Tuesday, July 10, 2018

Catherine Marie Rape Statement Analyzed




The following is a brief analysis of the allegation of rape made by Catherine Marie, publicly posted, against Alex Goldman. 

The analytical question:  Was she the victim of a criminal sexual assault by Alex Goldman? 

I. First is her statement as posted. 
II. Her statement with analysis added
III. Conclusion 

It is important to read her statement as posted, without the influence of emphasis added.  We begin with the same presupposition: she is telling the truth. 

In order for us to conclude deception, she must "talk us out of it"; that is, our presupposition of truth. 

This is not a moral exercise, but a technique used by analysts who routinely run at 100% accuracy in detecting deception. 



I. The Statement

Catherine Marie






**This can be triggering to read so keep that in mind as you read on.
I want to open this post with a recognition. A recognition of all survivors of assault and rape who have felt the need to stay quiet. To stay quiet for the feeling that no one would believe them, to stay quiet for the feeling that for your loved ones it would be too much, to stay quiet for the feeling that once it is out you will not be looked at the same, to stay quiet for the feeling that you might have given the impression that you wanted it, and to stay quiet for the feeling that you could have done something differently to stop it. This is for me, and this is for you. 

During the early hours of April 23, 2017 I was raped and sodomized. I woke up in Delta Kappa Epsilon Fraternity in Alex Goldman’s bed confused, bloody, bruised, with ripped clothing and splinter. I went to the police only to be asked if I had ever engaged in rough sex prior to my rape, and my friend to be asked if I slept around. I never slept around, in fact, I have never had a one night stand in my life. Not that that should matter, as rape is an act of violence-not sex. 

This process of reporting this has been horrible, not only did Alex Goldman expose me to his own evils but also to the injustices in this world. I spent 6 months being deceived and ignored by law enforcement. I spent 6 months trying to a work a system that is supposed to work for me. I spent 6 months trying to fix a “flawed” system only to realize it is broken entirely. I have spent my life feeling “protected”, feeling safe and feeling confident in my country’s justice system only to find out it was all a lie. 
ADA Maureen Barry ( https://www.linkedin.com/in/maureen-barry-3b727322/ ),an SU alum who was at one point apparently on my case, took her time to write a SIX page response to Alex Goldman’s lawyer stating that I was not raped by criminal standards and that she was not positive that my clothing was bloody, when it in fact was. She wrote this for Alex's lawyer to use against me in my University case against him. Despite her disgusting and inconceivable efforts to help Alex Goldman get away with my rape he was still expelled, as criminal burden of proof is much higher than that of a university.
Besides taking my own sense of security that night, Alex Goldman’s actions have exposed me to the true injustices in our “justice” system. I feel scared knowing that it is 2018 and women are in no means protected by our government. Knowing that women are still viewed more for the purpose of their body parts than the words of their hearts, of their souls.
Once I informed Detective Michael Bates from the "Abused Persons Unit" of Syracuse Police Department, for a third time, that I had been sodomized, the attitude with which he regarded my case changed. He even tried to tell me I never made him aware of the sodomy- only I had, he just clearly wasn’t listening. While I was happy with his change of attitude towards the seriousness of my case, I couldn’t help but be enraged by what his change of attitude had meant for me as well as for the women of America. That a rape allegation was only being taken more seriously because it was accompanied by sodomy? Penetration without consent should be wrong whether it was done to my vagina or anus, or both. Rape should not be dismissed because it was done to a sex organ, rather than a place of waste. 
We say it's our society’s attitude that feeds the rape culture in America. But our own legal system encourages it by making such biased assumptions and preconceived notions. By believing that the function of woman’s vagina speaks louder than her voice.
By assuming that my injuries were a product of having a vagina and not a product of rape. 
But injuries to my anus, and it not being a sex organ, must mean that I did not want what was done to me. Why do the biological functions of my body speak more than my own voice does? However, once a body part not made for sex is involved, automatically it must have been nonconsensual? As if my body’s role in sex makes me incapable of not wanting it to be penetrated. I thought women and men were equal and now I see we clearly aren’t. I thought in 2017/2018 people were given rights based off being human, not based off their gender. I no longer feel the same sense of security and comfort that I once felt in this world. 
And as impossible as it is to try to see any positive in this assault, I try to remind myself that in this very dark and ugly event there is light and hope, for me and for others. Since the days after the assault I have been faced with choices. The choice to resist accepting this as my new reality. Or the choice to fight like hell. 
To fight him, to fight my own internal denial, and to fight a system that was so clearly broken. To take back the power he so viciously took from me. To take action out of respect for myself and out of responsibility for all those who he will attack after me. I knew if I wasn’t able to fight for myself that I would then have to at least fight for the others that would come after me.
People don’t wake up one day and randomly decide they are going to violently rape and sodomize someone.
I won't allow him to damage someone else just as he did to me. Even though I will never get back what I lost that night, at least I can prevent others from having to endure his cruel and demeaning violence. Because being able to do that makes the fight that I have been fighting for these past 13 months worth it.
My motive is to try to stop him from ruining another person’s life, as this will not be the last time. 
He is a predator.
He didn’t have to rape and sodomize me.�He didn’t have to do any of this. 
This is more than just seeking justice; this is seeking prevention. 
I completed an entire two semesters at the school where my rapist was expelled from, one of which he was there for, but to this day he continues to walk free. My rapist has an internship with Bohler Engineering (which he has now been terminated from, as of June 5th ) and will be graduating from a different college, New Jersey Institute of Technology. I have had multiple individuals that have approached me, expressed their knowledge of Alex Goldman's track record.
Alex Goldman is a rapist. I write this post because this is not the first time Alex Goldman has raped someone and I want to make sure that it is the last. With the condition that he left me in, I am afraid for his potential victims. While I am proud to say I got my rapist expelled from Syracuse University, on November 15, 2017, he now attends New Jersey Institute of Technology where he is on track for graduation. Clearly my school officials saw something wrong enough with him to remove him permanently from my university, however, our law enforcement continues to allow him to walk the streets. While I tried doing this "the systematic way", this monster is free and should be behind bars.
To all of his fraternity brothers who lied during my process and turned a blind eye 
over the past years to Alex’s behavior you should be ashamed and disgusted with yourselves. 
NJIT
NJIT - Newark College of Engineering
Syracuse Police Department


II. Statement With Emphasis and Analysis 

The following is an abbreviated analysis only.  

