Friday, January 5, 2018

Transcript: Paul & Gemma Black on Death of Daughter


Here are the transcripts with a few highlights to help the analysis along.

Analysis Question: Does he reliably report what happened to Pearl, or is there more to the account in which he is not reporting?

PAUL:      The day it happened we  ….  It was a Sunday.  Emmm… we were both in the process of getting up, Gem was  …. I think Gem was changing or feeding Ace as far as I can recall and then she came   …..  again burst in through the door, daddy swings and daddy park, so she daddy swings and daddy park. I was delighted because she never asked me to do that. She never says daddy swings and daddy park.  It’s only just .. over the moon and I …..we were up early because I was in rehearsals for a play  ..eemmm .. and … errr so part  ..(unintelligible)  and they start around 10:30 and I said daddy work now and daddy come back and we go to the park with the swings, so I said to Gemma, “I’ll go to rehearsals and get her ready by the time we come back” and we discuss what park and I said take her to the park (unintelligible) you know the big park or there’s a park just up from my mom’s there just at the top of main square. I went to rehearsals.  Emm ..I joked with Anthony Van Gogh the writer of the play  emm .. because I’ve learnt all my lines and everyone else says and I joked about the fact, I’m too good for this lot.  I said can I go early? I said Pearl wants me to take her to the park. I said I’m  .. I’m done. I can’t do any more, can I leave. I never leave so early  cause it’s a great company and it’s a great cast and we have a good laugh but that day it was so strange because I just wanted to get out to there, like I said knew my bet I want to the park with her. Came home, Gem had her ready peppa coat, peppa wellies peppa jeans the works. Jumped in the truck, off up to my mom’s to get Rolla my Boxer dog. . emm..she went to climb up the stairs and I said “no”, she always /   at my mom’s she take like a little drum on to the first step and sits there and taps it and I said no not up the stairs. So it all comes to what if facts. If I hadn’t left rehearsals early, if I let her climb up another step, you know  ..aaah

Please note the very lengthy introduction.
Take special notice of any information that appears irrelevant.
Note who is named first in the statement.
Note under what context the victim's name is finally used.
Note the quality of social introduction of Rolla.

GEMMA:   because she’s she’s never, to put in context, she’s never here on Sunday afternoon because Paul’s out at band practice or rehearsals whatever. We pack up and probably go out to my parents for the afternoon, because she’s never here.
PAUL:   She’s never here, so unusual, she shouldn’t have been here.
GEMMA:  She should have been having Sunday dinner.
PAUL:   And I said I had Ace, and I said I’m gonna walk him to the park cause Rolla’s so well behaved, he’s he’s always off the lead and Sundays that one is relatively quiet anfd I’ve only got to click my fingers and he’s a well trained dog. My mom hasn’t got a gate on her house. The driveway just come up off on to the pavement from the main road, so like I say, Rolla was off the lead but to heel ..umm.. I have Ace in my left arm and Pearl was walking again to heel cuase she was , she was never one to run, she was only just, she hadn’t been long walking so, you know she was …
GEMMA:   She was late to walk, she was 17 months.
PAUL:  Ya and it was yeah, she wasn’t one of these children to walk off, she would just walk, she plodded along. She was by my knees and she was only a dot, she’s only a tiny little thing you know and she was on my left hand side and we got 3 foot, 3 feet from the curb and I had Ace here, I transferred him into my right hand, then as I was doing that I bent down to say “daddies hand now, tight tight tight” and my head was like this and I could hear the noise of something and I looked up and I could see this vehicle coming toward us at such a rate and I screamed at the vehicle, I obviously can’t say on camera what I shouted , ummm.. to stop and realised there was nobody in it, let her hand go and grabbed her coat. I threw Ace into the road the vehicle then hit the wall ..umm.. the wall came down and the wall snatched..
GEMMA:  You could move her quick enough.
PAUL:  So I couldn’t throw her into the road quick enough. The wall took her from me. I can’t say any more.
GEMMA:  I was in the retail park buying bedding (pause) such an insignificant thing to be doing and Paul rung me and I thought he said Terry which is Paul’s dad. So I come rushing up from the retail park to the scene where the wall fell expected it to be my father-in-law when it’s Pearl in the road.  I got there before the ambulance and anything arrived.
Gemma crying:  Ok no I can go on. (responding to interviewer) She wasn’t airlifted, that was widely reported. The air ambulance did come but she went by ambulance but she wasn’t airlifted. (some of this was unintelligible). They worked for ages.
PAUL:  They worked on her at the scene for ages. She died in my arms, she died instantly from the incident that I had to drag her from. She was gone in my arms and I had to put her on the floor. But they took her then in the ambulance and we were in the police car that escorted the ambulance.  And there was a crash team and all the staff were waiting at the hospital and then the doctor came through then and told us she was no longer with us which I knew anyway because of what I had seen and ..emm..  they proceeded to pump us full of Diazepam because we’re beside ourselves.
GEMMA:  They kept Ace overnight for observation.
PAUL: They keep Ace in for obs. And we were all in the same bed together  (long pause) through the night.
GEMMA:  The staff at Prince Charles were absolutely amazing, they literally cordoned us off, wouldn’t let anyone in. They kept the chapel open for us ..(pause) open till midnight.
PAUL:  (beginning is unintelligible, I think parroting Gemma on praising the hospital) between the births and the deaths of our children they’ve been amazing.
GEMMA:  They kept the chapel open till midnight err.. didn’t want us to be on our own, they were really awesome.
PAUL:  The kindness, the love, the spirit the general coming together of a community through such a tragic circumstance. Somebody actually compared it to Aberfan
GEMMA: (unintelligible) people who could have been from that era (Aberfan disaster). Phone calls from mothers of children who were killed in the Aberfan disaster. Saying “I couldn’t even image how you feel, we had each other. That this happened to your little girl and you’re on your own.” She knows lots of ..  she is the same age as my mother. The mothers who lost children in the disaster. Like you know, we can’t even imagine how you are feeling. I went to the Carphone warehouse yesterday to start a phone contract and I had to sit on the floor in floods of tears cause a guy I knew from school I hadn’t seen him since asked me how many children I had instant. You know he didn’t know. I haven’t seen him since I was in school.
PAUL:  I was in Kroger (?) getting some stuff for the shop err .. and a little girl coming round the corner in a pink coat pink boots pink hat, I said HIYA HIYA I literally screamed OMG and the mother must have been frightened and grabbed the girl and I had to run around the corner. I couldn’t cope with it and all the little girls the other day in Tesco (?) walking around in their Halloween costumes and stuff it ..I  just with that birthday, Gemma said the other day the birthday it’s for hers, her first birthday.  (unintelligible) wasn’t here but Christmas
GEMMA:  it’s for everyone, it’s his first Christmas.
PAUL:  Gotta be strong and entertaining as we can be. (Talking over each other)

GEMMA:  It’s not going to shape his life we don’t want him to be the kid who’s sister died. You know he needs as much normality as possible and we are going to strive to do that as much as we can. Christmas is going to be horrendous but it’s not going to be horrendous for him.

431 comments:

1 – 200 of 431   Newer›   Newest»
Anonymous said...

Ive processed this case in my mind overnight & I believe Pearl was sexually abused on the bedding, and that is why it had to be replaced in order to hide evidence.
She was probably suffocated with a pillow & that is why no cause of death can be determined. Pearl was not alive that morning as there is an abscence of linguitic indicators which would point to her living breathing presence.
The father making a show out of carrying her coffin and saying that he had never been so proud of her as he was that day bc she was no longer the same girl and that that other girl had flown to heaven indicates extremely warped thinking which matches quite well with a molester mindset. If he is proud of her for being dead, Im sure he would feel proud of raping or molesting her, and probably felt "proud" in his sick mind that she was "no longer the same girl". He is a monster.

Anonymous said...

Thanks to whoever did transcripts. I will read through them with attention to the blue highlighting.

Anonymous said...

This comment applies to the previous post

This post and the accompanying comments grounded in sound statement analysis principles serve to demonstrate that differences in culture, community and background have no bearing on the usefulness of properly applied technique. The use of video, photographs and comments by knowledgeable sources are entertaining and help the curious to develop a context for understanding a reported event. Ancillary information, however, is excluded from genuine SA and serves as a hindrance to the verbal focus that is required in SA.
A cursory examination of Mr. Black's comments (viewed though an elementary lens of SA) demands that the analyst move into a detailed and careful analysis of Mr. Black's remarks.

Mr. Black's language makes him suspect: it is convoluted, stilted, hesitant, redundant, self centered and lacks the expected emotional content used by grieving parents whose children have died under completely accidental circumstances. A close look at the transcript of Mr. Black's will be interesting. In the video we do not hear the interviewer's questions, nor do we know if the was continuous or took place over one or more sessions. When the transcript is published, it will be fascinating to see if Mr. Black's stage training and acting background reveal themselves as obviously as they do in the video. He freely speaks of his theatrical ability; how much of the text concerns this aspect of his lifestyle? His flare for the dramatic is clear in the photos, and video. His stagecraft is practiced and professional.

Peter, thank you for all of your hard work and dedication to your profession. You are a gifted and devoted teacher. Your generosity in sharing your knowledge is a true blessing to those of us who believe that truth is universal and that the unflinching insistence on it is a valuable contribution to the well being of all mankind. With Kind Regards, Amy Newton

Lucia D said...

He does seem defensive, with lots of explaining why he did things. But it seems to me that could come from the self blame/guilt of a parent whose child was killed on his watch. It is strange how he seems to avoid calling Pearl by her name. Possibly dissociating a little so he can get through telling the story without breaking down?

General P. Malaise said...

Blogger Lucia D said...
He does seem defensive, with lots of explaining why he did things. But it seems to me that could come from the self blame/guilt of a parent whose child was killed on his watch.


yet he does not take blame or guilt. he passes it off to fate. "If I hadn't left rehearsals early, If she climbed another step" he blames the wall. he shirk all forms of guilt or responsibility.

Anonymous said...

Heres what I get starting from the beginning:

1) Creation of alibi
2) Linguistic indicators of sexual abuse
3) High probability victim was deceased by morning
4) Story-telling (She always sat on the 1st stair tapping a drum)
5) Hiding evidence (new bedding "so insignificant)
6) Actual "incident" of Pearl being crushed by wall being implied rather than stated and I certainly will not say it for him.

Anonymous said...

Also, walls do not "snatch"!

Nic said...

it - distancing, Paul does not refer to The Day as being the day his daughter, Pearl, was killed.

“a”- something that is being introduced for the first time, story-like, contrary to, the expected: “it was Sunday, August…,” a specific and horrific place in time.

“we were both in the process of getting up”- extra wording, unnecessary. Need to persuade. Both have a process to getting up, neither of which are the same. He “thinks”Gem was “changing or feeding”Ace, making Gem “up” but unsure about what she was doing. Paul does not say he was “up”. He says he was in the “process” of getting up. He was not with Gem and Ace. He does not say where Pearl was or what she was doing, i.e., sleeping in her own bed or watching TV. What is not said is sensitive. He does not say he was “up”, just that he was in the process of getting up and he does not reveal Pearl’s location in the home that Sunday.

"Gem was" - improper social introduction

“as far as I can recall”- in line with "and that’s all I can say”, Paul is limited to what he can “recall”. Recall is quantified by a limit (far). That is not to say that his wife, Gem, could not recall more detail of that morning (that she could go farther (further) into detail).

and then she came… again burst in through the door”
missing time. “She”is not identified. Self-censoring. Dropped pronoun. This is two events. There is 1) then she came, and 2) [X] burst through the door. Paul does not reveal who “she” is who came [in]. He does does not reveal who “burst in”through the door. Whoever burst “in”was initially “out”of the room.

Nic said...

“[X] daddy swings, and daddy park, so she daddy swings and daddy park. I was delighted because she never asked me to do that. She never says daddy swings and daddy park. It’s only just … over the moon and I… we were up early because I was in rehearsals for a play.” "
swings and park is repeated three times making swings and park sensitive
There is no pronoun assigned to this statement. Paul does not say, "Pearl said, ….” there is also self-censoring after “she”
“that” (park) is distancing. The park is not a place that is close to Paul.

"over the moon and I… we were up early because I was in rehearsals for a play.”
The events presented here are out of sync. He needs to go back to the “beginning” to explain why (we - grouping) were up early which is unnecessary information given the age of his very young children. It is automatically assumed if you have very young children that you are up early regardless what day of the week it is. Being in the same house and a parent, if you co-parent, you would be part of the morning routine.

