Monday, July 30, 2018

Guest Submission: "We Don't Tip Terrorists" by Jason Henrikson






Here is a submission from analyst, Jason Henrikson, which highlights the thoroughness of working through a public post from Facebook. 

Update: Please note: Since the analysis, the author has admitted writing it and the restaurant apologized to the falsely accused customer. It is interesting to note Jason's work, particularly a single line which gives the author away. 
“I did write it,” Khalil Cavil, 20, told the Odessa American of the note on the receipt, which read “We don’t tip terrorist.”

This allows readers to see some expected results from applying oneself to training in  Complete Statement Analysis






Last night at work I received this note from one of
my tables. At the moment I didn’t know what to think
nor what to say, I was sick to my stomach. I share
this because I want people to understand that this
racism and this hatred still exists. Although, this is
nothing new, it is still something that will test your
faith. All day I’ve had to remind myself that Jesus
died for these people too. I have decided to let this
encourage me, and fuel me to change the world the
only way I know how. So to all the haters out there,
keep talkin, your only helping me step into my
destiny!


Last night at work I received this note from one of
my tables.


  1. Where a person starts a statement is important. It shows their priority and sometimes even their motive.

  2. Where a statement begins with the pronoun “I” it is likely to contain  information, even if the author is employing deception. This is why we never dismiss one as a "liar", which leads to failure in Content Analysis. 

    The statement does not start with “I” until later on but has the elements of time and location. This means that time and location are a priority to the subject. Why?

  3. The pronoun “I” is used so the subject now places himself psychologically into the statement.

  4. The rest of the sentence follows the expected truthful sentence structure of the pronoun “I”, past tense verb and object. We can believe that the subject did in fact receive the note from one of his tables. The question we are to identify is did he receive the note in the displayed form with the writing “We don’t Tip Terrorist”?
    1. The subject brings the note closer to him psychologically by using “this” instead of referring to that note. Why does he want to associate himself with the note? Why does he want to be closer to the note with xenophobic remarks?
  5. It is expected that the subject would simply state “I received that note last night”. It follows the Law of Economy, follows the truthful structure of the pronoun I, past tense verb and an object. The breaking of this structure shows sensitivity but we cannot conclude anything further at this point.

We listen to and follow his language.



Did we take notice he didn't receive the note from one of "my customer"?  It is true, technically, that it came from "the table" where he left it!   


At the moment I didn’t know what to think
nor what to say, I was sick to my stomach.


  1. The element of time reappears with “at the moment”. However “the moment” is used and not “that moment” referring to a past time event. Is he going to present tense now? Why is the element of time important to him?
  2. The Rule of The Negative is engaged with the subject telling us what he didn’t think of say instead of what he did think or say. This is a Sensitivity Indicator.
    1. The priority order of thinking and then saying is noted – was he thinking of the $0 tip or was he thinking about the written remarks?
  3. The use of emotion by the subject is also noted. For traumatic events the length of time between the event and the statement is crucial when noting emotions in a statement due to the way an individual mind processes the event psychologically. This is where we look for “artificial placement” of emotions (perfect placing before psychologically processing).
    1. Here is perfect or logical placement of an emotion. Has the subject processed his trauma from last night? Is he perseverating from an earlier traumatic event?
    2. Is this a Need To Persuade/storytelling?


I share
this because I want people to understand that this
racism and this hatred still exists.


  1. Here we have a hina clause which is one of two of the highest levels of sensitivity that is used. Now we see a possible link with the elements of time and place. The subject wants people to know racism and hatred “still” exists. He is highlighting that the racism and hatred is here and it is now – this is emphasized by the word “still”.
  2. Will this be a start of “Sermonizing” and “Virtue Signalling”?
  3. The word “this” again showing closeness of the subject shows he is psychologically close to racism and hatred.


Although, this is
nothing new, it is still something that will test your
faith.