Rape is a distinctly sexual violent crime. It is intrusive, personal and its impact is beyond what we are capable of measuring. The correlation between sexual assault and later compromised immune system is acute. 

All analysts must develop "linguistic human empathy" which allows them to "enter into the subject's verbalized perception of reality" in the work. Male analysts must be exposed to many sexual assault statements to understand not only what truthful ones and deceptive ones indicate, but to grasp, somewhat, the intrusive nature of the assault.  The analyst must see the vulnerability inherent in order to linguistically measure the intrusion of sexual assault. For example, it is easy for a male to dimsiss a "swat on the rear" and adhere to the  revelatory confession by a former US president: 

"I think it’s a good thing that we should all have higher standards. I think the norms have really changed in terms of, what you can do to somebody against their will, how much you can crowd their space, make them miserable at work."

This statement is both confessional and projective. It is how he views his career and it is his norm. In my experience (norm) most men would say he was fortunate to escape without professional dental intervention. 

The text is 1,341 words in length.  The expectation is:

1. The form will be balanced. Reliable statements are close to 25% intro, 50% on what happened (rape being the most important to a victim) and 25% of the information on what happened afterwards.  When we see anything that strongly deviates from this formula, we consider the statement "unreliable on its form."

Here is the measurement of her statement: 

The introduction is 131 words or 10%.  
The event (rape) is 94 words or 7%
Post event: 83% 

Unreliable on its Form.

Even before beginning analysis, we note with a simple math formula that the statement is very likely to contain unreliable information. We also know, from the extreme imbalance, that rape is not her priority.  

With this most intrusive, sexual, violent we begin with the opening lines, which indicate priority. 

Later, "Linguistic Disposition" will be critical for the analyst. 
"Linguistic Disposition", simply, is how the subject views the offender. 

In non-family sexual assault, the expectation is a negative disposition. 

For example, in one of the accounts of Bill Cosby's victims, she began with "Bill Cosby" as he was a celebrity. He was also revered as "Mr. Cosby" in her recall.  (the change of language is a strong indicator of experiential memory). 

The statement progressed with him becoming, in her verbalized recall, "Bill",  as she became closer to him, on a first name basis with a celebrity. 

Once the sexual assault took place, he became "Cosby" and as recall showed process, "he" and "him" (no more name).  

This revealed disgust for the assailant. 


**This can be triggering to read so keep that in mind as you read on.
I want to open this post with a recognition. A recognition of all survivors of assault and rape who have felt the need to stay quiet. To stay quiet for the feeling that no one would believe them, to stay quiet for the feeling that for your loved ones it would be too much, to stay quiet for the feeling that once it is out you will not be looked at the same, to stay quiet for the feeling that you might have given the impression that you wanted it, and to stay quiet for the feeling that you could have done something differently to stop it. This is for me, and this is for you. 

This is a lengthy introduction and it is a form of "Ingratiation" to her audience. She uses the popular "trigger" and "recognition" to immediately align herself with victims. 

The warning that this may be "triggering" is similar to the Rule of the Negative. 

Nothing invites young boys to trouble like a sign on a glass window saying, "Do Not Throw Rocks."

She opens with a tool of manipulation which invites interest. "I'm not afraid of being triggered, so I will read this!"  Advertising uses this element of human nature routinely.  People are more likely to read that which begins with "graphic" or other such warnings, than to pass over.  This is why outrageous headlines are often used and wear thin over time. 

Ingratiation is used for acceptance and attention.  She wants to be part of "silent victims" and it is her priority.  

The analyst should now remain alert for the subject's personal "trigger" in this unreliable statement.

Will we find a "trigger" for our subject?


Next, we look for her to linguistically tell us, "Alex Goldman raped me." This is a simple linguistic connection that should be followed with "Goldman" and "him", or even "the rapist" etc.  

During the early hours of April 23, 2017 I was raped and sodomized. 

She begins with time ("during") and does not commit to Alex Goldman raping her. 

The "rapist" is not identified. 

The next thing she tells us is:  "I woke up" and the location.

She woke up and where she woke up comes before an accusation. The location of sleep is always important: 



I woke up in Delta Kappa Epsilon Fraternity in Alex Goldman’s bed confused, bloody, bruised, with ripped clothing and splinter. 


This is, in context, an example of "passive voice" which removes the responsibility of who raped her from her statement. The passive voice also, specifically, removes the responsibility of who caused her to sleep in the location where she woke up. 

This is concealment. 

She does not commit to rape and now she accuses law enforcement.  This is consistent with her opening paragraph's priority: 


I went to the police only to be asked if I had ever engaged in rough sex prior to my rape, and my friend to be asked if I slept around. 

We listen for linguistic connection to the assault and are "unexpectedly confronted" with its absence. 

We find a neutral linguistic disposition towards the rapist and we find a negative linguistic disposition towards police. This coming after she conceals information about who caused her to sleep in the location mentioned. 

Next, she wants her audience to know that she is moral: 


I never slept around, in fact, I have never had a one night stand in my life. Not that that should matter, as rape is an act of violence-not sex. 

Here we find truth. 

She not only says she "never slept around" but she "never" had a one night stand "in my life."

She then dismisses this as immaterial.  

It is important to state. 

It is important to repeat.


It is important to negate. 

She then repeats the political falsehood:

"rape is an act of violence-not sex. "

Rape is distinctly violence in sex, the single most vulnerable part of a woman is targeted. This illogic is consistent with her opening paragraph of Ingratiation and helps us understand her target audience. 

She is also very likely a believer in the new ideology that adheres to being able to alter reality by emotion. 

Q. What was her linguistic disposition towards rape and sodomy?
A.  Neutral. 

Q.  What was her linguistic disposition towards the accused?
A.  Neutral

Q. What was her linguistic disposition towards police?
A.  Negative

Q.  What is her linguistic disposition towards the process?
A.  Negative: 

This process of reporting this has been horrible,

"Rape and Sodomy" were not negative, but the process has been. This is not the language of a rape victim. 

For the rape victim, not being believed, or being callously handled is bad, but not as bad as the crime itself.  It is often "insult upon injury" but it is not the injury.  

Next, who is the "rapist"? This is very important for the analyst to track: 


 not only did Alex Goldman expose me to his own evils but also to the injustices in this world. 

