Please take note:
In the raw interview, he had to be asked what his relationship with the missing mother was. This suggests to us that the pre-camera screening left the interviewer without this knowledge.
He calls her the gender neutral "person", not "my girlfriend" or "my fiancé" --- while she is missing. This robs her of a title but also means he does not connect himself to her.
He praises her as a mother while disconnecting himself from her.
In the raw interview, he slows down the pace, including waking up, hitting snooze button and getting a drink of water.
He portrays the day as "normal" indicating anything to the contrary.
"She is the most awesome person in the world."
"She's a great person."
When someone slows down the pace, it is not only to choose one's words carefully.
Here, the pace is slowed with additional and unnecessary information that allows the subject to psychologically avoid or delay information that is to come in the statement---
stressful info.
The lack of title and personal pronoun indicates a bad relationship with the mother of his child.
This could be that she was planning to leave him, he was planning on leaving her, or that he has guilty knowledge of her disappearance.
Note how concerned he is with his own comfort level while his fiancé' is missing, along with his child.
Note the question about what he wants to say to her.
He said he wants her to come home for her family, kid, and dog, but not for him.
Praising her as a mother only, using hyperbolic language, may indicate Ingratiation---making psychological peace with the public and with police, while portraying himself as "the good guy."
“I don’t know where she’s at” is not the same as not knowing where she is.
"She's at" is often in regard to one's stance on a topic (such as a relationship)
Analysis Conclusion:
The subject has a bad relationship with the missing mom.
The subject is under considerable stress which is self focused, rather than the stress of worrying about the missing mom and child. He is more concerned for his own comfort levels.
The interviewer asked compound questions but there is enough here for police to consider him a suspect at this time.
The water reference, particularly in the slowing down of the pace, is of concern.
Money pressures are part of his language ----while she is missing.
In the video in which media reports he denies involvement, the reporter first asked, "tell me what happened" but then changed to give him a specific time. It is a mistake. She could have allowed him to start anywhere he wanted. This would have been insightful.
He went directly to, not what happened, but what usually happens in his home waking up.
He avoids his fiancé's name repeatedly. This is psychological distancing language that is not context appropriate ---even for a bad relationship.
The more he speaks, the more information he yields
He did not deny involvement in spite of the media headline.
Hyatt Analysis Services for training.
15 comments:
Check the link below it has the video you posted Peter and also another which was made prior to that one. I transcribed a small section of it.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7796163/Tearful-fianc-denies-involved-disappearance-partner-two-week-old-daughter.html
About 50 secs into clip.
“After the book fare she called me around eight something. Err, on her way home from the book fare she said she spent $25, I was like that’s ok. I told her I have to go cause I was on my way out, and err.. I told you I love you, bye. And pretty much I worked all day till about one something, and then I got here around two. I seen her car, walked upstairs. She wasn’t here…, and her phone was off. So I thought she was at her friends house cause the friend lives in the same complex so she might be over there with her phone off so I thought nothing of it, but she was not back yet. So then I went and picked up my son from daycare and ahh… and brought him home and she, he didn’t finish his lunch, so he told me to grill it for him.”
He is making this up.
“I told her I [have] to go [cause] I was on my way out, and err.. I told [you] I love [you], bye”
He is commenting on a story he has made up, he is running the story in his mind and referencing from that perspective. This is causing him to slip into present tense and even worse his pronouns are way off.
“I told [you] I love [you], bye”
That statement on its own is beyond concerning, and there’s a ton of other things wrong in there. There’s a lot blue in it.
Adrian.
I love this blog and all the commentary!!! Have you ever looked into the unsolved murder of Stephanie Crowe in Escondido, CA January 1998? I wonder what you think of what her brother has said.
https://fox5sandiego.com/2013/11/14/stephanie-crowes-brother-cries-as-he-recalls-her-murder/
http://www.aleidalaw.com/who-killed-stephanie-crowe/
There’s something very off with this guy and I can’t put my finger on it. The smiling and stuff while the camera is on and talking to the reporter on the phone was weird.
If a man infant was missing I would expect this man to be asking and begging for answers and not looking for the angle of the camera to be “natural”.
Anonymous said...
“I love this blog and all the commentary!!! Have you ever looked into the unsolved murder of Stephanie Crowe in Escondido, CA January 1998? I wonder what you think of what her brother has said.”
I had a look at a few news articles about it and it certainly is a very interesting case. Are there any untainted statements from any of those who were accused? The only quotes I could find were from 2013 when the original suspects testified at the Richard Tuite retrial.
FOX 5 article:
“Michael Crowe, called to the witness stand by Tuite’s defense team today, testified that he woke up at about 4:30 a.m. on Jan. 21, 1998, [walked] to the kitchen [to] take something [for] a headache, and returned [to] his bedroom.”
This isn’t a direct quote from Crowe, but it should reflect his language to some degree. I think a reporter would use the word “went” not “walked” to the kitchen. If Crowe did say “walked” it would stand out to me.