  1. The Rule of the Negative is highlighted again and is asserting that “this” is “nothing new”. In the lesser context we do not know what he is referring to. What is nothing new? If the subject is unwilling and/or unable to tell us we do not interpret.
    1. Is it the racism and hatred that is nothing new or is it the subject’s posting of a potential “hate crime”?

      This is the "Normal Factor" in which the author wants his audience to believe that "Islamophobia" (irrational fear of the ideology of Islam) is a "norm." This is a form of "need to persuade" that suggests the author has not likely experienced negativity towards him, personally, as a "norm." Islam teaches "jihad" and subjugation of "infidels" (non followers), by violent coercion.
  2. Religion is brought into play by using “your” as a disassociation. The subject makes no mention of “my faith” but is “your faith”. This distancing language affirms the "Normal Factor"; he does not regularly experience negativity due to his political/religious belief.
    1. The greater context is that a potential hate crime has been committed by referring to the subject as a terrorist. Terrorism is not solely religious based but can be a political and that is the original etymology for the word terrorist.
    2. The lesser context the subject is psychologically distancing himself from the intended audience’s “faith”. Does he view himself as a believer in any faith? Why does he not align himself with the intended audience’s faith?
  3. test your faith” – is this leakage? Is this showing his motivation that he is testing the intended audience’s faith?

    *Is he testing his own faith and commitment to political Islam? Is he fearful or conflicted about embracing Islamic conquest?


All day I’ve had to remind myself that Jesus
died for these people too.

Ingratiation Factor and Masking

He now introduces "terrorism" as "faith" followed by reference to "Jesus" (Christianity). Ideology of Chrisitianty opposes deception. The two ideologies are diametrically opposed; based upon reciprocity versus coercion.


  1. The element of time is repeated with his stating of “all day”. This is enforcing the earlier possibility that he is wanting the intended audience to “know” that “racism and hatred” is “still” here and now?
  2. The subject brings in religion and also divinity with reference to Jesus. Is there a link from him brining Jesus into the statement here and “your faith” in the previous statement? Islam also holds Jesus as Isa as an important figure but not in the same way as Christians do.
    1. Using divinity is a Sensitive Indicator – the subject is sensitive to religion and Jesus
    2. By not referring to Isa but to Jesus is the subject specifically targeting the intended audience as a “Christian audience”?
    3. Using “too” (as in “addition” too) as a word he is referencing the alleged perpetrators as well as other people. But who are the other people? He does not include  himself psychologically in this part but who else did Jesus die for?
  3. Is this Sermonizing/Virtue Signaling again?


I have decided to let this
encourage me, and fuel me to change the world the
only way I know how.
  1. The subject is psychologically in the statement with “I” but uses the word “let” which diminishes his responsibility for what comes after. This weakens his commitment
  2. Encourage me and fuel me. These are not expected – in the case of retaliations it is expected that someone would be “forced to”, “no option but”, “must”. Encourage and fuel are weak in comparison. Why is the subject weak about his retaliation?
  3. Change the world – now we know what the subject’s aim and Priority is. He wants to change the world. How does he want to change the world? How does he want the world to be? He does not mention that he wants a world without racism, hatred so what does he want the world to be?


So to all the haters out there,
keep talkin, your only helping me step into my
destiny!

These are sobering words in context of terrorism and being tested.


Conclusion
Deception Indicated
The subject is deceptive about who wrote the comments on the note. Whether it was he or someone else that actually wrote the note it was not the customers who’s bill it was.
There are many sensitivity indicators in the statement; the main one being the hina clause. Here we see the true intention of the statement; he wants everyone to know that racism and hatred still exists [here and now]. This is also backed up by the elements of time and place in the statement. It is important for him to enforce these exist today.
The sermonizing/virtue signaling about religion/faith and the reference to “terrorist” in the note indicate his likely motivation. Terrorism in today’s context is almost uniquely used for Islamic peoples whereas its true meaning was for political violence. Even though Islam is its own political system the merging of meanings also highlights the subject’s motivation.
The possible leakage of the subject stating “tests your faith” would appear to fit the overall conclusion.
In an employment analysis situation the subject would be deemed a risk to his employer and proves a risk to his current employer due to his religious and political beliefs.