Here is an advocate waiting to find an injustice to protest.  She does not call this "injustice" for her, but "the" injustices.  This means that prior to this event and statement, she had "injustices of the world" lined up.  

This is a "social justice warrior" who if she cannot find injustice, she will invent one.  This is very common in moral narcissism; something so readily exploited by politicians.  Yet consider that it could have landed someone in prison.  This is the ultimate hypocrisy: claiming high moral high ground for justice while exercising injustice towards another. 

RPM: Rationalization, Projection and Manipulation. 

I spent 6 months being deceived and ignored by law enforcement.

"spent" is the element of time taking precedence over "being deceived" and for deeper analysis, the word "ignored" is critical in understanding the subject's motive and personality.  

The negative disposition continues towards police and her "world wide" view of "evils" confirms the opening of her statement. 


 I spent 6 months trying to a work a system that is supposed to work for me

Not to work for justice, but "for me."  


I spent 6 months trying to fix a “flawed” system only to realize it is broken entirely. 

83% of her "rape statement" is about her politics. 

All of this is consistent with the principle of Statement Analysis:

Where a subject begins a statement is always important and sometimes the reason for the statement. 


I have spent my life feeling “protected”, feeling safe and feeling confident in my country’s justice system only to find out it was all a lie. 

Advanced analysis will flag the use of "deception" and "lies" in her statement. This is what her brain is producing while she is reporting rape. 

She does not claim that the "rapist" has lied; but society and "the system" (police) have. 

She is, in this sense, revealing her own deception. 


ADA Maureen Barry ( https://www.linkedin.com/in/maureen-barry-3b727322/ ),an SU alum who was at one point apparently on my case, took her time to write a SIX page response to Alex Goldman’s lawyer stating that I was not raped by criminal standards and that she was not positive that my clothing was bloody, when it in fact was. She wrote this for Alex's lawyer to use against me in my University case against him. 


After the "rape" she is on a first name basis with the rapist, who is not a family member. 

"Alex" is informal and it is a "positive linguistic disposition" for the "rape victim."

Q.  How could "Alex" be positive, even in a deceptive statement, rather than just neutral for the subject?

A.  This indicates, in context, a favorable view of Alex Goldman. Why might she have a positive view of Alex?

The answer is in her own first paragraph.

Alex has enabled her to obtain the attention she acutely desires. 



Despite her disgusting and inconceivable efforts to help Alex Goldman get away with my rape he was still expelled, as criminal burden of proof is much higher than that of a university.

The "rapist" is given a positive linguistic disposition, but his attorney is "disgusting"; 

this "incongruence" is only inconsistent with rape, but it is, indeed, consistent with her statement. 

The attorney stands between her and her priority of her first paragraph. 

Alex is the "good guy" who made this possible but the attorney gets "disgusting and inconceivable efforts..." of distinct negative language. 

Enter her verbalized perception of reality and believe her: 

Alex isn't disgusting. 

Alex's attorney is. 

"Injustice" is no longer targeted.  She is going to be "really really really offended" with "true injustices": 


Besides taking my own sense of security that night, Alex Goldman’s actions have exposed me to the true injustices in our “justice” system. 

I feel scared knowing that it is 2018 and women are in no means protected by our government.

Her ideology comes out strongly as does manipulation and ingratiation. 

She no longer attacks police or an attorney, but indicts the "government" which she believes is to protect "women."  

Q.  What has the government failed to do to protect women?
A.  Change the impressions of people.  

This is her view of government (it is a religious view) where the government must govern the "hearts and minds" of men: 

 Knowing that women are still viewed more for the purpose of their body parts than the words of their hearts, of their souls.

Although some will dismiss this is silly pandering language, one should carefully consider the words she has chosen to express herself. 

She is not expressing rape, but herself. 

Consider "body parts" with her statement about "never" being immoral and that morals don't matter. 



Once I informed Detective Michael Bates from the "Abused Persons Unit" of Syracuse Police Department, for a third time, that I had been sodomized, the attitude with which he regarded my case changed. 

Note "raped" is now "sodomized" as she targets a specific law enforcement official. 

Note her ability to discern his "attitude." 

Please consider that the professionals in Sex Crimes Units such as above, are often those who volunteer and who undergo specific training. They are often the most empathetic among the police, and due to secondary psychological trauma, they often have short terms in this.  In short, they do it because they have a high commitment  to helping victims of sexual assault.

As you continue to read her statement, keep in mind the linguistic dispositions and her use of words like "deception": 


He even tried to tell me I never made him aware of the sodomy- only I had, he just clearly wasn’t listening

The "need to persuade" element is noted. 
The word "listen" is also critical to understand this subject. 

She has an intense need to be heard and she has a very specific audience:  "worldwide" and "women." 

"My rape" is not the expected language of a rape victim outside of many years of processing; often through professional intervention.  

Next note the unexpected positive emotion followed by the polar opposite so close together: 

While I was happy with his change of attitude towards the seriousness of my case, I couldn’t help but be enraged by what his change of attitude had meant for me as well as for the women of America. 

This is different than the expectation of international fame; not it is national. 

For her, she speaks for the "women of America." 


That a rape allegation was only being taken more seriously because it was accompanied by sodomy? 

Deception Indicated 


Penetration without consent should be wrong whether it was done to my vagina or anus, or both. Rape should not be dismissed because it was done to a sex organ, rather than a place of waste. 

As she seeks political attention, she may draw the ire of the homosexual community by calling the anus a "place of waste." Thus the risk and danger of the ideology and religious aspects of her belief system:  they change often.  

Continue to note how far she is from simply saying, "Alex Goldman raped me": 

We say it's our society’s attitude that feeds the rape culture in America. But our own legal system encourages it by making such biased assumptions and preconceived notions. 

Next, note the connection to Hollywood's "protests" against inappropriate verbal expressions while enabling, embracing and protecting a known rapist and misogynist. This indicates familiarity with the vulgar rants from Hollywood actresses: 

By believing that the function of woman’s vagina speaks louder than her voice.
By assuming that my injuries were a product of having a vagina and not a product of rape. 

It is interesting that she decries this separation after stating that rape was not about sex but only violence. She now wishes to close the gap. 

She loses sight of her audience as she does not believe in male homosexual sex: 

But injuries to my anus, and it not being a sex organ, must mean that I did not want what was done to me. 


