Thursday, April 25, 2019

Parents of Five Year old Reported Missing Arrested

The case is now resolved.  

Analysis posted on Twitter yesterday @peterfhyatt 

The 911 call is useful for training.  Even in hindsight we are able to glean much information from the words. 

The Linguistic Disposition of the subject towards the victim is critical information. 

These are notes from team analysis. Some of the comments and questions are exploratory in nature. 

D: What’s the address of your emergency?
C: [redacted] Crystal Lake
D: Yup got it and the phone number you’re calling from?
C: [redacted]
D: Ok. Tell me exactly what happened.

C: Uh, weuh, we havea missingchild. Um, woke up this 
morning and uh, he wasn’t, he wasn’t

Expectation: Context is a bio dad --  sexual – distinctly as a 
man, who has fathered the victim. 
Take ownership of the victim. 
He is telling the truth. “we” (plural) “have” something.  
The use of “we” by a bio dad of a missing child in an 
emergency call is unexpected. We may hear it in a later
 press conference where mom and dad are standing together 
and he is speaking for both. 
--need to share ownership – (step parenting, adoption, 
fostering)—We expect a bio dad to say “I” or “my” (singular)
 ESPECIALLY in the initial report 

we have a missing child” – The Linguistic Disposition 
towards the victim is neutral.  Conclusion: In context, this is 
Similar to Patsy Ramsey; speaking the technical truth.  The
 child does not “have” an issue to reckon with; the caller 
(parents), however, do. 
“child” is gender neutral.  The caller is not working to facilitate
 the flow of info. It is also to distance from gender.  This 
would need exploration. (resentment? Jealousy?)
“child” is anyone’s child: acute psychological distancing from 
his own child.  This is a red flag.  
“we” is repeated indicating increased sensitivity of being 
psychologically alone in this report. 
“we have a missing child” is a status report; it is not personal 

The subject avoids using AJ’s name.  Given the context of 
“missing”, this is a confirmation of the acute psych. 

Um, ____ woke up this morning and uh, he wasn’t, he wasn’t

The psychological distancing we saw in the first six words, 
now increases with the omitted pronoun,. 
He did not say “I woke up” or even “we woke up” 
We cannot say it for him. 
Parents may not have slept. 

Who woke up?

“he” – who is “he”?

They “have” a situation of a status report (“,missing child”)
, but “he” avoids the name of the child. 
The subject does not tell us they were asleep.  Consider the 
deception possible by implication…”we could not possibly be 
involved because we were asleep.  Interpret our words; don’t 
listen to us…”

D: how old is the child
C: we have a missing child

Even after using the pronoun 
“he”,. The caller robs the victim of the status of son.  He and the mother have this; not their son, but a case. 
The victim has not status and has no name.  He is a “case” but not a person. 
D: Yeah, how old is he?
C: he’s 5
D: what was he last seen wearing?
C: um, a Mario blue, like long sleeve sweatshirt and um, 
black sweat pants
D: and uh, male, white?
C: yes
D: when was the last time you seen him?
C: Uh, last night. Uh,probably9:30. Uh when he went to bed.
Why is going to bed “probable”? This is a lack of commitment; not to time, but to what follows: “uh, when he went to bed.”
Since going to bed is only “probable”, this is an unnecessary term that is not expected.  He is not estimated time but possible-probable account. 
When does the victim normally go to bed?
Does the victim normally put himself to bed? 
The victim is still not a person.  He does not have a name. The victim is still “child” –
Was the victim still in his clothes, at age 5, “probably”??
Consider that “probably” may be dismissive, uncaring, etc, as a result of chronic neglect? 
This question is forced upon the operator: 
D: ok. Are you the father?
C: yes
The subject did not claim to be the father, nor took ownership of his son, nor even used the victim’s name. 
The father should be thinking aloud in trying to grasp his missing son’s whereabouts or what happened…he should be grappling with a terrible mystery, tearing him at the core of his very being. 
Instead, he gives a one word answer. 
He only “accepts” status of father by affirmation; not by his own words. 

D: Ok. Know where hemight’vewent?
C: no, uh we’vecanvassedthe neighborhood.

He “canvassed” but “we” did not search.  “Canvassed” is cursory or superficial, like opinions. It is not searching. 
 Iwent to thelocalpark. 
This is the first time “I” enters his language. 
90% reliable--- if he did not go to the park, we are looking at a rare and dangerous liar. 
Uh, the local gas stations down here where we sometimes take himto buy treats.
a.    He does not commit to going to the gas station
b.    He is, however, a “good parent” in this context, who buys “him” treats. In context of this emergency call, this is a possible indicator of guilt in his role as parent. He needs to be seen as a good parent.  
c.     He does not “get” treats, but “buys” them.  This is line with the “three p’s” of biological relationship 

d.    After committing to the park, he returns to the weaker “we”
 Um,Ispokewiththe assistant principal over thereat the school 

where the park is. Theyhaven’tseen uh, him or 

any other child.
 I have no idea where he would be.
The subject does not want to be alone with this event, so 

much so, that the subject is attempting to portray the victim 

as in a crowd.  This is acute guilt. By adding in “any other 

child” –he is making an extraordinary and unique situation 

into one that is “normal” or common/usual. 
He must be a “good person” concerned with other missing

 children.  Further increase of guilt. 
I have no idea where he wouldbe.
This is offered freely by the biological father and is not in 

response to a direct or indirect question. 
The rule of the negative elevates this importance;
He does not say, “I don’t know where he is” but 
“would be” (conditional) as a weakened commitment to this 

lie. “Would be” rather than “is” is consistent with past tense

 and weak commitment. 

