Missing: Baby Delano Wilson Case Review

Statements and Deception

Fake Reward

911 Call

Now months have passed after a newborn disappeared from a reported kidnapping, the baby's parents spoke out, and Statement Analysis indicated the father for deception, and the mother's statements certainly raised questions as to what she knows from the father, Willie Wilson. 

 Recall that Willie Wilson said that his 'daughter, er, son' was kidnapped and that the kidnappers beat him and left him unconscious. Some came to his defense saying that a hit on the head might confuse the "son versus daughter" statement, yet others said it was his attack on his daughter, earlier, that may have been in his mind at the time of his statement.  

Police said his injuries did not match his description of the 'beating.'  We also saw his words did not match a personal conflict.  

"All we want at the end of the day, is our baby to be found," said Tanaisha Perkins, Delano's mother.

Delano Wilson

When parents are standing (or seated) together, we may hear things such as "our" daughter in an appropriate manner.  Yet, given the age of the child, we are more likely to hear a mother say "my daughter" or "my baby."  The maternal instincts, Solomon showed, are powerful. 

But the parents of missing infant Delano Wilson say they keep calling investigators for updates on the case and no one is calling them back.  They seem to not understand why police isn't given them any information. 

In short, police do not believe Willie Wilson.  

"It's like just leaving us hanging us to drying. Don't nobody knows what's going on," said Willie Wilson, the baby's father.

 Willie Wilson says a white man and a Latino woman robbed him at gunpoint in an alley near his house while he was walking with his infant son. Wilson told investigators the man attacked him, leaving him dazed, and then snatched the baby, taking off in a blue Ford Taurus.  The description is from media, not from him.  From him, we expect up close and personal language.  Anyone who has ever been the victim of an attack knows just how "close" and "personal" the assault is.  Distancing language raises suspicion. 

"I can still recall everything. Everything. That's something you not gonna forget," said Wilson.

There is a clarity in an attack like this.  Expected is close language, not "that", but "this" and mostly:

"This is something I am not going to forget", and not the word "you" which is distancing language. 

That's why Wilson says he's been searching online for a sketch artist to draw the people he says took his son. Police didn't supply a sketch artist because they did not want to waste resources on an obvious lie. 

"I'm pretty sure a sketch artist who's talented enough would be able to draw that out. 'Cause I know exactly how they looked. They'd be actually able to put it on paper so other people can see and look for these people," said Wilson.

He knew "exactly" how they looked but could not recall if it was his son or his daughter that they took.  

Oops.  

Wilson says investigators haven't offered to provide one, and the cheapest he can find costs $100 an hour.

'I think they don't want to because they see me as a suspect still. That's why I haven't gotten a sketch artist. That's why haven't nobody answered my phone calls," said Wilson.

This is true.  Willie Wilson has been indicated for deception in the disappearance of his daughter, er, son.  

Police have said Wilson's story has left them with questions, but have never named him or the baby's mom as suspects. Investigators have questioned both parents and removed items from their home.

"Anything they want us to do, we're not hiding. We're here. They know where we're at. It's not like we're running from anybody. We're looking for our son," said Perkins.

Taniasha Perkins says that's what they're going to keep on doing until they find him.

"I feel in my spirit that my baby's okay. I just need him back with us, with his family," she said.

Next, we saw a reward offered in which there were enough indicators to question the validity of such a reward:  Was it intended to help find the baby, or make the family look as if it was a real kidnapping?


Statement Analysis gets to the truth:

This is from a man identified as "Marlon Perkins" a cousin of the mother  

"Anyone in Indianapolis can help out my cousin in her time of need. "This is real, and she needs all the help and assistance possible in the safe return of her son. I'm personally offering $10,000 for any information that leads to his safe return. Contact IMPD immediately with any information!!!!"

Please now see the statement posted, again, but with emphasis and analysis:

"Anyone in Indianapolis can help out my cousin in her time of need. This is real, and she needs all the help and assistance possible in the safe return of her son. I'm personally offering $10,000 for any information that leads to his safe return. Contact IMPD immediately with any information!!!!"

The subject is identified as Marlon Perkins, cousin to the mother, who gave the video plea that has already been analyzed. 

1.  Note that help is sought for "my cousin" and not for the baby. 

2.  Note that the statement does use Delano's name, which is distancing language. 

3.  Note the statement, "this is real", begging the question, "Why would anyone need to claim that a kidnapped baby is "real"?  This may cause police to wonder if the subject knows or believes that the child is not kidnapped, and that the subject is either suspicious or knows that Willie Wilson has not been truthful. That "this is real" gives indication that it may be a fake offer.  

4.  Note the cousin's name is not used, either.  (ISI:  Incomplete Social Introduction) One may then wonder about the quality of the relationship between the subject and the mother. 

5.  "She needs" and not "Delano needs" or "the baby needs..."  The baby's welfare is not mentioned.

6.  Note the word "safe" is repeated, and the reward will be paid, not upon the baby's return, but "safe" return.  We may wonder why the subject has added this word as a condition to payout. 

7.  "I'm personally" is not necessary and when taken with:

a.  "this is real", it leads me to question:

* if this is a genuine reward and the subject actually has the money; 

*if the subject believes or knows the child is not going to be returned "safely"

*the subject may be attempting to self-aggrandize, or even use this as a tangent.  