“over the moon”
This expression is unexpected because if the context of the story (still in mommy and daddy’s bed and in the process of waking up). Moon is also associated with skin, i..e, “chuck-a-moon”, bare bottom.

so I said to Gemma, “I’ll go to rehearsals and [X] get her ready by the time we come back”
dropped pronoun
"by the time" implies a plan
“we come back” - he was the only one leaving to go to rehearsal, but he says “we” come back. We would mean both parents left with the intention of coming back at a specific time (by the time)

and we discuss what park and I said [X] take her to the park (unintelligible) you know the big park or there’s a park just up from my mom’s there just at the top of main square.
Dropped pronoun, This statement reads like he said to his wife, Gem, to take Pearl to the park.

Emm ..I joked with Anthony Van Gogh the writer of the play emm .. because I’ve learnt all my lines and everyone else says and I joked about the fact, I’m too good for this lot. I said can I go early? I said Pearl wants me to take her to the park. I said I’m .. I’m done. I can’t do any more, can I leave. I never leave so early cause it’s a great company and it’s a great cast and we have a good laugh

The writer is introduced by name and title making him respected by Paul. Paul finally says Pearl’s name for the first time in the context of Pearl wanting “him” to take her to the park. Not that he would like to leave early to take his daughter to the park. He needed an excuse to leave apart from the “fact” that he was good at his job (he was off book). I would say Paul has a large ego since he projects himself above/better than the rest of the cast. And he needs to persuade us that it is a great company and “great”cast. What follows “but”is what is important

but that day it was so strange because I just wanted to get out to there, like I said knew my bet I want to [X] the park with her.
the word “but”negates that which precedes is (extra detail)
“that day was so strange” - the word “that” is distancing, “so strange” in hindsight is minimizing - foreboding, story telling
what follows “because” is especially sensitive
the word “just” is an word that operates in conjunction with something else. He had something else on his mind besides “just” getting out to there
dropped verb - to [X] the park with “her”, major distancing. I would say he did not want to go to the park with Pearl. He “had” to go with her.

Came home,
Dropped pronoun.

"Gem had her ready"
Paul does not say, the person who wanted him to take her to the park was “ready”. He does not say, Pearl was ready to go to the park. Or Pearl was ready and excited to go to the park. He does not describe Pearl's excitement or what they would do at the park. He only says, that Gem had “her”ready and itemizes what she was wearing.

Nic said...


[X] Jumped in the truck, off [X] up to my mom’s to get Rolla my Boxer dog.
Dropped pronoun x2 and verb i.e., I jumped in the truck and off I went up to my mom's
the dog, Rolla, is given a proper social introduction. Note, neither the mom or Pearl (or the baby) are given proper social introductions.

So it all comes to what if facts
“What if’s” are vague. "What if’s" are suppositions or theories. “What if’s”are not “facts”.

Deception indicated. The father is withholding information.

Anonymous said...

Good point, Nic!

You wrote: ""Gem had her ready"
Paul does not say, the person who wanted him to take her to the park was “ready”. He does not say, Pearl was ready to go to the park. Or Pearl was ready and excited to go to the park. He does not describe Pearl's excitement or what they would do at the park. He only says, that Gem had “her”ready and itemizes what she was wearing. "

Thats because she was already dead at that time.

Anonymous said...

Why does Paul describe (with the use of body language also) that he was "carrying Ace like this ON MY LEFT ARM" and he exrends his arm out straight outwards, which would not allow him to carry a living child flat like that & noone carries their child like that but if the child was deceased with rigor mortis, Paul couldve carried a child like that.

Anonymous said...

That is so fake how Paul says how he (for reasons unknown) grabbed Pearl's hand 3 feet from the curb and says that he told Pearl "tight tight" (Keep in mind this was before Paul heard the noise of the oncoming vehacle.

Bobcat said...

1) Selective memory of the morning "as far as I can recall"

2) Planning with Gemma to conceal Pearl's death
I said to Gemma, "I'll go to rehearsals and get her ready by the time we come back and we discuss what part and I said take her to the park"

3) The well behaved dog heeling along on his right was to disguise Paul carrying Pearl near his knees.

4) Attributing human qualities to inanimate objects indicates personal handling.
The wall came down...the wall snatched.

Deception Indicated.
The subject is concealing information surrounding the death of his daughter Pearl.

Lucia D said...

So you believe, from their words, that these parents colluded to fake this accident? To hide that their daughter was killed another way? I'm willing to believe the father may have withheld some information, but that theory is out there!

Nic said...

It's different reading the statements/interview versus watching the video. Their grief is distracting.

General P. Malaise said...



There are more questions raised by the parents than answered. Why? Why would they need to obfuscate what occurred if it was an accident?

Anonymous said...

Dear Gawd!
What a bunch of nut jobs!
Can't get to Davey Blackburn, eh?

Anonymous said...

Re: Pauls extended arm gesture, it reminds me of a waiter carrying a tray, or, more disturbingly, his carrying of Pearls coffin.

Anonymous said...

@ Lucia, Theres nothing outlandish about my theory. Coroner could not determine cause of death, which points to suffocation or poisoning NOT BEING CRUSHED BY A WALL.

Anonymous said...

Paul is a lying piece of shit, and just looking at him the wife should have known what a loser he is with all those disgusting tatoos & hideous mohawk. Seriously she lets that thing touch her? Ewwww.

Anonymous said...

I hate Paul's "baby talk". It just shows what a piece of human garbage he is.

Nic said...

And I said I had Ace, and I said I’m gonna walk him to the park cause Rolla’s so well behaved, he’s he’s always off the lead and Sundays that one is relatively quiet anfd I’ve only got to click my fingers and he’s a well trained dog.

“And” - missing information/time.

Paul has Ace and his dog. Paul doesn’t say who he is talking to. Pearl is “missing”. At this point he is at his mom’s? But his mom is not present? Who is he talking to and saying that he has Ace?

My mom hasn’t got a gate on her house.

This is the third reference to “door” (door/gate) making door sensitive. Safety (abuse?) is sensitive. Note Pearl is wearing “wallies” (rubber boots). Water reference. Was it raining that day?

The driveway just come up off on to the pavement from the main road, so like I say, Rolla was off the lead but to heel ..umm.. I have Ace in my left arm and Pearl was walking again to heel cuase she was , she was never one to run, she was only just, she hadn’t been long walking so, you know she was … GEMMA: She was late to walk,she was 17 months. PAUL: Ya and it was yeah, she wasn’t one of these children to walk off, she would just walk, she plodded along.

heel (off lead) - dog (“never” run)
walk - children (plod)

At one point Pearl is heeling. And she wasn't one of these (close) children to walk off. What is presented in the negative is sensitive.
_________

I’m having a hard time with very tense change. I don’t know if it is Paul’s style/slang, but I do note that things that can be verified, i.e., at rehearsal, are in the past tense. Statements like what Pearl said (and his response) a lot of the time are in the present tense or the tenses are mixed.

Pearl literally has no vocabulary/energy associated with her, aside from “heeling” after getting the dog at his mom's.

_________

She was by my knees and she was only a dot,

A dot is a ball. To describe Pearl as a “dot” she would have to be a ball.


she’s only a tiny little thing you know and she was on my left hand side and we got 3 foot, 3 feet from the curb and I had Ace here, I transferred him into my right hand, then as I was doing that I bent down to say “daddies hand now, tight tight tight” and my head was like this and I could hear the noise of something and I looked up and I could see this vehicle coming toward us at such a rate and I screamed at the vehicle,

Pearl has no voice. She has no presence in this story. The only “noise” was the sound of the vehicle “coming" towards them (of it’s own volition) and Paul's scream.

Three is repeated, foot changes to feet (stuttering)? Three is the liars number. Story telling?

[X] , let her hand go and grabbed her coat.

Dropped pronoun. He does not commit to having her hand int he first place. Two separately spaced out actions. Paul does not say, I let her hand go and then grabbed her coat (two actions in quick succession). Why wouldn’t he just yank her out of the way by her hand? Why let go of her?

I threw Ace into the road the vehicle then hit the wall ..umm.. the wall came down and the wall snatched.. […]So I couldn’t throw her into the road quick enough. The wall took her from me. I can’t say any more.

The wall took Pearl. Paul is limited to being able to reveal any more details.

____________

IMO, Pearl is literally not present throughout Sunday afternoon.

Nic said...

She was by my knees and she was only a dot,

If he was looking down upon Pearl, she would appear as a "dot".

Did she suffer head trauma?

Nic said...

A dot is a period. A period marks time, be it the beginning (since "dot",) or the end [of a sentence].

Leakage?

Nic said...

I said can I go early? I said Pearl wants me to take her to the park.

The whole while Paul is "directing" the activity except here. Here, according to Paul, "Pearl" is the driving force and the one in control. However, Pearl did not say, "take me to the park, daddy". This is what Paul said.

Anonymous said...

Nic, interesting. Yeah, he was talking to? It doesn't seem his mother is actually present and also, why is his Boxer dog at his Mum's??

Nic wrote:

"Pearl literally has no vocabulary/energy associated with her, aside from “heeling” after getting the dog at his mom's."

That's because she was already deceased by the morning.

Anonymous said...

(Pearl) burst in through the door

She wasn't supposed to be there

Late to walk

There was no gate

(Pearl) was heeling (laughs)

3 feet from curb

I bent down and said "Daddy hand tight tight tight

The wall snatched her.

Buying new bedding, so insignificant

Thought he said Terry

Worked on her forever

Hospital was great

Pumped us full of Diazepam

All of us in one bed

Cordoned us off

Nic said...

Something I left out of my analysis above:

came and burst describe two completely different energy levels. One is passive, the other is urgent. Hence two different events/missing time.

Anonymous said...

Door

Gate

Bedding

Bed

Flood

Anonymous said...

Nic, interesting. Yeah there is something telling about the word "burst" in its urgency. I can't put my finger on what it is though.

Anonymous said...

I'm looking at any door/barrier type imagery:


Burst through door

Wanted to climb stairs

There was no gate

3 feet from curb

Wall snatched her

Cordoned us off

I'm getting from him the imagery of him telling her "no" about climbing the stairs
that she was trying to escape him at some point.

When he describes holding Ace with his arm bizarrely stretched outward, could this be leakage that he had his arm outstretched like that and maybe was strangling Pearl?

Anonymous said...

Paul says that he already knew Pearl was dead when the doctors told him she was dead "because of what I'd seen".

What did he see?

Nic said...

I threw Ace into the road the vehicle then hit the wall ..umm.. the wall came down and the wall snatched.

Time has slowed down. There is a lot of extra wording here, including more time lapse with "ummm".

I threw Ace into the road.
The vehicle hit the wall.
The wall came down (and)
The wall snatched... (talk over by Gemma and then Paul parrots words)
So I couldn’t throw her into the road quick enough.
The wall took her from me.
I can’t say any more.

Nobody was driving the vehicle. But it was the vehicle that hit the wall and it was the wall that took "her" from Paul.

Inanimate objects have a name and have their own energy to "inflict" leaving Paul and Pearl powerless, and Pearl has no name and has no reaction/interaction whatsoever. Paul speaks for "her".

Bobcat said...

"because of what I'd seen".

What did he see?



What he had "seen" does NOT tell us what HAPPENED.

Anonymous said...

Nic, Interesting. How very true. The "wall" is more present, alive, and animated than Pearl.

Anonymous said...

Bobcat, yes, correct.

Someone saw something that wasn't supposed to be seen though. Think about it.



Pearl burst through the door

She wasn't supposed to be there

Paul: "I knew she was dead because of what I'd seen."

General P. Malaise said...

Anonymous Anonymous said...
Nic, interesting. Yeah there is something telling about the word "burst" in its urgency. I can't put my finger on what it is though.

I get violence/anger from the word "burst"

Nic said...

she died instantly from the incident that I had to drag her from

This statement does not describe what first responders arrived to which is the wall having taken Pearl from Paul.

"the incident" sounds different from the wall. He would have had to pull her from the rubble. Dragging Pearl from "the incident" is to create a trail. Distance is involved in dragging.

Anonymous said...

Gen Malaise,

Sure, but how strange to say a 17-monther "burst" through the door!

Unfortunately, I feel it indicates sexual abuse with him (the molester) projecting his own violence onto Pearl.

Why does he LAUGH when he says Pearl "heeled" right before she got crushed by wall?

Why does he notice what she was wearing along with what other little girls are wearing (pink hat, coat, etc)?
We looked at another case where a male suspected molester remembered the exact clothes his daughter was wearing...oh tjats right...it was Casey Anthony's father remembering Cayleys outfit!!!! Paul remembers what the little girls in the store were wearing!!! I am a girly girl with cllothing but I would not remember nevermind mention to ithers what my nieces were wearing on a certain day etc. IT IS VERY STRANGE HE NOTICES, REMEMBERS AND MENTIONS DETAILS ABOUT LITTLE GIRL'S CLOTHING.

Anonymous said...

I agree "drag her from" does not sound like a wall incident.

It kinda sounds like if a dog attacked her and he might have to pull or drag her from the animals bites?