Friday, July 27, 2018

Susan Smith Confession: Team Analysis




Susan Smith reported that her children were kidnapped by a car jacker. She cried before the news camera and said, 

"My boys needed me", referencing her children, alleged to be in a car, in the past tense. It was an immediate indication of knowledge that her children were dead.  She had, in fact, strapped them into the car and drove them into a lake, drowning them. 

She was subsequently arrested and gave a written confession.  

Here is team analysis of her confession.  First is the Statement and then the Analysis and Conclusion.  

To obtain training in Deception Detection and Pscyho-linguistic Profiling, please visit Hyatt Analysis Services

I.  Confession 

When I left my home on Tuesday, October 25, I was very emotionally distraught. I didn't want to live anymore! I felt like things could never get any worse. When I left home, I was going to ride around a little while and then go to my mom's. As I rode and rode and rode, I felt even more anxiety coming upon me about not wanting to live. I felt I couldn't be a good mom anymore, but I didn't want my children to grow up without a mom. I felt I had to end our lives to protect us from any grief or harm. I had never felt so lonely and so sad in my entire life. I was in love with someone very much, but he didn't love me and never would. I had a very difficult time accepting that. But I had hurt him very much and I could see why he could never love me. When I was @ John D. Long Lake, I had never felt so scared and unsure as I did then. I wanted to end my life so bad and was in my car ready to go down that ramp into the water and I did go part way, but I stopped. I went again and stopped. I then got out of the car and stood by the car a nervous wreck. Why was I feeling this way? Why was everything so bad in my life? I had no answers to these questions. I dropped to the lowest when I allowed +my children to go down that ramp into the water without me. I took off running and screaming, "Oh God! Oh God, no!” What have I done? Why did you let this happen? I wanted to turn around so bad and go back, but I knew it was too late. I was an absolute mental case! I couldn't believe what I had done. I love my children w/ all my (heart-icon). That will never change. I have prayed to them for forgiveness and hope that they will find it in their (heart-icon) to forgive me. I never meant to hurt them!! I am sorryfor what has happened and I know that I need some help. I don't think I will ever be able to forgive myself for what I have done. My children, Michael and Alex, are with our Heavenly Father now, and I know that they will never be hurt again. As a mom, that means more than words could ever say. 
I knew from day one, the truth would prevail, but I was so scared I didn't know what to do. It was very tough emotionally to sit and watch my family hurt like they did. It was time to bring a peace of mind to everyone, including myself. My children deserve to have the best and now they will. I broke down on Thursday, November 3 and told Sheriff Howard Wells the truth. It wasn't easy, but after the truth was out, I felt like the world was lifted off my shoulders. I know now that it is going to be a tough and long road ahead of me. At this very moment, I don't feel I will be able to handle what's coming, but I have prayed to God that he give me the strength to survive each day and to face those times and situations in my life that will be extremely painful. I have put my total faith in God, and He will take care of me. 
  
When I left my home on Tuesday, October 25, I was very emotionally distraught. I didn't want to live anymore! I felt like things could never get any worse. When I left home, I was going to ride around a little while and then go to my mom's. As I rode and rode and rode, I felt even more anxiety coming upon me about not wanting to live. I felt I couldn't be a good mom anymore, but I didn't want my children to grow up without a mom. 
  