“I [walked] to the kitchen [to] take something [for] a headache”
To include that in his statement it must be important to him, it suggests there is something memorable about that journey to him. It focuses on the action itself. The expected would be “I went to the kitchen”.
He justifies his action “[to] take something [for] a headache”
I find it interesting he went for a “walk” in the middle of the night. If my wife told me she had “walked” to the kitchen, toilet or anywhere in our house I would be concerned. If she told me she “ran” to the toilet” I would understand that. She must have needed to get there quickly perhaps with an upset stomach etc… People walk to the park, walk to work or walk to the store etc…
If you heard a strange noise downstairs in the middle of the night and went to investigate you might say you “crept” downstairs. It would reveal to the listener how much tension you were feeling at that moment. Rambo on the other hand may tell us he “marched” downstairs and we would know by that he meant business :) Chuck Norris on the other hand wouldn’t have to worry about burglars as no one would be stupid enough break into his house. You get the idea anyway.
When someone goes as far as to include actions / body posture in their statement it reveals their state of mind at that moment. Michael Crowe didn’t say he “went” to the kitchen which is the expected; he said he “walked”. Something to think about :)
Adrian.
Also, if your fiancée was missing, wouldn’t you be answering every phone call on the first ring? Not this guy... half smirked through his tears and silenced the phone immediately lest it interfere with his interview.
He sounds like Chris Watts with the repeated comments - wherever she is just come home..whoever has her, etc. And like Chris with the inappropriate smiles and laughs. And the crying with no tears.
The video was removed by KVUE but can now be found here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_WT-7x9wV0g
He (almost immediately) starts with:
"I, I look down when I talk, I'm sorry, I wanna (or: 'm gonna?) look down the whole time probably."
Isn't a reference to holding head down or looking down a sign of shame? He refers to it twice. Also: "I'm sorry" is a possible sign of guilt.
Another thing I noticed is that he repeatedly mentions/refers to being in his truck when he called/tried to call his fiancée. For instance:
A) (at 2:09) "So, ah, at around 8 o'clock, ah, she called me, answered the phone, like I forgot, in my truck, ah, I work for Unicorn Moving...".
B) (at 10:46) “Ah, her cellphone is missing, it’s been turned off, whenever I pulled up around 1.40, it’s just been off since then…”.
Ad A) He wants us to think he was not at home (but, instead, in his truck) when he called his fiancée at 8 o’clock. He thought of saying this (“in my truck”) beforehand because he says “I forgot” (I agree Adrian, he’s making things up (and leaving things out)).
Ad B) I think “whenever I pulled up” is intended to make us think he was not near his fiancée and her phone (but, instead, in his truck) when he tried to call her at around 1.40. Why would that be important to him? How does he know her phone’s been turned off at around/since 1.40 (that is literally what he says)? Did he turn off her cellphone himself? Was he at home when he did this? Did he throw her cellphone away later (“whenever he pulled up”?).
I think police should try to establish where 1) his cellphone was at 8 o’clock and 2) where his cellphone was when hers was turned off. They should also do a forensic check on the car.
At 13:46 – when asked what he wants to say to the person she might be with – he says (among other things) “just put her somewhere safe” (“put” sounds as if she is a lifeless object) and mistakenly says “hurt the baby” instead of “feed” the baby”.
In another interview he talks about the scrutiny on him (see https://www.fox7austin.com/video/635540 at 7:05). It’s interesting (stutters on “I”, smirking and “it’s just not true”). He also makes another reference to money (at 10:25): “She’s the most giving person, she only has 4 dollars in bank account and she’s still helping somebody out”.
His discomfort and stress with the interview process is off the charts. He is dropping pronouns everywhere in the first 3.5 minutes when talking about what he did that morning.
I believe there's been considerable premeditation & planning to the point where he knew he would have to do media interviews at some point. He convinced himself he would be able to handle it and talk his way through it. All the smiling and laughing is stress relief because now that he is actually in the interview process he cant believe just how difficult it is and he cant believe he was stupid enough to think he could just talk his way through it without anyone raising an eyebrow.
I only watched the interview once and while he distances himself from his fiance i don't remember much concern being expressed for the infant at all.
At one point his phone rings and he chooses to continue the interview rather than answer it. clearly the person calling cannot give him more information regarding the whereabouts of his fiance and child than he already possesses.
Not really analysis, just my 2 cents on the video.
Shane Carey
https://www.insideedition.com/what-happened-to-texas-mom-heidi-broussard-and-her-2-week-old-daughter-margot-57646
Again there is bad transcription done by the media. In a quote from the video on the above page they have him as saying:
“I told her, ‘I love you. Bye,’” Carey said.
That quote is taken from the below video
https://www.fox7austin.com/news/boyfriend-of-missing-south-austin-woman-baby-speaks-out
Listen from the 1 minute mark in the clip and you can see he actually says:
“I told [you] I love [you], bye”
I suppose whoever did the transcript wrote what they thought he said, what made sense to them as opposed to what he really said. This is an example of the human mind filling in the blanks and automatically correcting what it is seeing/hearing. This is a good example of how we don’t really listen carefully.
