Gannon Stauch: Change of Language: "Gannon" and "G"

The following was submitted by a law enforcement analyst. 

A brief introduction first--

the analyst is doing a single "snap shot" of the step mother's statement: Change of language. 

Language does not change on its own, but signifies a change of reality for the subject. 

For example: "My car broke down on I 95.  I got the vehicle towed to a service station."

You'll notice that the "car" turned into a "vehicle"--- context is key. 

We look for a justifiable or observable change in reality.  When it was being towed, it became a "vehicle"-- the driver (subject, speaker) will not pick up his "vehicle" but once it is working again, it will revert to being his "car." 

When we view social introductions and names, it is also context specific. 

The step mother of a boy she cared for should use the possessive pronoun "my"--- just as the Solomonic instinct is viewed in other cases. 


"We have a kidnapping" Patsy Ramsey ---this is contrary to the natural instinct of a mother to take personal possession of her young daughter while missing. Instead, Patsy used "we", sharing not ownership of the victim, but what she is dealing with. This can be further reviewed here at the blog or at the You Tube video.  

Tecia Stauch did not use the possessive pronoun "my" in the statements I have thus far reviewed.  



Here is the analyst's observations on the name change from "Gannon" to "G"--- 

We expect (natural) that "Gannon" could revert to a nickname, term of endearment, or shorter abbreviation.  It is when it is reversed that we find an increase in importance. "My son, Robert..." becomes "Bob" or "Bobby" naturally.  This is shorter and informal.  Should the writer return to "Robert", we must take notice.  

The name to nickname may also reveal the parent:

"Bobby loves to play and is in Little League.  Robert's grades are excellent."

Here, we find the reverse, from nickname to formal which the context reveals which activity is more important to the parent---school. 


Kids have long understood what it means when their parent uses their first name and middle name...attention needed.  

This professional is not associated with the case. 

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

"Saturday Night, G was helping me unload in the garage and cut his foot because there are a lot of tools because Albert does woodworking."

A couple of points: 

1.  Gannon vs. G

'Gannon' is used when he is being held up as the example we should strive for or when Gannon is safe and loved: 

1. praying endlessly to bring Gannon home safe.  Loved and cherished

2. To Gannon, please come home soon because your daddy is waiting to watch the new Sonic movie that comes out this week and the cool shirt I got you to wear to the theatre is in your closet. 

Loved and cherished

3. Let’s Do what Gannon would do. Be Kind to one another! an example to us all

4. Gannon would want everyone to get along and to focus on finding him. loved and cherished, an example of cooperation, etc

It changes to 'G' --- is this the common law of economy or has  Tecia's reality has changed in a manner not yet explained contextually: 

1. I would like to think that overall most people are genuine and want to do everything in their power to find G. 

followed by 

2. With that being sad, Please take a step back for a moment and let me explain to you a few details that were not released. 

- Here's the change in reality: with that being said, there are other details pertaining to "G" that are by Tecia's own language not related to the loved and cherished Gannon, or the fine example set by Gannon; but pertain to this other person (in her verbalized perception of reality) of  whom we now know as 'G'

She wants to think that people would like to find "G"--- not that she thinks it, but "would like to..." 

'sad' vice 'said' - typo or leakage?

If the change to G occurred after the second sentence, that would be a suitable explanation; first we're talking about 'Gannon' the loved, cherished, and admirable then we're moving to what might be called the 'rest of the story' where the 'details that were not released' might alter Tecia's reality where Gannon, now 'G', is concerned.  

In a off-handed way, this is out of order information; not from a narrative perspective but from word choice as reflects reality.  This may suggest  that Tecia's perception of 'G' as shown in the perceived reality of her language has been 'G' from the start of this statement, which suggests a level of subterfuge as she presents us with 'Gannon', only to turn the corner to introduce us to 'G'

The first use of 'G' comes in the context of everyone's 'power' being directed towards finding him, which causes me to conclude matters related to his return or discovery (wherebouts, condition, who he's with, what he might tell authorities. etc) are sensitive to Tecia.  I don't have an opinion on whether Tecia caused his disappearance or harmed him in the context of the disappearance, only that this is sensitive territory for her.  It may be that his return would highlight her neglect or poor parenting, whether by his condition or by his actual words when interviewed. It also could signal that her treatment of him (as seen/heard in the video) caused him to leave the home. 

