Thursday, May 3, 2018

Nakea Darisaw Denies Fraud

The Subect has denied the allegation of committing fraud in the following. 

A Reliable Denial is produced when the subject is freely speaking and includes:

1.  The pronoun "I"
2.  The past tense verb "did not" or "didn't"
3.  The allegation specifically addressed. 

It is easy, low stress and if followed by "I told the truth", 99.9% reliable. 

It is also something that guilty people avoid stating in the free editing process. 

To state such, after reading or hearing of its lack, is no longer in the free editing process.

For the actual innocent, this short denial comes early and stands as a wall of protection, psychologically (intellectually and emotionally) against the allegation.  

Expectation:  "I did not paint the cars.  I did not paint the house."

That would end it, but also, "I did not start the fire" and other reliable denials are expected as well.

Let's listen to her wording to see if she issues a reliable denial. 



We may note the following:

She does not deny the allegation. Therefore, we cannot say it for her. 

"I would never scare my children" 

She only denies in the future/conditional scaring her children.  I do not believe they were scared.  

She uses ridicule rather than issue a Reliable Denial. 

"Insurance fraud of all things really!" is where she began.  This is indicative of her priority.  She is intelligent and knows that if she were to submit this to her insurance company, she would face insurance fraud allegations. 

"I can pay to have my vehicles repaired myself" is likely true, but is a tangent used to avoid issuing the denial.  She may be able to pay for them herself, but she has chosen the public, via Go Fund Me, instead. 

To have money does not preclude theft.  

In a recent theft interview, the subject also refused to deny stealing, instead spoke of his prior opportunities to steal:  "I handled thousands of dollars. Why would I steal?"

He did handle thousands of dollars and he stole due to both need and perceived insult.  

This is akin to Lance Armstrong avoiding denying using PEDs, instead focusing only upon his training. 

It is akin to a bank robber boasting of how many times he used the ATM without stealing. 

The need to change direction (tangent) is noted. 

She addressed the red paint in the house and instead of saying, "I did not paint it" and "I don't know who did", she addressed the type of paint instead. 

This is to suggest an ability to deceive that is part of her personality.  This is to indicate an intelligent manipulator. 

"I owe no money on my vehicles" is an unrelated sentence.  This also avoids a denial, but asserts something she wishes her audience to interpret:  "I don't need the money, therefore, I did not steal."

It also gives us insight into her personality.  Her ideological stance on theft is not "thou shalt not" but a pragmatic world view. 

It is to say, "if I owed money on my vehicles, I might have stolen..."

The unnecessary information is relevant to the analysis. 

"I work hard every single day" also is a tangent.  Some hard working people steal.  I have investigated lazy and hard working thieves.  Some work very hard at not working at a legitimate job; but most mix the two together. 

Remember:  she is not accused of:

being lazy,
owing money
having spray paint instead of liquid paint 

She is not even accused of insurance fraud.  She is likely too smart for that and has counted upon Go Fund Me, and the race baiting that is used to exploit.

It is to say "if you hate hate, please donate money" to appeal emotionally. 

The statements indicate talent at manipulation.  The use of Divinity is noted as well, in support of her wording. 

She tells her audience not to judge her without knowing her.  This is the "Gnostic" view of separation. 


Its to say "stealing is not really me."

All of this comes in light of the simple missing Reliable Denial. 


She could face serious charges.  She may avoid such, as we saw in the Baltimore case, by refunding everyone's money.  In this case, it was hatred of Christians and a love of exploitation that drove Julie Baker.  Here, the contempt which is always within the personality of deceivers, is for the general audience. 

Contempt is a driving factor in deceptive people, whether they use sex or they use race; they seek to exploit those who have a need to be on the "right" side of an issue.  The imperative to not "judge" shows this contempt.  "Don't judge me" yet donate money, an exercise of judgement.  Hence, the conflict. 

Racism

Is our subject a racist?

This is difficult to discern due to the sample size but what is here does not show racism.  She is "an equal opportunity exploiter" as the contempt is not race driven, but deception driven.  The linguistic disposition is best seen in the lower insult "nigga" instead of "nigger" but especially in the soft "Go" imperative.  

