Team Analysis Training Holiday Schedule:
Tuesday, December 17th, 9am to 3pm EST
Thursday, December 19th 12noon to 6pm EST
14 comments:
Martina
said...
This is from today's Daily Mail Online edition from an article about the McCanns:
In a new Facebook posting the couple, who have 14-year-old twins Sean and Amelie, poignantly state: 'Reasons we miss Madeleine.'
They detail: 'Holding her, hugging her, kissing the top of her head, lying next to her. Our complete family of five. Everything. We miss her. Please help us get her home.'
Madeleine would be 17 years old now. It strikes me what they list as what they are missing. Even for a 4 year old, it seems odd. Lying next to her? Kissing her on top of the head - that seems weirdly distinctive. They describe what they would do to a passive child, a 4 year old is anything but. What is missing is the life she should have led in the meantime. What SHE would have missed, all her birthday parties, her friends at school, the family vacations, all her experiences. The focus is not on Madeleine, it's only on the parents.
This is very dangerous. The amount of assumptions is staggering. If you were to evaluate other parents who have had their children go missing (and had nothing to do with their disappearance) you would see similar statements.....
Anonymous - What are you talking about? What is dangerous & would u please indicate the staggering list of assumptions, I can't seem to find it? Many thanks Gerry.
So I decided to go to the store last night and then some dude tried to force me in his vehicle no joke try to shove me in a black van or SUV type shit I fought him off and I ran called my husband and he came and got me (he was asleep cause he works nights and usually I am fine alone) he came and got me it’s a scary fucking world when women can’t even go to the fucking store without almost being taken or worse killed!  Idk wtf he hit me in the head with but my head feels like it’s gonna pop Lady’s be extra careful at night this happened last night I’m not sure what time thank god I fought back or I wouldn’t be here telling y’all about this shit! I thought this shit only happens in TV shows or movies but nope it happens in our own city’s watch out for your selfs and your friends I’m still shaking from it. This world is going crazier and crazier by the minute!
“New England Water Blog said...Here is a statement worth studying.”
It certainly is thanks for posting it.
After reading it through to get some context we see what appears to be an account of an attempted abduction/kidnapping. If this is genuine then analysis of the language will support it. We look to what the speaker begins their statement with as it will reveal their priority.
The expected would be something along the lines of “A man tried to kidnap me last night” or “I was nearly kidnapped last night”. That information tells the listener who, where, when and what occurred. Our speaker instead chooses to open her statement with:
“So I decided to go to the store last night”
From her words we see her priority is location and time. It shows that she needs the listener to know this information first and places its importance over the event of her being nearly abducted.
The first few words of her statement leave us asking questions. The first is where was she, was she at home or some other location? The second question is did she go to the store? She tells us she “decided” to go to the store, but we must not assume that she did because she did not tell us that. Note this is the most important thing to her, her priority. Her priority is that she “decided” to go to the store.
“and then some dude tried to force me in his vehicle no joke try to shove me in a black van or SUV type shit”
“and then” indicates missing time and we jump from a decision being made to go to the store to “some dude tried to force me”. We still don’t know where she was when her account began and what happened between her decision to go to the store and her meeting her attacker. Why is this information missing, is it sensitive to her? We note her linguistic disposition towards her attacker; she calls him “some dude”. This would be neutral and we would expect her to use negative language in relation him, again this is unexpected.
“tried to force me in his vehicle no joke try to shove me”
There is a tense change. First she says “tried” (past tense) and connects it the word “force”. Force could mean either physically or by verbal threats. She then says:
“no joke”
Her saying “no joke” is another form of saying “honestly”, which tells us she is sensitive to people thinking she might not be being honest or she is joking. I question why an honest genuine person would be sensitive to telling the truth. In her mind she has a worry people might not believe her story which causes her to use persuasive language.
After the “no joke” we see the tense change from the previous “tried” to “try” (present tense) - “no joke try to shove me”
This is not reliable as it suggests story telling by its present tense usage. Also I note the missing pronoun “he” which would connect the shoving to her attacker. We expect her to connect the shoving to him, but she doesn’t and her use of present tense “try” instead of “tried” suggests this part of her statement is made up. Remember she fronted this with the words “no joke” which means she is sensitive to if what she is going to say will be believed.