Bobcat said...

Regarding the transcript. I'm comparing with another listen to the video and have found some differences. Will post pertinent excerpts and send to Peter asap.

Lars Bak said...

"Rolla was off the lead but to heel ..umm.. I have Ace in my left arm and Pearl was walking again to heel"

He spends a disproportionate amount of time to tell us how well behaved his dog was – it’s very sensitive to him. Here the dog was to heel (not heeling!) as Pearl was (unless it is to be read “they were walking close to my heel”). I don’t know – are children normally “heeling” in English? Anyway it has something to do with obedience, hasn’t it? So Pearl was well behaving as well. After some victim blaming to explain why (she walked poorly) he emphasizes his control with “…I bent down to say “daddies hand now, tight tight tight” (could this be leakage?); “tight” three times… He never tells us that he actually said it, let alone that he in fact held her hand at this point, but only that he later let her hand go in order to grab her, which seems paradoxically. He might not have held her hand at all.

I think it was an accident due to that he wasn’t in control of the situation. Maybe his dog was not that obedient (he’s overdoing it), maybe he was busy bringing it to heel, maybe Pearl at the same time had gone out of reach. The extensive victim blaming throughout the narrative could then be because his guilt is a heavy burden.

Hey Jude said...

Bobcat - I have sent one, too. :)

Bobcat said...

Previous:
GEMMA: You could move her quick enough.
PAUL: So I couldn’t throw her into the road quick enough.

My listen:
Gemma: You couldn’t move her quick enough, could you.
Paul: [4:45] I couldn’t throw it into the road.

Lars Bak said...

I hear it as "I couldn’t throw her into the road quick enough." but "her" whit a silent "h" - "throw er"

Anonymous said...

I think both parents are withholding information regarding the events leading up to Pearl’s death. I have tried to picture how the wall could have caused her death, if the vehicle came from across the street, mounted the pavement and hit the wall, surely the wall would have fallen into the garden where the flowers have now been placed? Was Pearl walking on the wall, was she the other side of the wall and it fell on top of her? If they were in the process of crossing the road wouldn’t the danger have come from the vehicle itself, if not, then her father is not disclosing the position of Pearl at the time of the accident. I can understand him not wanting to go into the details of her death for fear of causing more distress to his wife. I have lived in Wales and the people are wonderful but they do have a tendency to go off on a tangent when telling a story. He referred to his daughter as a ‘dot’, this is an affectionate term for someone who is tiny. I do think the position of where his dog was walking is sensitive to him, although I don’t think Pearl was attacked by the dog as this would have shown up in her injuries. The father doesn’t mention Pearl by name until he talks to his boss, could this simply be that the whole interview was about Pearl so he didn’t feel the need to? When his wife broke down during the interview I didn’t see any tears, I found that unusual. I am not well versed in SA so I am commenting from a novice’s point of view.

Hey Jude said...

It's a dropped aitch - 'throw'er'.

Anonymous said...

- by Willow -

1. There is indication to suggest Paul was not involved in hands-on daily caretaking of daughter Pearl.
Father distancing fom a child can be a risk factor in many ways.

2. Paul repeats: "Pearl wants me..." "...to go to the park with her".

Paul poses himself as the object of the daughter's wanting. He underlines that it's Pearl wanting, (not him).
This is in congruence with the way he avoids taking responsibility throughout the narrative.
Sometimes his explanations are unbelievably fantastical like "the wall snatched.."

It would be a heavy personal task indeed to open up of what one truly wants and ask for it carrying the consequences.

It's the toddler, Pearl, "she", who does the wanting, according to Paul.

The attitude of refusing to accept responsibility of own wants and actions is familiar in abusive relationships of all kind. The target is held liable for their own exploitation.

3. Paul is "over the moon".

It is a strong expression, but understandable if put in context of perceived, successful release of responsibility having to do with powerful personal motivations of nearly taboo-nature.

"Swinging" and "swinger", are emotionally charged words that have a double meaning in standard language.


4. "Why does he LAUGH when he says Pearl "heeled" right before she got crushed by wall?"
- Paul is coming to the culmination of the script. He has trouble remembering the points and he's afraid of making more mistakes. He is delighted that the interview is soon over.

- The father cannot hide, and feels no need to even try to conceal the pleasurable sense of power when making his toddler "heel" like a dog.
Telling this on camera may be for the speaker even greater gratification than the act itself.

Lars Bak said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

I wonder, is it worth prompting South Wales police about all this? This could be an IMMENSE injustice. I would be VERY surprised if they have not done some due diligence on this man already. The more I listen to Black the more negativity I get from him. The Welsh deserve more than a load of online spin masquerading as "news" and deserve to be treated like adults for a change. If that means shoving a some unpalatable truths under some noses then so be it. Deception is everywhere!

Contact form is here:

https://www.south-wales.police.uk/en/contact-us/contact-us-form/

Habundia Awareness said...

Just a short comment for now...........why does Gemma tell us Pearl wasnt air lifted? While the media says she was?
"Pearl was taken to Prince Charles Hospital in Merthyr Tydfil by air ambulance but died a short time later."
If she had died instantly, why would they take her to the hospital then? They dont airlift people who are death (for as far i am aware that is)
Has the media told us a lie? Or is Gemma not telling the truth?

happyuk said...

Paul Black's recent comment concerning road safety on his Facebook page is instructive:

"This is to the lady in a jeep with 2 children aboard who nearly run me over in CoOp pentrebach about an hour ago. She exclaimed I was in the middle of the road which is where I was entitled to be as I was crossing the junction. When I told her to read her highway code and called her unnecessarily a stupid c@#t she replied to go fuck myself. I've been in the store and seen her on cctv but unfortunately and lucky for her I didn't get her number. I've seen enough traffic related incidents this year to last me a fuckin lifetime so no wonder I'm on edge. So, go fuck yourself."

Their crocodile tears arouse in me not genuine empathy but cold curiosity.

happyuk said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Hey Jude said...

Anon - looking for more info - Pearl's death is still under investigation. There was a pre-inquest review in October, with another scheduled for December 2017, on which there has been no follow up in the media, so perhaps that was postponed. The inquest was turned into a pre-inquest review because the investigation was still ongoing. it appears that is related to interviewing the owner of the runaway Range Rover, who works away, and who has been unavailable for interview. Can't imagine all houses have not been asked for any CCTV, or that there might not be any - it is reported that house to house enquiries were made at the time.

Habundia Awareness said...

Someone was telling that it was not done to doubt the story that these parents told the media in this interview.
I dont think anyone who joins this blog (and comments) wants people to be guilty of horrible crimes.
I do think people here want to hear reliable anwsers to questions asked..........although the questions aren't clear, the anwsers given tell us that this did not happen the way this father is telling us.
He was the only person (adult) present at that time (the baby, Ace, would be to young to tell us what really happened), as someone said before.......wonder if there were any witnesses during the 'accident'.
"Police are investigating the circumstances surrounding the incident and have appealed for witnesses."(media says)

Ive been trying to use Google maps to locate the place of the accident......half way that road google maps doesn't go further (does anyone else can go further then the picture of the older woman who's walking the road upwards?)
https://www.google.nl/maps/@51.7468512,-3.3968011,3a,75y,56.08h,89.84t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRrX_WZ-S_AaxTYhdoxcdfw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Habundia Awareness said...

suffocation..........i believe that this can be seen in the eyes if someone has been suffocated....ive seen many episodes of autopsy's done and i remember it has been said in these episodes that there will be little red dots in the eyewhite of the eyes, but iam not sure if this is shown 100% of the times someone has been killed by suffocation?!

LisaB said...

When my daughter was small, this was normal for us. As we approached a curb, I took her hand. It did not matter if there was a car in sight, it was like buckling a seatbelt when you get in the car. Precautionary.

Also, not directed at anyone specifically, how does "local" language play into the way we are reading this? I should point out that I am only reading transcripts and articles, and have not yet heard the father speak. In reading the words, I keep "forgetting" that he is not necessarily speaking in "American" English, until I am reminded by phrases like "this lot" and use of "floor" for ground. Needless to say, it would be obvious in listening to him, as I assume he speaks with an "accent".

I think when he describes Pearl toddling along beside him (as if a new walker could keep pace with a grown man) he is emphasizing her smallness when he says she was "like a dot" and also "at my knee" although my initial take on these phrases was that she was both far away (a speck on the horizon) AND right beside him (at his knee).

LisaB said...

I also wondered why he did not pull Pearl by the arm, rather than letting go and grabbing the coat!

LisaB said...

You have to wonder about that, don't you?

WHY was his dog kept at his mum's house, when she did not even have a gate?

Had there been any sort of incident in which the dog was NOT well-behaved, causing concern for the children's safety if he stayed in the home?

Was he knocking Pearl down when she tried to walk?

Might he have knocked her down the steps onto a hard surface, resulting in Paul not allowing her to climb more than one step up from the bottom, to minimize the risk of injury?

She was now walking, and likely more adventurous as a result. Perhaps she climbed up several steps on this day, and sustained fatal injuries when she hit some surface similar in composition to the wall? Stone? Cement?

LisaB said...

I keep coming back to him throwing his infant in the road, and releasing the hand of his toddler. He did not draw them toward himself, he pushed both into harm's way.

LisaB said...

I thought he was remarking about a girl in a store wearing THE SAME pink slicker, wellies, etc. that Pearl had on that day...

LisaB said...

Thanks for clarifying "dot" and tendency of the Welsh to ramble.

LisaB said...

I think Gemma said the air ambulance came, but was not used to transport Pearl.

Likely a mistake on the part of a reporter who saw a medevac arrive and depart, and assumed Pearl was inside.

Hey Jude said...

Habundia - yes, the map goes much further up - click ahead then scroll, it will go to landscape and you can continue up on street view. I located the house pre-accident, and possibly also the play park he was talking about it, quite a bit further up the hill from the house, and just as the street turns to country lane. It is. small gated area with a few swings and baby swings, with notices on the gates - they most likely read no dogs allowed inside the gated area - can't zoom in that close. A little further up the lane someone has painted in large letters onto the road surface "THIS ROAD IS NOT A DOG TOILET'. A fair bit further up the lane, the Google car captured four lads in two parked cars having a conference, and a little further on again, a burned out car. Amazing what Street View brings up.

It looks as if the Range Rover might have rolled down from the driveway opposite, Pearl would not have stood a chance whether the vehicle had also impacted her or not - the wall is quite high, and was solid red brick, not like the concrete mould type on the dividing garden wall.

Can't post the images, but if you keep clicking forward and scrolling up on street view you will find the house, and a play park - probably he meant that one. it would be a long walk for a toddler, and dogs not meant to go in there.

Habundia Awareness said...

"It's different reading the statements/interview versus watching the video. Their grief is distracting"

Isn't that exactly why SA is going of the words spoken/written.........not from looking at facial expressions?!

One would expect grief for the circumstances these people are in..........but at the same time we have seen many parents in tears who eventuately were guilty of the murder of their child altough they showed 'grief' and tears.
Grief needs to be shown in the words spoken/written (according to SA) so that they cry and show grief doesnt say a thing if their words show different (guilty feeling of a murder can cause tears too i would think)

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/criminal-charges-pearl-black-considered-13714918

Nic said...

Jumped in the truck, off up to my mom’s to get Rolla my Boxer dog. . emm..she went to climb up the stairs and I said “no”,

Missing time. To me it doesn't sound like the truck left the drive-way/did not finish it's trip.

1) There is a dropped pronoun making "jumped in the truck" sensitive. Paul said Gem got Pearl ready, but there is no mention of strapping either of the kids into their car seats. There is no mention of the drive "up to my mom's to get Rolla". Rather, "off up to my mom's" is in context of "jumped in the truck" -- the why (intent/purpose). There is no pronoun attached to "off up to my mom's". If you have small kids this age, getting out the door, let alone arriving anywhere is a huge production. There is no mention of his mom at the other end/her interaction with her grandkids, or of the dog's excitement being reunited with her human pack, etc. Instead the story goes from "jumping in the truck", to "she went to climb".


The parents spend a lot of time agreeing she never should have been "there". The first time I listened to the video I thought it was an odd statement to make about Pearl not supposed to be there at her own home, regardless the hour, and then the over explanation about usually packing up to go to her paternal grandmother's for dinner.

"Ya and it was yeah, she wasn’t one of these children to walk off, she would just walk, she plodded along."

Speculation:

If the routine was for Pearl to pack up and go to her paternal grandmother's on Sunday, what would be so odd about her walking along with a parent to the car to go to "mum's" (her grandmother's). She was just a "dot" and therefore not easily noticed. Especially if she walked to "heel". (Where do toddlers stand when by their parents? At the knee, usually behind where you can't immediately see them, i.e., at the heel/also known as the "heel" command for a dog.) Pearl was late to walk so it's not like they were conditioned to always be looking where she was, i.e., unexpectedly following/walking out the door along with them. It's not like if you went to jump into the truck to do an errand, you would be looking in your side-view and rear-view mirrors to see if there was a toddler in the drive-way. How does the family exit the house to get into the car? Would Pearl have to walk behind the vehicle to get to her side?