There are enough indicators within this post to question the validity of the offer.  

911:  What is the location of your emergency?  

 Therefore, we expect order to begin with address.  His answer: 

"I'm on Hardy Street, and by chase (?), and I was robbed and someone took my daughter, I mean my son."

Note that being robbed came before reporting his son missing. This is not expected.

Was this a drug robbery?

Note the error between "daughter" and "son."  It would be interesting to learn if he also has a daughter near the same age, with another woman.

It would also be interesting to learn if he is on drugs.

"I'm laying on the middle of the street off Oliver..."

911:  What's your name?

Subject:  Willie.

"One was a white male who was a man the other person who was a  lady was hispanic. "

Specific description even of the shoes.   "Jordans, red black and blue..."

911:  They took your son?

Subject:   Yes, they abducted my son.

It is interesting to note that he did not enter the language of the 911 operator, but changed "took" to "abducted."

He calls out that he was just "robbed and pistol whipped" but did not mention the baby, to the passerby.  That the child was abducted would be the expected first thing he said.

Later, to another passerby, "I was robbed and they took my two month old son" with "took" and not "abducted"

Being "robbed" came before the taking of his son.

INDIANAPOLIS, Ind. (August 28, 2014)– Freshly released from a night in custody, Willie Wilson made an emotional appeal for information on the whereabouts of his missing child.

“All I want is my son. I am begging, please search. I love my son.”

The mother of six week old Delano Anthony Wilson Taniasha Perkins made her own emotional statement in the 500 block of Chase Street earlier in the day.

“He means the world to me and his dad and as his parents we work really hard for our child and for you to take him away is tearing a hole in my family and in my heart,” she said.

The hole in the heart:  first family, and then the mother.  This is not expected.

Wilson told police that he was accosted by a white male and hispanic woman in an alley less than a block from his home Wednesday at noon.

Delano Wilson

Wilson said the pair intended to rob him of his cell phones and his wallet but took his baby instead.

“He said ‘I don’t care.’ That’s when he hit me knocked me down. I got the baby in my arms. That’s when I knew they were gonna do more because she didn’t do nothing because the man is constantly yelling at me telling me to empty my pockets, grabbing at my pants. All I could do is give him what I had. I didn’t wanna harm the baby.”

The use of the word "because" twice here is not sensible.  Is the lack of sense due to deception, or is it because he was knocked unconscious?  

The 911 call does not show the priority of a kidnapping.  

The father's account is not believed by police.  He likely killed or sold the child. 

 Crime Stoppers at 262-TIPS.

We are hoping to expand our Statement Analysis services to include audio files, transcription services, and  online courses available via download.

If you would like to help:

 

Denial, Substance Abuse, and Deception

Do you worry about a loved one's drinking?

Are you fretting over your teen's possible drug use?

Do you own or are responsible for a company in which substance abuse is nothing but trouble and need to learn the truth?

Statement Analysis is key.

Someone recently quipped, Denial?  Yeah, "D E N I A L" means "Don't Even Know I Am Lying", which, at times, certainly seems like a correct statement.

One who's brain has worked diligently at protecting itself from the truth has done so, little by little.

Rarely will someone wake up one day and say, "I am a drug addict. I need help."

This is why interventions are often used, as someone is confronted, often not with proof of drug abuse, but the evidence of drug abuse.

The drug user often thinks that if no one sees her take pills, she didn't take pills.  This goes on, in some cases, for years.

The family does not always see the results of such because they are too close to the scene, and the changes in the personality, are often so slow that it takes someone from the outside to say, "Wow!  She has got a major drug problem here!"

In an intervention, those present may not be able to say that they saw the subject using, but can say, "I have seen the evidence of drug abuse.

What does the evidence look like?

In a recent case of a talented and successful businesswoman, the signs, over the past few years, were so subtle that family was left behind the curve.

Missed appointments.

Hey, every body misses appointments sometimes.

Lots of missed appointments, which add up to a strong signal:  Neglect.

Drugs and Neglect are first cousins.

The Neglect can be anything from neglect of children, neglect of a spouse, neglect of business, and neglect of self.  This is especially true for someone who is normally quite responsible.

Erratic Behavior  Inconsistent, illogical, followed by times of lucid thought.  Giving orders one day, retracting them the next, yet still demanding why they were not followed on the third day.


Mood Swings.  This is something that really impacts office morale, especially if the addict or drug user is a supervisor, manager, or in upper management.  It can become downright abusive and hostile as the mood changes due to changes of the drug content in the bloodstream.


Forgetfulness   Some drugs actually sharpen memory.  People snort ADHD to get a mental rush, but what happens later, when it all comes crashing down?  The language crashes ("joneses") just as the body does.


These, taken by themselves, do not suggest drug abuse, but when taken together, especially from a normally successful person, they can point to drug abuse.

Linguistically, Statement Analysis gets to the truth.

The interview must be conducted very carefully.

In an employee employer relationship, as employer, are you prepared to pay for drug treatment?  Does your company have a drug testing policy?  If so, you may have to have a program of professional assistance and depending upon the drug abuser's drug of choice, length of use, and other personal attributes, could cost you, the employer, up to $60,000 and more, for treatment.

You must be careful.

