Friday, December 29, 2017

Lie Detection and Statement Analysis Training Opportunities

                        Want to train to detect lies?

Move from guess work to formal training for 2018!

We offer in house training seminars for:

Deception Detection
Advanced Statement Analysis 
Sex Crimes Unit Advanced Linguistics (language of sexual assault victims, PTSD impact, trauma, etc) for SCU that have formal training in Statement Analysis. 

for law enforcement and business.  

With Steve Johnson of Veritas, we offer joint Statement Analysis and Handwriting Analysis seminars (including Advanced, profiling, anonymous author identification, etc).  

We also offer a in-your-home Complete Statement Analysis Course

This course is a broadly based complete instruction in the principles and application of Statement Analysis.  With registration, the analyst/investigator is given 12 months of e support, in which his or her work is checked, proofed, corrected and strengthened.  This is indispensable in reaching and obtaining our expectation in lie detection:  100% Accuracy rate.  

The completion of this course is to not only bring new skills and career traction, but with immediate results.  Our analysts are supported.  When a conclusion is reached, the work is checked for accuracy.  This protects the analyst's reputation, and the implication of error.  Whether it be in business or in law enforcement, the goal and expectation is singular:  100% accuracy in detecting deception.  

Those who enroll in this course, are eligible for other trainings.  This currently includes:

1.  Monthly, live training. 
2.  Advanced Statement Analysis and Profiling

1.  The live training is at Go To Meeting and you participate from your home or office.  You can listen quietly or engage via commenting and questions.  Present in these trainings are professionals from the United States, Canada, Western Europe, and so on.  This includes full time instructors, professional analysts, investigators, business executives, medical and social professionals,  therapists, journalists, writers, and others.  It is a supportive and "team" atmosphere of work.  Those who are new to training regularly report how helpful the top professionals are.  

This separate live training has been approved for Continuing Educational Units (CEUs) for professional licenses in the United States through the University of Maine.  

2.  Advanced Statement Analysis and Profiling is a large course and it not only uses advanced techniques, but focuses on profiling.  The profiling is such that when one analyses an Anonymous Threatening Letter, the author's background, experiences, personality traits and motive is detailed to the degree that the author is very likely to be identified.  The course also prepares the analyst for Employment Analysis and Threat Assessment.  This course is not offered to anyone who has not successfully completed our "Complete Statement Analysis" course.  

Profiling (identifying the author's background, his experiences in life, his dominant personality traits and his priorities) is complex work.  It is dependent upon a strong foundation of Statement Analysis, including the understanding of its principles. 

Enrollment in the Complete Statement Analysis will also allow the analyst/investigator to enroll in future courses, including Employment Analysis and separate speciality courses to be released, including "Child Protective Services", "Analytical Interviewing" and Ransom Note Analysis. 

Currently, the Sex Crimes Unit Advanced Linguistics is only available in live seminars and this is for units that have a solid foundational training in detecting deception.  Please contact via email for more information for your Sex Crimes Unit. 

Tuition to increase 1 January, 2018.  

Also, enrollment in the live, ongoing monthly training (1) is on approval only.  Those who attend a singular training often sign up for a full year subscription.  We will continue to offer a discount, though enrollment may be limited.

When you submit your work, especially tests, a single question should be met with at least a full page answer!  You are writing to a professional, as if the recipient has no training and no understanding of the principles of Statement Analysis.  You must explain everything and buttress your answers with examples found on line, in the news, in your life, work, etc.  

filming ABC's "20/20" 
This trains you for future work, including submitting reports, writing articles, and being able to defend your finding to the point where the conclusion is evident to all.

If you have thought to further your skills in detecting lies as well as build traction for your career, consider enrolling prior to the New Year to avoid the increase. 

Samples of the work are found at the website, Hyatt Analysis Services as well as at You Tube, including documentaries and televised news appearances.  

