The following comes from Team Analysis with analyst, Eugenia Sarri putting together the analysis for public reading.
Jennifer Pandos lived in Williamsburg Virginia with her parents Ron and Margie Pandos in a gated community. Her father, Ron, was a successful accountant at the time.
In the morning of February 10, 1987, after her parents woke up they discovered that their fifteen-year old daughter had vanished. They found a note in her bedroom in which it was claimed that she had run off with an older man.
Her older brother, Stephen was away at college at the time. Her parents waited until February 13th to contact the police and report her missing. Their relatives were informed about her disappearance a month later. Relatives on Ron’s side of the family did not know anything about it for years.
Jennifer was never found. Both parents claim they had nothing to do with her disappearance. They both failed polygraph tests they took.
Her brother Stephen became convinced that his parents knew what happened to Jennifer and that his father was to blame for her disappearance.
Decades later, the case sparked the interest of HBO producers and a four part documentary which was filmed during a seven year period was made. In it, Stephen talks about his father’s abusive behavior towards all members of his family. We also learn that Jennifer was on the phone talking to one of her friends the night before her disappearance when a heated argument with her father occurred. His parents eventually divorced.
The documentary “Burden of Proof” has generated new interest in this unsolved case. In the absence of physical evidence after so many years, the note is considered to be of great significance. It did not appear to be in Jennifer’s handwriting.
No one has ever been charged in Jennifer's case yet, and her parents deny having had anything to do with her disappearance. Investigators stated there was no evidence of a crime in her case. The case remains unsolved.
The team of analysts analyzed the note. Identifying an author and describing their personality traits is challenging and exciting work and in this case it may prove valuable in the pursuit of justice. Analysis follows:
The note
“Mr and Mrs Pandos
Your daughter is with me. She is fine. She is having some problems though. She needs some time away from this place 3-5 days max.
She is like a daughter to me, and Im like a Dad to her
here are some of Jennifers quotes
“Im fine. I just need time to think”
“Both of you please go to work tomorrow cause I will try to call you. I wont call at home, only at ( ) yalls work.
“Cancel my doctors appointments on Friday
Please put my money you owe me in my bank account. Do not call the police. I can
Easily find out if you do and if you do I may never come back home.
“Don’t tell my friends about this just tell them Im sick
Please do what I’ve asked !!
Analysis
Mr and Mrs Pandos
- The author knows Jennifer’s last name
- The note is addressed to specific recipients
- There is no “Dear” or any kind of greeting
-“Mr” comes first – the tone of the note is polite.
The author’s linguistic disposition towards Mr and Mrs Pandos is positive.(+)
The beginning of the note is formal.
Questions: Would a peer or someone younger use “Mr and Mrs”?
Or, would someone wish to be respectful towards the recipients?
Could it be masking?
Your daughter is with me.
- “Daughter” is her relationship title, her name is not mentioned. Does the author know that they only have one daughter? In the context of a relationship, the author does not seem to have a need to use her name first. This is an incomplete social introduction.
“Daughter” without name; the author(s) perceives Jennifer in a relational way; not as her own person.
- “Your daughter is with me”
The use of the word “with” between people indicates distance, either physical or emotional. This is used instead of, “I have your daughter.”
- The ISI (Incomplete Social Introduction) indicates a possible problematic relationship; in either direction. If it was written by the daughter, it could indicate a reminder of relational status (a reminder would indicate a void/perceived problem in the relationship, by a child).
Question: What is the cause of distancing language here?
-The relationship comes before use of the name.
Does this highlight a parental relationship as a priority?
Does this point back to one or more of the parents?
- “Your daughter is with me” should cause us to consider if Jennifer is elsewhere (including being deceased) and the author knows it.
The author’s priority is the location of their daughter.
- Linguistic Disposition: the author is reassuring the recipients (parents) about Jennifer. This is another positive LD (+)
She is fine. She is having some problems though.
- “daughter” now becomes “she” following the law of economy. This normal progression should continue, but if her name is then used, we should take careful note of it.