Analysis Conclusion:  

The subject knows the identity of the painter/arsonist and is exploiting emotions for money. 

To learn deception detection:  Hyatt Analysis Services 

14 comments:

Lucia D said...

She states the can present on her kitchen counter was not red paint "that's the thing". Similar to one asking to be believed without challenge because they say "obviously", "of course" or the like. But noticeably absent is her saying what the can did contain, if not red paint. If I were wrongly accused of having the paint can in my kitchen, and knew it was a different substance, I would say what it really was! And probably post a photo of that can showing it's label as proof.

Peter Hyatt said...

how much time would have been saved by "I didn't..."!

At least we know the photo is genuine.

IF she avoided insurance, she can cash out of Go Fund Me and roll the dice with police. Its a heckofa gamble for not a lot of money.

Anonymous said...

does any know what the go fund me is up to?

GeekRad said...

Digging a deeper hole. "Its not red paint that's the thing". Well than what is it?

General P. Malaise said...

Anonymous GeekRad said...
Digging a deeper hole. "Its not red paint that's the thing". Well than what is it?


the paint may have a secondary word to the title such as "flame" red or "fire engine" red or "candy apple" red. splitting hairs but than that is what deception generally is.

who paints a room red?

Anonymous said...

Note in her first statement there is no colour (red paint) attributed.

Then we have her "denial" after it's pointed out that the can of "paint" is in a photo.

Her rebuttle (of said "paint") will appear given the photo.

"Change in language"

"Spray paint"
"Red spray paint"
"Red paint" ×2

So, is it "paint" or "spray paint"?

Responce to her first post.

"African Americans do not see the term "nigga" as a racial slur!!! She clearly has the same paint in her kitchen.Coincidence???"

Now, as far as im aware no_one mentioned "spray paint"



Anonymous said...

"I have a past but who doesn't"" (that one gets me)

Still, there are many shades of red spray paint and it isn't clear through the photos that the one on her counter matches any sample on the house or vehicle.

Why cut the phone line? It does most likely power the internet/tv as well.

Perhaps a social media fight?

Burn the woods? Who knows if it was intentional set or the painter used a flammable thinner to clean his or HER hands afterwards while smoking>

A lot of people paint rooms red! A bunch. If she lives in Texas it is the trend.

Courtney Marie said...

I would like to point out that the door doesn't even say "GO". It clearly says "Get $" i.e. "Get money". I have been baffled by all of the people who did not notice this.

Anonymous said...

Her charming daughter Mi'zala Williams seems to have no problem using the N word (same spelling) on her FB posts on May 3.

Anonymous said...

It was most likely her daughter.

It looks like a retaliation strike. Cutting the phone lines and not doing anything more aggressive than spray paint is telling.

Note how they missed the wreath on the door. They didn't hit the bar-b-que grill either.

Betcha mom tried to force her to help paint the house. So, she did.

Peter Hyatt said...

Anonymous said...
Her charming daughter Mi'zala Williams seems to have no problem using the N word (same spelling) on her FB posts on May 3.
May 5, 2018 at 11:17 AM


Agreed.

We are looking at someone who has exploited before and if not charged, will do so again. Her Facebook "denial", sans denial, is an impetus of self justifying behavior and calling upon Divinity to manipulate others. It is not what she did; it is who she is.

Rank and File have a great deal of difficulty with cases like this because their superiors fear being called "racist" publicly.

All that is needed is the polygraph.


Peter

Mike Dammann said...

She actually admitted that the picture with the paint can is real?
Incredible.
That could have been a way out claiming it wasn't.
Almost 8k USD were raised via Gofundme:
https://www.gofundme.com/darisaw-family
Insurance would (if there was a real claim) pay what?

Anonymous said...

#1 RETAIL THEFT (4 OR MORE PRIOR CONVICTIONS)
STATUTE: 812.015-2 (F F)

#2 RESISTING A MERCHANT
STATUTE: 812.015-6 (F M)

#3 CONTRIBUTING TO THE DELINQUENCY OF A MINOR
STATUTE: 827.04-1 (F M)

Nadine Lumley said...

It wud be great if you could put the bankers and the military complex under S.A. scrutiny as well. They steal billions every year. Exposing black welate mom's is chump change.

.