“They haven’t seen him…” is to avoid telling us the gender of the asst principal ---

Consider: the subject may have a need to neutralize gender, in general.  (concern, background exploration)

D: Ok. So you put him to bed last night. So he was in his pajamas? And then you went to get him for school, he wasn’t there. Then you looked around for a bit?
Training is needed. 
Compound questions (4)
The operator interprets precisely as a deceptive person wishes. 
C: Yes
She allowed him the luxury of using only one word to answer 4 questions.  The caller is not facilitating the flow of information to find the victim; who is not still…his “son.”
The victim has no title and has no name.  The victim is not a “person” in this sense. This is not only extreme distancing, but likely insight into hostility felt towards the victim. 

D: What time was he supposed to be at school?
C: Wellhedoesn’t go to school, buthad a doctor’s appointment this morning. When I got back from the doctor’s appointment, uh I checked in on him to say good morning. He wasn’t there,sothat would’ve been
Narcissistic personality …possible sociopathic tendency of indifference (or guilt or both) – ‘the victim? What the victim might be going through right now?  Fear, anguish, hungry, with a stranger?  No, let’s talk about me.’ 
This is about the caller…who, along with the mother “has” a case on their minds; not the victim, who remains without a name or relationship title. 

D: What time was that?
C: Between 8: 15-8:30
D: And have you check everywhere? Like under tables? Closets?
C: {unintelligible} closets, the basementthe garage.Everywhere.
The repeated words reduce sensitivity (parroting) yet it heightens the offered words of “basement” and “garage.”
Consider that the victim was wrapped in plastic (basement) and dumped in a shallow grave (shovel?) 

D: What’s the child’s name?

He forced the question. 

C: Uh, Andrew last name Freund. We call him AJ.
D: What’s the middle?
C: Uh, Thomas
D: Date of birth?
C: [redacted]
D: Is mom at the residence as well?
C: Yes
D: Ok and what’s your name, sir?
C: Uh, Andrew Sr
D: Ok. Do you have any pets in the house?
C: Yes.
D: Are they missing as well or no?
C: Nope.
D: Was any of the doors open?
C: No (sigh) [unintelligible] No outside doors or anything like that.
D: No doors or windows?
C: No
D: Officer’s pull up [unintelligible] now
C: Ok. Yeah, I see him
D: Just let me know, but you checked the house, right?
C: Yes. Yea. Yea, we’ve been through the house like 
completely. Yea
D: Let me know when the officer’s at your door.
C: He’s here right now.

D: Ok. I’ll let you go.

Analysis Conclusion:

The technical truth told belies the deception beneath it. 

The subject may be a child sexual abuser, himself. The "Sr." 

defeated the "junior" from which the subject indicated distancing 

language so severe, that contempt for his son is likely. 

The indifference also speaks to chronic Neglect. 

Like the Ramseys, they have an issue. 
Like the McCanns, there is no concern expressed for the 

For training in deception detection, visit Hyatt Analysis Services


Mike Dammann said...

Even though we are looking at a written statement, the voice call listened to displays a far too slow pace in terms of replying and speaking for a parent expected to be adrenalized and on high alert/stress due to his child missing

Jennifer said...

What kind of a life that poor boy must have had.
Great analysis.

Concerned said...

The news this evening about little AJ's abuse and manner of death shows, sadly, that you nailed it, Peter.
I hope we get to read the LE interviews of the pregnant mother.

Me said...

His junkie moron parents
Deserve the death penalty!

Queen said...


Bernie Sanders will make sure they still have a right to vote.

Me said...

They should make the father take a shower in lava.

Also, since the parents say they forced the boy to stay in a cold shower before his death, does this mention of water indicate that they were sexually abusing the boy?
I thought there were some SA indicators of that in the 911 call. Also, the father’s voice sounded like a pedo voice.

Anonymous said...

"The case is now resolved."

Who has hijacked your site, Peter?

Martina said...

C: no, uh we’ve canvassed the neighborhood.

Canvas is police speak, not how an ordinary citizen talks. Ingratiating.

Huge red flags all over, plus first he tells he found him missing after waking up, later after coming back from doctor's appointment. Caught in a lie right there.

William said...

Peter, I wonder if his use of "missing child" language ie.

"we have a missing child'
"canvassed the neighborhood"
"haven't seen him or any other child"

(Also, something jumps out at me with the "where we used to buy him TREATS")

could indicate that he has molested and killed before.