Rather than tell us reliably what happened against her will, she states that only the injuries can speak for her.  


Why do the biological functions of my body speak more than my own voice does? 


Always note a question in an open statement. 


However, once a body part not made for sex is involved, automatically it must have been nonconsensual? 

Subjects often speak to themselves and these questions should cause a professional of whom is committed helping the subject, explore her childhood history.  


As if my body’s role in sex makes me incapable of not wanting it to be penetrated. 

Her fixation upon anal sex is noted. 
The lack of connection to the alleged rapist/sodomizer is noted.  


I thought women and men were equal and now I see we clearly aren’t. I thought in 2017/2018 people were given rights based off being human, not based off their gender. I no longer feel the same sense of security and comfort that I once felt in this world. 

With moral relativism, the shifting can be quick.  When a devout follower commits such a "sin", she can quickly claim to be "woke" as a means of repentance and then donate money or volunteer time as a means of doing penance.  See analysis of Joy Reid. 


And as impossible as it is to try to see any positive in this assault, I try to remind myself that in this very dark and ugly event there is light and hope, for me and for others. 

here is why Alex Goldman is a "positive" for her while his attorney is given the negative language. 


Since the days after the assault I have been faced with choices. The choice to resist accepting this as my new reality. Or the choice to fight like hell. 

...further insight into childhood damage...

To fight him, to fight my own internal denial, and to fight a system that was so clearly broken. To take back the power he so viciously took from me. To take action out of respect for myself and out of responsibility for all those who he will attack after me. I knew if I wasn’t able to fight for myself that I would then have to at least fight for the others that would come after me.


this is the language of childhood abuse 

People don’t wake up one day and randomly decide they are going to violently rape and sodomize someone.

Rape is personal.  It does not happen to "people"; it happened "to me."  This distancing language is not trauma distance (disassociation) but deceptive distance.  


I won't allow him to damage someone else just as he did to me. 


note sense of control is often missing from victims until many years  later, which much processing.  This is artificial. 

Even though I will never get back what I lost that night, at least I can prevent others from having to endure his cruel and demeaning violence. Because being able to do that makes the fight that I have been fighting for these past 13 months worth it.
My motive is to try to stop him from ruining another person’s life, as this will not be the last time. 
He is a predator.
He didn’t have to rape and sodomize me.�He didn’t have to do any of this. 
This is more than just seeking justice; this is seeking prevention. 
I completed an entire two semesters at the school where my rapist was expelled from, one of which he was there for, but to this day he continues to walk free. My rapist has an internship with Bohler Engineering (which he has now been terminated from, as of June 5th ) and will be graduating from a different college, New Jersey Institute of Technology. I have had multiple individuals that have approached me, expressed their knowledge of Alex Goldman's track record.

Alex Goldman is a rapist. I write this post because this is not the first time Alex Goldman has raped someone and I want to make sure that it is the last. 

to fulfill her opening statement's priority, she is willing to have Alex Goldman's life ruined.  Please consider this in relation to the positive linguistic disposition she holds towards him.

 Her narcissism is powerful and her manipulative personality serves it. 

In false rape accusations, once we've seen the deception, we look for the accused "leaving" the accuser.  Here is is: 


With the condition that he left me in, 

Here is another motive or priority, subservient to fame, that is driving her:

humiliation. 

Humiliation is her trigger. 

She may be driven with a desire to be famous, be interviewed coast to coast and held up as a "women's champion" but the trigger to push her over the top was Alex "leaving" or no longer wanting a relationship with her. 

This is her "trigger" (note her opening warning). 


I am afraid for his potential victims. While I am proud to say I got my rapist expelled from Syracuse University, on November 15, 2017, he now attends New Jersey Institute of Technology where he is on track for graduation. 

Note the absence of a negative linguistic disposition towards Alex Goldman continues and has been consistent. 

She is "proud" of the harm she has inflicted. Her acute awareness of the language of political correctness likely impacted the school's decision.  One should consider exclusion where police and prosecution determined no crime, with regard to "justice" in our subjects repetition of the word "justice" in her statement. 

She knows what she has done to him.  It is very likely that she also struggles with conscience.  The need to state that she is "proud" suggests such weakness in the assertion.  


Clearly my school officials saw something wrong enough with him to remove him permanently from my university, however, our law enforcement continues to allow him to walk the streets. While I tried doing this "the systematic way", this monster is free and should be behind bars.

We now have him as a "monster." This is the first negative thing she said about him.  

Is it connected to a rape of which she refused to connect him to?

We look to context for our answer.  This lets the subject speak for herself. 

Q.  Why is he a "monster" in her language?
A.  Because law enforcement failed. 



To all of his fraternity brothers who lied during my process and turned a blind eye 
over the past years to Alex’s behavior you should be ashamed and disgusted with yourselves. 
NJIT
NJIT - Newark College of Engineering
Syracuse Police Department

III. Analysis Conclusion

Deception Indicated. 

The subject had a distinctly negative sexual experience.  She is deceptive about the choices she made, and she is deceptive about what happened. 

She is, however, most clear on what her motive is. 

She seeks national, if not, world wide attention and acclaim for herself. 

She cannot bring herself to directly lie, and she reveals a most troubled childhood, with the possibility of some perseveration from past sexual abuse. 

But even this is subordinate to her goal.  Alex Goldman is her ally.  The accused is her "linguistic reality friend" who has enabled her to seek attention. 

She uses politically correct language until she gets to sodomy.  Here, she attempt to please her audience, but fails to be "all inclusive."  This indicates a superficial or "copy cat" view of Hollywood and politicians' language.  She is not likely well informed beyond headlines. 

She is intelligent and likely easily influenced by emotion. Her craving for attention is dangerous due to the combination of humiliation and a personal need for recognition and relevance. 

The police, based upon her perception and choice of words, likely acted appropriately, including using hesitancy towards directly accusing her of lying. Police very likely know exactly what happened and why the evidence did not match her words. New York Police (and prosecutors) take rape very seriously.  

She made some bad choices and had a bad experience but regarding rape, she is deceptive.  

The number one trigger (point in which the motive will be put into action) for many crimes (including false reports) is humiliation. 

We look for humiliation in statements.

Question: What did Catherine Marie tell us?

Answer:  "he left me." 

