Tuesday, June 25, 2019

London Bus Attack Analysis

Last Wednesday, I had a date with Chris. We got on the Night Bus, heading for her place in Camden Town, climbed upstairs and took the front seats. We must have kissed or something because these guys came after us. I don't remember if they were already there or if they got on after us. There were at least four of them. They started behaving like hooligans, demanding that we kissed so they could enjoy watching, calling us 'lesbians' and describing sexual positions. I don't remember the whole episode, but the word 'scissors' stuck in my mind. It was only them and us there. In an attempt to calm things down, I started making jokes. I thought this might make them go away. Chris even pretended she was sick, but they kept on harassing us, throwing us coins and becoming more enthusiastic about it. The next thing I know is that Chris is in the middle of the bus fighting with them. On an impulse, I went over there only to find her face bleeding and three of them beating her up. The next thing I know is I'm being punched. I got dizzy at the sight of my blood and fell back. I don't remember whether or not I lost consciousness. Suddenly the bus had stopped, the police were there and I was bleeding all over. Our stuff was stolen as well. I don't know yet if my nose is broken, and I haven't been able to go back to work, but what upsets me the most is that VIOLENCE HAS BECOME A COMMON THING, that sometimes it's necessary to see a woman bleeding after having been punched to feel some kind of impact. I'm tired of being taken as a SEXUAL OBJECT, of finding out that these situations are usual, of gay friends who were beaten up JUST BECAUSE. We have to endure verbal harassment AND CHAUVINIST, MISOGYNISTIC AND HOMOPHOBIC VIOLENCE because when you stand up for yourself s*** like this happens. By the way, I am thankful to all the women and men in my life that understand that HAVING BALLS MEANS SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. I just hope that in June, Pride Month, stuff like this can be spoken out loudly so they STOP HAPPENING!

II. Statement With Analysis 

Last Wednesday,Ihad a date withChris.

a.    The statement does not begin with a pronoun. 
b.    Priority: element of time 

Context:  An assault is “personal” and it is intrusive. It is personal because it is “us” or “our body” that is invaded.  What makes it “intrusive” (invasive) – the element of surprise or lack of expectation. 

 Wegot on the Night Bus, heading for her placein Camden Townclimbedupstairs and tookthe frontseats.

a.    Unnecessary information regarding what town they were headed and to specific location. 
b.    “we” is now produced when in public (Night Bus) and…
c.    Front and Center is noted, with unnecessary information that slows down the pace. 
d.    It is important to the subject, not that they were assaulted, but these unnecessary details are known to the public. Why?
e.    Incomplete action (“heading for…” not “headed towards”) 
f.     For whatever purpose, our subject “climbed” and our subject “took” ****
These terms, in context, appear to indicate a public display – the “front” seats located “upstairs”---unnecessary inclusion on both. 
g.    Could “climb” and “took front seats”reflect the subject’s experience as a flight attendant? 

 We must havekissed or somethingbecausetheseguys came after us.

a.    Weak commitment (“must have”) of a physical (sensory) action by someone who began her statement about being on a date.  Note the use of “we” as our subject looks back to write to the public about what happened.  
b.    Q. Does the subject fail to remember due to trauma? A. No. Please note the details of not only where they sat, but how they got there, according to the subject. Incongruent with trauma.  High hormonal response from attack gives us an expectation of recall. 
c.    must have” is weak assertion. Q. Did they kiss? A. She does not tell us. She further weakens the assertion with two more points:
d.    “or something”—allows for the weakness of “kiss” to be supplanted by another activity 
e.    because” is unnecessary information to explain why “guys” “came after us.” 
f.     These three points of sensitivity suggest that she is truthful: “or something” caused the guys to come after us, but she does not tell us what it is and she does not commit to it being a kiss. She allows it to be something other than a kiss; therefore, we now allow it to be caused by something other than a kiss. 
g.    The subject is not working in detail from memory, but is “reasoning” what “must have” happened. This sentence is telling us to ask, “Tell us what happened to cause these guys to go after you?” The subject is concealing the reason why the “guys” went after, not attacked, them. 
h.    came after us”--- we need to know what does “came after” mean? 
i.     came after us” is not attack, but softer language (in comparison to attack, bloody photos) 
j.     There is no violence yet in the statement. 
k.    Why the use of “guys” here? What made the attackers or teens “guys” right here, in context of withholding information as to the cause of the “came after us”? 
l.     The “guys” are “these” (close), which in context of withheld information causes us to ask, “did our subject (and/or Chris?) have any communication or contact with the alleged attackers prior to this point in the statement? 
m.  She cannot bring herself to tell us it was the kissing that caused “guys” to come after them.  She allowed us to think of something else, while not telling us. We follow her lead. 