It is also worth considering
“some dude tried to force me [in] his vehicle no joke try to shove me [in] a black van”
It is not clear whether her attacker tried to force her “in” (while she was inside) or “into” the vehicle. It is easy to come to the assumption that she was being pushed into the vehicle but she does not tell us that by saying “into” she only says “in”. It is a possibility she was in the vehicle and her attacker was trying to force her to do something against her will and that something has been omitted from her account. My analysis only covers the first one and half lines of her statement which shows just how SA rich her account is.
Russell Simmons isn’t happy about being featured in an upcoming documentary by Oprah about the MeToo-movement (multiple women have made allegations of sexual assault against him). Simmons wrote the following message to Oprah
“Dearest OPRAH,
you have been a shining light to my family and my community. It’s so troubling that you choose to single me out in your recent documentry [sic]. I have already admitted to being a playboy (more appropriately titled today ‘womanizer’) sleeping with and putting myself in more compromising situations than almost any man I know… So many that some could reinterpret or reimagine a different recollection of the same experiences.
I have taken and passed nine 3-hour lie detector tests. These stories are UNUSABLE.
I am guilty of exploiting, supporting and making the soundtrack for a grossly unequal society, but I have never been violent or forced myself on anyone. Still I am here to help support a necessary shift in power and consciousness."
1. ingratiation (“dearest”, “shining light”, etc.) 2. “singled out” -> does this mean he belongs in the group of men that sexually assaulted women? 3. he confesses to putting himself in compromising situations with women that could be interpreted differently -> thereby suggesting that these “situations” could be interpreted as sexual misconduct/assault 4. “more than any man I know” -> so these “situations” happened very often 5. he says he passed lie detector tests and the stories are UNUSABLE -> he doesn’t say the stories aren’t TRUE though 6. “I’m guilty of exploiting, etc.” -> he seems to feel the need to confess (see also “I have already admitted”) -> since he obviously doesn’t want to confess to sexual assault he confesses to a related (less serious) set of facts 7. “I have never been violent or forced myself on anyone.” -> this isn’t a reliable denial because he doesn’t address the specific allegations (and he stretches the time (“never”) (so as to ease the guilt?) 8. “Still I am here to help support a necessary shift in power and consciousness.” -> “still” is similar to “but” -> is he therewith diminishing the veracity of the previous phrase (“I have never (etc.)”)? Why does he use the word “still” at all? Did he do something that makes it unlikely for him to support a “necessary shift in power” etc.?
A while ago some of us commented on the supposed murder-suicide of Conner Snyder (8) and Brinley Snyder (4). The mother’s story was that she found Conner and Brinley hanging by a dog lead and that Conner was suicidal but didn’t want to go alone. The family dog was gone.
In the meantime, the autopsy report was finalized: both children died from hanging and their deaths were ruled homicides. The mother has been charged with murdering Conner and Brinley, animal cruelty and sexual abuse of a dog.
One of the mother’s friends told investigators she said she’d “had enough” of her children just weeks before the hanging.
According to police, the mother purchased the dog lead the day before (and picked it up just hours before) the hanging. She also sent sexually explicit photos of her and a dog to an unnamed person.
Point 3 you on your list is especially concerning.
“So many that some [could] reinterpret or reimagine a different recollection of the same experiences.”
He allows that others “could” interpret what happened differently than how he sees things. Rape is not something which should be open to interpretation. When talking of allegations of rape, someone who is innocent would not use that kind of language. We expect very strong denials but he does not make any.
Also regarding the polygraphs:
"I have taken and passed nine 3-hour lie detector tests. These stories are UNUSABLE."
Why would someone need to take “nine 3-hour” (he includes 3 the liars favourite number) lie detector tests, wouldn’t one be sufficient? It appears he may have been shopping for the right results.
Thanks Adrian, good point about expecting strong denials from an innocent man accused of rape. I would also expect the denial to be issued in the first part of the message. Simmons only issues a denial in one of the last sentences.
I discovered Simmons' message was longer than what I copied above. See below. He writes he took the lie detector tests for his daughters. Were the not convinced by one polygraph? Or did they require he take a test each time a woman accused him? Nine polygraphs sure is a lot. Who conducted the tests?