I felt I had to end our lives to protect us from any grief or harm. I had never felt so lonely and so sad in my entire life. I was in love with someone very much, but he didn't love me and never would. I had a very difficult time accepting that. But I had hurt him very much and I could see why he could never love me. When I was @ John D. Long Lake, I had never felt so scared and unsure as I did then. I wanted to end my life so bad and was in my car ready to go down that ramp into the water and I did go part way, but I stopped. I went again and stopped. I then got out of the car and stood by the car a nervous wreck. Why was I feeling this way? Why was everything so bad in my life? I had no answers to these questions. I dropped to the lowest when I allowed +my children to go down that ramp into the water without me. I took off running and screaming, "Oh God! Oh God, no!” What have I done? Why did you let this happen? I wanted to turn around so bad and go back, but I knew it was too late. I was an absolute mental case! I couldn't believe what I had done. I love my children w/ all my (heart-icon). That will never change. I have prayed to them for forgiveness and hope that they will find it in their (heart-icon) to forgive me. I never meant to hurt them!! I am sorryfor what has happened and I know that I need some help. I don't think I will ever be able to forgive myself for what I have done. My children, Michael and Alex, are with our Heavenly Father now, and I know that they will never be hurt again. As a mom, that means more than words could ever say. 
I knew from day one, the truth would prevail, but I was so scared I didn't know what to do. It was very tough emotionally to sit and watch my family hurt like they did. It was time to bring a peace of mind to everyone, including myself. My children deserve to have the best and now they will. I broke down on Thursday, November 3 and told Sheriff Howard Wells the truth. It wasn't easy, but after the truth was out, I felt like the world was lifted off my shoulders. I know now that it is going to be a tough and long road ahead of me. At this very moment, I don't feel I will be able to handle what's coming, but I have prayed to God that he give me the strength to survive each day and to face those times and situations in my life that will be extremely painful. I have put my total faith in God, and He will take care of me. 

II. Analysis with Emphasis Added 



Whenleft myhome on Tuesday, October 25, Iwas veryemotionallydistraught. 


a.    It does not begin with the pronoun “I” indicting a psychological distancing, or lack of commitment to what follows. 
b.   When” begins with the element of time
c.    Focus questions upon what happened prior to leaving. 
d.   This opening sentence is very important, and may even be why she is now writing. 
e.    “emotion” was sensitive with “very”: emotionally distraught
f.     The subject’s emotions are a stated priority 

Q.  Who left the home on Tuesday?  
A.    She did.

Q. Who was with her?

A.  No one. Linguistically, in her verbalized perception of reality, the victims do not exist.

 Linguistic Disposition (LD) 

LD:  subject towards self:  Empathy noted


LD: towards victims:  They don’t exist:  Extreme Negative: This is beyond depersonalization. If the boys (victims) were in the car at this time, we have a denial of their very existence. Using "Intended Recipient", the author does not allow for the victims to exist to the recipient (police). 

The priority is self.  LD is positive towards self. This is unexpected in context.


didn'twant to live anymore!

a.    Sentence begins with the pronoun “I” 
b.   Past tense commitment 
c.    “!” is unnecessary emphasis  NTP?
d.   didn’t” : the Rule of Negative increases importance 
e.    Focus upon self 


Our subject is “alone” (6b) and her focus is singular: self.  Emotions. What she did not want to do.  No existence of the children (victims) in her verbalized perception of reality. 

Please note that the pace of the statement, in context of the boys’ death, appears to be slow.  This is consistent with a statement that did not begin with the pronoun “I” 

Q. The subject’s focus upon self, including what she did not want, leads us to ask, ‘Does our subject see herself as the victim in this case?’ 

A. (We allow the statement to answer) 

Q. Does the subject indicate entitlement?

A.  (We wait upon the statement to guide us) 

We wait to let the subject answer us in the statement. 

felt like things couldneverget any worse. 

Weak assertion; allowing for us (intended recipient/audience) and/or herself, to “feel” (felt, past tense) differently. 

didn'twant to live anymoreIfeltlike things could never get any worse.

Incongruent –she is talking the investigator/analyst/reader out of believing that she did not want to live. 
  

When Ileft home, I was going to ride around a little while and then go to my mom's. 