 I don't rememberif they were alreadythereor if they got on after us.

a.    Contamination sensitivity from police interview?
b.    Ifnotcontaminated: Our subject should only tell us what she remembers. This is unnecessary information that is about the element of time. 
As this is “in the negative” it is elevated in importance. 
c.    The failure of memory is about time --- 
d.    We note that she was doing “something” to which she withheld in her statement. 
e.    Speculation: we do not know what it was, therefore, these are presented as questions--- could it have been a sex act? Could they (or our subject) been on her phone?  Could our subject have been already (time) communicating with the alleged perpetrators? 
f.     Element of time continues to be important to the subject. 

 There were at leastfour of them.

a.    Appropriate estimate consistent with larger assault events – or instigated fight or assault 
b.    Possible interaction with four of six? 


a.    They were not “hooligans” nor “hooligan”likeprior to this point in time in the statement.

demandingthat wekissed sothey could enjoywatching

a.    “demanding” 
b.    “so” – how would she know they are enjoying it?  (she does not quote them) 
c.    Why the need to explain “why” they made demands? 
d.    Change of verb tense while repeating “kissing”—
e.    Did she (they) kiss for the “guys” and now they are “ like hooligans” demanding more? 

calling us 'lesbians'

false narrative of victimization –if so, its use tells us that the missing information from the subject is guilt related…
is she trivializing the attack that left her and Chris bloodied? 

and describingsexualpositions.Idon't rememberthe whole episode,

a.    “describing” takes time.  It takes interaction. It takes pause. It means listening, paying attention etc. 
b.    “I don’t remember” in this context, is for our subject to deceptively withhold information 
c.    “episode” is neutral. It can be positive or negative. An attack is negative. This is not the language of an attack at this point in the statement. “Episode” can be one of many---please note external info that the subject described 10 years like this. “Episode” can also be voyeuristic (like seeing a “sitcom” of someone’s life on TV). 
d.    Consider the softer or neutral word “episode” may be related to her withholding of information of her own words/actions in this period of time. 
e.    “episode” is a neutral linguistic disposition towards an attack.  Consider that the subject may not want to include her own activities/communication in this event as it would condemn herself. 

 butthe word 'scissors' stuckin mymind.

but”– refutation or comparison with what preceded it. 

“scissors” – cutting, they can be a weapon,   The only person in present in this sentence (passive is the subject, herself.  We note it is passively given---no one is accused of carrying a weapon.  With no one else in the sentence (person) but our subject, we should consider possible act of a “weapon” (utilized) in her language.  She may wish to be interpreted as saying she feared one of them carrying a weapon but she does not. We cannot interpret her words.  

Why did scissors enter her language?
a.    Sexual position of lesbianism? 
b.    Violence?
c.    Cutting? Whom? What? Where? How? Why? 
d.    What was on her mind at this point in the statement that she thought to use this word?
e.    We should consider this as possible manipulation by expressing it without detail, coming off the “I don’t remember” 
f.     Is something “stuck” in her mind? 

Please note “scissors” is not consistent in the narrative, but appears to be artificially added for effect. Therefore, it is very important to the subject and to the analysis. 

*Why “scissor”here?

Could she want the audience to believe the “guys” wanted to see “scissoring”?

Or, could she want her audience to believe she was in real danger due to the “hooligans” possibly having a weapon? 

Please consider this comes as she is describing the “episode” –not the attack.  

Note “we” is now “I” and “my” – 

Question--- Did Chris say “no” to more, which caused the break here? 

Please consider that she is telling the truth that “scissors” was stuck in her mind.  Not that anyone pulled one out, used one, or threatened.  She conceals HOW this word got stuck in her mind.  Was it she, herself, that used it? 

Was she “reliving” in her mind, a performance in an episode? 

Did Chris object? (note the distancing language in the priority) 

Did a request or demand for “scissoring” turn the “guys” into “hooligans”?
Or, could a refusal to “scissor” have caused the change? 

 It was onlythemand usthere. In an attempt to calmthingsdownstartedmakingjokes.

a.    Note the order, “them” before “us” --- they are “like hooligans” now –she lists “them” before the victims at this point in the statement. 
b.    The subject has withheld information about her role in this, now feels the need to explain why she told jokes. 
c.    What went on that they now need to become “calm”?  (see “climbed” and “took”, front, etc) 
d.    it was in jest” is a common form of deception to cover words. 
e.    She didn’t use communicative language for jokes, she was “making”—(started) – was this physical jokes or gestures? 

Does she need to cover or explain her actions (unintended recipient) due to possibly not obtaining public sympathy?

Did she fear, “you provoked them!” as a response, rather than pity for victim status? 

“things” needed to be calmed. She did not need to calm the hooligans down. She needed to calm “things” down. This suggests interactive behaviors that escalated. When we calm things down, we’ve been involved. 

 Ithought this mightmake them go away.

“came at us”---now she wants them to “go away” ---
To “go away” is not to stop the assaultive behavior. She was telling jokes. 

If one is telling “jokes”, one is holding an audience. 

She used her “jokes” to make them go away? 

When one is being entertained, one pays attention, not walk away. Jokes are used to bring in attention—not to drive it away.  