She was humiliated by her own choices and by Goldman's reaction towards her during and after their sexual encounter. 

The subject is in need of professional intervention especially if this publicity campaign fails to obtain relevancy for her. 



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


Hyatt Analysis Services


In a UK study testing the "SCAN" method, the United Kingdom decided it was not worth the investment to train its law enforcement because the study showed a 74% success rate. 

If law enforcement officials tested at 74% accuracy rate after 2.5 days of training, it is that they are likely to run at 100% accuracy in detecting deception with a semester of formal training. 

To host a seminar or to train at home, we offer the "Complete Statement Analysis Course" to both law enforcement and non-law enforcement, including business, legal professions, journalists, advocates, psychologist, social workers, Sex Crimes Units and a wide variety of professionals from the United States, Europe, Australia and beyond.  The training comes with 12 months of e support. The expectation of corrected work is 100% accuracy.  

53 comments:

Lucia D said...

Amazing analysis, Peter. I was puzzled by her rant on anal sex and the way her language turned so crude. I wondered if she was trying for some shock value.

ima.grandma said...

Thanks Peter. Though a sensitive examination of her words produces uneasiness, I learn valuable lessons from these types of analytical articles. I need to remind myself she voluntarily presented her words subject to public scrutiny. I struggle to remain objective without some bias. This is today’s sad reality. I fear for future sad realities.

Peter Hyatt said...

Lucia, I wonder if this was something most regrettable for her; one of which she would not have normally engaged in without alcohol.

ima, you're welcome. I have been encouraged by some of the commenting on this. I, too, had to pause and remind myself:

1. She did this publicly; therefore there is an expectation of audience reaction;
2. She publicly attacked a police officer, using his first and last name and his specific department,
3. Got her victim thrown out of his school and seeks to destroy him in order to obtain attention.

She has a very rough road before her in life. Her lack of self awareness is acute.

We have so many victims of sexual assault who suffer for so long. This false report brings cynicism to the public. She, and every false accuser, do disservice to victims while claiming to honor them.

Perhaps she should consider a career in politics....

Venezuela calling?

Peter

New England Water Blog said...

OT: Is she lying?
“And we were there celebrating and some kids, about 20 of them, ran in front of our home and started yelling the N-word at us,” Hostin shared. “They said, ‘This is America, we are patriots, this is our holiday.’ Things like that.”

https://pagesix.com/2018/07/10/view-co-host-sunny-hostin-racially-harassed-on-hamptons-vacation/

ima.grandma said...

I have an off topic question for you, Peter. When subjects are asked to provide a written statement - are pens used to eliminate erasures forcing strikeouts instead? Or are erasures by a pencil used to provide additional insight? Do requests to rewrite a statement exist? If so, how would an investigator respond?

M said...

Poor Venezuela and Venezuelans, it is a humanitarian tragedy, I cannot see how they can have anything to do with this troubled girl.

The history of Latin America and the intervention of the US military, CIA, over the years is important to know in order to begin to understand.

This girl is a pure product of the US education system and has adapted a middle class "left wing feminist" ideology, nothing to do with Venezuela in my view..

I lived in two neighboring countries and witnessed the desperation of the poor Venezuelan citizens who saw their country destroyed, no fault of their own, corruption comes in all stripes and mostly victimizes the poor.

ima.grandma said...

M, I appreciate your counter as it opens opportunity for understanding vantage point.

Hey Jude said...

‘Where a subject begins a statement is always important and sometimes the reason for the statement.’

I find myself passing over the beginning of a statement too quickly, thinking it might not be one of the times when the beginning is the reason for it.

To me, it seemed her priority had to be to destroy Alex Goldman, as that is what she is trying to do. She woke up in his bed, confused etc - she didn’t say he was there, too - it can be true that “hell hath no fury like a woman scorned”. I thought that she must really hate him, to not only get him expelled and to be proud of that, but also because of her efforts to try to ruin the rest of his life. Yet, for all she says, she does not say that she hates him, and the two instances of her using “Alex” are in contradiction of that.

So, here I am reminded to apply the principle, with which her opening statement about recognition cannot be merely a pretext for destroying Alex, which is how I had seen it - it’s actually her priority, and her campaign to ruin his life is “necessary” to that. The surprise is that she may even like him, because he has been convenient to, and her enabler in gaining ‘recognition’.

Also, very helpful are the explanations about her “linguistic disposition” - I had wondered about the use of “disgust/ing” - I could see it was skewed in context, but didn’t know why.

----

I should have got "he left me", and humiliation as the "trigger" as that has come up several times in earlier articles.







ima.grandma said...

Jude - Ditto.

Lucia D said...

I would think alcohol as a factor was extremely likely. But it struck me that if she was so drunk as to not be able give consent, her case would have been prosecutable.

ima.grandma said...

She had medical and blood testing within her rape kit exam following standard protocol during the first 26 hours according to msm. A grain of salt added for extra measure. Wouldn’t a full panel drug and alcohol screen be executed in determining circumstances and facts, especially since she states she woke up confused? HIPPA laws circumvent the facts as determined by professional medical staff. I hope her signature is evidential, notifying her of full disclosure as to how her medical records may be used. I fully support these laws. Violation is prosecutorable under federal law.

Alex said...

Despite her disgusting and inconceivable efforts to help Alex Goldman get away with my rape he was still expelled, as criminal burden of proof is much higher than that of a university.

In the above statement, isn't she referring to the ADA, not Goldman's lawyer?

Alex

Anonymous said...

She was asked if she was into rough sex and one night stands. She denied one night stands but didn't deny being into rough sex. The word 'splintered' is interesting. She doesn't explain what she means by that. Are we meant to conclude some kind of dissociation? Seems like narrative tension building.

General P. Malaise said...

"...I woke up in Delta Kappa Epsilon Fraternity in Alex Goldman’s bed confused, bloody, bruised, with ripped clothing and splinter. ..."

note the use of the word "in" with regards to the location of Catherine. her use of the word "in" adds to her linguistic neutral/positive toward Alex. it is a small point but bolsters her consent to being there. if she had said "on the bed" it would be distancing from the location.

Alex said...

Someone asked earlier about false claims on college campuses. The Duke Lacross team and more recently a case at the U of Arkansas come to mind.

Alex

General P. Malaise said...