If you listen to the subject (hopefully you have taken statements and have been trained in Analytical Interviewing), you will have learned that those in denial are not exempt from the princples of Statement Analysis, in particular, of the Reliable Denial.


1. Know your company's internal policies
2.  Get training in Statement Analysis and Analytical Interviewing.  Know what is a legally sound question and what to stay away from.

Better yet:

Learn to ask the right questions to screen out potential substance abusers from gaining employment in your company, and stop the trouble before trouble enters the front door.

Q.  What can you tell me about substance abuse in our office?

A.  Who, me? I've never, I mean, I, I never even know what drugs look like. Why would you ask me?  This is ridiculous.  This is persecution.  You better be asking everyone else here, too.  I know my rights. I took piss tests.  They never found nothing.  I am so sick of it.  I, I, I am always being targeted. You're gonna stand here and accuse me?"  


Statement Analysis gets to the truth.  How many principles can you identify in the one statement above?  Name them in the comments section.  

Get your company trained.

To learn more, contact Peter Hyatt at PHyatt1962@gmail.com for training.

Announcement: Statement Analysis Services Full Time Offerings

We are pleased to announce that we are taking the plunge to full time Statement Analysis Services!

1.  Statement Analysis Training:  Law Enforcement and Civil Business  (2 to 4 day training, including investigations, human resources, legal disputes, etc)

2.  Analysis of individual letters, emails, statements including anonymous letters/threats

3.  Instruction in Interviewing, including Pre Employment Screening

4.  Representation in Department of Labor Unemployment Hearings

5.  Human Rights Commission Participation and Representation

6.  Dispute Settlement, including Landlord/tenant

7.  Sales force training:  Using the write words to close the deal.

8.  Avoid being scammed or lied to, as noting hurts more than what deception can do to you.


Getting to the truth, no matter the situation, is always beneficial.

Letters of Reference from Law Enforcement and American corporations supplied upon request.

NOTE:  Statement Analysis Services has not lost a single Unemployment Hearing. 

How much does your company lose in unemployment from those who left fraudulently, only to be awarded unemployment unjustly?

Unemployment exists for a reason and for those it helps, as designed, should be protected, but those who "game the system" can be identified and defeated in our training.  

If you are able to assist us launch our full time business, we are grateful. Launching a new business in a climate like ours can be frightening.  Heather and I are thankful for the kind comments and support of readership, so any investment into this business is not only appreciated, but it is an investment into the truth.

We hope to offer our e-book, "Wise As Serpents...." shortly.   Look for the announcement.

 Thank you to those who have assisted thus far and to those who now grasp the gravity of such an event as this:

Please donate:  

 

For a consultation, write to Peter Hyatt at PHyatt1962@gmail.com

Peter Hyatt will be speaking in October at:

Foxcroft Academy
Penobscot Christian School

More dates to follow.

The Devastation of Lying: Stephen Collins and Sexual Abuse

Stephen Collins recently admitted to 'molesting 3 little girls' and, as has already been pointed out by commentators, this is likely a minimization of what he has actually done.

In one quote, he began in passive voice, as if the little girl's hand had a mind of its own, only to correct himself in active voice.  Passivity in Statement Analysis shows a distancing language where one wishes to avoid responsibility.  "The gun went off" is a lot easier to digest than "I pulled the trigger."

For Collins victims, even as 40 years may have passed, the consequences continue.  What came of his victims of this unnatural and evil action?  We have statistics to guide us on what kind of lives these young girls might have faced, as well as every person who loves them:

promiscuity and the self-debasing accompanying it;
venereal disease
suicide
substance abuse,
self loathing
self injurious behavior
depression
anxiety
panic disorders
compromised immune systems and the host of diseases that the body failed to successfully fight off;

and on and on the list goes, without anyone knowing, exhaustively, what the few moments of abuse did to the life of the victim.  Nor do we know the pain that the spouses, children, and parents of the victims experienced.  We do not know what marriages disintegrated because of a stolen moment of perversity, what careers were derailed, and what promises in life went unrealized.

Many victims hide their sufferings behind the facade of a professional and successful career, not showing the tears, the nightmares, or the private terrors she faces.

The victim often acts out her pain, which can then be acted out against an unsuspecting husband, who, going along in love with his wife, knew nothing about what went on inside of her, including her "panic" over being loved, since childhood sexual abuse interferes with brain development.  This means that when you and I turned a certain age, we closed the bathroom door because we knew where our bodies ended, and the boundary for someone else's body, and we wanted privacy.  The 3 year old sexual abuse victim knows no such thing.

The self loathing teenager wants to be called "slut" by her angry father and, 20 years later, may act out just to get her husband to despise her and call her the same derogatory name.  Why?  Why would she want that?

It is her comfort level.

During critical brain development, there were things that were done that had powerful, explosive after effects that even as 40 years has passed, as is the case of Stephen Collins' victims, the suffering can not be fully told.

In recent conversations about the impact of deception in sexuality, men and women have spoken about being happily married only to be utterly shocked to learn that one was having an affair.  Victims of childhood sexual abuse are, percentage wise, likely to destroy their marriage in this manner.

The statements from such differed greatly from the statements of married couples who were having marital problems, one or both had affairs, both were hurt, but the hurt was mitigated by expectation.  It was those who, for whatever reason,


Described as being laid open bare, and filleted from the inside out, without anesthesia.  Others have called it the "atomic bomb" of their lives.