****What did she say to them that she now wishes to be seen as “jokes”?

Insults could ruin the publicity, exploitation and attention she seeks.  This is why the testimony of the boys is vital. Given the political climate, we may never know from media. 
*Did she insult them?
Did she infuriate them?
Did she threaten them?
Did  she humiliate them? 

 Chris even pretended she was sick, but they kept on harassing us, throwing us coins and becoming moreenthusiastic about it.

She and Chris are still separated. 
Chris “even pretended”, which takes time, to be sick. 

Note “enthusiastic” is an unexpected positive word by one who is being “harassed” –incongruence noted – 

Throwing coins--- not at us, but “throwing us coins” is “kept” (continual)--- they did not throw coins “at” the subject and Chris.  Soft language. 

Consider that our subject was acting out a sexualized episode for her audience in this episode.
Consider that Chris may have feigned to be sick to not have to perform (“scissoring?”) any longer. 

 The next thing I knowis that Chris is in the middle of the busfightingwith them. 

This was a fight. This is her language chosen. 

This is why there is a distinct absence of intrusive assaultive language in the subject’s statement. 

On an impulse, I went over thereonly tofindher face bleeding and three of them beating her up. 

“On an impulse” she has the need to editorialize her account, as if it was without pre-thought. She is adding to her story. Please consider her “jokes” is the language of communication just prior to the main event. 

Did the subject instigate this “fight” with both her communication and her actions? 


Please note external info:  She now has two fundraisers from the public 

Note the order reflects priority--- Chris fighting, comes before Chris being beat up. 

Please consider that the subject may be shifting responsibility for the “fight”
 to or towards Chris. The subject was only making “jokes” but Chris was “fighting.” 

The subject was making jokes (not “telling”) and “the next thing” she knows…Chris is fighting. 

Note that Chris wasn’t bleeding, her face was. (distancing) 

The next thing I know is I'm being punched.

Note, again, the passing of time without telling us what she did…more leakage of time passing. She is concealing information about her actions right here. 

Note “I’m being punched” and not “I was punched.” 

 I gotdizzyat the sight of my blood and fell back.

Her friend’s blood didn’t cause this reaction. 
Consider “dizzy” may be an emotional reaction (not at the sight of blood of Chris) –consider that the subject may have artificially edited into this account her emotion. 

Is this her reasoning or excuse for not aiding Chris? 

 I don't rememberwhether or not I lost consciousness. 

Third use of telling us what she does not remember in an open statement. She is concealing information. 

How does one not remember whether one lost consciousness? 

Suddenlythe bus hadstopped, the police were there and I was bleeding all over

Our stuffwas stolen as well.

 I don't know yet if my nose is broken,

Note the manipulative impact---the fight was last Wednesday.  

 and I haven't been able to go back to work,butwhat upsets me the most is that VIOLENCE HAS BECOME A COMMON THING, that sometimes it's necessary to see a woman bleeding after having been punched to feel some kind of impact.


Passivity---assault is highly personal and it is intrusive. When there is an expectation, the intrusive element of surprise is gone. This was a fight. 

The language just prior to the “fight” was hers. She classified it as “jokes” that was to calm “things” in the episode down. 

She distanced herself from the language of assault. 

 I'm tired of being taken as a SEXUAL OBJECT, 

Note external statement of “10 years”--- this is the language of manipulative exploitation. 

of finding out that these situations areusual, of gay friends who were beaten up

Note the recipient or “dog whistle” language to allow others to enter into her victim status. 

 JUST BECAUSE. We have to endure verbal harassment AND CHAUVINIST, MISOGYNISTIC AND HOMOPHOBIC VIOLENCE because when you stand up for yourself s***

The subject provoked the teenagers. She was “making jokes”—please consider that the content likely insulted teenaged boys, which could have included chauvinistic or other insults. 

Consider incongruence of “standing up for self” and on “impulse” are incongruent. 

When she had ther attention as a "sexual object" things were ok. They were “guys” and they only started to act “like” hooligans. It was only after she lost their attention that it became a derogatory definition of women. 

Manipulative and exploitative personality reaches out beyond the scope of an “assault” to signal need to reach others: 

 like this happens. By the way, I am thankful to all the women and men in my life that understand that HAVING BALLS

note the language earlier as dominant and aggressive. The use of “HAVING BALLS” affirms her personality type and activity. 

MEANS SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. I just hope that in June, Pride Month, stuff like this can be spoken out loudly so theySTOP HAPPENING!

She does not hope for arrests, justice, safety but to be “spoken out loudly”---attention seeking behavior. 
Note that “they” stop happening---who is “they”? 

Consider she likely used abusive language to teenage boys about having “balls” ---

This does not negate what they did (punched, etc) but it shows what she was concealing and why this date was her priority. It has, thus far, obtained the attention (and money?) she sought. 

Deception Indicated about her role in the fight. It was not an unprovoked unexpected homophobic attack.