Here are some Samples:

Missing Person Documentary:  Katelyn Markham

Kidnapping:  Madeleine McCann

FBI National Academy:  Murder of Hailey Dunn

Crime Watch Daily:  Baby Ayla  disappearance and cover up. 

Law Enforcement eligible for tuition payment plans. 

*We will honor tuition deposits up to 31 December, to hold price of course, upon terms agreement.  

Tuesday, December 26, 2017

Baby Ayla: Justin DiPietro 911 Call

Analysis by Peter Hyatt

The following is Statement Analysis of the 911 emergency call made by Justin DiPietro to report his child, Ayla Reynolds, missing, from his home. 

Justin DiPietro, father of two children, while unemployed, took out a large life insurance policy against one of his children, Ayla Reynolds, and not his other, weeks before making this call. 

Is this call a genuine call for help for Ayla, or is it a deceptive ruse to cover a crime?

Statement Analysis gets to the truth. 

I.  The expectations of a kidnapped child 911 call
II.  The text and analysis
III.  Analysis Conclusion

I.  The Expected

What do we expect Justin DiPietro to say to the 911 operator about his daughter, Ayla Reynolds?

In a call to report a missing child, we expect the caller to seek help for the child, and express concern for the child.  The victim is a toddler with unique needs and one incapable of self protection. The caller is the biological father, which unique paternal instincts.  

We expect him to commit to kidnapping and to express direct concern for what the living kidnapped child is experiencing, and to facilitate the flow of information to accomplish the success return of his child. 

We look for a complete social introduction indicative of a good relationship:  "my daughter, Ayla" is a good sign, using her name, title, and the possessive pronoun.

We look for a sense of urgency.  A child is in danger...imminent danger.

We look for a sense of need, since the child is incapable of self protection, and expressions of such.  We think the parent might mention that she needs her "blankie" or her "binkie" or favorite toy, medicine, or food.

We look for a deep rooted panic and parental anxiety, protective instincts inflamed from the caller, with a sense of urgency, not for himself, but for his child.

We listen for a sense of impotency and utter frustration and fear, in a parent, left utterly bereft of strength to help his vulnerable child.

We listen for impatience, even rudeness, as the father cares only for his child, and not politeness, or worse, over-politeness, in a manner more consistent of guilt. 

We expect to even hear foul language as the father of a missing child may become unhinged at the thought of terrors facing his beloved daughter. 

Will he ask for help for Ayla?

How often will he use his daughter's name while speaking of her?

Will he ask for help in finding her?

Will he offer tips to the police to assist them?

Will he demand on communicating with the kidnapper?

This is very personal and acutely instinct provoking. 
 We expect to hear a father filled with resolve in finding his daughter working to get the most information he can to the police.  

II.  The transcript with Statement Analysis 

911:  Where is your emergency?

In Enhanced 911 systems, this is unnecessary and the better question is, "What is your emergency?" which allows the caller to chose his own words and begin his response according to his own priority. 

A:    *** Waterville

911:  "What's going on there?"

Instead of "What is the emergency?"

JD:    "Ah, I woke up this morning, my daughter is not here."

Please note that the order of the call tells us what is most important to him. 

"I woke up this morning" is mentioned first.  What is first said in an emergency often speaks to priority.  To this caller, that he was asleep is first. 

This is his priority:  before I tell you that my daughter, Ayla, has been kidnapped, I don't know what happened to her because I was asleep.  

"my daughter is not here" is a truthful statement.  He does not say she is "missing", only that she is "not here."  To a deceptive caller, "missing" would not be truthful.  Only that she is "not here" is reported.

People rarely lie directly, as lying causes internal stress.  Most lies are by omission, or missing information.  

Order speaks to priority.  What is most important to the caller is that police believe he was asleep, by reporting first that he "woke up"

Please notice, however, the additional wording, "this morning", which is not necessary.  This should make investigators question whether or not he was asleep, since he does not say so, and he feels the necessity of adding that he woke up "this morning."