Men have said that they did not know who they were.

A case often shared in counseling is that of a successful author who had family and business success only to one day learn that his wife was having an affair.  He was so terribly undone that he went to his  family cabin in the woods to "put his affairs in order" and began writing farewell letters to his grown children.

Even in counseling, the abuser will often minimize, and the denial will be powerful.  This sometimes is seen in the language, such as Collins choosing "3" victims.

I would wager a cup of coffee: there are more.

He was unable to find a purpose or a will to live.  As the story goes, he wrote, at length, to each of his grown children and at the end of several days, the drive to commit suicide lessened, as he journaled his pain through.

The suffering has a lot to do with the element of shock.  There is shock to the spouse of the childhood victim, and shock to the victim's children.

One husband described it to me in these terms.  He said, "Everything I am is gone.  Everything I thought about myself is a lie.  Everything I thought I knew I didn't know.  I don't know who I even am, anymore."  A successful young professional, he knew of his wife's sex abuse history, and had supported her years of therapy.  They were happy together, though she was often almost frigid when it came to intimacy, and was often afraid of strange men, without cause.  When he learned that not only had she had sex with a stranger, but did so in his car, in a dangerous neighborhood, he said, "I do not recognize her, either.  She is an utter stranger to me."

A few months later, he had declared "victory" in overcoming the triggers and that he and his wife "were never happier."

I cautioned him that his present euphoria was the body's rebound to the shock of stress and to prepare himself for the fall.

He almost committed suicide a few weeks later.

The perpetrator of his wife was a close family relative.  She was a little girl and not only trusted him, but listened to her parents' praise of her uncle.  She grew up hating herself for thinking her uncle was a "bad man" and had to accept that she "was the bad" for her thoughts.  Her hatred of herself (common with sexual abuse victims) was enough to drive her to do things that would cause parents, teachers, and even peers to sneer at her in disgust.  The disgust she received made her "comfortable" as she "deserved it."  The one person in this world who refused to condemn her was her husband.  For years he devoted himself to her.  At the time of her infidelity, he thought it was impossible for them to be any happier.  The kids were great, work was great, and together, they were best friends, sharing every secret.  He even accompanied her to any store where strange men made her fearful.

Yet, something triggered her, and she did that very thing that would make him join the rest in condemning her.

He then attempted suicide.

He turned to his mother-in-law for help.

The victim's mother is now, even at a latter age, racked with guilt for failure to protect.  Did she know?  How could she not know?  What of denial?

She lashed out at her husband, denying any sexual abuse even though her sexual acting out from the abuse had happened for more than 10 years before she met her husband.  The drugs, alcohol, and indiscriminate sex were all designed to destroy her, just like the perpetrator made her feel worthy for nothing but destruction.

What of Stephen Collins' victims?

What of their husbands?

What of their children's?

We often hear minimizing language and denial within parents of victims, especially if the perpetrator is the father or uncle.

There is a movement within our country to get pedophilia to be yet another disability; that is, the government's responsibility to pay for housing, and pay the pedophile to stay home, in housing that is away from school districts.  The pedophile will be rewarded with money for his evil and the money will come from taxation; taxation of victims who work.

This is to re-victimize the victim in order to satisfy a perverse sense of an immoral compass, turned on its head.

It will not be the first time we have seen the maladies in the DSM go political rather than dealt with.

Once politics enters, the emotional contest begins to see "who is the most compassionate?" and go down the path to:

Begin the quest to remove pedophilia from the DSM,
Move on to getting common Americans to accept pedophilia, and begin the "don't judge!" campaign, which is the bane of the weak minded;
and eventually, come to praise it with the bowing to the god of tolerance.

What was once considered a perversion that demanded restraint and treatment, has already moved into the next step in Europe:  perverted child molesters should not be punished, they should be 'helped', which is the political code word for money.

The sexual abuse victim, suffering for a life time, along with her loved ones,  will now have money taken from her pay check and given to the perpetrator in order to "treat" him.  As this cash cow is fought over, the next step is "understanding" and having "compassion" (again, code words for someone to ask, "how much is this going to cost?").

The victim may have to give up her parking spot to the perpetrator.

Eventually, evil is called good, which is the final step.

It is shouted down now, but as morality has become a blurred line, and terms like "marriage" are redefined, words lose meaning.  As we move from a nation of laws to a nation of chaos, the move to "accept" pedophilia, will continue.  Eventually, Hollywood will portray a pedophile in an emotionally accepting role (cue just the right music), while bigamy may be chuckled at.

The suffering of Michael Collins victims is not only unknown, but may be immeasurable.

Strong prison sentences are intended to frighten pedophiles into staying away from children.  We cannot legislate thought (we've seen what 'hate crime' has done in dividing our country), but we can legislate action.

Having said all of this, there are those who, molested as children (generally males) who have a sexual attraction to children, who voluntarily undergo treatment, but more importantly, undergo voluntary boundaries, staying away from children, who deserve our assistance.  When I say "our assistance", this is not code for money, or for the government, but for men and women of good will to encourage the pedophile, who recognizes that nature has been twisted into something foul, and seek to not act upon their evil thoughts.  I have met some who have voluntarily told others of their private curse and hell, agreeing to not be alone or even around children, who were accepted by others.  It can happen within a community. There are medications that help, including those that seek to quell sex drive.