He sounds like someone who has perhaps sat back and watched news reports of police and searchers trying to find another one of his victims.(?)

Also, I am very disturbed by the fact they wrapped him in plastic. I cant quite put my finger on it, but it seems like someone who is an experienced murderer would do. They seriously couldn't at least wrap him in a blanket?!

He is as cool as a cucumber on the phone in the 911 call.

I get a terrible vibe off the father both emotionally and linguistically.

I would not be surprised if he has killed a child before.

I don't typically feel that way in these types of cases, but something is very wrong in this case.

Even the way they dumped his body quite a distance from their home (7 miles) jumps out at me. Like it seems he must have had the confidence to just drive all that way probably because he's done it before. Also it just seems unusual in these types of cases--usually the victim is discovered closer to home.

It just couldn't have been his first kill.

William said...

Also, listening to the 911 call again, doesn't he have the same voice as the guy who killed those 2 girls (I forget where) and the girls had taped him saying "Go down the hill". Is it the same voice?!?!

William said...

Please listen to this:

It is the Delphi killer saying "Go down the hill"/

I was going on memory when I said that the Dad sounds like the Delphi killer, but then I listened to it and got chills. It sounds like the exact same voice and he even looks like the suspect!

William said...

It is the exact same voice,

I just googled and Indiana is only 3 hours away from illinois.

I wonder what the Dad did for work like if he was a truck driver or something who could have been travelling through Indiana.

Please listen to the voice.

Anonymous said...

Video footage of Andrew's Dad talking to reporters. He uses more "police lingo". He says something to his friend like "I think he has some good info we could develop" (police lingo).

He also has the same gait as the Delphi killer. You can see him walking in the video and police had released footage of the Delphi killer's odd gait to try to see if they could get info. Well, it looks like Andrew's Dad has the same gait.

Anonymous said...

What are "the “three p’s” of biological relationship"?

Statement Analysis Blog said...


Willow said...

"I have no idea..."

The expected: I don't know what... is replaced with "idea" that the Caller doesn't have.
The C. intoduces a new unrelated concept: "idea that I don't have".

Why is "I don't know" enough for the C.?

The C. cannot distance himfself from acutely well "knowing". During the call he isn't able to forget "knowing" for a second. Unawares he does an overkill by saying "I have no idea", when "I don't know" would have been enough.

GeekRad said...

He was far too calm in that 911 call. Huge red flag.

Lilstr said...

I heard "down there" the first time.

Hey Jude said...

Freund is a disbarred attorney.

Andrew Thomas Freund, Crystal Lake

Mr. Freund, who was licensed in 1984, was suspended for two years and until further order of the Court, with the suspension stayed after ninety days by a two-year period of conditional probation. While representing his client in a dissolution of marriage case, Mr. Freund was convicted of indirect criminal contempt after the judge found that he had violated court orders. Also, he appeared in court on behalf of a client after he had been removed from the Master Roll of Attorneys due to his failure to register or complete his mandatory continuing legal education requirements. The suspension is effective on October 13, 2015.

Anonymous said...

Peter encourages lengthy analysis, yet posts sloppy notes here and "brief" on twitter?


William said...

Hey Jude, That is interesting! Thank you! Did you listen to the Delphi killer voice and compare to Freund’s 911 voice? It is the same voice! What is your opinion about it?

William said...

Look at the mug shots.

The mother and father look genetically related to each other--exact same eye shape, facial structure....he is 60...she is 38. Is that her father??? I see she has a different last name but maybe she was married before or had her's mother's maiden name as her last name. I am pretty good with faces and those 2 absolutely look related!

William said...

Everything about their face is literally identical--eye shape, space between eyes, eyebrow shape, eyebrow placement, bone structure, location of lines coming down from nose to mouth, lip shape (hers are a bit fuller but lips can thin from age), eye color is the same...only thing different is their chins cut men's testosterone causes their chins to be more angular, broader. There is no way that the 2 are not related.

William said...

their nose shape, width, placement etc is also identical

William said...

Their ears are even the same...same placement and shape, lines coming down from nose to mouth (placement and angle is the saame), curvey line between lips and chin is also the same shape and the same placement

William said...

He is definitely her father.

Hey Jude said...

William yes, I did listen, but it would be better to have not. There must be hundreds or thousands of men who might potentially sound or walk like the man on the bridge or in the audio recording. It is one of those known to the people of Delphi who would be more likely to be the murderer - it is believed he is or was a local due to his knowledge of the area.

Did you know that last week Delphi police issued a photofit of a much younger man, who is now the suspect? He probably has been a suspect all along, as the photofit is two years old.

Tania Cadogan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Tania Cadogan said...

A mother and her sister have been arrested in connection to the disappearance of a six-year-old boy.

Jackee Contreras, 29, was arrested on Thursday after deputies from the Apple Valley Police Department responded to a residence on Cherokee Avenue.

The officers went to the home following the request for a welfare check from six-year-old Duke Flores' grandmother, Lydia Gutierrez.