I've only ever read this article/watched the video. I don't know the geographical layout of the town and I'm not familiar with what the investigation involved. But I found it really amazing how the mother was on the scene before first responders.

jmo

Hey Jude said...

Might account for some of the sensitivity round the dog being unleashed - obvious dog fouling problem in that area, along with his stated intention to not only take the dog to an enclosed playpark where the notices probably do say that dogs are not allowed - but also he went especially to collect the dog in order to take him there. He was hardly going to be scooping dog poop with two babies in hand, either. Could be some of the sensitivity round the dog, and the dog not on a leash - it's illegal to let a dog foul without picking it up in most parts of the UK - and also to not be on a lead/leash unless you're in spacious parkland where they are allowed, or a a field where there are no sheep or cattle, sort of thing.





Hey Jude said...

Where the subject chooses to start his or her account is important. Is that where the account begins, when they were getting up, or did the interviewer ask a previous question which has not been included? I wondered if that were so, as Paul Black says that Pear burst into the room 'again'. Had he already recounted her doing that earlier, and possibly already introduced her by name, as his daughter?

Habundia Awareness said...

Hey Jude....thanks for your respons. Ive been trying to go further from that older women but wherever i click it doesnt go further. You said the map goes much further up.....but i wanted to get down that street, not up (maybe i didnt read you right) but i cant go beyond that older lady down the road........up i can go to the end of the road where a sign is saying 'death end street' even that street is viewable untill the end of the hill where you can look over the area behind the hill.
On the left top corner you see a screen with 3 dots vertical clicking on it it will give the oppertunity to share the image.........maybe you could send the link of the picture you talking about.......that would be great.

I saw another picture of Beechwooddrive..........this particular area i can find although google maps has blurred out the sign of Beechwood drive (which is stupid when the street name is seen when scrolling down that street)
Did the accident happen nearby that sign? (wonder why this sign was pictured in an article about the case because its not the name of the street where the accident happened)

Peter Hyatt said...

To begin,

I think readers are beginning to see that the dog is a much more important aspect of this account of the child's death than people initially may have considered.

Peter

Peter Hyatt said...

Blogger happyuk said...
Paul Black's recent comment concerning road safety on his Facebook page is instructive:

"This is to the lady in a jeep with 2 children aboard who nearly run me over in CoOp pentrebach about an hour ago. She exclaimed I was in the middle of the road which is where I was entitled to be as I was crossing the junction. When I told her to read her highway code and called her unnecessarily a stupid c@#t she replied to go fuck myself. I've been in the store and seen her on cctv but unfortunately and lucky for her I didn't get her number. I've seen enough traffic related incidents this year to last me a fuckin lifetime so no wonder I'm on edge. So, go fuck yourself."

Their crocodile tears arouse in me not genuine empathy but cold curiosity.


***********************************************************************


This is a small snapshot of insight into his thinking. He chooses his words in less than a microsecond of time, just like everyone else.

Peter

Anonymous said...

- Willow -

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/tot

'Tiny tot' is an informal, inoffensive way to call a child.

LisaB said...

In July, his wife posted on Twitter that he had stopped drinking "3 years ago" yet 2 months later (Pearl died in between) he posted that he was "tipsy."

Habundia Awareness said...

I do think its very odd for a father who was 'delighted' that his daughter (who just was able to walk for 1 month) asked him to go to the park with her to get on the swing, that he first went to get his dog......why does the dog live at his mothers home? And why would he go get his dog first if he were to go out with his childeren to the playpark? Why would the dog be needed to bring if you were going to play with your child in the park?
At most playparks dogs are not aloud.

Who in his right mind would take a 18 month old child, a 5 month old child and an unleashed dog to go for a walk to the park, without a stroller? That to me is very unresponsible or is it just me.

Then if he went by car to his moms home........why would he then go walk with the child to the park instead of taking the car to go to the park?

LisaB said...

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/voice-star-used-body-human-10944650

Either this article is wrong on numerous counts, or there is some misinformation in other sources.

1. A woman is quoted as saying Paul threw himself in front of the vehicle, and that they were struck by the Jeep. There is no mention of the wall.

The article goes on to say he was hospitalized for his injuries.

It is not clear if she is repeating what she heard, or saw it.

2. Pearl's birthday is cited as being "7 weeks away" when she died. This would mean that she was 22 months old, and had been walking for 5 months.

3. The article suggests that Paul Black has a history of deception, as examples cited from his appearance on The Voice;
"Paul Black - who joked he was Tom Jones' son when he sang on The Voice in 2014" and "He also convinced judge Will.i.am that he was from the same town in New Jersey as Frank Sinatra".

Anonymous said...

- Willow -

Peter Hyatt says at January 6, 2018 at 10:34 AM:

Peter Hyatt said...

To begin,

I think readers are beginning to see that the dog is a much more important aspect of this account of the child's death than people initially may have considered.

Peter

Oh, so sad, Peter, if the hypothesis of boxer-accident is true.

1. The "bursting" toddler through the door has been an enigma in comments today.

Can we apply the idea of the 'Rule of 180 degrees' here?

2. If the dear boxer of father Paul "bursted" in through the door fatally injuring the toddler Pearl, it would be within reason to suspect that the father handles his enormous pain by familiar techniques.

3. These methods of avoidance, repression and survival are instinctual for anyone who displays the kind of thinking and values Paul Black does.

4. In order to be able to cope with reality, the father distorts the reality, upside down.

5. Paul places the hideous "bursting" behaviour onto the victim of the incident, Pearl.

6. This is to alleviate guilt and shame and make it possible for the life to go on.

7. In a fantastically unbelievable way it also leaves the dear boxer blameless.

Where is the boxer now?

Hey Jude said...

Habundia - thanks, now I know how to share an image. See how long a distance for to expect a toddler to be able to walk - he could not carry two babies all the way up there, surely. Pearl had only been walking a few weeks, she would not be able to do that walk without help, it's all uphill. I think it unlikely he would take them there without a pushchair. I will check round for any nearer parks, but he did say up near his mum's, and that is up and fairly near. Hardly worth the effort for just a couple of swings - just put a swing in the garden - push the boat out, add a slide, or a seesaw. That's a mean park, as parks go, Merthyr Council.

The house and wall - 2009
https://goo.gl/maps/NV74xYWj3jH2

House and opposite driveway - 2016
https://goo.gl/maps/tjUxgAwJJwA2

Enclosed playpark with notices - July 2016
https://goo.gl/maps/JXP8xHgGb2S2

Playpark notice on the second gate - July 2016
https://goo.gl/maps/b8ybrHcuVYE2

Painting on road - July 2016
https://goo.gl/maps/R1f3bcs9WXM2


____
Just because:

Lads in a lane and a burned out car:
https://goo.gl/maps/i8M2P72X9F42

mom2many said...

Where does logic fit in with Statement-Analysis?

Is it logical to presume rescue couldn't tell an hours old dead child from a just deceased one? Is it logical to suggest that a man, carrying an already deceased child, an infant, with his dog next to him, could suddenly come upon an accident in which to hide his burden? Or, could string together a scenario involving an unattended vehicle on a hill, with just the right trajectory to take out a wall in a way as to hide his child, and her injuries? Is it logical to suggest that medics cannot tell the difference between blunt trauma and animal mauling? Is it logical to think medics would overlook sexual assault trauma involved in a child's death?

This word association game must fit within the bounds of logic and reason. Too often I read commenters on here, one in particular, who gets carried off on an association game which defies probability. What surprises me more are the rather more level-headed folk that go along for the ride.

Peter, could you answer the first question? How do we apply logic when we see some of these trigger words, like doors and water, in a statement?

Burst: maybe part of Pearl's body burst on impact
Why so much about the dog?: A well trained dog always heels on the same side. The dog was where he always was. If Pearl had been on that side, she'd have been safe.
What he'd seen: The father was also the one to identify her. Pearl was greatly traumatised. With his wife sitting right there, and a media which really has no rights to the details, perhaps he felt no need to go into heart-wrenching detail. It's ghoulish to persist to extract details outside of a situation which warrants it, to legitimate investigators, for example.
Why cause of death undetermined?:I have seen situation in which details are withheld, and the death certificate reflects it. Sometimes cause of death is updated later on. Maybe the trauma was so severe they couldn't determine between blunt force and sharp force. What was the manner of death listed as?

Nic said...

I said I’m gonna walk him to the park cause Rolla’s so well behaved, he’s he’s always off the lead and Sundays that one is relatively quiet and I’ve only got to click my fingers and he’s a well trained dog. My mom hasn’t got a gate on her house. The driveway just come up off on to the pavement from the main road, so like I say, Rolla was off the lead but to heel ..umm..

Does anyone know why the dog would have been at his mom's house/not with the family at home?

Why would that park being relatively quiet make a difference if the dog was so well trained?


http://www.itv.com/news/wales/2017-08-10/range-rover-that-hit-wall-killing-toddler-had-handbrake-fully-applied/
The Coroner's Officer told the inquest, in Aberdare, that Pearl was taken to Prince Charles Hospital in Merthyr Tydfil where she was pronounced dead.

But he said the cause of death could not be established.

I find this really interesting. If a wall crumbles atop a toddler and she dies from those injuries, wouldn't the cause of death be easy to determine?

General P. Malaise said...

mom2many said...
Where does logic fit in with Statement-Analysis?
Why cause of death undetermined?:I have seen situation in which details are withheld, and the death certificate reflects it. Sometimes cause of death is updated later on. Maybe the trauma was so severe they couldn't determine between blunt force and sharp force. What was the manner of death listed as?


with SA the goal is to understand the language of the speaker. logic helps us to understand the language. Care must be taken that we don't apply logic that overrides the language. logic helps us form questions we try to answer in the language but not change the language to fit our logic.

as to the undetermined death, to me that is a red flag that the coroner has unanswered questions about the death. Period. If the wall fell on her then the cause of death would be crushing and I think the coroner would state it as such, "death by crushing" resulting in ruptured organs etc.

with regards to SA we need to ask these questions, we often can not derive a cause or method of the event. we gather questions we want to find answers to, then try to find those answers. a big issue is the conjecture or stating a fact out of our questions, when they need to remain questions.

General P. Malaise said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
General P. Malaise said...

I see a quick temper and underlying anger in his language. Admonishing Pearl for climbing the stairs, twice with a firm and angry NO. The facebook post also shows a rage in him.

Blogger happyuk said...
Paul Black's recent comment concerning road safety on his Facebook page is instructive:

"This is to the lady in a jeep with 2 children aboard who nearly run me over in CoOp pentrebach about an hour ago. She exclaimed I was in the middle of the road which is where I was entitled to be as I was crossing the junction. When I told her to read her highway code and called her unnecessarily a stupid c@#t she replied to go fuck myself. I've been in the store and seen her on cctv but unfortunately and lucky for her I didn't get her number. I've seen enough traffic related incidents this year to last me a fuckin lifetime so no wonder I'm on edge. So, go fuck yourself."

Nic said...

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/criminal-charges-pearl-black-considered-13714918

Criminal charges are being considered over toddler killed by runaway Range Rover

The father of a one-year-old girl, who died after a car rolled down a driveway and into a wall, made an emotional statement as details about her death began to emerge.

Paul Black was speaking after a pre-inquest review was held into the death of his young daughter Pearl Melody Black and described how he and his wife are "living hour by hour".

The hearing had been told that police are investigating whether criminal charges should be brought over the death of the one-year-old girl.

Pearl died after an unattended Range Rover rolled down a driveway and into a wall in Heolgerrig, Merthyr Tydfil.

She was taken to Prince Charles Hospital by ambulance after the incident but died shortly afterwards.

Police Constable Tony Farr said officers had taken statements from eyewitnesses, the emergency services and had carried out door-to-door inquiries.

"At this point we have not interviewed the driver of the Range Rover Andrew Williams," he said.

The officer said Mr Williams, who was a long-distance lorry driver and travels abroad, would be interviewed.

Pc Farr said CCTV and ANPR cameras were being looked at to "establish a timeline of the vehicle prior to the collision and its movements".

He added: "As you are aware we have conducted a series of mechanical examinations on the Range Rover which have included tests on the braking efficiency."

At an earlier hearing the court heard the automatic transmission of the Range Rover, which was stationary on a driveway, was believed to be in park at the time, with the handbrake fully applied.

South Wales Police was called to the scene in Heolgerrig in Merthyr Tydfil at 1.39pm on August 6.

After the hearing, Mr Black said: "My wife and I are just beyond words, how upset we are.