Use of the word 'power' might indicate her perception of the relationship she had with Gannon. 

 Perhaps he was difficult and a constant challenge to her power as a step-parent or adult. The power to impress your will on another?  

I'd need to see more information from her concerning her verbalized reality of their relationship. That she would characterize the efforts of those looking for Gannon in terms of 'power' warrants further exploration.  

Then we get to the next sentence: 

"Saturday Night, G was helping me unload in the garage and cut his foot because there are a lot of tools because Albert does woodworking."

1.  She doesn't state he cut his foot on a tool;   we are meant to infer this as the cause of the injury. This may speaks of self-preservation; she needs to provide context for an injury that absolves her of bad parenting or abuse or neglect; it was an accident because of the tools, which subtly also blames Albert. 

2.  Her level of sensitivity here is extreme; "because' appears twice in the same sentence.  She twice articulates the presence of tools; they are there on the floor, and they are there on the floor because Albert does woodworking.  She does not state the tools caused his injury. 

This is important to note. 

3.  Here he's not the angelic idealized 'Gannon'; he's the 'G' involved in the few details that were not released; the one who's connected with the concept of  'power'

An injury sustained by 'Gannon' would be accidental and unintentional; with an injury to 'G' we must understand contextually, per her own personal dictionary, it connotes impatience, frustration, etc.  all the normal things that come with dealing with an 11 year old boy from time to time.  

If Gannon bled in the garage, the police would likely find it and want an explanation. Tecia is anticipating the possibility of having to account for an injury on Gannon that would explain the shedding of blood.  This would suggest she anticipates him being found at some point, whether dead or alive.

Could this be why she stated online that an "accident" had taken place? 

Note it is my assumption that at this point in the investigation, police would have already searched her home and if there was blood found, would have already questioned her about it.  

As she doesn't explicitly state 'G' was injured by a tool or that he actually bled in the first place, Tecia may be preparing to account for an injury on Gannon's body, whether on his foot or somewhere else.  She hoping it will have been plausibly explained in her statement and as such, authorities will just move on past it.  

According to Tecia, we have a house with two adults and an 11 year old boy living in it.  The house is surrounded by a fence, the fence has a gate; the gate is lockable and the lock is actuated by a key.  The only key to the gate is maintained by the minor child in the house who, least more than twice, has gone to the gate in the context of being 'injured' in some way in the presence Tecia, after being bandaged up and deemed 'good to go'.  Very alerting. 

At the end we have a return to "Gannon"

That can be scanned for actual time verification. Last, from day one the Sheriff's office has known a description of the person/friend whom Gannon left with. 

Here we have Tecia actually characterizing the individual who potentially has her missing and unaccounted for stepson as a 'friend'. 

Friend of hers or friend of Gannon?

Gender Neutral noted. 

'a' description, not 'the' description of the person/friend. 

 Is she minimizing her knowledge, or her personal opinion, of who this person/friend is or might be?

If she is able to qualify this individual as a 'friend', then she has to have some idea who it is.  

Why is she holding back? 

Why the gender neutral? 

This language shows a neutral to positive linguistic disposition (protection of identity) towards the purportedly unknown person who has her stepson, who himself is in God-knows what condition, if he's alive at all.  

Per her own personal dictionary, her use of 'Gannon' vice 'G' indicates in her perception, 'Gannon' is presently safe with this person/friend and is actually better off that when he was 'G' with her. 

If you wish to study deception detection, please visit Hyatt Analysis Services.

Individual study as well as seminars for law enforcement, business, social services, etc.