Upon arrival, Contreras told deputies that Duke had not been seen for about two weeks.

Police immediately began searching the area for Duke, but he wasn't found.

Contreras was then arrested and booked into the High Desert Detention Center for child neglect for her delay in reporting her son missing.

Authorities returned to Contreras' home on Friday and continued their search for the missing boy using K9 units and other first responders.

After interviewing multiple family members, officers then arrested Jackee Contreras' sister, 29-year-old Jennifer Contreras.

They were both charged with murder and are being held without bail.

As of Sunday morning, detectives had not located Duke.

The sheriff's department declined to say why investigators believe Duke is dead.

Duke's grandmother, Gutierrez, told KTLA that she hadn't seen Duke in 10 days.

'I just want to find him,' Gutierrez said through tears.

The child's godfather, Juan Contreras, said he didn't believe Jackee Contreras would harm her son.

'That's her pride and joy,' Juan Contreras said.

Juan claims that Duke, who has autism, has wandered away in the past.

Family members have organized their own search teams as they desperately try and find Duke.

Authorities are asking anyone with information regarding this investigation to contact the Specialized Investigations Division, Detective Narcie Sousa at (909) 387-3589 or Sheriff's dispatch at (909) 387-8313.

Anonymous said...

Would anyone like to take a stab at this statement that was posted online over the weekend:

My wife (31/f) and I (29/m) have been together since high school. We've been married for 3 years and we have twin daughters (5f&5f).

My wife was pursuing her phd when we got married. She's really intelligent and she was awarded her phd( in political science ) a couple of years ago from a well known university. I was really happy for her and it was her dream. Now, she has a great job.

Yesterday, my wife told me that she had to talk to me about something really important. It was in the middle of the night, so I wasn't really paying much attention. Then, she started crying and told me that she had lied to me and cheated on me. She told me that she was sexually involved with her professor.

She tells me that she had no choice, because he was a douchebag and she only did it for her degree and I'm the only person she's ever loved. She confessed because she felt really guilty about this and could no longer contain it. I was really heart broken. We've been together forever and I never expected her to do this. I love her, but I don't think she has my respect now.

She wants to make it up to me and promised me full access to her mobile and social media. According to her, she never saw him again. But I really don't know. And I want some help with this. And I'd really appreciate some genuine advice regarding this.

Nancy said...

Um...what is your question about the statement?
It seems like the questioner is being honest...although he is not totally consistent with the past tense. It’s also kind if weird how he mentions “I wasnt really listening” bc you would the gravity of his wife’s confession would be dominant in his brain & that if he wasnt listening that carefully when his wife first woke him up it wouldnt be a detail of much importance so why mention it?

frommindtomatter said...

OT infidelity statement.

“My wife was [pursuing] her phd”

His language describes how serious about her PhD she was. She wasn’t just studying but “pursuing” her PhD which reveals where her priorities were focused.

“She’s really intelligent” – “a well-known university”

He holds her in high regard and is proud of her achievement.

“She [tells] me that she had no choice”

He uses present tense so we can’t trust what he is telling us. We know everyone has a choice it just comes down to which we decide pick.

“[because] [he] was a douchebag and she [only] did it for her degree”

She takes no responsibility for her actions and shifts the blame onto her professor, “he was”, making it to be his fault. She “only” did it for her degree is very weak as she is admitting she slept with her professor just to get a degree. That’s not very nice, doesn’t paint a picture of a nice person. If he had made advances and she had rejected them, yet he still continued on she certainly would have had a choice, and that would have been to report him for misconduct, but she didn’t. That in itself tells us she was complicit.

“She confessed because she felt really guilty about this and could no longer contain it.”

Earlier in the statement we are told she got her PhD a couple of years ago so we wonder why it has taken two years before the guilt has forced her to confess. If she really wanted to stay with her husband I would have thought it a better strategy to never mention it as it would cause ( which it has) a lot of damage to their relationship. It could be a possibility that this is in fact what she wants, perhaps to make her husband leave her.

[According to her], she [never] saw him again.

He doesn’t trust her and she is not reliable.

All I can say is poor guy. If we believe what he told us then we see a woman whose priority was her career. She made her choice and was complicit in the affair. She must be aware of how much damage her bringing this out will cause, so is either genuinely ridden with guilt or there is another motive. One possibility could be she thinks it is all going to come out and she is trying to limit damage by admitting to it first, or she is using it as a way to destroy the relationship deliberately as she has other plans.


frommindtomatter said...

OT Duke Flores.

'[That's] her pride and joy,' Juan Contreras said.

Couldn’t say his name or even “he`s”.

Juan claims that [Duke], who has autism, [has wandered] away in the past.

It looks like the kids a repeat offender according to Juan, he moves the blame onto the child. By trying to shift the blame he has unwittingly disclosed that the child has been badly supervised by letting us know this has happened numerous times.


NanaGrannyPants said...

douchebag means he’s from Boston

Hope this helps!

Anonymous said...