"....I spent 6 months trying to a work a system that is supposed to work for me. I spent 6 months trying to fix a “flawed” system only to realize it is broken entirely. I have spent my life feeling “protected”, feeling safe and feeling confident in my country’s justice system only to find out it was all a lie. ..."

she "spent six months to work a system ..." "work a system" this language is often used by people who are using the system to gain personally in a way the system is not supposed to be used. it maybe an embedded admission.

she doubles down on the admission with the words "... it was all a lie."

the brain knows what it knows and this knowledge leaks into the langage.

ima.grandma said...

“fix” can have a double meaning
Influence and correct the desired outcome of system process by underhanded means

ima.grandma said...

I woke up...in Alex Goldman’s bed, confused...
With the condition that he left me in, I am afraid...

ima.grandma said...

Examination of my comment:
Catherine - in
Alex - out

ima.grandma said...

We say it's our society’s attitude that feeds the rape culture in America. But our own legal system encourages it by making such biased assumptions and preconceived notions.

Breakdown:

“We (hiding in a crowd) say it's our (plural possession) society’s attitude that (distance)feeds the rape culture in America.
But (in comparison to that which preceded it) our own (belongs to we/our) legal system encourages it by making such biased assumptions and preconceived notions.”

Our (me &you) attitude feeds rape culture
But
Our (owning) legal system encourages rape culture

Personal inclusion of I with you - we/our/own

I feed rape culture...
But
I encourage rape culture by making biased assumptions...

Anonymous said...

I have a gut feeling something else is at play other than rape in the traditional sense most people think.

She states "my rape" a couple of times.

Then notices a change in the police officers attitude when she introduces sodomy.

She clearly states by omission she doesn't know how she ended up in Goldman's room, nor does she state how she knows him nor how long she has known him.

At her age, it is normal now to belong to the crowd. Her age isn't mentioned.

The phase "the condition he LEFT me in" and not "he LEFT me" as smeared above.

Face it: kids are doing odd things in jr. high nowadays.

I'd watch this one for a while and not assume she's on-boarding the bandwagon.

ima.grandma said...

General, I thought we were buddies. Nice trigger. At a point to let this one go. Until you identify her as Catherine. Topic comments observation - she or her used in lieu of her name. Backspacing and avoiding this personalization of her name throughout my commenting - I, ready to publish her name on previous discussion halted to delete not Catherine but Ms. Marie. I avoided even that. I was trying to disconnect from her. I was trying to connect to her. I didn’t want to use the name Alex in my comments but did, I wanted to use Goldman. Until ... Catherine. Complexity. I’m learning.

Hey Jude said...

I took it that she none too subtly gave away that she was trying to "fix" the "flawed" system to her advantage - like footballers have sometimes "fixed" matches. She believed the police weren't taking her seriously enough, until she made the detective understand that she was raped AND sodomised - after which she was happy with his change of attitude. I can't see any other description of how she has attempted to fix the flawed system.

Hey Jude said...

Maybe she sat on a fence, or something, to get that splinter. Though she didn't specify where it was, or what type of splinter.

I thought about referring to her as CM.

General P. Malaise said...


Blogger Hey Jude said...
Maybe she sat on a fence, or something, to get that splinter. Though she didn't specify where it was, or what type of splinter.

is it possible she meant sphincter?

Hey Jude said...

General - that's not what she said.

Hey Jude said...

If it was a typo, the most likely would be that she intended 'splinters' than a completely different word - but she probably checked her lengthy post of 'recognition', it's likely she wrote it that way because she wanted to say it that way. People mean what they say. It sounds so awkward that it probably was? :-D

tania cadogan said...

Off topic bolded by them

The father of a two-year-old girl who died when her parents' car rolled into a river has said there was "no point in blaming anyone".

Kiara Moore was found by divers in the River Teifi in Cardigan, Ceredigion in March - a week before her third birthday.

Her father, Jet, said he would "imagine" she was still alive and still read her favourite book regularly.

"There is no point in blaming anyone," he said. "It was a freak accident."

In May, Dyfed-Powys Police said inquiries had concluded and no charges would be brought.

"It doesn't seem that she has gone," said Mr Moore, in an interview with BBC Wales. "You still imagine she's there - maybe that's my way of dealing with it, but her happiness and fun is still with me."

Mr Moore and his partner, Kim Rowlands, initially thought their car had been stolen when it vanished from the slipway outside their business on 19 March with their daughter inside.

In a Facebook post written shortly after her death, which has since been deleted, her mother Kim said her "beautiful baby girl" had died, adding: "Due to my own stupidity, I will have to live with the guilt of this for the rest of my life.

"Mummy loves you baby girl and I'm so sorry."

Mr Moore said: "There is no blame for that day. There is no point in blaming anyone.

"If you go back to that day there was so many little things that happened that, if you were to try and do it again, wouldn't happen.

"At worst, what could I blame? I could blame the handbrake on the car, maybe, if I felt the need to.

"Sometimes your mind wanders off to what happened. Could any of us have changed anything? We could have not got out of bed that day, we could have not gone to work. But that's all could ofs - there's no point really of dwelling."

In a Facebook post written shortly after her death, which has since been deleted, her mother Kim said her "beautiful baby girl" had died, adding: "Due to my own stupidity, I will have to live with the guilt of this for the rest of my life.

"Mummy loves you baby girl and I'm so sorry."

Mr Moore said: "There is no blame for that day. There is no point in blaming anyone.

"If you go back to that day there was so many little things that happened that, if you were to try and do it again, wouldn't happen.

"At worst, what could I blame? I could blame the handbrake on the car, maybe, if I felt the need to.

"Sometimes your mind wanders off to what happened. Could any of us have changed anything? We could have not got out of bed that day, we could have not gone to work. But that's all could ofs - there's no point really of dwelling."

He said he continues to read one of her favourite books, Dear Zoo, to remember his daughter, said the family carried a little Donald Duck toy in her memory when they went on adventures.

The first trip they took as a family after her death was up Snowdon, in north Wales, where they scattered her ashes.

"She was everywhere with us, so wherever we have been since, we can say: 'Oh yeah, Kiara was here doing this or that.' In three years she did a lot," he said.

tania cadogan said...

cont

Mr Moore continues to run his outdoor pursuits business close to where his daughter's body was found, but said being on the water had given him a sort of therapy.