- “fine”: This is minimizing. The author does not say she is “safe” or even “alive”. It could indicate numbness, or trauma. It is not likely something that came directly from Jennifer.
- That Jennifer is “fine” is separate from the quotes. We consider this as possibly the author’s language and perception; not Jennifer’s.
- She is “fine” is also reassuring. This is the third (+) positive LD towards the parents.
We should consider that the author likes or is favorably disposed towards the parents.
She is having some problems though.
-“she” is used again.
- “some problems” is consistent with minimizing language in the context that she is missing. Note the inclusion of “though” after “fine.”
Questions:
Who is having some problems?
Is it our author?
Would these problems need some “days” to clear up?
Why would these problems need some days to resolve?
What are the problems?
“She” is the one having some problems. Is this a subtle blaming of the victim?
The author (s) does not blame the parents. If Jennifer (age 15) had written this, we would expect to see blame placed with the parents, or a list of grievances.
Are the parents (either or both), image conscious?
She needs sometime away from this place 3-5 days max.
- Time is the dominant theme of this sentence presenting her “need.”
- 3-5 days max suggests an author who is strong on planning. An accountant? One who likes things to “add up”?
- “this” place: Is this a slip? (Latency) The word “this” indicates closeness. If Jennifer had gone to the place of the author, it would be from home that she needed time away from.
“This place” could be either the parent or Jennifer, writing from home. If Jennifer, it is out of sequential order as “your daughter is with me” emphasizes location. It would be unexpected for a 15 year old to go out of sequential order unless she was fabricating.
This may be masking, as an attempt to sound as if it was written in her bedroom.
Our author (s) has problems on his hands, at the time of this writing.
Our author needs time. In the context of a missing 15 year old, it is incongruent.
Behavioral Analysis: the parents took time before reporting her missing. From the time delay, we may consider the parents protective instincts were reduced or not engaged. Why?
She is like a daughter to me, and Im like a Dad to her
- Is this an embedded linguistic autograph (self portrait) from the author?
- Note that Dad is written with capitalized “D”.
This is another (+) positive LD towards the Dad.
here are some of Jennifers quotes
- The name “Jennifer” now appears, which is a reversal of expected order (“daughter”, “she”) and may indicate a change in reality. What changed?
- “Jennifer” may not be his “daughter”.
- Is “Jennifer” now deceased?
- Rather than, “Jennifer said…” the author gives her quotes.
This is more like a eulogy than a communication of what Jennifer said.
This may, again, reflect nostalgia and further causes us to ask if Jennifer is dead and the author knows it.
“Im fine. I just need time to think”
- “I’m fine” is unlikely to be the language of a 15 year old who is not, presently, in a position to engage further.
- This language is more likely to be the language of an adult male. (See the first time the word “fine” was used above)
-We note another positive LD (+) towards the parents. Jennifer seems to be assuring them not to worry; she only needs time to think.
The author is giving comfort and protection to the recipients (parents).
I just need time to think”
Such as 3-5 days max, would provide.
-“I’m fine” may be the author attempting to soothe himself. Could the author, if the father, be seeking to assure the mother? Neither reported her missing for 3 days.
“Both of you please go to work tomorrow cause I will try to call you.
- Written to Mr and Mrs, the word, “both” is an unnecessary word of emphasis. Is it a reminder? Are they in this together? We know that “Both” did not call the police for 3 days.
The author is likely considering what would be separate actions/testimonies.
- “please”: courtesy is extended to parents (+)
- “please” also expresses uncertainty. Is a male author now addressing the mother? Did the mother need persuading to keep things together and stay with the story? (alibi)
- Time: “tomorrow” may suggest the author knew the letter would be found the next day, early enough to go to work. The author knew when the letter would be found. The author’s certainty or confidence could have been from one who is attentive to detail.
- Sensitivity of blue: The author (s) preempts being asked why he/they would go to work, the day they learn their 15 year old daughter is missing. As if to say this is a “normal” day to which they should carry on usual duties. This signifies, by its inclusion, that the author knows this day will be anything but normal.
- Our author could have used anything but chose work. Our author is likely someone who liked work and was successful.
- “to try to call” is a weak assertion.