"We are literally not living day by day, we are living hour by hour.

"There's not a second goes by in our lives that we don't think of our darling little girl.

"This morning it seems very real with all the legalities beginning. We will never have the same life that we had.

"She was just an enormous part of our lives and she will always be.

"My love for her still grows every day, as my wife's does, and our family."

Coroner Andrew Barkley adjourned the hearing at Aberdare Coroners' Court to December 8 for a further review.

He told Mr Black: "There is an ongoing police investigation into a potential criminal matter that is of course subject to investigation and then subject to a decision by the CPS.

"If there were to be a criminal charge then ordinarily the inquest would not be resumed."

Speaking about the opening of the inquest in August, he said: "On that occasion I learned something of the circumstances as they were believed to be.

"The intervening period suggests that enquiries into the circumstances are still ongoing. For that reason, I decided to convert today's hearing into a pre-inquest review."


Nic said...

Cont'd

CCTV footage from the council and retail parks in the area, and CCTV from the fire service, have also been obtained to try and establish a timeline of events prior to the incident, and police have also carried out house-to-house enquiries.

PC Farr said: "We're just trying to establish 100% the timeline for the movements of the vehicle."

The coroner said: "The assumption is whatever an inquest would achieve would be dealt with. They are parallel processes.

"If we do end up having an inquest, it's not likely to be before the early part of next year."

Mr Black expressed concern about the "gruesome" details of the incident being explicitly referred to during any future hearings.

Referring to his wife, he said: "I don't want her to hear any of those details that I saw.”

Speaking after the hearing, Mr Black said: "If I may briefly thank the borough of Merthyr Tydfil for embracing us and putting their arms around us, from musicians and walkers to motorcyclists, I just can't thank people enough."

Anonymous said...

Statement Analysis is a tool used to determine the likelihood of a speaker being deceptive. It can be used by law enforcement as a way to pursue leads and examine a crime from a different and rather objective standpoint. The language used by a suspect or witness can often reliably indicate the direction an investigation takes.

Statements by law enforcement are often scripted to with hold or reveal information that will spark a public response. Law enforcements ongoing investigation is an indicator that there are questions surrounding an event that lead them to continue asking questions. Media reports are often inaccurate and contradictory. They should be relied upon to establish "facts in evidence".

Speculation on the part of the commenter's here should not be confused with the conclusions reached by a trained and experienced statement analyst. This blog is designed as a teaching and marketing tool.

General P. Malaise said...

Blogger Nic said...
Cont'd


it seems someone doesn't want an inquest

Nic said...

The thing about the Range Rover is that it has been determined that it was in park and the emergency brake was fully applied. But it wasn't secure. (The doors weren't locked.) That tells me that the owner didn't want petty criminals smashing his door windows (causing the owner $$ in reparation,) to steel what would be in, i.e., the glove compartment. In other words, there was nothing in the car to steel and all a petty criminal would have to do is open the door to see that.

So how does a vehicle, in park with the emergency brake fully applied, end up at the bottom of the hill? If the car was maintained and the forensic specialists agree that the vehicle was in park with a brake fully applied, how did it roll backwards down the hill? If there was a mechanical failure why not report it?

What is not stated is important. Is it a leap to consider the vehicle was tampered with?

ima.grandma said...

@Nic
Mr Black expressed concern about the "gruesome" details of the incident being explicitly referred to during any future hearings.

Referring to his wife, he said: "I don't want her to hear any of those details that I saw.”
....................

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/voice-star-whose-daughter-killed-11285111

Mr Black told an inquest hearing: "I was there to see the gruesome details but I want to protect my wife from it.

"I haven't been able to tell her what happened, she doesn't know."

A coroner agreed he would do his best to avoid any "unnecessary distress" for Mr Black's grief-stricken wife Gemma, 37.

Police are investigating the tragedy and a file of evidence will be sent to the Crown Prosecution Service.

General P. Malaise said...

Blogger ima.grandma said...
@Nic


Mr. Black doesn't want an inquest. Why? most parents would be screaming for one.

Gemma said she got to the scene before the ambulance

GEMMA: I was in the retail park buying bedding (pause) such an insignificant thing to be doing and Paul rung me and I thought he said Terry which is Paul’s dad. So I come rushing up from the retail park to the scene where the wall fell expected it to be my father-in-law when it’s Pearl in the road. I got there before the ambulance and anything arrived.

Lucia D said...

Lars, that makes sense to me too.

Anonymous said...

Gemma states that she arrived at the scene before the EMT squad.

Bobcat said...

I listened four more times.
4:45 http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/were-missing-more-every-day-13828145

Paul distinctly says "I couldn't throw IT into the road."
He does not drop an "h" in her, but he pronounces a distinct "uT" (it) BEFORE "into".
I do hear his accent. I also hear the clear enunciation of an actor.

His statement is clear. I believe him.

Pearl was already dead, and he didn't want to abuse her corpse by throwing it into the road.

ima.grandma said...

"I haven't been able to tell her what happened, she doesn't know."

I believe him. Gemma doesn't know.

Hey Jude said...

He grabbed Pearl's coat - maybe he covered her body with it to prevent Gemma seeing her injuries, and he or paramedics shielded her from seeing her once the paramedics arrived.

ima.grandma said...

@GenP
with regards to SA we need to ask these questions, we often can not derive a cause or method of the event. we gather questions we want to find answers to, then try to find those answers. a big issue is the conjecture or stating a fact out of our questions, when they need to remain questions.
........... I agree

“Upon this first, and in one sense this sole, rule of reason, that in order to learn you must desire to learn, and in so desiring not be satisfied with what you already incline to think, there follows one corollary which itself deserves to be inscribed upon every wall of the city of philosophy: 
"Do not block the way of inquiry.”
— Charles Sanders Peirce, "First Rule of Logic"

Hey Jude said...

Here is a link to an article which includes a photograph of the demolished wall shortly after the incident - the bricks have been cleared but the floral tributes remain - compare the house in the Google Street View image I posted earlier if you want confirmation of it as the correct location/ height of the wall.


https://www.pressreader.com/uk/daily-express/20170808/281891593367439


I know it is not SA - I hope I will attempt analysis of the interview tomorrow or Monday - can't concentrate that much today.

The images of the lads in cars and the burnt out car were not meant to suggest they were related to the incident - I just liked to find something further up the lane.

The 'this is not a dog toilet' graffiti might be irrelevant, too - or it might be some of why the dog not being on a leash was sensitive - he is very keen on receiving continuing community support -yet just the idea of intending to take your dog out unleashed to a play park, whilst also not likely to be able to pick up its poop, due to having two babies without a pushchair, is not likely to draw much support - even though he didn't, the hazardous and anti-social intention was there, according to him. What was he going to do - lay the five month old on the ground, which might be all contaminated, whilst he put Pearl into the swing, and pushed her, and lifted her out?

The person who asked why it would matter that it was relatively quiet up there on a Sunday - fewer cars, reducing the risk of Pearl or his dog being run over on the road -there are no pavements further up - no-one around to complain about him taking the dog into the playpark, or having it off the leash. Practically, though, it would be ridiculous to go up there without a pushchair - it's reasonable to question if that was ever his intention.


___

Bobcat, I am willing for your hearing to be better than mine, if it is - I'll try different headphones and listen again.

__

His boxer dog was photographed in the back of his pick up truck, on Twitter, months after Pearl"s death.

__

Person who wants a new Davey Blackburn thread - if you click 'older post' on the last page of the Blackburn thread which has filled up, that is where they are posting. It is mostly about cakes -someone is putting in a lot of effort in an attempt to make it unreadable, but they surely can't keep that going through five thousand comments.

mom2many said...

The picture just makes me more confused. Where are the steps?

This is the second article that states they were on the way home from the park. The interview does not give that impression. If true, though, perhaps he left the dog at the house, traveled up to the park, and then this happened as they collected the dog to go home. Why didn't he speak about doing anything in the park in the interview?

habundia said...

What about she hearing Terry instead of Pearl when paul rang her? Dont see how these names would sound alike on the phone.
Also she's very detailed of what she was doing, but no detail on what Paul told her when he called her about what happened. Only that she thought he said Terry.

Hey Jude said...

Bobcat - after listening several times, I maintain he said "I couldn't throw *her* into the road quick enough."

I was thinking to slice them all together so as to better compare them - or more to demonstrate they are the same word as I'm so convinced he said *her*. Ha, probably that would take ages and be difficult to do tidily - besides, people can easily listen for themselves and make up their own minds.
__

You say: 'Pearl was already dead, and he didn't want to abuse her corpse by throwing it into the road.'

If Pearl was already dead before the Range Rover demolished the wall, and if he had caused the Range Rover to demolish the wall, he would already have abused her corpse.

happyuk said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Bobcat said...

Hj,

I shouldn't project his intent with "it". The notable language is that he called his daughter Pearl an "it". Pearl was no longer with him to be abused or thrown, but her corpse was.

Anonymous said...

vIt sounds like they've had to be nice as everyone has been nice to them, but now anger is setting in and the reality that their little girl will never come back is becoming more real with each passing day.

You people are making too much out of it, imo.

Bobcat said...

I still have more to review, but there is much sensitivity regarding the dog. A ntp that it is a good dog. And that he went to his mom's to get the dog. Was there a need for the dog to be removed from the morning-at-home part of the story?

General P. Malaise said...

Blogger happyuk said...

I think the use of cliche and hyperbole is to make himself appear worldly and knowledgeable and a need to persuade as such.

Buckley said...

vIt sounds like they've had to be nice as everyone has been nice to them, but now anger is setting in and the reality that their little girl will never come back is becoming more real with each passing day.

You people are making too much out of it, imo.


That their pain is real and that Black is leaving out information are not mutually exclusive; both can be true. There is a wide gap between the picture he wants is to see and the actions he's able to reliably report. Something is awry.

Nic said...

Anonymous said:
Speculation on the part of the commenter's here should not be confused with the conclusions reached by a trained and experienced statement analyst. This blog is designed as a teaching and marketing tool.


Additionally, posting on a public forum means none of us have access to any sort of active investigative interviews, let alone the opportunity to ask follow-up questions. The statements Peter posted from the Black family are in free editing which, considering the source, (media) is a rarity.

SA aside, the dog is sensitive (why was he over-night at Paul's mom's?) and IMO, so is the truck he was supposed to be driving that day. Not just the truck, but his mom's drive-way. Why mention the drive-way and its proximity to the road and whether or not it has a gate? Too much has been omitted. i.e., there is no "we", which would include the kids. There is just jumping in the car, but no activity reported during the trip or after he got there. There is zero activity around the kids except right before the accident.

"And I said I had Ace, and I said I’m gonna walk him to the park cause Rolla’s so well behaved, he’s he’s always off the lead and Sundays that one is relatively quiet anfd I’ve only got to click my fingers and he’s a well trained dog. "

He said he had Ace and was going to walk Ace (him) to the park with the dog. Pearl is not there in the story with them. She is not mentioned until he is refers to her walking "to heel".

Paul specifically picked that park because it was relatively quiet on Sundays. That means little activity in the park as well as around the park.

Was the wall on his mother's property? Paul said:

So it all comes to what if facts. If I hadn’t left rehearsals early, if I let her climb up another step, you know

How would being allowed to climb another step make a difference to the wall falling on her?

Buckley said...

"...picture he wants us to see..."

Buckley said...

I think they mean if the timing had been different, she would not have been in front of the wall when the car hit it.

Buckley said...

If she'd gone up steps, they would have left the house a little later.

Nic said...

This article is from the Irish Mirror and it is dated August 8, 2017

http://www.irishmirror.ie/news/world-news/baby-daughter-voice-star-killed-10944034

[...]His wife Gemma, 37, was said to be "devastated" by the accident at 2.30pm on Sunday afternoon.

She was at home looking after the couple's eight-month-old baby son when the accident happened.

Gemma is being comforted by relatives and a specially trained police officers are supporting the family.
______________-

From August 7th
https://1london.net/the-voice-singer-paul-blacks-one-year-old-daughter-pearl-killed-after-being-hit-by-runaway-car/

Local mother Rebecca Morgan, 30, said she saw the little girl’s father standing near the site of the accident from a window on Sunday night.

__________________________

Very different details from the posted interview transcript. The only part of the reporting that the mother corrected was that Pearl was not airlifted to the hospital.

General P. Malaise said...

Blogger Nic said...

So it all comes to what if facts. If I hadn’t left rehearsals early, if I let her climb up another step, you know

How would being allowed to climb another step make a difference to the wall falling on her?


I see this as distancing himself from responsibility. blaming fate. why he does not blame the vehicle or the owner is unexpected, the fact that (even if he is a fatalist) he chooses to mention the rehearsals and the stairs as moments where fate could change an outcome is an insight on what is in his mind.

Anonymous said...