Please note the name:  "my daughter" is "not here", and not, "my daughter, Ayla" or "my daughter, Ayla Bell..."

This is an incomplete social introduction (ISI) and indicates a troubled relationship.  She is his daughter while she is "not here."

She is not kidnapped. She is only "not here." 

911:  Okay, how old is she?

JD: She is an infant she's only twenty months years old.

Here is the mention of her young age.  It is that she is "only" twenty months that means she is vulnerable and incapable of self protection.  It is here we expect to hear something about her characteristics, particularly in regard to being so young.

Nothing more is reported, however.  This is not expected. We expect that since she is "only twenty months" we will hear linguistic reference to her needs and her inability to take care of her self.  

We expect him to tell us that she has been kidnapped.  

911: She is how old?

JD: Twenty months old.

911: Twenty months old?

Will he show linguistic concern for her?

Remember:  he began with linguistic concern for himself:  he was sleeping.  
JD:  She's not even two- twenty months old.

At this point, with "only" and now "even", (dependent words) we expect that her "only" and "even" being twenty two months old will have linguistic concern points made.  

He repeats her exact age. 

What causes the sensitivity?

The context is with no words of concern.

The subject is likely attempting to sound concern, without expressing concern, and presenting himself as a "good father" since he knows her exact age. 

Yet, he has not expressed any concern for her well being "even" though she is "only" 22 months of age. 
911: Was there anybody else with you overnight?

The question is specifically to "overnight"

"Overnight" is when he would have been asleep if he woke up this morning.  The answer should be in the past tense.  The operator heard his priority:  that he was asleep. 

JD: My sister's here, her daughter and my girlfriend and her son are here.

Note that he does not say if they were there overnight, but speaks in the present tense. 
Note the order:
1.  Sister
2.  Her daughter
3.  my girlfriend
4.  her son

Please note the incomplete social introduction as he does not use his sister, Elisha's name, nor does he use his girlfriend, Courtney Roberts' name.

911:  Hang on, I'm putting you through- this is in Waterville?

JD: Yes sir.

911: What number are you calling me from case I lose you?

JD:  ***-****

911: Okay, hang on, I'm putting you through, do not hang up.


WCC: Waterville Communications Center, what's the address of emergency?

911: DPS Augusta.  I'm putting through a report of a missing child from a residence at *******.

WCC: Okay.

911: Sir, go ahead.

WCC: Hello.

JD: Hello.

A greeting is not expected, though this is simply responding to the greeting.  We now expect him to report his child kidnapped, use her name (closeness) and express his verbal concern for her well being at such a young age. 

WCC:  Hi, How long ago did you see your child?

The question is "how long ago?"
JD: When I put her to-

Note interruption likely due to phone going dead.  He began, not with an answer of how many hours, or even what time, but he began his answer with his own activity. 

This is consistent with his report of an emergency:  "I was sleeping..." 

AV: December 17, 2011

911: 911, where is your emergency?

JD: Yeah, I, I was just, I'd called, my phone just died and I have another cell phone now, so

Please note the stuttering on the pronoun, "I", which shows increase in anxiety.  Please note that the pronoun "I" is used millions of times and is not likely to be stuttered on since its focus is the person itself, unless the person is a stutterer.  Note no other stuttering. 

In Statement Analysis, this is called the "stuttering I of anxiety", since humans are highly efficient at using this pronoun.  

Next, note the focus on himself.  He was sleep. When he put her to... and now "he was just...his phone died...he has another phone..." all the focus is upon him.  

Note also that he did not lose connection but his phone "died."

911: okay, where are you located?

JD: *******

911: ********, is this regarding the juvenile?

JD: It is, yes sir. 