"[The water] has given me so much, but it's also taken away something so special," he said.

"It took us a while to decide whether we were going to come back, but the river and the area is a beautiful area. The accident that happened on that day was a freak accident.

"I'm still constantly thinking about her and that it happened, but then I also try and lead my mind into a positive way of how much fun she also had.

"You've got two choices in my mind - you give up or you carry on", he said, "I couldn't just sit indoors and give up."

Mr Moore is appealing for help and support to set up a foundation in Kiara's name to offer adventure therapy to other bereaved families.

"There are definitely moments when it is not so positive, when it is hard," he said.

"The hope for any of your kids is that they go on to do great things. She hasn't got that now, but in three years she inspired a lot of people, even at her funeral I think there were 500 people there, and for a three year old, to have that many people at your funeral, that's pretty impressive.

"There's absolutely nothing we can do about what happened that day, it's one of those awful accidents, we can't change that, but I guess we can move forward and make hopefully the best of what we can as a life in the future.

"I hope this can be Kiara's legacy. That it can do something of good."

An inquest into Kiara's death has been opened and adjourned.
But after a police search the silver Mini was found in the river, along with Kiara's body.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-44781248

His language still strikes me as odd

Anonymous said...

Also, she says she was: "trying to a work a system."

Not work within the system, not work with the system, but instead, she spent 6 months trying to manipulate and "work" the system.

GetThem

ima.grandma said...

Catherine is too smart to make a simple typing error in writing her message. She’s composed her post carefully over time, possibly with assistance. She meant the use of the word “splinter” exactly how she wrote it.

“I woke up in Delta Kappa Epsilon Fraternity in Alex Goldman’s bed confused, bloody, bruised, with ripped clothing and splinter.”

I woke up...with...splinter. (context: fragmentation of memory )

ima.grandma said...

Hobs - who is you? He dominantly uses the second person pronoun - you - to address his audience. Who is his audience? Timing of release of his statements coincidental with setting up foundation? The “bolded by them” is interesting. MSM @ work?

tania cadogan said...

Hi Ima.grandma.

His language has always been distancing and odd.
If anything i would expect him to be blaming his wife for their daughter's death and she was the one with responsibility.
It was the mom who put Kiara in the car.
It was the mom who drove to the location.
It was the mom who decided where to park.
It was the mom who left her daughter in the car.
It was the mom who first reported the car as stolen.

It would be natural to blame the caregiver for making the decisions that killed their daughter.

Mr Moore said: "There is no blame for that day. There is no point in blaming anyone.
Except there is blame, there is a point in blaming someone.

By placing the blame where it should be laid it may prevent another parent from doing the same thing.
There were warning signs placed to make it clear not to park where she decided to park.
Had she parked elsewhere then it would not have happened.
At best she would have been guilty of manslaughter, neglect charges could also have been laid.

Some may say she has suffered enough.
Surely her daughter suffered enough, trapped in her car seat in a sinking car with no escape.
Those many minutes it took for the car to roll into the water and then the inexorable in flowing of water through windows, doors, floor, air vents. screaming and crying and fighting to get out till the water closed over her head.
Fighting to hold her breath hoping mom would come and save her and then the searing pain of inhaling cold river water into her lungs, still fighting till there was no breath left to take.
That is suffering.

Mom and dad get to live their lives, maybe make some money from gofundme pages and setting up foundations so they can use their business to help sad people.

I don't buy it.
His language is off and for a reason.

Anonymous said...

Usually 500 at a funeral means they've got a lot of relatives and live in a small community where everyone shows up to pay respect not only for the deceased, but to the relatives (parents, uncles, aunts, etc.) It's typical really.


I found an article that states BOTH Catherine Marie and Goldman woke up in his bed fully dressed, neither remembering anything from the night before.

Perhaps both were drugged and she felt raped. Maybe she was sodomized or something else occurred to make her think that.

If someone drugged the both of them, that is assault.

I could see how she would/could come to the conclusion that she did.

Remember Laura Giddings? A law student recently graduated and was butchered before she could move on>...tragic. By another law student, too.

General P. Malaise said...

Blogger ima.grandma said...
Catherine is too smart to make a simple typing error in writing her message. She’s composed her post carefully over time, possibly with assistance. She meant the use of the word “splinter” exactly how she wrote it.

“I woke up in Delta Kappa Epsilon Fraternity in Alex Goldman’s bed confused, bloody, bruised, with ripped clothing and splinter.”

I woke up...with...splinter. (context: fragmentation of memory )



how do you know she is too smart to make a simple typing error?

what is she claiming?

"with ripped clothing and (ripped) splinter" it does not make sense, "ripper sphincter" does.

I do not know if it is a mistake or typo, I am saying it doesn't make sense the way it is worded. I am not making a conclusion, rather an observation.

Cash said...

Whatever she's saying about "splinter," it's incomplete and she can't commit to it. I'd guess she wants us to believe she has been sexually assaulted with a wooden object, but she can't commit to saying that.

Bobcat said...

Urban dictionary:
splinter cell
The technical definition of being a splinter cell means working alone...
"I am a splinter cell."


Perhaps in her context, 'splinter' means 'alone'.
Add in the later details and it's not only 'alone', but having been "left" alone. Splintered and broken off from the one who should have stayed in bed with her.

Hell hath no fury.


Hey Jude said...

Well, she doesn't clarify. and we shouldn't interpret. People mean what they say.

I think she meant she had a splinter, though it is niggling that she doesn't use the article.

As I understand it, she moves from her mental state - "confused" - to physica/bodily state - "bloody, bruised" - to the material, "*with* ripped clothing, splinter".

Hey Jude said...

General, it's not what she said, plus a ripped sphincter would be placed ahead of ripped clothing in anyone's priority?

ima.grandma said...

The wording is so intriguing. Occam’s razor may be at play. A simple typo? Possibly? Yes. Probably? No. Rabbit hole results... Absurdity is poking its head out standing tall.

A* Freud’s theory: The fixation of anal erotism would thus originate in the denial of splinter damage and of angry. On the classical theory, there is supposed to be one process: from positive valuation of faeces to negative.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.2044-8341.1966.tb00984.x

B* Working with the Trauma of Rape and Sexual Violence: A Guide for Professionals - you can view several pages.
https://books.google.com/books?id=7XU8DQAAQBAJ&pg=PA202&lpg=PA202&dq=rape+splinter+rape+trauma&source=bl&ots=7V7leiIsaN&sig=xe5ww0a0YVAw35bhZo-Wjzi9FK8&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwish7iK7JTcAhUR7J8KHW_eBTgQ6AEwBHoECAQQAQ#v=onepage&q=rape%20splinter%20rape%20trauma&f=

General P. Malaise said...