His real words tell us how his mind was working. He is running a scripted story in his mind and commenting on it. He is not there in the story (in reality) otherwise we would hear him say “I told [her], ‘I love you.” Or “I told [her], ‘I loved [her].”
His words do not appear to come from experiential memory. If he has killed his girlfriend and child he may well have said:
“I told [you] I love [you], bye”
This would have been said as he left them in whatever location he disposed of them. If this turns out how it looks like it’s going to turn out I feel sorry for his father who is there comforting him throughout the video.
Adrian.
Anonymous said...
His discomfort and stress with the interview process is off the charts....
the video i was referring to is here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmj2siQL-O0
and not the interview done outside the apartments
Anonymous (December 16, 2019 at 4:50 PM), I once listened to a 48-hours show on the Stephanie Crowe case. I remember thinking her brother and friends did it. I'm rather skeptical about "false" confessions (especially in this case where two of the boys confessed and the other also made very disturbing statements). Nowadays its a concept that is very much in fashion. Whenever a suspect in a high-profile case claims false confession under duress, the mainstream media/podcasts/documentary makers (+ part of the public) are prone to immediately support them (never mind the fact that they didn't attend the court case and don't have access to all the files). I think in many cases the confessions were truthful but the suspects/perpetrators later - based on legal advice - claim duress because they have no other defense left. Examples: West Memphis Three, Jens Söring, Chuck Erickson (Ryan Ferguson's friend -> I think both are guilty), Brendan Dassey (Bruce Lisker is another one although I don't know if he confessed to police -> he confessed to a cellmate). I'm sure there are many more. Disgustingly - especially for the relatives of the victims - their claims sometimes succeed and they get millions in compensation. When I have more time I will look at the Crowe case again and give my thoughts.
Shane says all her things are in apartment, baby car seat ID purse and keys and cell missing..She never keeps car doors unlocked... ever but her car was found unlocked he stated.I dont think she made it back to apartment or when she got out of car she would of locked it after getting baby out.Whatever happened happened in that car and he is the one to put items in apartment after.....my theory but makes sense. He also said door was wide open but thats his story!!
Shane Carey said he had called and the phone went straight to voicemail, the reason he said that it was off at 1:40 pm and he could not speak of what time it was off as he was not there. Stress & grief are shown with people looking down, it’s called depression, which he spoke to 9-11 responders about, when they came to their home when he made the missing persons report at 8 pm. He mentions that he has to remember how beautiful she & the baby are and have faith that they will be found somewhere safe, and also said he has been crying and fighting grief. He & his dad put their personal cellphones online for the public to call them with tips, I have read that they continue to receive calls from strangers who don’t know any of them only screaming and harassing them with accusations, at a time when they await news of any kind.Carey mentions that he wouldn’t want media attention on him or a video with him in it, he wants Heidi Broussard &!their baby instead to be shared by people who might see them, and help them to get home safely wherever they are.
"stress & grief are shown with people looking down, it's called depression"
I'm not saying looking down in itself is necessarily a sign of shame. However, I believe I read somewhere on this blog (or on Peter's twitter?) that referring to "head hanging down" in statements can be a sign of shame. I think the first words of a statement (in the context of a (possible) crime) are always important -> it tells us what's on the speaker's mind most prominently. In this case "looking down" is repeated which makes it even more important. He doesn't say he is depressed or grieves (he may be, but he doesn't say it). No, he warns he will be looking down. I could be wrong but my personal opinion is: he knows he is going to lie and be deceptive and feels it will be difficult to do so while looking straight in the camera and therefore preemptively says he will be looking down the whole time.
Was it published in the media that he spoke to 9-11 responders about depression and grief? I couldn't find it online.
He consistently said "the baby", days 3 week year old baby, he has visceral reactions to the word family twice and once when he last "made contact with her (Heidi) ". Jokingly to my husband's I said, referring to when either of us leaves the house without the other, if we should say we're making contact (when kissing and saying bye, I love you, have a good day, be safe etc). The whole raw interview, the tugging on his beanie, he says his ex wife and beautiful daughter Addison (from that marriage) yet... has such a hard time owning that Heidi is (at the time, assuming he didn't know she was deceased) his WIFE TO BE, and they just had a daughter together literally 2 weeks before they disappeared.... also he's extremely generous with the would be perpetrators isn't he? Saying he doesn't care, just drop them off somewhere, "you won't be in trouble", drop them off at a hospital or here (where they live). Lots of things that distance, don't add up (he said he left at 7 40, then says he left at 6 40), where he says I dunno 100x because he's trying to come up with something in the moment and can't. I don't see how he wasn't, AT THE VERY LEAST, abusive and in a very bad relationship with her if we're to believe reports of physical and emotional abuse, which I do..... I guess we'll see what law enforcement says and what they ultimately do with him but I'm not convinced at all that he's innocent. Not by a long shot, despite what the media says about law enforcement not considering him a suspect.
Post a Comment