Note the respectful and short response.  The respectful response is not expected during such an emergency, and neither is such short responses.  An overly respectful 911 call may cause some to question whether the caller is trying to 'make peace' or 'be friends' with law enforcement, rather than the demanding of help for the child.  He offers nothing but affirmation of what is asked.  We expect him to interrupt and say, "Ayla's been kidnapped!"

911: Hang on, I'll put you back through Waterville Com.

    (dial tone/telephone ringing)

WCC: Waterville Communication Center, what is the address of your emergency?

911: DPS, putting through

JD: Yes ma'am I was just on the phone with you and my cell phone died.

Note again that while his toddler is missing, he has the presence of mind to use respectful language.  Those who know him best would be able to say whether or not this is his norm.  This is not evidenced by his other statements.  It is not his norm, according to his televised interviews. 

We do not expect the parent of a kidnapped child to be so polite and patient.  

We do not expect the parent of a kidnapped child to not use the victim's name.

We do not expect the parent of a kidnapped child to avoid saying, "Ayla's been kidnapped!" and we do expect demanding, impatient, urgency for the sake of the victim.

That he would be very polite to police, while under such extreme circumstances, is indicative of one attempting to please police and be seen in a favorable light, rather than a frightened, urgent father. 

WCC: Okay yep, I tried calling you back it went right to voicemail.  What is your daughter's name sir?


WCC: Waterville Communication Center, what is the address of your emergency?

911: DPS Augusta- putting through a report of a missing child from a residence at *****.

WCC: Okay.

911: Sir, go ahead.

WCC: Hello

JD: Hello

WCC:  Hi, how long ago did you see your child?

The question is specific to Justin DiPietro:  how long ago, which is time period, did you, Justin, see your child:  

JD: When I put her to bed  last night.  My sister had checked on her.  Um, woke up this morning, went to her room, and she's not there. 

Any information that goes past the boundary of the question is to be considered very important information. 

1.  He answers the question with:  "when I put her to bed last night." instead of saying "when I put her to bed"; he adds, "last night" which is not necessary.  This unnecessary information, along with woke up "this morning" brings the time frame to the place of being considered "sensitive" information that may prove unreliable. 

2.  He went beyond the boundary of the question:  "my sister had checked on her" and not "my sister, Elisha," or "Elisha";

3.  "my sister had checked on her" using "had" to elongate time.  This makes the time frame, again, sensitive.  "My sister checked her" would have been sufficient. 

This should have been a strong indicator into his personality for the interview and investigation:  he would very likely pounce upon any excuse or blame shifting that alleviated his guilt. 

4.  "Woke up this morning" has dropped the pronoun "I" making it unreliable. He does not say that he woke up this morning, therefore, we cannot say it for him. 

This is a strong indicator that Justin DiPietro did not go to sleep that night, but was up while Ayla was killed. 

5.  "Went to her room" also drops the pronoun, reducing commitment.  He is unable or unwilling to say that he woke up, and he went to her room. 

 We cannot say it for him. 

 We cannot say that he went to her room which will cause readers to believe that Justin DiPietro is revealing that he knew she was not there to be found prior to entering her room.  

6.  "and she's not there" is to speak in the present tense, and not the past tense.  The test for reliability in language is the pronoun "I" connected to an event by a past tense verb.  He violates this by dropping his pronouns, and switching to present tense verb. 

This is another  indictor of deception in his speech. 

WCC:  Okay, how old is she?

JD: Twenty months old.

WCC: Twenty months?

JD: Yes ma'am.

He stays very close to what now appears to be a 'script' giving very short answers with little additional information.  He is only answering questions.  He is denying them valuable information. He is showing no linguistic concern for Ayla, the victim. He is hindering the flow of information by caution. 

WCC:  All right.  So you saw her last sometime in the evening?

911 operators should avoid leading questions and specifically avoid introducing new language whenever possible.  Training in Analytical Interviewing needed. 

JD: Yeah, yeah, I put her to bed (inaudible)  at 8:00.

The 911 operator gave him reason to agree.  Note the repetition of "yeah" making this agreement important to him. The leading question was likely comforting to him. 