Entire message:
"Dearest OPRAH,you have been a shining light to my family and my community. Contributing so much to my life that I couldn’t list a fraction of it in this blog.Ihave given you the gift of meditation and the groundbreaking book”THE POWER OF NOW “we bonded to say the least. This is why it’s so troubling that you choose me to single out in your recent documentry. I have already admitted to being a playboy more (appropriately titled today “womanizer”) sleeping with and putting myself in more compromising situations than almost any man I know. Not 8 or 14 thousand like Warren Beatty or Wilt Chamberlain, but still an embarrassing number. So many that some could reinterpret or reimagine a different recollection of the same experiences. Please note that ur producers said that this upcoming doc was to focus ONLY on 3 hand chosen women. I have refused to get in the mud with any accusers, but let’s acknowledge what i have shared. I have taken and passed nine 3-hour lie detector tests (taken for my daughters), that these stories have been passed on by CNN, NBC, BUZZFEED, NY POST, NY MAG, AND OTHERS. Now that you have reviewed the facts and you SHOULD have learned what I know; that these stories are UNUSABLE and that “hurt people hurt people”. Today I received a call from an old girlfriend from the early 1980s which means that they are using my words/evidence against me and their COMMITMENT / (all of the claims are 25 to 40 years old) It is impossible to prove what happened 40 years ago, but in my case proof exists of what didn’t happen, mostly signed letters from their own parents, siblings, roommates, band members, interns, and in the case of 2 of your 3 accusers, their own words in their books. Shocking how many people have misused this important powerful revolution for relevance and money. Maybe you should name your documentary “FLAVOR OF LOVE”!? In closing, I am guilty of exploiting, supporting, and making the soundtrack for a grossly unequal society, but i have never been violent or forced myself on anyone. Still I am here to help support a necessary shift in power and consciousness. Let us get to work on uplifting humanity and put this moment and old narrative behind us"
14 comments:
This is from today's Daily Mail Online edition from an article about the McCanns:
In a new Facebook posting the couple, who have 14-year-old twins Sean and Amelie, poignantly state: 'Reasons we miss Madeleine.'
They detail: 'Holding her, hugging her, kissing the top of her head, lying next to her. Our complete family of five. Everything. We miss her. Please help us get her home.'
Madeleine would be 17 years old now. It strikes me what they list as what they are missing. Even for a 4 year old, it seems odd. Lying next to her? Kissing her on top of the head - that seems weirdly distinctive. They describe what they would do to a passive child, a 4 year old is anything but.
What is missing is the life she should have led in the meantime. What SHE would have missed, all her birthday parties, her friends at school, the family vacations, all her experiences. The focus is not on Madeleine, it's only on the parents.
This is very dangerous. The amount of assumptions is staggering. If you were to evaluate other parents who have had their children go missing (and had nothing to do with their disappearance) you would see similar statements.....
Anonymous - What are you talking about? What is dangerous & would u please indicate the staggering list of assumptions, I can't seem to find it? Many thanks Gerry.
Here is a statement worth studying.
So I decided to go to the store last night and then some dude tried to force me in his vehicle no joke try to shove me in a black van or SUV type shit I fought him off and I ran called my husband and he came and got me (he was asleep cause he works nights and usually I am fine alone) he came and got me it’s a scary fucking world when women can’t even go to the fucking store without almost being taken or worse killed!  Idk wtf he hit me in the head with but my head feels like it’s gonna pop
Lady’s be extra careful at night this happened last night I’m not sure what time thank god I fought back or I wouldn’t be here telling y’all about this shit! I thought this shit only happens in TV shows or movies but nope it happens in our own city’s watch out for your selfs and your friends I’m still shaking from it. This world is going crazier and crazier by the minute!
https://www.facebook.com/jessica.hartney.9
I got 3, but I am stuck on
SLUENS
Anyone know?
Check this out...
The mom said "Whoever has my baby, I know he’s safe, and I know you’re taking good care of him ... "
https://www.clickondetroit.com/news/local/2019/12/12/man-who-thinks-hes-1994-missing-child-dwan-sims-gives-dna-sample-to-police/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=snd&utm_content=wdiv
“New England Water Blog said...Here is a statement worth studying.”
It certainly is thanks for posting it.
After reading it through to get some context we see what appears to be an account of an attempted abduction/kidnapping. If this is genuine then analysis of the language will support it. We look to what the speaker begins their statement with as it will reveal their priority.