There are indicators of sexual abuse:

Door
Bathing (in written part of article)
Noticing every article of little girls' clothing
New bedding

Other weird stuff he says, which if it were dream imagery, Freud would attribute it with sexual content ie. climbing stairs, beating a drum.

Also, a LOT OF VIOLENT words used by the Dad especially in written part.

Buckley said...

I think he does take some responsibility when he says he was unable to throw her to safety. He has regret not only about the timeline, but, through sensitivity about the dog not being on a leed, that he is "walking Ace" (as opposed to putting him in a stroller).

He wants us to think he had grabbed Pearl's hand, and let it go to grab her coat. But linguistically he hasn't told us he did. I think he'd need both hands to throw Ace to safety so couldn't do that and hold on to her.

The "heel" stuff is sensitive and it seems related to both the dog and Pearl. Was the dog "running loose" and Pearl following him, which impeded Black's ability to rescue her (and led to him throwing his baby)?

I agree there is missing info in his account as well as info we wouldn't expect. The more I look at it, it relates to either why the timeline what is was or that he had two very young kids and a dog in a way that isn't the most responsible and engendered his inability to quickly control the situation at a second's notice. He indeed declares regret he didn't rescue her, and its at the most emotional point in the interview.

Anonymous said...

Oh also, he says he is proud of her for dying: That is totally molesterish.

Anonymous said...

Maybe he took the dog so the dog could dig a hole for him to bury Pearl in bc he was probably too f&ckin lazy to dig it himself!

Habundia Awareness said...

Thanks Hey Jude.......this part of the map i could see too that i was mentioning about the death end road.......wasnt aware that the beechwood sign was across the wall that was crushed.

Now that i have seen the wall..........i cannot believe that crushing of that wall would cause a child to be killed, sure the child would be injured but killed?......i thought the wall would have been higher this wall doesnt seem high enough to kill a child. If the child was only hit by the bricks of this wall (and not by the car).

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017/08/07/13/430B36D100000578-4766578-image-a-31_1502107929420.jpg
How come this wall seems much higher then the wall on google maps? Or is it visual fraud?

Also i read articles that state that father was SEVERELY injured........if that was true, why didnt Paul tell he was injured too?
I also read police hadn't conformed Paul was injured too, so maybe that was one of the misswrittings from the media.

Ive been listening to the interview a couple times.
A lot of things i spotted have been mentioned by others on this blog.

One commentor mentioned anger in Paul's voice on couple occassions. I also heared it when he decribed how he told Pearl to take his hand. "Now my hand!" "Tight thight thight"....while the first parts hears some agression, the second part seem to be more kind.

What i really don't get is this. He tells us (while showing with example) how he took Ace in his other hand (in a way that is not a normal way to take over a baby from one arm to the other, while at that time there was yet nothing to be afraid of, he wasnt aware of any danger at that point he talks about), how he 'commanded' Pearl to grab his hand, THEN while doing this he suddenly hears 'noise' (does a car rolling of a hill make noise? More noise then an other car would? If a car is stationary, would the motor be running? Or would it be off?), what he does then surprises me.....instead of pulling her as fast as he can away from the place she's at while he was grabbing her hand, he decided to let go of her hand, trow Ace in the road?!!!! (WTF? who trows his babychild in the road?) and grabs her by the coat, to then be to late to pull her back, then the wall crushes and 'takes his girl'......while standing 3 (foot) feet (the number 3?) from the curb?
If the car didn't cause injury to Pearl, but only the wall fell.....would that wall have been able to fall on top of her?
Looking at the pictures of that wall........it doesnt seem like such a high wall that it would be able to 'snatch a child' who's standing 3 feet from the curb, but i could be absolutely wrong about that
https://goo.gl/maps/YuJKmqNLSSA2 (picture of the wall before accident)

Habundia Awareness said...


Cont.

Then we have Emma telling us that normally on a Sunday, Paul would be with the band and she would take the kids to her parents to have dinner. But this time Paul decided to come back early from rehearsel (not knowing upfront if he would be aloud to go away earlier from the rehearsel) but still tells Emma to 'get her ready, if he came back' (as if he wasnt capable of getting her ready himself when he came back?), he get off sooner from rehearsel and goes back home, takes both his kids, but Emma decided to go to the retail shop to buy bedding?????
If it wasnt 'normal' for them to be together on a Sunday afternoon, and Emma stayed at home with the kids without knowing for sure if Paul would be able to be back sooner (they didnt tell if he had called her to let her know he would be able to be back earlier from rehearsel) to take Pearl to the park as he had promissed and also decided to take Ace with him, instead of Emma going with them she goes to the store?
Why didn't she come along to go to the park together as a family on a Sunday afternoon? If it wasn't something that occured often you would think that she would have come along, so why would she have chosen to go shopping instead of having a family trip to the park?
Especially because it was not the standard they were together as a family on a Sunday. It could be that it was 'Daddy's time' but Emma doesnt tell that so I can't tell it for her.

He hasn't been able to tell her what happened........didn't he just did moments before in front of the camera??????
Would he really have to go into detailled graphics about her injuries caused by the accident? To not 'been able to tell her what happened?"
Is what happened not what he described in the interview? And hasnt been able to tell her the real story of what happened that faithfull day this precious child died?
So what more does he is able to tell about what happened, which he isn't telling

This interview is full of missing information. I found it difficult to read because of all the broken sentences he used, many times of not finishing his words and his stuttering.

And one other thing that caught my attention was his refference to 'in the progress of getting up'......isn't that the same as.....'I just woke up, I was getting up'......to me it sounds like the same 'story building' (but again i could be wrong) and everytime i hear these words......my attention raises, this time was no difference.

Anonymous said...

@ Habundia,

Maybe he placed Ace in his left arm like that so he could use his right hand to put the key in the ignition, start the car, and drive it into the wall to stage Pearl's death.

Buckley said...

He happened to have the key to the ignition of someone else's car?

General P. Malaise said...

Blogger Habundia Awareness said...

in the interview only Ace was held overnight for observation and no mention of any injuries to Paul. I think they refer to scratches or scrapes.

the vehicle was not running and it was not occupied. as per story it rolled down a driveway and crashed into the wall.

the language indicates a temper in my opinion.

3 foot, 3 feet from the curb. this is important because they needed to be far enough in from the curb for the wall to be able to crush the child. now the question why did HE NEED TO TELL US THIS? it is unnecessary information which makes it very important in SA. not only is it unnecessary but he tells us twice. NTP

General P. Malaise said...

Anonymous said...
@ Habundia,

Maybe he placed Ace in his left arm like that so he could use his right hand to put the key in the ignition, start the car, and drive it into the wall to stage Pearl's death.


lol who said he had a key? the vehicle was parked as per inquest with the doors unlocked in park and handbrake fully applied. the owner is a long distance truck driver who was not at home at the time.

Anonymous said...

And maybe what he grabbed in his right hand "tight tight tight" was not Pearl's hand but the steering wheel.

Maybe the sensitivity around the word "heel" was him lowering the emergengy brake in the car so he could drive it into the wall cause if you think about it, pulling up the emergengy brake is like yanking a dogs leash to make the dog "heel", both actions (pulling up emergency and making a dog hell are dog at the lower waist area...the emergency brake is below the drivers waist when seated & when you make a dog heel you hold the leash a few inches below the waist alongside yourself and give it a quick yank snd say "heel". The 2 actions (pulling up or lowering emergency brake and yanking leash to make a dig heel mirror each other, and both cause the car or dog to "stop".

Habundia Awareness said...

When we in Dutch say "a car is running stationary", then the motor of the vehicle is on while the car is in free gear and on handbreak and standing still. So that wouldn't need a key to put it in driver mode, it would already be in it, 'running stationary'
But iam not sure if this means the same for the English language.

Anonymous said...

Maybe it was left in the ignition or he used a gadget to turn the ignition or just lowered emergency brake and rolled it if it was parked on a hill.

Anonymous said...

He lowered the emergency brake. It is right there in his language:

Anonymous said...

Guy sounds like he is high on something.

Anonymous said...

Ive trained a dog before and the leash is held against the side of your body at the exact position as where the emergency brake would be in a car & you give the leash a quick, short yank to get the dog to heel & that is like pulling up orlowering emergency brake.

ima.grandma said...

Is Gemma subtly blaming Paul here?
GEMMA:  You could move her quick enough.
PAUL:  So I couldn’t throw her into the road quick enough. The wall took her from me. I can’t say any more. 

I'm out of practice, so many times the word never is overused in the prologue: Peter has taught us the word "never" is sometimes used for emphasis by liars. Paul does tell us why "never" in a few instances but an explanation doesn't follow all references from himself or from Gemma.

PAUL: ...  I was delighted because she never asked me to do that. She never says daddy swings and daddy park.  

 I never leave so early  cause it’s a great company... 

GEMMA:   ...because she’s she’s never, to put in context, she’s never here 

... We pack up and probably go out to my parents for the afternoon, because she’s never here. 

PAUL:   She’s never here, so unusual, ... (gemma and paul, why was she never there?but WAS there on this Sunday morning?)

...she was never one to run, 

General P. Malaise said...

Blogger ima.grandma said...

GEMMA: ...because she’s she’s never, to put in context, she’s never here

... We pack up and probably go out to my parents for the afternoon, because she’s never here.

PAUL: She’s never here, so unusual, ... (gemma and paul, why was she never there?but WAS there on this Sunday morning?)


I think that is very important. both say she should not have been "HERE" what do they mean by "HERE" I would expect the word to to be THERE not HERE. that is unless the incident happened "HERE" and literally speaking "HERE" would have been their home not a sidewalk.

Habundia Awareness said...

"The 4×4 was left unlocked on the driveway in Merthyr Tydfil, South Wales, but the handbrake was applied.

You dont need a key if you live on a steep hill and a car is left open....the question would be.........was the handbreak still in 'break'modus or was it set to 'drive' modus when the car was found crushed into the wall.

http://metro.co.uk/2017/08/07/the-voice-stars-daughter-identified-as-girl-1-killed-by-runaway-range-rover-6833883/

BTW.......one other thing that suddenly lids up my brain..........what about calling 911???? There is NO mentioning of calling 911 ........only him calling his wife......was 911 called? If so, i would 'love' to hear that call.

"An inquest heard that lorry driver Andrew Williams, 51, had been driving his 17-year-old Range Rover before leaving it on his driveway on the hill."

So if Andrew wasnt home.........who then had driven this car and left it unlocked on the driveway?
I also read that this person wasnt (isnt) interviewed yet, which is odd if an inquest he had driven it.

Anonymous said...

"between the births and the deaths of our children..." Has there been more than one death?

"she was never one to run" All this talk about the dog makes me wonder if the dog ran into the street, and the child chased it, or if the dog was somehow involved in the death.

Anonymous said...

Please scroll down to the picture under "How to teach a dog to heel".
The position in relation to the body where the leash is held and yanked back exactly the same positiin where the emergency brake would be. It is the same motion bc I have trained a dog.

http://www.akc.org/content/dog-training/articles/teach-your-puppy-these-5-basic-commands/

Buckley said...

All this talk about the dog makes me wonder if the dog ran into the street, and the child chased it

Yes, I wonder that, too, except rather than street, towards the rolling vehicle.

Anonymous said...

@737,

I noticed that also about his use of the word "children". Did you also notice that in written part when he says what the funds are going to be used for he says that they will also be used for Ace's future HOPEFULLY.

Habundia Awareness said...

If his car was in his driveway.........how would it be ever possible that this car ended up into a brick wall at the end of the road
See this picture (viewed from Beechwooddrive where the vehicle supposedly would be in someones driveway before ending up into the brick wall at the end of the road?
I dont see how this is possible, only if the car was standing along the curb and not on the driveway

Habundia Awareness said...

https://goo.gl/maps/ohytteu6kyr
sorry forgot to give the link

Lucia D said...

Black's Facebook post about the road rage incident shows him to be hot tempered, verbally abusive, and to use his own word, entitled. But being unlikeable isnt a crime. I still believe Pearl's death was accidental,via the truck, and Black has lots of regret and guilt about it. There are indications that he didn't spend that much time alone with Pearl, and perhaps wasn't very competent at child care. He shows strong sensitivity surrounding his dog, and signs he is withholding some information

. A likely scenario to me is he left Pearl unattended for a moment to chase the dog, and that is why he was unable to "snatch" her before the wall did. He wouldn't want his wife, nor the authorities to know that he was in any way negligent in her death. So his comment about not being able to tell his wife what happened, while at face value means not describing their daughters horrific injuries to her, may be leakage, because he dares not tell her Pearl died due to his own negligence.

tania cadogan said...

Off topic

Investigators say the widow of the man who killed dozens of people at a gay nightclub in Florida knew her husband 'was going to do something bad' before the attack.