WCC:  Alright, hold on just one second while I get somebody started right over there okay, don't hang up the line.

WCC: Sir.

JD:  Yes ma'am.

WCC:  Hi, I've got officers on the way over there.  What is your name sir?

JD: ****** ********

WCC: ******* ********?

JD:  Yes ma'am.

WCC: And you said ***** or ***** sir?

JD: ********

WCC:  Alright.  What was she wearing the last time you saw her?

JD: Um, she had some pajamas on, um, they were green pajamas.

Note the extra word "some" to describe the pajamas.  The subject is initially vague and inconclusive in his description of the pajamas, then describes them as "green." Why would the subject's initial description of his missing daughter's clothing, an important piece of information in locating her,  be vague? 

We continue to wait for him to report her kidnapping, including, "someone broke into the house and took her!"  

Remember:  parental instinct overrules everything else, including politeness.  

He is not seeking the flow of information, he is hindering it by limiting his answers so that he can fulfill "cooperation" while not cooperating.

WCC: Green pajamas?

JD: Yeah

WCC: Okay, can you remember the exact time you saw her last or somebody saw her last in her crib?


Please note that unless an inaudible portion in the transcript contained the word "crib", we have not heard Justin DiPietro use this word.  If so, the 911 operator should have followed the rule of not introducing language and should not have assumed she was in a crib.  

This is an error.  

JD: Um, Elisha, when was the last, when is the last time you went in her room last night when you saw her?

He feeds Elisha the information.  This is insightful into his intellect and may suggest a lack of willingness on Elisha's part to lie for him. 

Note that rather than ask the question, he gives additional information which reveals scripting by agreement, with the reminder of their story. 

He could have simply entered the language of the operator and asked "when was the last you saw Ayla, Elisha?

Instead, he has not yet used Ayla's name (outside being asked her name) and he uses the additional, "when you went into her room"; making this needless.  Here is why:

If she was, really, in her room, and Elisha checked on her, there would be no other room to check her in.  Yet, DiPietro feels the need to add the location which should have been presupposed. 

This is indicative of scripting by Justin DiPietro. 

EP: 10:00

JD: 10:00, 10:00

WCC: 10:00 okay.

    (radio communication)

WCC: (inaudible) units responding, she was last seen her crib wearing green PJs approximately 2200 hours  last night.

WCC: What's a good phone number for you sir?

JD: ***-****

WCC: ******, okay.  I've got officers on the way over there right now sir and well help you, okay?

      (disconnect/return call)

WCC: What is the address of your emergency?

911: DPS, putting through

JD:  Yes ma'am I was just on the phone with you and my cell phone died.

WCC: Okay yep, I tried calling you back it went right to voicemail.  What is your daughter's name sir?

JD: Ayla Reynolds

WCC: I'm sorry, Ava Reynolds?


WCC: E-Y-L-A, okay.

Thus far, he has not used his daughter's name except when asked.  This is distancing language and not at all expected from an innocent father, nor about a child "kidnapped." 

WCC: Okay, and you've checked all through the house, is there any way she could have climbed out of her crib?

JD: No ma'am, she, there is no way she could ah.  got, there's no way she could.

Self censoring is when one stops himself from completing a sentence.  What was he going to say here?  "there is no way she could a got..."?  Gotten out of the house?  Out the door?

Note that he attempts to only answer the question by using the 911 operator's words.  This is not expected.

This is minimized responses.  

An innocent parent will, when given an opportunity like this, not only use his child's name, but will jump in and speak of her characteristics, how well she was walking, climbing, opening doors etc. 

The lack of information here is unexpected from an innocent father. 

It should also be considered that the caller self censored here because the child was not in a crib, as this may have been language introduced by the operator.  If the child was not in a crib, it would be difficult for the caller to place her there in his mind and subsequently his language. Remember, he already indicated that he did not go to sleep overnight and that "some" pajamas may be missing. 

