including relatives or renters.
f. Motive for Writing: note the inclusion of the reason: "for no reason" attempts conceals the motive. "for no reason" would be false: it would be for "BLM terroristic" reasons, but she is telling us something about herself: this is not for BLM reasons." She has come very close to a "Statement Analysis Confession"
g. note the important (and strong) change to "me" from "we" as a change of emotion : This means the analyst should take notice of that which is going to now come from "me" as more important than what "we" produced.
What does she tell us?
She introduces "me" because she is now going to reveal herself:
1. She has anger
2. She has hate
3. She has self loathing
Analysis Conclusion: Deception Indicated as the author of the Facebook post reveals herself as the author of the vandalism and false reporting of robbery.
This post is not about a home invasion, but it is about her and how close she has come to a confession.
She has shown her emotions and her self loathing reveals knowledge that what she has done is wrong and self destructive.
By negating the motive as "BLM" racism, she tells us that there is another "reason" or motive, outside of "BLM."
Please note that police now suspect that financial motive is behind the criminal reporting.
"Fake Hate" crime trend continues to increase dramatically as "Victim Status Mentality" continues to gain popularity in our culture.