Dad was a lawyer.

Anonymous said...

To clarify, the 911 caller, the father ( AJ Freund Sr) is not disbarred. He was suspended from practicing law a few years ago, but never disbarred. His status is able to practice law (well, before this arrest that was his status, anyway).

NanaGranny said...

Did you see this video regarding AJ Freund?
The mother didnt dven try to hide the abuse and every single neighbor knew of the abuse & all of them called police. The woman in the video called the cops at least 6 times! How the hell could cops & DCF just leave him there & why the hell did his mother abuse him so badly?! Also why does the mother look like her “partner” is actually her father?!?!

Nanagranny said...

Nanagranny said...

Seriously?! AJ had so many bandages for serious wounds that neighbors thought he was dressed up as a mummy!!! Go DCF!!! Nevermind DCF knows that heroin junkies don’t even feed their kids. i ended up feeding a 4 and 5 year old brother dinner every single night for 6 mos until they moved into a trailer park bc the heroin junkie mother NEVER FED THEM. She was passed out locked in her bathroom high on heroin all day every day. The little boys were visibly malnourished and underweight. DCF and cops were called many times (including by us) and absolutely nothing was done! In fact the lack of feeding was just getting worse to where the boys would ask us for lunch also. It became clear that the only way they were going to be fed is if we fed them, which is what we did. We grilled outside everynight & bought extra food for them every night and would load up their plates and they would devour it all. It is hard to fathom that a parent can just never feed their kids but it is a reality and if we hadnt feed them every night they simply would not have been fed. That’s how bad DCF is. It doesnt matter how harrowing the child’s situatiin is, thry jusr leave the child in it. If neghbors don’t feed the kids, they don’t eat.

Nanagranny said...

We would literally feel guilty about going anywhere at night bc we knew if we did not feed them they wouldnt eat. I don’t think we ever did go anywhere bc we knew we had to be there to feed those 2 boys.

Troy said...

Imagrandma, Can you please report back with feedback on Nanagrannypants’ astute observations?

It fills me with happiness to know there are now other senior citizens here to add to your immeasurable wisdom!

Hey Jude said...

Anon on April, 29th, 5.30pm. - further clarification:

‘Suspension and temporary disbarment mean the same thing. In some states, if a suspension lasts for more than six months, the suspended attorney must take, and pass, the professional responsibility portion of the bar exam before returning to practice. Sometimes, suspension is limited to certain courts.’

Hey Jude said...

You are right, though:

‘Freund’s license was suspended for two years in October 2015. The Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission of the Supreme Court of Illinois at the time found he was convicted of indirect criminal contempt for violating a court order while he served as JoAnn Cunningham’s divorce attorney.

The suspension was stayed after 90 days in January 2016 and Freund was placed on probation and allowed to practice law again. He was allowed to continue practicing law as long as he meets the requirements of his probation, which include continuing treatment for substance abuse.’


I don’t know if he did meet the requirements or continue to practice law - he could have continued, if he had met the requirements.

Anonymous said...

Is he her father?
How could they possibly look that much alike if he is not her father?

Anonymous said...

Why haven’t the mother’s parents come forth? Is it because Andrew’s father is also her father? Im being totally serious....the resemblance between the 2 is striking!

It may also help to explain Andrew Sr.’s strange distancing from his being the father on the 911 call!

Hey Jude said...

Imhaven’t Read anything about her father, but Cunningham’s mother is probably too busy looking after her surviving grandsons to ‘come forth’ - she applied for, and was awarded, custody of Joann Cunningham’s eldest son, who had been living in squalor and filth with his mother and Andrew Freund Sr before Andrew was born. The grandmother maybe now has Parker, the youngest son, too - I know the two surviving sons were together a few days ago - hopefully they can stay together as they looked so happy.

Joann Cunningham left home when she was fifteen - if there’s a publicly given reason, I haven’t read of it so far.

Hey Jude said...

I read that Freund Sr liked to dress up in an army uniform and parade around in the house, even though he had never been in the army - a higher rank uniform, too. That was according to Cunningham’s former husband, who went there one day, and witnessed the sinister charade.

i also read and saw that a while back Andrew had injuries on his head and forehead, and had lost hair, from when, according to Cunningham, he had pulled a pan of scalding water over himself.


Just saw on NBC4 that Cunningham’s mother identified Freund as her daughter’s divorce attorney. That’s not to have identified him as her husband, former husband or partner, or as her daughter’s father - which likely she would have, if that were the case? She also had said the boy she eventually got custody of was frightened of Freund walking round the house in an army uniform, with a gun, and that he and his mother would hide in a bedroom from Freund. Cunningham told the boy she would kill herself if he went to live with his grandmother- they both terrorised them.

Anonymous said...

Jude, He looks EXACTLY like her.
Im sure it’s her father.
If I drew her face and then made one alteration to the drawing (widened the chin) it would look exactly like Andrew Sr.
What a psycho dressing up as a high ranking army person.
I have a feeling he killed the boy, not her.

Anonymous said...