The expected would be something along the lines of “A man tried to kidnap me last night” or “I was nearly kidnapped last night”. That information tells the listener who, where, when and what occurred. Our speaker instead chooses to open her statement with:
“So I decided to go to the store last night”
From her words we see her priority is location and time. It shows that she needs the listener to know this information first and places its importance over the event of her being nearly abducted.
The first few words of her statement leave us asking questions. The first is where was she, was she at home or some other location? The second question is did she go to the store? She tells us she “decided” to go to the store, but we must not assume that she did because she did not tell us that. Note this is the most important thing to her, her priority. Her priority is that she “decided” to go to the store.
“and then some dude tried to force me in his vehicle no joke try to shove me in a black van or SUV type shit”
“and then” indicates missing time and we jump from a decision being made to go to the store to “some dude tried to force me”. We still don’t know where she was when her account began and what happened between her decision to go to the store and her meeting her attacker. Why is this information missing, is it sensitive to her? We note her linguistic disposition towards her attacker; she calls him “some dude”. This would be neutral and we would expect her to use negative language in relation him, again this is unexpected.
“tried to force me in his vehicle no joke try to shove me”
There is a tense change. First she says “tried” (past tense) and connects it the word “force”. Force could mean either physically or by verbal threats. She then says:
“no joke”
Her saying “no joke” is another form of saying “honestly”, which tells us she is sensitive to people thinking she might not be being honest or she is joking. I question why an honest genuine person would be sensitive to telling the truth. In her mind she has a worry people might not believe her story which causes her to use persuasive language.
After the “no joke” we see the tense change from the previous “tried” to “try” (present tense) - “no joke try to shove me”
This is not reliable as it suggests story telling by its present tense usage. Also I note the missing pronoun “he” which would connect the shoving to her attacker. We expect her to connect the shoving to him, but she doesn’t and her use of present tense “try” instead of “tried” suggests this part of her statement is made up. Remember she fronted this with the words “no joke” which means she is sensitive to if what she is going to say will be believed.
It is also worth considering
“some dude tried to force me [in] his vehicle no joke try to shove me [in] a black van”
It is not clear whether her attacker tried to force her “in” (while she was inside) or “into” the vehicle. It is easy to come to the assumption that she was being pushed into the vehicle but she does not tell us that by saying “into” she only says “in”. It is a possibility she was in the vehicle and her attacker was trying to force her to do something against her will and that something has been omitted from her account.
My analysis only covers the first one and half lines of her statement which shows just how SA rich her account is.
Adrian.
Puzzled:
UNLESS
Russell Simmons isn’t happy about being featured in an upcoming documentary by Oprah about the MeToo-movement (multiple women have made allegations of sexual assault against him). Simmons wrote the following message to Oprah
“Dearest OPRAH,
you have been a shining light to my family and my community. It’s so troubling that you choose to single me out in your recent documentry [sic]. I have already admitted to being a playboy (more appropriately titled today ‘womanizer’) sleeping with and putting myself in more compromising situations than almost any man I know… So many that some could reinterpret or reimagine a different recollection of the same experiences.
I have taken and passed nine 3-hour lie detector tests. These stories are UNUSABLE.
I am guilty of exploiting, supporting and making the soundtrack for a grossly unequal society, but I have never been violent or forced myself on anyone. Still I am here to help support a necessary shift in power and consciousness."
https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/50-cent-russell-simmons-slam-oprah-over-upcoming-sexual-misconduct-documentary
^^
1. ingratiation (“dearest”, “shining light”, etc.)
2. “singled out” -> does this mean he belongs in the group of men that sexually assaulted women?
3. he confesses to putting himself in compromising situations with women that could be interpreted differently -> thereby suggesting that these “situations” could be interpreted as sexual misconduct/assault
4. “more than any man I know” -> so these “situations” happened very often
5. he says he passed lie detector tests and the stories are UNUSABLE -> he doesn’t say the stories aren’t TRUE though
6. “I’m guilty of exploiting, etc.” -> he seems to feel the need to confess (see also “I have already admitted”) -> since he obviously doesn’t want to confess to sexual assault he confesses to a related (less serious) set of facts
7. “I have never been violent or forced myself on anyone.” -> this isn’t a reliable denial because he doesn’t address the specific allegations (and he stretches the time (“never”) (so as to ease the guilt?)