Q. What is the author’s linguistic disposition (LD) towards her sons?
A.  They do not exist. 


The “double left” indicates critical information deliberately withheld.

This should be understood in the Greater Context:  the victims do not exist. 

Q.  Did the author “ride around a little while”? 
A.  We do not yet know.  She only told us what she intended to do. 


AsI rode and rode and rode, I feltevenmore anxiety coming upon meaboutnot wanting to live. 

felt couldn'tbe a good mom anymorebut didn't want my children to grow up without a mom.

Here we have the “good mom” principle (or “good guy”) --the subject portrays herself as a "good mother" indicating to the contrary. 


Is this a faux moral justification?

but didn't want my children to grow up without a mom.

She chose what was “best for the children”? 

Rationalization
Projection
Minimization 

In domestic homicides we  look for justification of the crime in the language.  We always look for minimization and we  look for possible trigger.  

Person entered the statement here:  children” 
We now measure or observe the author’s linguistic disposition towards the children. 
a.    “children” is ISI
b.   “children” is “my”
c.    Gender neutral
d.   They do not have names
e.    They did not exist prior to this. 

Q. What brought the victims into existence?

A. Death 


Her suicidal ideation.  The children had to die so she could live. 

The children did not exist in her verbalized perception of reality, until she introduced death, or not wanting to live. 

Premeditation noted. 


Linguistic disposition towards children is positive. 

Q. When is it positive?
A.  In not allowing them to grow up without a mom. 

 I felt I had to endourlives to protect us all from any grief or harm. 

“I felt” –was our subject victimized in childhood?

Q. LD of author towards self?
A.  Positive, again 

I had never felt so lonely and so sad in my entire life.

Very positive LD of the author to self after committing murder 
“never” so lonely while removing 2 persons from her life. Inconsistent with confession, remorse, etc. 


 I was in love with someone very much, but he didn't love me and never would.

a.    “someone” enters the statement, of whom the author was in love;
b.   LD:  he “didn’t” love her, and “would never”  Negative LD 

The topic that caused the victims to come into existence is “death.”


 had a very difficult time accepting that

She has not addressed the deaths of the children. Did she not “accept” them? See embedded admission above. 



ButI had hurt himvery much and I could  see why he could never love me. 

ISI = bad relationship OR she does not want to use his name. 
Empathy shown towards this male, but not towards victims.
She “hurt him very much”; but what did she do to the victims??


WhenIwas @ John D. Long Lake,Ihad never felt so scared and unsure as I did then. 

a.    There is no children here in the statement. 
b.   She expresses empathy for self; not for victims. 

wanted to end my life so bad and was in my car ready to go down that ramp into the water and I did go part way, but I stopped. 

a.    Premeditation planning concealed, including “before” she “left”
b.    Pace very slow; weak commitment ** 
c.    Regarding suicide:  deception indicated 


She isn't saying she wanted to die. She wanted to end her life. In her mind, the life she had  died.

Combined with the heavy pronoun “I” and the word, “felt”, and the slowing down of the steps to get there, she is not committed to suicide. She wants her IR to believe such, but is not. 


I went again and stopped. I then got out of the car and stood by the car a nervous wreck. 


Why was I feeling this way? 

Note questions in open statement.  

Why was everything so bad in my life? 

Does our author consider herself a victim?

Thus far, she has indicated that “he” is a victim; but not the children. 

had no answers to these questions. 

I dropped to the lowest when allowed+my children to go down that ramp into the water without me. 

Control (“I”) and a “passivity” together : minimization 

Note the control, "I allowed" even within passive voice.  She is both in need of control, while rejecting responsibility for her action. 
Note the steps necessary:

first allowing, 
then the ramp
and then the water. 

With shorter ways of saying, "I sent them into the lake", she has chosen, again, "water" as her term. 

The odds of mother killing her own children and using such language are very high that she was sexually abused in childhood. 


I took off running and screaming, "Oh God! Oh God, no!” 