WCC: Okay.

WCC: Okay, the officer is there with you right now. I want you to go out and speak with her, okay?

JD: Okay.

WCC: Alright,  Bye-bye.


III.  Analysis Conclusion

Deception Indicated. 
Justin DiPietro said as little as possible and entered into the language of the 911 operator whenever he could.  His priority was self protection and a presentation of cooperation. 

In every call, the operator gets the sense that the caller is working with the operator to facilitate the flow of information, or the caller is not working to facilitate the flow of information.

This caller sought to limit information solely to the point of answering the questions only. 

He did not report Ayla kidnapped. 

He did not in an open sentence, use Ayla's name. 

There is no urgency in his words, no impatience for Ayla. 

He does not ask for help for Ayla, nor even for himself to find Ayla,

He gives no description of her abilities, character, nor even her needs.  This is strongly indicative of distancing himself from the child. 

His deception and specifically, the lack of any words to describe Ayla's needs, unique vulnerability in any form, indicate that the victim is beyond what parental instincts and protective capacities are capable of:

Ayla is dead.

He does not use Ayla's name, other than to answer the direct question.  This is strongly indicative of distancing language showing the need to remove himself from Ayla. 

Not once does he express concern for the child.  He does not speak of her being vulnerable, nor in danger.  In fact, not once does he say anything that shows concern for the child. He does not mention her needs (medicine, blankie), her being afraid, etc. 

We look for a sense of urgency.  A child is in danger...imminent danger, and find none

The caller is below average intelligence and one who is very likely to blame another. 

Priority:  establishing an alibi for himself.  If he was "asleep", he could not have done anything to Ayla.  This is his need.  

Even shorter answers, such as about the phone, focus upon him, himself.  

He began his answer wanting the police to believe he was asleep overnight. This need, itself, told police that he was not asleep, nor was Ayla in her bedroom, nor in a crib, that fateful night. 

He did not ask for help for Ayla. 
He distanced himself from Ayla. 
He did not offer tips to police, nor even suggest what might have happened, or who might have taken her. 

He offered nothing other than direct answers in minimum wording. 

He showed the agreed scripted language when he spoke to his sister, Elisha.  

This makes her a co-conspirtor.    

This was a scripted call and it is deceptive and is designed to deceive police into believing that Ayla was fine that night and in bed, when she was not.  

The original analysis published when the call was released was:

Statement Analysis indicates that Justin DiPietro has guilty knowledge of the fate of Ayla Reynolds, and his call was scripted and an attempt to deceive police.   

From the first time the father spoke, Statement Analysis revealed:

1.  Ayla was deceased
2.  Justin DiPietro fabricated a break in and kidnapping 
3.  Justin DiPietro needed an alibi 

For training in Statement Analysis:  Hyatt Analysis Services 

Was Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee Truthful?

Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, who was accused by a United Airlines passenger of bumping her from a first-class seat, said in a Twitter screed on Tuesday that she believes the incident is all about race.

United Airlines was deceptive, falsely blaming the customer but later apologized.  

Teacher, Jean-Marie Simon, 63, said she was tossed out of her first-class seat on a Houston to Washington, DC, flight on Dec. 18 to make way for Jackson Lee.

The teacher from Washington, DC, said in a Facebook post two days later that she saw a uniformed United employee pull Jackson Lee from the priority boarding line and escort her to a first-class seat before any other passengers got on the plane.

When Simon went to board with her first-class ticket, an agent said it wasn’t in the system. Another United attendant told her that had changed her reservation an hour earlier and upgraded another passenger to her seat. Later, they changed this again to "she canceled" it.  

Simon later learned the congresswoman ended up in her seat.
But Jackson Lee, in her Tweets, said she did “nothing wrong.”

Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee first 
 denied being given preferential treatment. 