8. “Still I am here to help support a necessary shift in power and consciousness.” -> “still” is similar to “but” -> is he therewith diminishing the veracity of the previous phrase (“I have never (etc.)”)? Why does he use the word “still” at all? Did he do something that makes it unlikely for him to support a “necessary shift in power” etc.?
OT: Conner and Brinley Snyder
A while ago some of us commented on the supposed murder-suicide of Conner Snyder (8) and Brinley Snyder (4). The mother’s story was that she found Conner and Brinley hanging by a dog lead and that Conner was suicidal but didn’t want to go alone. The family dog was gone.
In the meantime, the autopsy report was finalized: both children died from hanging and their deaths were ruled homicides. The mother has been charged with murdering Conner and Brinley, animal cruelty and sexual abuse of a dog.
One of the mother’s friends told investigators she said she’d “had enough” of her children just weeks before the hanging.
According to police, the mother purchased the dog lead the day before (and picked it up just hours before) the hanging. She also sent sexually explicit photos of her and a dog to an unnamed person.
https://people.com/crime/pennsylvania-mom-accused-hanging-kids-fabricated-son-bullied/?#
Poor, poor Conner and Brinley and dog. RIP
OT Russell Simmons.
Good analysis Autumn.
Point 3 you on your list is especially concerning.
“So many that some [could] reinterpret or reimagine a different recollection of the same experiences.”
He allows that others “could” interpret what happened differently than how he sees things. Rape is not something which should be open to interpretation. When talking of allegations of rape, someone who is innocent would not use that kind of language. We expect very strong denials but he does not make any.
Also regarding the polygraphs:
"I have taken and passed nine 3-hour lie detector tests. These stories are UNUSABLE."
Why would someone need to take “nine 3-hour” (he includes 3 the liars favourite number) lie detector tests, wouldn’t one be sufficient? It appears he may have been shopping for the right results.
Adrian.
Thanks Adrian, good point about expecting strong denials from an innocent man accused of rape. I would also expect the denial to be issued in the first part of the message. Simmons only issues a denial in one of the last sentences.
I discovered Simmons' message was longer than what I copied above. See below. He writes he took the lie detector tests for his daughters. Were the not convinced by one polygraph? Or did they require he take a test each time a woman accused him? Nine polygraphs sure is a lot. Who conducted the tests?
Entire message:
"Dearest OPRAH,you have been a shining light to my family and my community. Contributing so much to my life that I couldn’t list a fraction of it in this blog.Ihave given you the gift of meditation and the groundbreaking book”THE POWER OF NOW “we bonded to say the least. This is why it’s so troubling that you choose me to single out in your recent documentry. I have already admitted to being a playboy more (appropriately titled today “womanizer”) sleeping with and putting myself in more compromising situations than almost any man I know. Not 8 or 14 thousand like Warren Beatty or Wilt Chamberlain, but still an embarrassing number. So many that some could reinterpret or reimagine a different recollection of the same experiences. Please note that ur producers said that this upcoming doc was to focus ONLY on 3 hand chosen women. I have refused to get in the mud with any accusers, but let’s acknowledge what i have shared. I have taken and passed nine 3-hour lie detector tests (taken for my daughters), that these stories have been passed on by CNN, NBC, BUZZFEED, NY POST, NY MAG, AND OTHERS. Now that you have reviewed the facts and you SHOULD have learned what I know; that these stories are UNUSABLE and that “hurt people hurt people”. Today I received a call from an old girlfriend from the early 1980s which means that they are using my words/evidence against me and their COMMITMENT / (all of the claims are 25 to 40 years old) It is impossible to prove what happened 40 years ago, but in my case proof exists of what didn’t happen, mostly signed letters from their own parents, siblings, roommates, band members, interns, and in the case of 2 of your 3 accusers, their own words in their books. Shocking how many people have misused this important powerful revolution for relevance and money. Maybe you should name your documentary “FLAVOR OF LOVE”!? In closing, I am guilty of exploiting, supporting, and making the soundtrack for a grossly unequal society, but i have never been violent or forced myself on anyone. Still I am here to help support a necessary shift in power and consciousness. Let us get to work on uplifting humanity and put this moment and old narrative behind us"
https://www.lipstickalley.com/threads/russell-simmons-open-letter-to-oprah.3043966/
Do they think "freedom of the press" means they have freedom to lie to everyone else?
Post a Comment