But when the government talks about "acceptance", remember who government is:

government is an opinion with a gun, and if you do not agree with government's opinion, it can, at the end of that gun, coerce you into that which you do not agree with.

Not good.

Not the purpose of government.

If a man molests a child and receives a 50 year prison sentence, and is kept in prison for the entire sentence, it is very likely that other children will be kept safe.

As to the one victim?

The victim will suffer for his or her entire life, likely longer than the prison sentence.

Should Collins make a statement, we'll cover it.

Ad: Statement Analysis Services: Corporate Training

Peter Hyatt:  Statement Analysis Services 

Statement Analysis Services (SAS) offers 2 day trainings in Corporate America. This course is specifically designed for business needs, rather than law enforcement.  Law Enforcement training is 2.5 days.

Part 1:  Statement Analysis and detecting deception
Part 2:  Interviewing based upon analysis.  ("Analytical Interviewing)

When a company is able to learn the truth, it is at a great advantage.  Whether it is plugging the right person into the right job, or detecting deception to solve a problem, or detecting deception as a preventative means, getting to the truth is always advantageous in business.

From employee interviewing to Human Resources resolving disputes, the knowledge of Statement Analysis will directly save companies money.

*Reduce unemployment costs
*Reduce shrinkage and theft
*Resolve employee disputes
*Conduct internal investigations
*Statement Analysis Background clearance for Credit
*Anonymous Letters can be anonymous no more.
*Learn to use Statement Analysis is sales techniques, entering into your customers' language, and learning to listen carefully to their needs.

In the interview process, when an applicant is found to be deceptive, did you know that the applicant is more likely to

a.  "Fall" on the job and file a claim?
b.  Steal from you?  This includes time theft
c.  Trouble other employees and damage morale
d.  Harm your reputation
e.  Take clients and business away

In general, the deceptive person will put his or her own needs before the material needs of the company.

And...

it is only getting worse in American corporate life as many are now "gaming the system" in order to get money their hands have not earned.

It is time to fight back, and the weapon of choice is the truth.


The deceptive applicant is a "problem bringer" to your business and not a "problem solver."

Join the growing list of companies who have been trained and are successfully dealing with deception and have saved countless dollars and countless headaches through the ability to discern deception.

For a consultation contact Peter Hyatt at PHyatt1962@gmail.com

References upon request.  Consultation is 1 hour.  1 year post training follow up support.  I am also sometimes available to conduct actual interviews.

Please note that companies are now being able to identify fraudulent employees, and are able to reduce losses with this knowledge.  Each company that does an internal investigation is able to utilize these principles, and conduct legally sound, non-intrusive interviews, and can even identify those employees who are not only honest, but who should be considered for promotion.

For an example of this may be found here where Statement Analysis shows you how to identify the right person for the right position.

Knowing the truth is invaluable.

Sexual Assault Statement

http://tmz.vo.llnwd.net/o28/newsdesk/tmz_documents/1003-war-machine-docs.pdf

We look for a subject to guide us.  We look for an innocent subject to tell us he did not do it.  We note where one begins a statement as critical, and often the reason for writing.

This man is accused of sexually assaulting his porn-star girlfriend after allegedly finding her in bed with another man.

"Gone Girl" and Nancy Grace

This is a bit off topic, but readers here do often watch The Nancy Grace Show, and I use the transcripts from the program for statement analysis, and the movie, "Gone Girl" opened last night to rave reviews.  No movie critic, I impose upon you my most intellectually fueled conclusion that I can muster at this early hour:

It was a stinker.

The premise promised interest, as it could have been a good story line, and the reviews convinced me to do what I have not done in years:  go to a movie theater.  Perhaps the reviews 'set me up' for the disappointment, or, perhaps more so, it was the "GWTW Night" we had with the kids recently, where intermission, fun snacks, and the art of cinematic beauty and thespian artistry was on full display in all its glory.

A woman goes missing and her husband is the obvious suspect with transparent 'acting' (like watching wood move and talk) was met with transparent writing. The shortened sentences ("one liners") included body parts just enough to satisfy junior high need for imbecilic yet embarrassed chuckle. (This is worse than 50 Shades of Humiliation imposed upon American teenagers who will, for a season,  think billionaires in private helicopters are going to pick them up for first dates, and use pain to derive pleasure).

 The Scott Peterson underline met with the Nancy Grace cartoonish caricature was rivaled by the gratuitous sex scenes that are demanded by today's dumbed down audience. Even the most hardened of Hollywood critics recognize that the post "code era" of Hollywood, in the 30's, forced writers (and actors) to become suggestive, deepening the weight of artistic value, as the actor (and the camera!) is forced to greater heights of influence.  (I do like the short, pre-code movies of the early 30's,  even the B status still holds some charm).  Without gratuitous camera angles, filmmakers were forced to rely upon talent. Today, as immorality is the main star, with all others just a supporting cast, we don't have the same dramatic impact as we did in the Golden era (though who came up with married people in double beds, I do not know). Clara Bow has everything on anyone who calls herself "GaGa."

2 hours and 25 minutes later, having used the iPhone to read news stories and stay awake, the audience stood up, looked around, and had a palpable feel of disappointment.