In this extreme context, it is likely that the author knows that no call will be made to work.
I wont call at home, only at ( )yalls work.
-We note that “home” is used and not “house”. This seems odd in the context of a presumed runaway
-“at home”: is the author giving latent information revealing that he knows Jennifer will not be able to call “at” home?
-The explanation as to why, being unnecessary should be viewed with the negative, “won’t” as this increases the sensitivity. This further suggests the author does not anticipate a call at work.
“Cancel my doctors appointments on Friday
A 15-year-old girl is leaving home with someone who is not a family member without taking anything personal, without telling anyone of her plans. She is not worried about how this will hurt and worry her parents or brother. She is not worried about her possessions or her school, but she is worried about canceling a doctor’s appointment. Is the doctor’s appointment connected to her disappearance and possible death?
15-year-old kids do not worry about canceling doctor’s appointments as they are running away from home. Their focus is on other more pressing things. Who worries about canceling doctor’s appointments?… parents do.
This further suggests the author’s personality: one who is responsible.
-“cancel”; not reschedule. Will she no longer need appointments?
The author may not want the parents to get stuck with a bill and this constitutes another positive LD (+)
Question: Might the author have been afraid of Jennifer going to the doctor?
Please put my money you owe me in my bank account.
Question: Did Jennifer “owe” the author?
Please note that the parents did not put any money in her bank account though they followed all the other “instructions” in the note.
Do not call the police.
- This is stronger as it is a change from “please”. The author DOES NOT want the recipients to call the police.
If the father is the author, is he speaking to the mother?
I can easily find out if you do and if you do I may never come back home.
The author knows Jennifer is never coming home.
- Also note: a 15 year old girl is not likely able to get information from the police. A dad who is friends with a police chief would. This is another indicator that the father may be the dominant author of this letter. It points to his ego (bragging) regarding his connection with police.
- Also, this provides the parents with the answer when challenged why they did not call the police.
- The more we see the positive linguistic disposition towards the parents by the author, the more we now see Jennifer portrayed negatively, such as demanding, threatening and stern.
This reveals the author’s positive view of the “Dad”, and the negative view of Jennifer, the missing 15 year old victim in the story.
“Don’t tell my friends about this just tell them Im sick
- Does the author fear being called “sick” in context of his missing daughter? (latency) Is this image consciousness? The author wishes to comfort and protect the parents.
In the alleged quotes, the daughter goes from “I’m fine” to “I’m sick…”
Please do what I’ve asked !!
- The author moves between being polite and uncertain of the outcome three times in this note, by using the word “please” when he asks them to go to work, put money in the bank account put and do what I’ve asked, and using the imperative without any courtesy when asking the parents to cancel doctor’s appointments, not to call the police and not tell Jennifer’s friends about this. The tone changes from asking to telling them not to do the first things a parent should do in a case like this, to call the police and her friends, and has a need to also tell them to cancel the doctor’s appointments. The tone gets imperative when it comes to parental duties.
We note the emphasis added in this last instruction by the use of the exclamation marks plus the underlining of the word please. It is a strong attempt to persuade the recipient(s) to do what was asked. Again, we may ask: was this intended to appeal to the mother’s emotions?
Conclusion
The language and the tone used in the note are not the ones we would expect from a teenager leaving home.
The language is consistent with adult language.
The positive linguistic disposition towards the parents throughout the whole note is unexpected by an adolescent who is running away.
Time is sensitive as is the reason why they should go to work and behave as if everything is normal.
The author is organized, meticulous and cares about handling financial issues.
The author subtly blames Jennifer.
The author knows Jennifer is not coming home.
The parents, particularly the father should be considered suspects in Jennifer's disappearance.
4 comments:
"this place" If she wasn't home it would refer to where she was presently. Therefore credence should be given that the writer is familiar.
Great analysis and a fascinating case I was not familiar with.
“[Both] of you [please] go to work [tomorrow] [cause] I will [try] to call you. I [won’t] call at home, [only] at ( ) yalls work.”