Blogger Hey Jude said...
General, it's not what she said, plus a ripped sphincter would be placed ahead of ripped clothing in anyone's priority?


it would in a real world, she is manufacturing her reality.

Hey Jude said...

Well, she didn't say "ripped sphincter", or "trauma splinter" - it's still just 'splinter'. Maybe she wanted people to debate what she meant by her wording there -though she doesn't seem the cryptic type.

Interesting second link, Ima.

Peter Hyatt said...

Anonymous said...
Usually 500 at a funeral means they've got a lot of relatives and live in a small community where everyone shows up to pay respect not only for the deceased, but to the relatives (parents, uncles, aunts, etc.) It's typical really.


I found an article that states BOTH Catherine Marie and Goldman woke up in his bed fully dressed, neither remembering anything from the night before.

Perhaps both were drugged and she felt raped. Maybe she was sodomized or something else occurred to make her think that.

If someone drugged the both of them, that is assault.

I could see how she would/could come to the conclusion that she did.

Remember Laura Giddings? A law student recently graduated and was butchered before she could move on>...tragic. By another law student, too.
July 11, 2018 at 10:36 PM



The greater context should be considered: her police report.
Lesser context shows deception.

Black out memories from alcohol are generally considered non-recoverable.

The language of such will only show TL, but not specific deception. What we do not know, we do not need to deceive over.

Peter

Anonymous said...

In above by Peter, TL is time lapse I think.

Anonymous said...

Here is a recent, public statement countering an allegation of harassment:
https://www.theguardian.com/music/2018/jul/12/simon-le-bon-duran-duran-shereen-hariri
Maybe an interesting exercise...

Lucia D said...

“What we do not know we do not need to deceive over.” That is a great point, lol! I’m going to remember those words.

tania cadogan said...

In such cases where a child died either through murder, neglect, accident then there will be many more mourners than perhaps those of an expected child death although if the child is well known to the public and media then hundreds maybe thousands would turn out, not only family and friends but members of the public who want to pass on their condolences and perhaps to show unity with the family.

Also in adult deaths perhaps due to murder or celebrity then there may be far more at the funeral than the usual family and friends.
you only have to see the tens of thousands or even hundreds of thousands at the funerals of some celebs, Elvis, michael jackson, Lady diana, royalty, presidents, world leaders.

Some funerals attract mourners because they knew the person, some to be part of the circus, some because they wanted to show their condolences and some for any number of other reasons.

Why was he so focused on how many turned up?
Doesn't it sound familiar (davey blackburn anyone?)

I have been at funerals where there have been 3 of us, the daughter, the son-in-law and myself.
She was the mom of a close friend of mine who had been brought down to live near her daughter due to her age (well into her 80's) and her poor health. Her granddaughters lived either too far away or simply didn't care.
others i have been to have included 100's, my dad for one who was known far and wide for his rallying days, his sailing and boats in general as well as running his garage. Some i recognized from way back when we used to spectate whilst he raced, or from when he was running his garage or from his boats, others i didn't but they all knew of me and my brothers.

General P. Malaise said...


Blogger Hey Jude said...
Well, she didn't say "ripped sphincter", or "trauma splinter" - it's still just 'splinter'. Maybe she wanted people to debate what she meant by her wording there -though she doesn't seem the cryptic type.

"...But injuries to my anus, ..."

I am not saying it isn't meant to be "splinter", I am saying it doesn't fit and there is support for it being "other" as by her quote. "...But injuries to my anus, ..." heck it could have been auto-correct.

Lucia D said...

The word splinter is puzzling in her context. If it was autocorrect I think she would have edited it, given her priority of being heard?

Hey Jude said...

It would be interesting to know what she meant the reader to take from her use of "splinter", but she doesn't clarify - she could have clarified, if she had wanted to. She maybe intended for that to be unclear, along with who she claims (or rather implies) raped her, and where Alex Goldman was when she woke.

-----

If, as stated above or in previous article's comments, from news report, they both woke in his bed, then he likely was not there by the time she woke, as she says "the condition he left me in" - she doesn't say that he was present, or that she saw him that morning - or even the previous evening/night.

Hey Jude said...

re: Kiara Moore death:

'Dyfed-Powys Police said inquiries had concluded and no charges would be brought over the "tragic incident".'

BBC.

There is no press release on Dyfed-Powys Police website, but from Tania's post, that was stated in May, not clear by or to whom. "Tragic incident" is not "freak accident" as described by Jet Moore. So, the police are not bringing charges, but they are also not describing it as an accident, if the source is reliable. Would there have been consideration of bringing charges if it were believed to be an accident? I expect the police cannot describe it as an accident ahead of the inquest, in case a different cause of death is found.

Nothing and nobody is to be blame, not even the hand-brake. If I thought it might be due to a faulty hand-brake, I'd probably be allowing for the possibility that at least some blame might be due to the car manufacturer, particularly as it was a new-ish car. I'd at least wait for the inquest, in case it might be established that the car rolled due to a faulty hand-brake, in which case that could be taken up with the manufacturer in separate proceedings following the inquest. An inquest is for establishing the circumstances of death rather than apportioning blame. It's odd that he is talking about blame, or not blaming anyone or anything ahead of the inquest - as if he's doing his own inquest ahead of the inquest. He's making sure everyone knows it was a freak accident, which it may have been, but that's for the Coroner to determine.

Hey Jude said...

"At worst, what could I blame? I could blame the handbrake on the car, maybe, if I felt the need to."

At worst, he could blame the hand-brake if he felt the need to.
Is that to suggest there was something wrong with the hand-brake, but he doesn't feel the need to blame it? Why would he not want to blame it, and the manufacturer if he believed or knew it was faulty - his daughter died.



Hey Jude said...

He has such a big heart, he would not even blame the hand-brake if it was the cause of his daughter's death. Don't be worrying about anyone else's baby who might be left parked on a slope, while the driver trusted in the same hand-brake, then. Jet Moore.