The Orlando Sentinel reports that a statement written by an FBI agent and signed by Noor Salman says that she was in denial that her husband, Omar Mateen, could hurt other people when he left their home with guns and ammunition.

'I knew when he left the house he was going to Orlando to attack the Pulse Night Club,' Salman said allegedly during an 18-hour interview that was written by a FBI agent.

Salman faces charges of aiding a terrorist organization and obstruction of justice. Mateen killed 49 people and wounded at least 68 others during the mass shooting at Pulse nightclub on June 12, 2016.

But Bruce Frumkin, a Miami psychologist and expert on false confessions, will testify that Salman's testimony to FBI was not true.

In a ruling on Friday, U.S. Judge Paul Bryon sided with the defense to let Frumkin testify, according to Salman's lawyer Charles Swift.

Swift has argued that Salman was not in custody at the time she was detained by the FBI, hours after the attack.

He also asserts that the woman was not read the Miranda rights but U.S. attorneys respond that she was never in custody in the first place and gave her statements, voluntarily.

'I knew on Saturday, when Omar left the house about 5 p.m. that this was the time that he was going to do something bad. I knew this because of the way he left and took the gun and backpack with ammunition … ' Salman said, according to the statement she signed.

Her statements were recently made public.

'I knew later, when I could not get ahold of him that my fears had come true and he did what he said he was going to do,' Salman added.

'I was in denial and I could not believe that the father of my child was going to hurt other people.'

Salman shared that Mateen became obsessed with the Middle East and ISIS recruitment videos for two years up until the shooting.

He was said to have been looking at the area now referred to as Disney Springs and City Place in Palm Beach, according to Salman's statement.

The couple was said to have driven around the club for a week before the shooting with their young son sitting in the vehicle.

'"How upset are people going to be when it gets attacked?"' Mateen said, according to his wife's statement.

'I knew he was talking about himself doing the attack on the Pulse,' she added.

Salman's attorneys and federal prosecutors continued a hearing Friday to discuss whether sealed evidence and an expert witness' testimony should be allowed at her March trial. The hearing was closed to the public.

She apologized in her statement.

'I'm very sorry I lied to the FBI,' she said. 'These are my words.'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5240193/Officials-Shooters-widow-knew-bad.html

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

Yes, that's exactly where I've gotten to on it. Dog not on a leash, baby not in stroller. Simply unable to tend to and protect all three adequately. He knows If he'd made more responsible choices, it would likely have turned out differently. He wants us, and his wife, to think he had a handle on it all but knows he didn't. He adds details (perfect dog, reached for hand) leaves out details (she ran from me, dog ran off, had hands full so couldn't grab her) to justify his choices and make himself seem more responsible than he knows he was. "It was fate that she was there at that time."

New England Water Blog said...

This article has a better photo of the wall.

http://www.cetusnews.com/news/Car-experts-to-investigate-Range-Rover-after-toddler-dies.HkmsvzaFD-.html

Anonymous said...

It sounds like no one here believes a vehicle can jump out of gear and take off on its own. People who haven't seen nor done much believe little more.

Freak accident.

Freaks commenting to make themselves sound smarter in their own eyes.

ima.grandma said...

Lucia, good comment.

There are indications that he didn't spend that much time alone with Pearl, and perhaps wasn't very competent at child care.  (Perhaps she usually stayed with Grandma on Sundays, in particular. Paul's repeated use of the word "never" may indicate limited time spent one-on-one interaction with Pearl.)

Black's Facebook post about the road rage incident shows him to be hot tempered, verbally abusive, and to use his own word, entitled. But being unlikeable isnt a crime.  (I've also noticed his repeated use of the word "c**t on Facebook.)

He shows strong sensitivity surrounding his dog, and signs he is withholding some information. (Paul: Rolla’s so well behaved, he’s he’s always off the lead and Sundays that one is relatively quiet anfd I’ve only got to click my fingers and he’s a well trained dog.) (Pearl may not have been as well-trained.) 

Habundia Awareness said...

I do believe a car can jump out of gear............i only cant believe that (seeing at the pictures of the situation) that a car would stand in a driveway, then roll onto the road to then end up in a wall at the end of the road, the car had to have made a turn to roll down the hill......if it would have roll straight ahead it wouldnt be ending up in the wall it did......you just have to see the picture of Beechwood road (where the car would have been parked in a driveway and the intersection with Heolgerrig (where the wall was crushed)
To me it seems like a car has an odd way of traveling on its own.

Buckley said...

There are things about the car rolling into the wall and killing her that seem improbable, but it also seems an improbable way to cover up a death that occurred very differently.

General P. Malaise said...

I have just spent the last two days watching my car. it hasn't jumped out of gear in the last two days. maybe tomorrow it will. my gun hasn't fired itself either. I'm watching it too.

ima.grandma said...

GenP

giggle...

Lucia D said...

"Freaks commenting to make themselves sound smarter in their own eyes" embedded admission anon? ;)

Anonymous said...

Currently, I have my toaster and microwave under surveillance.

Buckley said...

I googled "car recalls faulty brakes" and can't find a single example on the whole interwebz :/

ima.grandma said...

https://www.thesun.ie/news/1380326/one-year-old-daughter-of-the-voice-star-paul-black-was-crushed-to-death-by-runaway-range-rover-which-had-the-handbrake-fully-applied/

THE one-year-old daughter of The Voice star was crushed by a runaway Range Rover which had the handbrake “fully applied”, an inquest heard.

Little Pearl Black, daughter of Paul Black, died on Sunday after the vehicle rolled across the road and hit her while she was going home with her dad and brother.

The Mirror reports coroner’s officer Gareth Heatley as saying: “The vehicle had been left parked with the automatic transmission in park and the handbrake fully applied.

“As the vehicle gained momentum down the driveway it has travelled across the road and on to the footpath opposite, demolishing the boundary wall.

“That same wall has collapsed. Tragically it fell on to one-year-old Pearl who had been walking on the footpath, causing crush injuries, I am told.”

ima.grandma said...

Hobs's Off topic
...(she KNEW all these things but excuses herself by copping to the convenient psychological denial...)

Investigators say the widow of the man who killed dozens of people at a gay nightclub in Florida knew her husband 'was going to do something bad' before the attack.
...
The Orlando Sentinel reports that a statement written by an FBI agent and signed by Noor Salman says that she was in denial that her husband, Omar Mateen, could hurt other people when he left their home with guns and ammunition.
...
'I knew when he left the house he was going to Orlando to attack the Pulse Night Club,' Salman said allegedly during an 18-hour interview that was written by a FBI agent..
...
'I knew on Saturday, when Omar left the house about 5 p.m. that this was the time that he was going to do something bad. 
...
I knew this because of the way he left and took the gun and backpack with ammunition … ' Salman said, according to the statement she signed. 
...
'I knew later, when I could not get ahold of him that my fears had come true and he did what he said he was going to do,' Salman added. .
...
'I knew he was talking about himself doing the attack on the Pulse,' she added. 
...

Anonymous said...

He is a liar because he has tattoos and a Mohawk? Are you here to learn statement analysis?

TheSkeptic

Mizzmarple said...

I have mot read all the comments on this analysis yet but what i am thinking is:

Did Paul tamper with the vehicle ? I read in an msm article the vehicle was unlocked - so could it be that Paul was scoping out the neighborhood (which he was familiar with) for an opportunity to disguise his abuse, etc. as an "accident"?



Anonymous said...

And the mother was out buying new bedding during the freak, accidental truck/wall killing why?

Its similar to when Patsy got up early and started washing JonBenets dress. In this case, Mom doesnt wash the bedding, she goes out & buys new bedding.

This case involves sexual abuse.

Anonymous said...

"Daddy park (car)"

"Daddy swing (it into first gear)"

Are those phrases leakage from Paul that he drove the car into wall?

Anonymous said...

"just a click of my fingers"

What? Did he hotwire the car?

Anonymous said...

Im not even convinced the dog was with him.

He went to his Moms for some other reason, maybe to get a shovel. Hes just using that as an excuse for why he stopped by his Moms or maybe ge discarded evidence tgere.

ima.grandma said...

(dp)Came home, Gem had her ready peppa coat, peppa wellies peppa jeans the works.
(dp) Jumped in the truck, 
(dp)off up to my mom’s to get Rolla my Boxer dog. . 
(There is much missing information here. Sequencing doesn't make sense. What happened after he jumped in the truck? Was rolla already with him when he sees her on the stairs?)
emm..she went to climb up the stairs and I said “no”, 
she always /   at my mom’s ( is this an incomplete thought  due to transcription difficulties? What was he trying to say about "she" always /at his mom's?)
(dp)=dropped pronoun

Anonymous said...

I started rewatching the video & when he says "Pearl heeled" & then laughs & then says "cause she was walking"
IT IS DUPING DELIGHT BC SHE WASNT WALKING.
SHE WAS DEAD.

Lucia D said...

People do occasionally buy bedding, and even for a benign reason, like their old bedding is worn out. I believe Paul did not help out with child care very often. And it's likely Gemma just took advantage of a rare afternoon without the kids to do some shopping.

Anonymous said...

How does "Pearl" sound like "Terry"????

Is that overcompensation? Trying to feign shock/ignorance of who was deceased?

Anonymous said...

"My head was like this"

Head lowered.

Was that to protect his face when he crashed car into wall?

Hey Jude said...

Habundia - rotate Street View round the end of the road, opposite the wall which was demolished - to the house which has the Beechwood sign -that's the end house on Beechwood as you enter the street turning - the house also sides onto Heolgerrig, and the driveway is opposite the demolished wall. A Range Rover parked on that driveway would, if the brakes failed or were released, careen down the driveway, into the section of the wall opposite. It is a two ton vehicle, and a single falling or flying brick can potentially kill an adult. Pearl was tiny, and at the height for head or crushing injury from a falling wall. As the bricks have been cleared and the remaining wall 'made safe' by the time of the photos, the extent of the impact on the wall can't be judged. It looked an old wall, much of it may have fallen on impact. I think that is the driveway from which it would have been possible for the Range Rover to have rolled down into the wall - an ariel view would be better to see the angle of the driveway and the likely path of the Range Rover relative to the wall. It's not in question that the vehicle rolled down into the wall, I don't think? - it's how the brakes failed which is under investigation.

---
Paul Black said, 'I said I had Ace' - other parts of his account might also be his remembering what he had previously said.

Nic said...

I'm still back at the initial reporting in August wherein it states Gemma was at home with Ace when the accident happened.

Anonymous said...

Lucia, Sure. But how likely is it her bedding just happened to be worn out and needed replacing the day that her daughter just happened to die?

I listened to the recording again, and there are serious problems at the beginning of the tale. In my opinion, the description of the morning before he leaves for rehearsal is fabricated. I also noted that the wife's statement that begins "to put it into context, she wasn't supposed to be here" suggests collaboration in the lie.

Anonymous said...

Why does Paul laugh when he says "Pearl was walking...she heeled." ?

Why does he say that she was "just a dot"?

Anonymous said...

Paul: "The day it happened. It was a Sunday."

Note: He does not say what happened, and he does not actually say that whatever happened happened on a Sunday, which puts the time of death into serious QUESTION!!!

Anonymous said...

Around 2:45 in the video, they are hiding something.

The whole "she shouldn't have been here" "it was so strange"

Something is very off because the reason why Pearl was there at home is because Paul was going to come back from rehearsal and take her to the park. The Mom says that normally Paul would be at "band practice or rehearsals or whatever" and she and Pearl would be at her Mom's having Sunday dinner.

OK. I note 2 things: There is deception surrounding where Paul's normal location typically was Sundays when the Mom and Pearl would be at the grandmother's. The Mom says Paul would usually be at band practice or rehearsals or whatever"...Linguistically the Mom does not reliably tell us where Paul typically was on Sundays. I don't believe that Paul was usually at either of those locations and the fact that that very day when he allegedly went to rehearsal he showed up and then left pretty much immediately and claims that leaving like that was "so strange" for him, suggests that may not have been his normal location. There are linguistic indicators that that is not his normal location on Sundays.

Linguistically I am noting deception around the statement that Pearl "wouldn't have normally been there" (at home on Sundays). The mother did not go to Sunday dinner that day either, so it is just very odd that the alleged typical locations of father, mother and Pearl do not seem to match reality including on that very day.

Evidently there is a reason they choose to hide what the typical locations of Mom, Dad and Pearl were on Sundays. My guess is that the Mom usually went out shopping or meeting a friend to get out of the house and Dad stayed home with Pearl, and God knows what would go on but my guess is it was NOT GOOD!!!

Hey Jude said...

He took some time saying things which 'obviously' cannot be repeated on camera - so that would be several words, each of which takes time, then however long it took to realise there was no driver, then another second to let go of Pearl's hand and to grab her coat, and finally he says he threw the baby into the road, after all of which ‘the vehicle *then* hit the wall’ . He has more time than I would expect.