For those of you who are fascinated by true crime, and tune in to the Nancy Grace Show, save your hard earned money.  Nancy Grace won't take any hits for this one.  There was nothing subtle about the portrayal, which, again, is a shame.

Perhaps someone in Hollywood will give us credit for being able to enjoy a moment of quiet understatement.

For those of you who want to see the movie, I'll not spoil it for you.  An overabundance of greasy popcorn and Ben Affleck will accomplish that for you.

For those of you who have not had the pleasure of introducing 12-14 year olds to "Gone With the Wind", you're missing a fascinating eye-opening moment in the lives of your youngsters, who are well trained to not think, process, or carefully consider far past LOL.

There was one character that I thought had some cleverness to her:  it was the 'billie jean groupie' type, who sought to get a "selfie" from Ben Affleck.  Sadly, missing person cases also attack these types of social misfits who seek purpose and 'limelight' even if by the clinging to an infamous person.

The premise was good, the delivery was not.

At least now you know why I stick to Statement Analysis and not movie criticism.

It would be nice if Hollywood could produce a movie that doesn't insult the intelligence. 

Language and Personality Part 1: Adversative Words

   

               Language and Personality:  Adversative Words
                                                               by Peter Hyatt

"Out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks..."

How we speak reveals who we are.

A few years ago, a company capitalized on this fact claiming to help improve one's vocabulary, in order to make a better impression upon others.

Unfortunately, good vocabulary comes from reading and reading takes time and effort, and is not the 'past time', culturally, that it once was.  Reading to children, before they are able to read (or even speak), seems to help create a love of books, which whether it be in electronic or paper form, remains key to education and language growth.

A poor vocabulary leaves a poor impression.  We can complain that we should not be judged, all the day long if we wish, but people will continue to judge us, first on appearance, and then upon our language.

In the very least, we should consider that since we cannot stop others from judging us, we can influence that judgement.

Did you ever notice how people that are dressed a certain way have an easy time in stores when they are making returns?

It's true.

I've tried it, in both jeans and a t shirt, and in a suit.  It's always easier, even without question, while wearing a suit.

Language reveals us, and coarse or inappropriate language, for example, in a business setting, will leave an impact upon peers, customers, or our superiors, whether we like it or not.

As language reveals us, a personality trait may appear.  This is, in effect, a kind of profiling, that is, of collecting data (if only in our brains) about the type of person speaking to us, as we listen to his words.

I.  Personalty Type:   Impulsive Control

Have you ever met someone who is very impulsive?  This is the kind of person that often "leaps before he looks" and will jump in, both feet first, often with enthusiasm, but little pre-thought.  Where might this person fit in your company?

Impulsive individuals can be successful, for example, when the right fit is made, according to their personality type.  Some might do well in environments where aggressive sales is necessary, whereas other sales positions might be better suited for pensive, thoughtful, careful employees.

Personalty types do emerge from language.

In studying pronouns, we sometimes see that those in positions of authority, often drop the pronoun "I" in their memos, or emails, opting for either a missing pronoun, or the pronoun, "we", which can be, in some settings, distancing language.

But what of the impulsive type of personality that may even be aggressive, or disagreeable?

What of a subject who lacks impulse control?  Can he be identified in the employment interview?

In Statement Analysis, we have noted that the word "but" is often used to compare, via a form of negation, two or more things.  "I'd like to do that for you but..." and we say:  "Always note the words that follow "but" as very important."

This can negate that which preceded it, or it can minimize, via comparison.

What if your position requires someone who is thoughtful and pensive, and must use critical thinking but specifically, "look" before one "leaps" and make careful decisions?

Langauge can identify poor impulse control in people.

The "Adversative" words are:  "but, however, nevertheless..." and so on.

Subjects with poor impulse control are noted to use these words in abundance.

It is not likely that you counted the number of times you heard these words from someone, but I am betting that you have met someone like this, and you felt a certain uneasiness about the person, and wondered why.

You would likely not be surprised if later on you learned that the person you thought to be "difficult", even though you only spoke a short time, is actually one with poor impulse control, and the "adversative" words were 'getting to you' a bit.

These are often found in intuitive individuals who do very well with training in Statement Analysis and in Analytical Interviewing.  Studies have shown, even among hospitalized individuals with poor impulse control, an excessive use of such words.

II.  Personality Type:  Obsessive Compulsive

What about someone with Obsessive Compulsive tendencies?

Again, a person with obsessive compulsive traits can be very useful, particularly when placed within the proper work environment, just as they can drive others crazy when placed in inappropriate or ill-fitted situations.

The person with obsessive compulsive tendencies can become quite anxious when attempted to resolve himself to stopping the habit.  Many are "logical" to a fault, and must find a "reason" to repeat apparent senseless acts, such as hand washing, or checking and rechecking to see if the back door is locked. These types will often argue, even to himself, to justify or find a reason why the repetitive behavior is maintained.

What do we hear in their speech?

"So, since, therefore, because...." and so on.

They continually offer reasons for what they do in senseless repetition.  These are words we highlight as sensitive, if the subject is asked, "What?" rather than "Why?", while feeling the need to justify action.

In what may appear to be 'mind-blowing' tedious labor, can be actually fulfilling to the subject, which is why the manager or supervisor must not project his or her own personality into the subject, particularly while attempting to be empathetic.