What have I done?   Why did you let this happen? 

I wanted to turn around so bad and go back,but I knew it was too late.

Persuasion and manipulation strong characteristics.  

 I was an absolute mental case!

couldn't believe what I had done.

 I love my children w/ all my (heart) That will never change.

This is a drawn heart.  Note clinical immaturity. 

 I have prayed to them for forgiveness and hope that they will find it in their (heart-icon) to forgive me.

Immaturity -clinical or lack of appropriate development 
We've seen this in Employment Analysis from those with depression and/or difficulty getting along with others.  

 I never meant to hurt them!!

 The passivity is used to keep personal responsibility psychologically away from her: 

 I am sorryfor what has happenedand I know that need some help.

Not what the boys needed, nor how they suffered, but sole focus upon self.  Narcissistic -- sociopathic like 

 don't think I will ever be able to forgive myself for what I have done.

 Rule of Negative elevating importance (sensitivity)

 My children, Michael and Alex, are with our Heavenly Father now, and I know that they will never be hurt again. As a mom, that means more than words could ever say. 

The children are now named, with the possessive pronoun and their title. 

CSI:  good relationship 

They did not exist at first, but came into existence when the author introduced her own desire for not living, but now they have a very good relationship with her. 

Why?

What has changed?

We let the subject herself, tell her why she now views favorably those she denied existed, then depersonalized but now has a 180 degree change 

Question:  Contextually, when does the author have a good relationship with her children? 

Answer:  When they are with “our” Heavenly Father: when they are no longer with her, subject to her. 

She has a "great relationship" (linguistically) and loves them now that they are dead. 

Void of human empathy sans self. 

Suicide not indicated. 

Question:  What was the linguistic disposition of the author to the children after the event?

Answer:  positive.  Before they were dead, they did not exist. To the lake, they were de-personalized.  Now that they are in the water, dead, and no longer alive, she has life and she views them positively.  
I knew from day one, the truth would prevail, but I was so scared I didn't know what to do. It was very tough emotionally to sit and watch my family hurt like they did.

Narcissistic- the impact upon self is the emphasis -dominant personality trait

Many guilty subjects reference "truth" in passive voice. 

Control:  she “let” it happen

 It was time to bring a peace of mind to everyone, including myself

My children deserve to have the best and now they will.

Justification

Fulfillment of plan? (premeditation)


 I broke down on Thursday, November 3 and told Sheriff Howard Wells the truth.

 It wasn't easy, but after the truth was out, I felt like the world was lifted off myshoulders. I know now that it is going to be a tough and long road ahead of me. At this very moment, I don't feelI will be able to handle what's coming,butI have prayed to God that he give methe strength to survive each dayand to face those times and situations in my life that will be extremely painful. have put my total faith in God, and He will take care of me. 


There is no linguistic empathy for the victims 

Analysis Conclusion:

Deception Indicated in her confession. 

a. She withheld information about what happened prior to the murder. 
b. She is indicated for premeditated murder
c. She is deceptive about suicidal ideation 
d. Clinically immaturity 
e. Narcissistic
f.  Basic Human Empathy lacking
g.  Childhood trauma and Sexual Abuse indicated 
h. Desperate need for protection and acceptance
i. Sexualization: will use sex to obtain acceptance and protection; including same sex, though not her norm. As natural aesthetics dissipate, personal dissatisfaction to increase. 
j. Manipulative; superficial, which will appear "flighty" or "flakey" to those close to her.  
k. Deception type: "Survivor Liar" or one who employs it regularly to survive, even in places where no one else perceives threat. Deception learned very early in life. 
l. Children may have been driven round and round to put them to sleep.  Cough syrup, Benadryl, etc may have been regularly used. 

Significant childhood trauma leads some to have very strong human empathy while others react to the contrary and become indifferent to human suffering. She is the latter. 

She is likely to confess to anything, even while she protects her image, to obtain attention.