Jude, He looks EXACTLY like her.
Im sure it’s her father.
If I drew her face and then made one alteration to the drawing (widened the chin) it would look exactly like Andrew Sr.
What a psycho dressing up as a high ranking army person.
I have a feeling he killed the boy, not her.

Jean Paul said...


Chris Watts is looking to appeal his conviction as well as his guilty plea!!!

I really wish Peter would do the analysis on Chris's interview, because so many people want to know the truth.

Hey Jude said...


Anon, your assertion is interesting, but what has that do with SA?


Chris Watts can’t appeal his convinction, or withdraw his guilty plea, he can only claim ineffective assistance from his legal counsel - that is according to Scott Reisch, who is an attorney who has covered the Watts case on YouTube.

If he does that, he will lose the attorney-client privilege, so anything he has ever said to his lawyers could be used in open court. That would be interesting. That’s not likely to go anywhere unless he is offered some pro bono legal assistance.


One incentive that could be used to get him to give up more information, would be that of access to further education, which is not available in the prison he is in. When he spoke (prison interview) about what was available educationally, he spoke clearly, he didn’t um and ah as he did the rest of the time - he liked the facility, though it seemed he would like it better if he could access education. All that was on offer there was a sex offender class.


It wasn’t Armchair Detective who first talked about the shadows on the video - he was the first one who came up when I searched for the video I had seen previously, and for which others say he took credit. That went some way to account for my puzzlement when I watched it again the other day - it was a different channel. In a later one, he was claiming there were ghosts in the Watts house, which was exploitative - he’s in it for clicks. I prefer the true crime channels in which the hosts do their own research and have a care for the victims.

Anonymous said...

Jean Paul said...

He CAN appeal his conviction.

He is claiming mitigating circumstances.

He can file an appeal. He can hire new counsel.

The odd thing is why is he doing it? It's certainly interesting in that he "confessed" to everything and had never claimed to be innocent (except in the very very beginning). But even then he admitted to killing Shannann.

I don't like Armchair Detective anymore. I have heard his theories about the JonBenet case in which he claims that Burke cracked JonBenet's skull due to an argument about her taking some of his pineapple. I lost a lot of respect for him when I heard that, as Burke was not capable of causing the catastrophic crack in her skull. Nor is that in any way believable on so many levels it would take paragraphs to get into it. He also believes Burke "tried to bring her back to life" by poking his train set into her. Really dumb stuff.

Hey Jude said...

He can’t make a straightforward appeal, because he pled guilty - he can claim ineffective counsel, which he was talking about iin the prison interview. He said during that interview that his attorneys repeatedly checked with him if he really wanted to plead guilty, and he said yes each time, so he can’t claim coercion. As he was talking about ineffective counsel, he probably considered that was his most likely chance.


“The defendant was advised at the time of his guilty plea that he was giving up certain constitutional rights, including the right to an appeal,” Krista Henery, Community Relations Director for the Weld County District Attorney’s Office, told

OK, so he's not supposed to, but that doesn't sound like he absolutely can't. An expert told there are ways around this.

Aya Gruber, professor of law at the University of Colorado, told that although he is timed out, it is possible. She said a person can appeal if they claim the sentence is illegal or in regards to the appeal process itself.

“[You can] if you were not informed, or you were coerced, or you didn’t get effective assistance of counsel,” she said. “All appeals are pretty much long shots but appealing a plea bargain on the basis of coercion or ineffective assistance of counsel, that’s like a super long shot.”

Gruber added that because Chris is detained there is always habeas corpus, which is the act of a person claiming unlawful imprisonment.

“It allows a person who is detained to challenge their detention, but without a direct appeal it’s very difficult to do,” she said.

So, Watts probably won't be getting out of jail.

Hey Jude said...

Why is he doing it? Maybe because prison is boring, he has no classes to attend, and life is long - he is probably dwelling on NK who is ”on the outside” still living her child-free life, and not visiting or writing to him. What did he mean when he said that if he hadn’t met up with her night, if he had just said he couldn’t get a babysitter, none of it would have happened?

Hey Jude said...

^ that night

Jean Paul said...

Jude, Thanks. Interesting info.

I read that he is going to appeal his sentence as well as his guilty plea on the basis of mitigating circumstances that supposedly occurred.

My guess is that he is going to go back to saying that Shannann strangled the kids and that therefore, his killing her was influenced by that mitigating circumstance.

What other mitigating circumstance could he come up with, unless he wants to finally admit that his Mom and Dad helped him plan it...but even then I don't see how that would in any way effect his guilty plea and sentence.

He may be bored in jail, but still, it is odd that he is appealing. Somewhat puzzling.

Hey Jude said...


If he is able, he will very likely try to claim that his actions were caused because of the Level patches he used - that was one of the things he and his parents had been discussing (he said that in his prison interview) - ineffective counsel and the patches. He won’t stand a chance as NK has said in one of her statements that he always had on two of the patches, whereas only one was recommended. Misuse of the product was his choice. Not that it’s likely that it was the patches which influenced him - even if that were a possible effect, it was his choice to use two.