“I asked for nothing exceptional or out of the ordinary and received nothing exceptional or out of the ordinary. I proceeded to take my seat and work on legislative issues on my way to Washington,”

                                     "I did nothing wrong."

She asked for and received preferential treatment, as is her norm with United Airlines.  
"Proceeded" is to lengthen time and show step by step processing. This is said due to the involvement she had in obtaining the school teacher's seat.    

Note the need to associate "nothing" with her "work on legislative issues."

This is to attempt to cover special privilege as her work and life is more important than the teacher who saved up airline miles to travel first class. 

She has issued another statement.  

Next:  what do we know about her from the following statement?

We look for four elements in language:

1.  Background
2.  Experiences
3.  Priority 
4.  Personality Traits 

“Since this was not any fault of mine, the way the individual continued to act appeared to be, upon reflection, because I was an African American woman, seemingly an easy target along with the African American flight attendant who was very, very nice. This saddens me, especially at this time of year given all of the things we have to work on to help people. But in the spirit of this season and out of the sincerity of my heart, if it is perceived that I had anything to do with this, I am kind enough to simply say sorry. But as an African American, I know there are too many examples like this all over the nation .

Note she reduces the other passenger (school teacher) to one without a name or occupation.  This is to depersonalize  her.  The teacher has no "work", no race and no sex.  

She then identifies herself by both race and sex.  

Note she identifies the "very very nice" flight attendant by race.  

Next, note what saddens her:  she works "for" a purpose.  

Was there collusion between herself and United?

Was it due to race and not just politics?

Note the use of "we" in her statement reveals the answer. 

Who is "we" here?  She unites herself with the specific race of the flight attendant.  

 Next note her embedded admission:  But in the spirit of this season and out of the sincerity of my heart, if it is perceived that I had anything to do with this,

Next note the narcissistic self view with how "great" she is; great enough to say sorry. 

Note that she does not apologize nor say "I am sorry" to the one who she reduced to "individual" who is then accused of being a racist (with hint of mysogyny.  If the customer had been a male, she would have continued her them as a "African American woman."

She does not say "I am sorry" but that she is kind enough to do this, yet she then refutes it with the word "but" and tells us why she refuses to apologize:  because her accuser is a racist.  She knows this because the accuser took her photo.  
“I noted that this individual came toward me and took a picture. I heard later that she might have said ‘I know who she is,’ ”

Jackson Lee said she "heard"  that the woman had “canceled her own flight.”

Analysis Conclusion:

Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee is deceptive about the change of seats. 
Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee is an exploiter. 
Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee is a racist. 

The subject got United Airlines to deliberately bump a passenger to give her the first class seat. It was not happenstance but orchestrated by her.  

She revealed that this is not only what she expects, but what she normally receives. 

When caught, she revealed her own narcissistic entitlement and superiority.  

When challenged, she revealed her own racism.  

Our words reveal us.  

This is a politician who used her office, race and sex to exploit for others, but in doing so, she revealed how deep her lack of self awareness is, and how readily she will trample the rights and dignity of others.  She reduced the school teacher to a non-entity, no name, gender, race or employment.  This is done in comparison to herself.  This is the view of the narcissist. 

She does not apologize but asserts her own personal greatness possessing the ability to do so.  She cannot bring herself to say it:  we shall not say it for her.  

The self importance is acute and likely far deeper than just that which arose from reaching the political office. This is a dominant personality trait that those close to her can confirm.  

She holds the teacher (and other passengers, given the context of "normal") in contempt.  

This is the language of an "elitist." 

She lies with impunity, adding insult to the lies, and thinking she is portraying herself as magnanimous, she only reveals the contempt she holds the world in.  This is the language and profile of a pathological liar. 

This is someone of whom constituency should expect will always do what she has done her entire life:  put her own interests before that of others.  

It is who she is.  

To host a law enforcement seminar, or to receive Statement Analysis training in your home, visit Hyatt Analysis Services.