The poor impulse subject has a need to "oppose" others, and act upon the first impulse (poor "over the board" chess players, yet better at "Blitz" chess).

Human Resources, skilled in interviewing, can, therefore, find proper placement for the prospective employee (if the subject has been truthful in the interview process, therefore, not weeded out) that will benefit both company and employee.

How can Human Resources accomplish this?

a.  open ended questions

b.  specific exercise


a.  open ended questions.

In Analytical Interviewing, we ask questions beginning with the legally sound, open-ended questions and move on to the analysis questions (from the written statement) and so on.  This is exciting in training and quite useful.  Even questions such as:

"What is your favorite movie?" will get someone speaking, with the goal to have the subject enter the "Free Editing Process", where he chooses his own words and we listen.

b.  The Ten Minute Exercise

This can be a lot of fun.

Using your stopwatch, timer, or your iPhone, ask someone to speak, non-stop, about anything they wish to talk about.

Both healthy and individuals with mental illness can do this for about 10 minutes without difficulty.  (Recently, someone did this to me, without stopping, for 48 minutes).

As the subject speaks, the Interviewer (HR, investigator, therapist) writes down the critical words and will be able to get a start on a profile of the subject by the words the subject uses.

The Interviewer is taught to write down adversative words (even in a number count!) as well as the "why" words, and note any words that are repeated.

It is not as difficult as it might sound, as the Interviewer becomes more experienced, since this is an exercise that can be practiced at work.  (Recall the counting of words that follow "no" in a "yes or no question" format, and how this can reveal deception.)

The interviewer will soon learn that based upon the words, alone, gender will arise.

Do you have young children?

Do you have grown children?

This is something you can even do with your children, noting how the younger the child, the more use of "I" versus "we" and, you may even discover, that when you view old video tapes of your children who are now grown:

they will be able to differentiate which voice belongs to them and...

speech patterns will show similarity to the adult child.

Next up:  How to spot a negative, problem bringer, in your employment interview.

Correlation Between Language and Activity

Correlation Between Language and Activity

                                                           by Peter Hyatt

Language is a camera's lens into what happened.  Human communications can be as complicated as the splitting of the atom (who understands that?), yet can be as simple as some of the principles of Statement Analysis indicate.

"I fell down a flight of stairs" case, continued.

When asked to "tell me what happened?", the subject stated that it was 3 steps that she fell down.  The subject also said, "the fall caused pain in my leg" while giving an initial account, over the phone.

I noted two indicators of deception.

One is not Statement Analysis' content analysis.  It is a statistical observation:  the number 3 being often chosen by those who are not truthful.  This observation is credited to retired US Fed Marshal, author, and Statement Analyst, Mark McClish, who not only noted this in his own work, but asked others to contribute to his study.  At no time is someone to say "aha!  the number 3!  they're lying!"

It is only a small tool to take note of; nothing more.

It is possible to fall down 3 steps.

It is possible to be robbed by 3 men.

It is possible to be "just having 3 boats chase us..."

It should not be seen as deception, as we do not, ever, conclude deception on a single indicator.  This is why some comments must be either answered or deleted; this is not a blog for disinformation or error.

Back to the account:

With two indicators of deception, I still did not conclude anything.  It puts me on alert, only.

How did the account end?

This has to do with change of language.

When language changes, there should be justification within the statement, to show what caused the change.  Language does not change on its own.

"Who says I stole the necklace?  I don't steal.  I don't steal jewelry! I saw the jewelry there and all I did was take the necklace out of the case, to show the customer.  When I was done, I put the necklace back in the case.  I don't steal jewelry and I swear to you that I am going to sue this company, once and for all, for these false accusations.  This is about discrimination.  Again and again, I keep saying that I do not steal.  I am not a thief.  I am a loyal, hardworking and honest employee.  When I held the necklace out, I showed the customer how beautiful it was.  I put the jewelry on the customer, and she just didn't appreciate the beauty.  She handed me the necklace and I did what I always do.  I always put them back in the case like I am supposed to.  If you don't trust me by now, I am going to talk to my lawyer!"

Did you notice that, at times, it was "necklace" but at other times, it was "jewelry"?

Language does not change on its own.  Either there is a change in reality, as discerned within the statement itself, or in the follow up interview, or...

the subject is not speaking from experiential memory, and has lost track of the wording used.

In the above statement, carefully view the context.  Does the coloration help?

"Who says I stole the necklace?  I don't steal.  I don't steal jewelry! I saw the jewelry there and all I did was take the necklace out of the case, to show the customer.  When I was done, I put the necklace back in the case.  I don't steal jewelry and I swear to you that I am going to sue this company, once and for all, for these false accusations.  This is about discrimination.  Again and again, I keep saying that I do not steal.  I am not a thief.  I am a loyal, hardworking and honest employee.  When I held the necklace out, I showed the customer how beautiful it was.  I put the jewelry on the customer, and she just didn't appreciate the beauty.  She handed me the necklace and I did what I always do.  I always put them back in the case like I am supposed to.  If you don't trust me by now, I am going to talk to my lawyer!"

The subject is speaking from experiential memory.

While it was in the subject's possession, or associated with the subject, it was a "necklace", but when it was either in the case, or on the customer, it was "jewelry" and not a "necklace."