Would it not be more expected that he heard a sound, looked up and saw the Range Rover just as it mounted the pavement and went into the wall. That it happened so fast, there was nothing he could do to save Pearl. That's how it usually goes with accidents - vehicles, falling walls, masonry, trees - little, if any, time to react. In what should have been very little time to react, he swore enough to not be repeatable, saw there was no driver, grabbed Pearl's coat when he already had her hand, then threw the baby, though apparently not because he himself was about to be struck by the vehicle, which, reasonably, would be the only reason to risk throwing the baby. He was uninjured, or had minor injuries.

'But she died In my arms she died instantly from the incident - that I had to drag her from'

He finds Pearl's death to be the result of an incident rather than an accident.

'The wall took her from me.'

He also said she was snatched by the wall - personification of the wall.



Anonymous said...

Why does Paul say that after Pearl died in his arms that he "put her on the FLOOR"?!?!

Anonymous said...

Good point, Hey Jude. Youre right, even time-wise it makes no sense how he can yell a string of curses at the car, throw baby into the road, let go Pearl's hand and grab her coat, etc etc....if he has that much time he could get out of the way.

Anonymous said...

I think Pearl was killed in the bedroom and placed on the floor. Linguistically, and concerning evidence (new bedding, cause of death undetermined which points to suffocation by pillow) it is the only thing that makes sense.

Maybe Paul came along right after the car hit the wall and then just put an already deceased Pearl in the rubble.

Anonymous said...

I agree Hey Jude, the wall "snatching" and "took her from me" is very odd and indicates personification of the wall.

Perhaps Paul handled the rubble to place an already deceased Pearl into the rubble if he came along shortly after the wall collapsed.

Hey Jude said...

Anon @ 2.16 - It's all off. I wondered if the interview was conducted at Paul Black's mother's house due to the 'here'. Where is here? If they are in their own home, it would point to something happening in the home. Where Paul Black choose to begin his account will be of some significance to him. That is where his mind went when he was asked a question concerning the day it happened - pity we don't hear the questions.

---

Gemma is backing him up and trying to make him sound better. She tries to soften that he didn't have time to also 'throw' Pearl into the road, to he didn't have time to 'move' her. It doesn't make sense as he would not just 'move' her rather than pull, yank, snatch or grab her out of the path of an oncoming vehicle - he would 'move' an injured or dead child. To throw a baby or toddler into a road would endanger them so much that it would have to be a desperate act - yet Paul Black was not injured, why would he throw the baby into the road, unless the vehicle was about to hit him? So, I doubt he did that - maybe he said that because he wanted to make himself seem somehow heroic.

Anonymous said...

Did Rolla "snatch" Pearl and drag her?

Hey Jude said...

Mom2Many - the steps - he said 'stairs', then that she sat on the first step -so I think he means she sat on the stairs inside his mother's house. In my use, stairs are inside, steps are outside. He said she sat on the stairs, but also that she sat on the first step rather than the first stair, or at the foot of the stairs. Stairs do have steps -maybe he calls the individual stairs 'steps' - in addition to calling the ground the floor.

Hey Jude said...

Well, Paul Black said he dragged Pearl from an incident.

Would you be more likely to drag a toddler from under a fallen wall, or would you be more likely to remove the bricks which had fallen on her?

Is a fallen wall an incident or an accident?

Hey Jude said...

^ I don't know if he usually calls the ground the floor, or if he said floor where normally he would have said ground, which, if so, would pose the question - did something happen inside rather than outside? I'll go through his FB and Twitter again with an eye for any references to floor and ground - might be a needle in a haystack type thing, but still worth a look.

Hey Jude said...

'....so I said to Gem, “I’ll go to rehearsals, and get her ready by the time I come back, and I’ll take her with me.” '

While he made it sound as if he came back early especially to take Pearl to the swings, his main intention was to go somewhere else, as he was only going to take Pearl with him. "I'll take her with me."

Habundia said...

Has he called 911 as I mentioned before?
Because it isnt mentioned.......the "accident" happened, Gemma is called, she's there before anyone else (police, paramedics) still no mentioning of calling 911??????!!!!

Habundia said...

https://www.google.nl/search?q=handbrake+failure+causes&oq=handbreak+failure&aqs=chrome.2.69i57j0l3.14891j1j4&client=tablet-android-lenovo&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8

Someone said he couldnt find anything about failure of brakes.....first it was a failure of handbrake not footbrakes......the link included shows failure of handbrake on many cars, so it does happen.....especially with a 17 year old car I would think

Hey Jude said...

Having read through more of the comments - if the coroner hasn't been able to determine cause of death, that would say he is not satisfied that it was caused by the wall falling on Pearl, or by collision with the Range Rover, and that the police are seeking advice on how to proceed, and if a prosecution is viable and likely to succeed. I think not to write or to think any more about this - Pearl was not snatched by the wall.

I thought Paul Black's praise of the community for their 'support' was a bit OTT and artificially 'needy' - he needs them on-side. His character and real attitude towards the community is in his social media posts. He spent the fundraiser funds at B&Q 'getting stuff for the shop' - only pausing to scream and run at the sight of a little girl dressed in pink. Is that how a grown man conducts himself, really? 'Stuff for the shop' - he was refurbishing his tattoo parlour as 'Pearl's legacy' within weeks, rather than giving it to his wife for the surviving baby, or using it for some new play equipment in the swing park, which would have been a lot more appropriate to his daughter's memory than Pearl's Tattoo Emporium. IMO. Not SA, no - I just wanted to vent.

Anonymous said...

- Willow -

The more I spend time with the narrative the more the open holes and discrepancies protrude.
It is natural that journalists fill themselves in empty places in interviews. Disinfo is commonplace and acceptable in trivial matters in some measure.

Trying to see why Paul went to the park without the wheels-chair/baby-carriage. This is a big question that is hard to understand from any "normal" angle.

A boxer, two babies who practically needed to be held nearly all the time. I don't believe Pearl's walking was very stable yet.

Alibi-building? Yes, it makes sense.
Paul needed a reason, a good explanation, why he had more than his two hands full. And why he was so slow to get from under the Rover.

Had he had wheels, baby-carriage, with him, it would have been hard to explain why he could not get Pearl from under the peril in 2 seconds.

A decision is made in panic to build a script. Perhaps in the middle of the night. At home, own home, or someone else's.

The Rover-owner who is introduced first a paramedic (link), later in media he has a name and he is a lorry driver. He lives close to where the wall collision happened (link), says the article.
In close proximity of the accident-place live also Pearl's grandparents.

I would suggest the Blacks know the RR owner from earlier. Why is there nothing of him on the video?

Gemma was not introduced properly by Paul.

She, indeed, was introduced correctly in one article containing her previous name and profession. She is formerly a speech writer.

A good faulty narrative has the fake perpetrator and fake key witnesses a) absent, b) corrupted in silence by misplaced loyalty, mutual dependency or bribing, threatening, or c) he is deceased.

A car without a driver. A wall snatching. Bulls' eye perpetrators, inanimate objects as the culprit.

Missing from the narrative is plenty. Here a few points:

- grandparents who live only "doors away" (link) from accident location.

- the paramedic/lorry-driver. No voice, nor any substance, of this person. He is a rumour.

- mother Gemma's recount. without Paul. What would she say?

- the inhabitants of the house with demolished fence.
- photos of the accident, afterwards. How quickly was the RR driven away?

- is it explained somewhere why the heavy RR that had gathered momentum going downhill didn't push through the fence to the wall of the house or even to the nearest bush growing on the side of the house? How come the fence was enough to stop it?

- the bikers happened to have a meeting at the community that week-end 6.8.. (link) Paul says the bikers helped them. How?


Hey Jude said...

From Google Street View, there was not much distance from the driveway to the wall, so even though the Range Rover rolled downhill it only moved the length of the driveway on which it had been parked, and across the narrow road, before it struck the wall - the speed did not increase so much as for the vehicle to continue past the wall and to also hit the house.

Mizzmarple said...

I am thinking something similar:

Did the dog "snatch" = bite Pearl? Did it happen in the house or bedroom = sheets?

Too much unnecessary info about the dog and sheets IF Pearl was run over by a vehicle that was parked, off, and no one in the vehicle

Mizzmarple said...

Adding: did the dog "snatch" and then maul Pearl in the home

Anonymous said...

If Gemma got there before the ambulance, police, etc. she would have seen the accident scene and Pearl dead, so Paul would have no reason to withhold details to protect her, like he says. Also, how could Gemma have Pearl ready for Paul to take her out unless she knew what time he would be coming home or if he called on his way home, which he doesn’t say. You can have a toddler ready to go out in a few minutes but you cant have them ready to go out an hour in advance. Also, why wouldn’t Paul have a stroller for a diaper bag, bottle, etc?

mom2many said...

1999 Land Rover Range Rover POWER TRAIN:AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION
NHTSA Campaign #00V377000
Date Announced:
NOVEMBER 16, 2000
Vehicles Affected:
59,445
Summary: Vehicle description: Certain sport utility vehicles fail to comply with the requirements of FMVSS no. 114, "theft protection." Water contamination of the automatic transmission oil can lead to various failure modes of the transmission. One of these failure models results in incorrect operation of the park lock function that could allow a vehicle to roll away if parked without the handbrake properly set.

Consequence: Unintentional vehicle movement could result in a crash or personal injury.

Actions: Dealers will check the park lock function; reposition the automatic transmission breather tube; and test the automatic transmission fluid and flush if necessary. For detailed information & supporting documents, see the official NHTSA page concerning recall #00V377000 »

https://www.carcomplaints.com/Land_Rover/Range_Rover/1999/recalls/

Was the handbrake fully, properly engaged? Articles will only say "believed to be" engaged.

Mizzmarple said...

Question:

Was the dog really with him when the vehicle hit the wall ? And did the investigators pilice See the dog?

Mizzmarple said...

I am sorry for typos - commenting from phone

mom2many said...

On undetermined cause of death:
"The classification of death falls under five categories; natural, accident, suicide, homicide, and undetermined."
...
"The manner of death is equally as important as the cause of death, particularly in insurance benefits."
...
"If after doing a medical/social history I cannot find a reason for the drug overdose, the pathologist will rule the death undetermined until further information is provided. This information can be provided by family members, friends, and coworkers later on in time. Unfortunately, many times we do not find the reason and the manner of death is left as undetermined. The only effect an undetermined death can have would be with an insurance policy. The insurance company might not pay out to the beneficiary the amount due for the death."

https://criminology.regis.edu/criminology-programs/resources/blog/undetermined-death

The police have been candid that they have been unable to question the driver/parker of the automobile. I believe the coroner is refraining from determining cause of death conclusively until it has been decided whether this will be a manslaughter case due to negligence of the driver, or accident.

Follow up questions I would like to ask the father:
Did this occur before or after visiting the park?
Why was the dog at your mom's?
Where are the stairs you mentioned?

Alex said...

I think what we have is a father feeling the weight of guilt from the neglect of his daughter, Pearl. He didn't want to be there, he wanted to be with his friends.

I think the scene prior to the accident was much more chaotic than described. I think he was paying more attention to the training of his dog than the safety of his daughter.

Expected vs. unexpected; If I saw a vehicle bearing down on my daughter I would not release her hand to try to grab her coat. I would reflexively pull her to me. The vehicle, wall, train or whatever would have hit both of us or neither of us, but certainly not my daughter alone.

Alex

Buckley said...

I said that. I was sarcastically responding to the comment "I have just spent the last two days watching my car. it hasn't jumped out of gear..."

Buckley said...

"If I saw a vehicle bearing down on my daughter I would not release her hand to try to grab her coat."

Agreed and if you look at his language, he hasn't reliably told us he had her hand, but he wants us to think he did:

PAUL: ...then as I was doing that I bent down to say “daddies hand now, tight tight tight” and my head was like this and I could hear the noise of something and I looked up and I could see this vehicle coming toward us at such a rate and I screamed at the vehicle, I obviously can’t say on camera what I shouted , ummm.. to stop and realised there was nobody in it, (dropped pronoun)let her hand go and grabbed her coat. I threw Ace into the road the vehicle then hit the wall

happyuk said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Buckley said...

If we're able to put aside Paul's cultural choices (the hard core way he looks, music industry, tattoo business, etc), are there any linguistic indicators he was impaired by drugs or alcohol?

Peter Hyatt said...

Buckley, that is a fair question to ask.


To others struggling:


Something else to consider:

In analyzing the statement, could there be points of deception but it still remain an accident?

Human nature is very complex, and situations are often complex.



Peter

Anonymous said...

I was going to ask if he was buying drugs from the bikers, had his back turned and Pearl got hurt. Gemma made a comment about him being alcohol sober for 3 yrs.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 431   Newer› Newest»