I just watched a YouTube by a lady named Sari - she posed an interesting question. If Chris wasn’t able to carry Shan’ann’s body down the stairs without dragging her in a sheet, how did he carry her to the gravesite without assistance? There weren’t any drag marks, or tyre tracks leading to the grave.

Also, though it has been asked before, were the girls put into different tanks because they were disposed of simultaneously by more than one person? You’d think, or rather I think, that if he was acting alone, he’d go the shortest route to the nearest tank with each of them rather than walk the distance to the further tank, and separate them, especially considering his plan was hours behind schedule as Shan’anns flight had been delayed. He didn’t ppear to have had time to have cleared up the Cervi crime scene - sheet out in the open, and broken shovel standing upright at the grave Makes me wonder if , in the event, he was set up - the skunk thing bothers me. Was there actually a dead skunk somewhere in the truck? He said he could smell a smell like a skunk on the drive out. I’ve never encountered a skunk, so I wouldn’t recognise the smell. He couldn’t explain a lot of things - was it all due to disassociation? It doesn’t seem to compute with his willingness to say how he claims he killed the girls at the oilfield, which made it all even worse, and him worse, if that were possible. Is he covering for someone who might actually have set him up, because they thought he was a skunk? Well, he didn’t really have that separation conversation with Shan’ann.

What did he mean by he had to talk NK off a ledge a couple of times? According to her they didn’t argue.

Why was NK so insistent the investigators should not interview her male oilworker friend who had been visiting with her? Why isn’t she tramatised because of what Chris did to his family? Why doesn’t she express horror that he’s not the man she thought he was? Why does she try to make out she was not as involved in his life as she was, when she’d even been to view apartments for him to potentially rent, and without him, it seems, as he had lost interest.


I think they stil are not satisfied the crimes are all solved and justice done - I don’t believe for a moment the FBI went out there just to hang out and to find out more of how Chris Watts ticks.

It’s just some thoughts from watching that YouTube - I would like to have a go at analysing some of the prison interview some time, there’s so much of it, it’s daunting to even think about.

Jean Paul said...


All interesting points and questions you've brought up. Also, if he killed the girls out at the oil tanks, why did he wash both of the girls sheets the next morning, telling NK that they were "smelly"? It is flabergasting that the FBI did not seek some follow up on his reason for doing that if they were actually killed out at the oil fields.

I have listened to full psychoanalysis of Chris by youtubers and have in my brain that he is a covert narcissist (which somehow explains all of his horrible actions), yet the other part of my brain knows from SA that his "confession" is not reliable. In fact, I can't think of one part of it that is reliable. Does that mean it is all a lie? No. But Chris mainly "confesses" by either using hand gestures to describe what he did after the info is fed to him by his interrogators (with Shannann's death) or responds affirmatively to questions asked of him by interrogator's). HIs whole "confession" about what he did to the girls is mainly affirmative responses to questions asked of him and then sometimes parroting back what has been suggested to him.
Oddly, my gut feeling says that he didn't kill the girls and I can't explain why I feel that way because I have nothing negative feelings towards him as being a monster, but there is something so bizarre about his "confession". Did he have help? He could have. The skunk smell thing is really weird, but again, his interrogators suggested what it could be (Shannan defecating) and he just accepts their suggestion.
Much of all of the info he has supplied is not stated in a spontaeous statement or freely composed statement. In fact, far from it. It is not reliable. Perhaps some or much of it is true if Tammy and the other guy were suggesting the right things that happened. But it is simply not reliable. There is hardly one sentence that is freely composed. Even his confession of how he killed Shannan and what led up to it is not reliable.
What I have found is that when someone is feeding someone questions and suggestions and for whatever reason the person "wants" to confess, it is easy to "fool" them and have people say "ah yes he has confessed, he has told us what happened," But actually he hasn't told us what happened at all. He has definitely fabricated bits of it (like the sex with shannan and then straddling her etc) and the rest is mostly him just agreeeing with questions asked of him and going along with what is suggested. And I will tell you from other cases I have looked at where similar "confessions" are given, it actually reveals NONE of the truth. It is very easy for someone to be led and just agree and fill in what they know someone wants to hear.
Something is very very wrong, and I don't know what it is exactly and yes I do believe he is a monster, but his "confession" reveals that he hasn't told us much of anything, just "agreed" with the interrogators and yes he did know the locations of all 3 of them so without doubt he has guilty knowledge....however, his confession is a non-confession in statement analysis terms. It is utterly unreliable. I do not know what actually happened, but Chris sure as hell has not told us.

I tend to think his father had something to do with it for a variety of reasons.

Jean Paul said...

Also, within a confession, if someone does not tell us something in a reliable way, if they say they don't remember, if they say things that do not make any sense, if they are simply agreeeing with Tammy and the guy as they feed step by step what could have happened and maybe filling in a bit here and there (that conflicts with earlier things they said--like suddenly strangling turns into smothering etc) they have not confessed in a reliable manner to much of anything. That's the key is "reliability".