The statement is sensitive as it seeks to explain why the request (plea) should be completed. The author/s does not feel the request of “go to work” will be enough to guarantee compliance and bolsters it by saying “please”. This begs (pleads) for the readers compliance at an emotional level while also adding urgency to the request. The author/s goes further in that they need to explain why their plea should be completed using the negative statement of “I [won’t] call at home, [only] at ( ) yalls work”. The writer does not believe the call can be made due to the weak assertion of “I will [try] to call you”. So all the effort made by the writer to get their request complied with will in their mind ultimately only result in a failed attempt to call. Why all the effort to convince for something that will only be attempted?
It’s likely the author/s needs the home empty “tomorrow”. What value does an empty house have to them? No witnesses.
“She is like a daughter to me, and Im like a Dad to her”
Why is there a need to explain the mechanism of the relationship? It’s obviously important to the author.
“here are [some] of Jennifers quotes”
If these are “some” of them what were the others? Was a list made up and certain ones selected due to their suitability to the situation? Alternatively was there another note actually left by Jennifer from which quotes were taken, which had information that the parents did not want disclosed leading them to write another note to conceal the original. It is odd the inclusion of -
"Please put my money you owe me in my bank account"
Why does the author think about and include that, where is the value in it even from a deceptive standpoint.
Adrian.
Adrian wrote: ‘Alternatively was there another note actually left by Jennifer from which quotes were taken, which had information that the parents did not want disclosed leading them to write another note to conceal the original. It is odd the inclusion of -
"Please put my money you owe me in my bank account" ‘
—-
If Jennifer had intended to run away, she would want and need whatever money was hers; this reads as a true request - it’s a strong and polite statement and request. It is her money, which is owed, and she wants it.
Why do the parents “owe” their daughter money? Did they borrow from her, or did Jennifer do paid work for them, for which some amount was due? Did they promise her some amount which they hadn’t by that time given?
It could have been stronger: she could have used ‘pay’ rather than ‘put’ if they owed money for which she had worked for them; she could have used ‘repay’ or ‘return’ if they had borrowed from her. “Put” seems a neutral choice, not hinting at how the money came to be owed. How much was she “owed” - dollars, hundreds of dollars, more? Is she being diplomatic in using’put’? Kids don’t want their parents to argue.
Maybe a fifteen year old who was concerned about getting her money from parents would think to not incur expenses for them in unattended doctor appointments in case that amount was deducted from what was owed her. Lost wages, too, might be a reason not to put “my money you owe me into my bank account”.
Is this a fifteen year old who worries about her parents finances, who forward thinks their possible reasons or excuses not to give what they promised or return what they borrowed? I wonder what “owed” means, and why the parents didn’t put anything into Jennifer’s account - well, most obviously it would seem they didn’t believe it was necessary, but maybe they didn’t want to enable her to run further, had she run, or expected the “older man” to take care of her, if they believed he existed.
—-
Because of her request for money owed, I, incline toward Adrian’s questioning/thinking - I believe that there was a note from Jennifer which included those words - selective quotes from the original note were included in the note that was “found”.
To my mind, the quotes support that Jennifer was concerned about receiving her money, and her concern about doctor appointments(fees) and parents going to work(lost wages) were related to excuses she could foresee them making for not putting money into her account. The reason I think they might work jobs which dock wages for days missed is because they owed their fifteen year old money, which seems desperate, to me. Also, that doesn’t make them look good, so it’s interesting that was included - especially when they didn’t go on to put anything into her account. That was the most heartfelt part of the note, though - so it would be more convincing to include it than exclude it, despite it didn’t reflect well on them. IMO. Maybe it was just that month’s pocket money/allowance becoming due, and a fifteen year old’s way of thinking.
Very interesting case, analysis, and comments.
"Please put my money you owe me in my bank account"
If the note was written by someone close to her (one of her parents or both for example) it would seem a strange thing for them to include that statement. If they had been involved in her disappearance and they had written the note to throw the authorities off the scent it would be odd that that would be something on their minds. The request itself does make the statement more credible if in fact she was owed money, as if she had taken off then the money would be of aid to her.
Adrian.
Post a Comment