People like to think "oh! he's confessing" but unless the person is actually stating what happened step by step in reliable statements, the person hasn't confessed. Chris WAtts' "confession" may be one of the most flawed unreliable confessions I've ever heard. Even the Memphis 3 "confession" (although unreliable and regurgitating what was fed to him) was stated in sentences without continual prompting, leading and feeding of info.

In short, something is wrong with his confession, Very wrong.

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

Jude, interesting!

I have also wondered if he was set up...the sheet left on the ground right above the grave along with the shovel sticking out of the ground marking the grave seem to point to someone setting him up. When the FBI asks him about it and even "feeds" him a possible explanation--"Did you leave them there because someone came up on you?" Chris does not agree with that nor supply any other explanation. He acts like he just doesn't know why the sheet and shovel were left there.

It makes no sense that he would leave them there.

It doesn't really make sense either that he would have driven all that way to hide bodies and kill people at the exact spot where he had told his supervisor he would be at by himself that morning.

There are different people that act suspicious including Chris' mother and father--neither seemed upset about Shannann or the kids being killed in such a horrible way.
Chris had also deleted some texts sent to him by his father when he was in N. Carolina and I don't think anyone ever retrieved them. Those texts were sent after the nut fallout from the grandmother exposing the kids to nuts. Shannann told a friend how Chris was deleting texts sent by his father after he would receive them. I think that that is very suspicious all things considered.

Jean Paul said...

I think Chris's father either did it or hired someone else to do it, and told Chris where the bodies were. Chris, having dependant personality disorder, would likely have not stood up to the father, would have just passively accepted what he had done and covered for him. So yes Chris definitely has guilty knowledge and is a total jerk but his words to not reliably point to him being the killer. The father may very well have added the additional twist of framing Chris with the sheet and shovel because he and his wife were mad at Chris for the falling out and were also mad at him that he married Shannann. On one level I believe Chris is a complete monster, but I have to force myself to stick with SA as well as I actually cannot see him killing his kids in the way that he says he did. It's just beyond fathoming. I also don't see how someone as passive as he is as well as dependant could lash out with extreme hitman type brutality. The killing and disposal of his little daughters remind me of a hit the Iceman would have done. Something just doesn't add up. If you notice, Chris' father does not seem concerned about anything when Chris "confesses" including the fact that his son Chris will be in jail for life.

Jean Paul said...

Chris made sure to give his daughter medicine before he went out the night of the killings with NK. Why would he have bothered doing that if he planned on killing them all? And he also makes sure to pack his lunch?

If you look at the video of Chris loading the truck, I don't see what Armchair sees which he claims he sees Chris dragging out Shannann and loading her into the truck. I don't see that. He says that because Chris turns around for a second that means he was loading Shannann into the truck. I don't agree and I don't see it.

Anonymous said...


Note the liar's number of 3.

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

Interesting Jude...that you say the FBI knows the girls were really killed at the house. I believe it...the FBI came right out and asked him after he had been convicted "You really did these things right? You're not just saying you did for some reason".

I think the rake handle/sheet just scream that he was framed. Why would the perpetrator leave them like that?!

I noticed that too that he said that he felt terrible that her family thinks he;s a monster and that does coincide with someone who is sad that they actually believe he is capable of something so awful when he wasn't.

I also thought that the fact that Shannann's phone was found in the home the next morning squeezed between couch cushions made no sense. That made me wonder if someone had framed him. Why would he just tuck it in the couch cushions rather than throw it in a lake or on the side of the road somewhere since he had driven to work in the morning...didn't he come home after allegedly getting rid of the bodies and then go back to work?

One thing I think is weird, and I hesitate to say it for fear of sounding heartless, is Nicole Atkinson's behavior that morning. I feel like she was way too vigilant seemingly knowing preternaturally that Shannann was dead in a ditch somewhere. It might be nothing, but why get up after being asleep 4 hours etc to check her phone for Shannann texts and then go to the OBGYN appointment to find out if she had gone....I consider myself a good friend but just can't see myself rushing to the OBGYN and demanding confidential info about a friend when they hadn't even been missing. Nicole Atkinson acts as if she has been missing for days when it is merely the next morning after she had dropped her off at 2:30. So, Nicole Atkinson's reaction goes way beyond concern into some kind of preternatural awareness that would not a common type of awareness.

Also, interesting about his personification of the rake and that probably meaning that he dug the grave. Could he have been forced to dig it? Like someone holding a gun on him forcing him? And forced to leave the sheet lying out and the rake handle marking the spot? You're making me think that that may have been what happened.

Hey Jude said...

Sorry, it is not my intention to make you think anything - at least not if it’s based on possibilities rather than SA.

Maddie said...

Scumbags like this do not deserve beautiful innocent children. Look at them.

Maddie said...

The truth is he threw his family away in dirty oil. He has no remorse. He has no human soul.

Maddie said...

I know. It’s heartbreaking. From day one at the very least, neglected.