This is what influenced the language:  the proximity of the item to the subject. 

In our 3 step fall, the subject missed the x-ray appointment, but on the follow through appointment, needed assistance entering the building, but when no one was looking, left without any difficulty in gait.

When the next follow up appointment was made, the subject described the "ever increasing" pain...

in her leg.


The doctor noted:

it was the wrong leg.


Herein a correlation between language and activity.  I have only encountered this once before, but it was a plastic air cast put on the wrong ankle, by a mentally ill subject seeking empathy.  The subject had forgotten which ankle was reported to have been injured.

Like a school child telling a lie, it is hard to keep track of lies, linguistically and it can be just as difficult when language is acted out in reality.

Words are the lens into the subject's event.

Statement Analysis listens...

very carefully.

Keep checking back for another audio lesson to be released.

We are hoping to expand our Statement Analysis services to include audio files, transcription services, and  online courses available via download.

If you would like to help:

 

John Ramsey: Jonbenet, his Daughter, in Statement Analysis

We have published analysis on the CNN interview of John and Patsy Ramsey which is in our archives. 

The Grand Jury concluded:  Jonbenet Ramsey died as a result of child abuse. 

 I agree with LSI that the language shows that Jonbenet was likely a victim of sexual abuse and that Patsy Ramsey knew of the abuse. 

Sexual abuse takes place in all types of homes.  That this was an upper class, or upper middle class home does not discount that sexual abuse took place.  We focus upon the language, which suggests sexual abuse, while the bed wetting and urinary tract infections and constant visits to the doctors also suggests. The sexualized costumes do nothing to eliminate this from our minds. 

Here, we want to focus on how John  Ramsey referred to Jonbent.  This is a specific lesson.

We have already indicated him for deception.  

Parents who abuse their children sometimes struggle with the the words "my daughter" due to the process one must go through in one's mind, particularly in sexual abuse. 

Key is context.

When is she "Jonbenet"?

When is she "my daughter?"

When is she "our daughter"?

When is Jonbenet "she"?

Also, how often will they mention their daughter?  This is another interesting aspect since they were being interviewed about their daughter.  

To whom is given their time?   To whom is dedicated most of their words?

When a child dies due to child abuse, the child, in the ind of the parent, is often now "safe"; that is, no longer a "child" who is at risk.  

CNN Interview:  

CABELL: Why did you decide you wanted to talk now?

JOHN B. RAMSEY, JONBENET'S FATHER: Well we have been pretty isolated -- totally isolated -- for the last five days, but we've sensed from our friends that this tragedy has touched not just ourselves and our friends but many people. And we know that there's many people that are praying for us, that are grieving with us. And we want to thank them, to let them know that we are healing, and that we know in our hearts that JonBenet is safe and with God and that the grieving that we all have to do is for ourselves and for our loss, but we want to thank those people that care about us.

He calls the murder a "tragedy" which is not only softer or minimizing language, it is also often something used when something happens that is unintended. A "tragic accident" took place, and so forth.  This is not expected language. 

The Reference:  

1.  Jonbent

In this reference, she is "Jonbenet" who is "safe" and "with God"

RAMSEY, J: But the other -- the other reason is that -- for our grief to resolve itself we now have to find out why this happened.

Note that John Ramsey wishes to learn "why" it happened, and not "who did it."

CABELL: There has been some question as to why you hired a defense attorney.

RAMSEY, J: I know. Well, we were fortunate from almost the moment that we found the note to be surrounded by friends, our minister, our family doctor, a personal friend of mine who is also an attorney, and we relied on their guidance almost from that moment on and my friend suggested that it would be foolish not to have knowledgeable counsel to help both us and with the investigation.

No reference to Jonbenet. 

RAMSEY, P: And if anyone knows anything, please, please help us. For the safety of all of the children, we have to find out who did this.

RAMSEY, J: Not because we're angry, but because we have got to go on.

He is not "angry" at the murder of his daughter.   No mention of Jonbenet. 

RAMSEY, P: We can't -- we can't --

RAMSEY, J: This -- we cannot go on until we know why. There's no answer as to why our daughter died.

He finished her sentence.  One might, in context, wonder if this was scripted and rehearsed, with Patsy losing her line. 

CABELL: Are you fully convinced that your daughter was kidnapped by some outsiders outside your family or circle of friends?

RAMSEY, J: Yes. I -- we don't -- you know, it's just so hard to know, but we are -- our family is a loving family. It's a gentle family. We have lost one child. We know how precious their lives are .

He answers with "Yes" which is then followed by "I", "we", "you know" and then settles on the plural only.  The avoidance of the pronoun "I" by the father of a murdered child is unexpected. 

CABELL: Mrs. Ramsey -- you found the note. Was it a handwritten note, three pages?

RAMSEY, P: I didn't -- I couldn't read the whole thing I -- I just gotten up. We were on our -- it was the day after Christmas, and we were going to go visiting, and it was quite early in the morning, and I had got dressed and was on my way to the kitchen to make some coffee, and we have a back staircase from the bedroom areas, and I always come down that staircase, and I am usually the first one down. And the note was lying across the -- three pages -- across the run of one of the stair treads, and it was kind of dimly lit.

It was just very early in the morning, and I started to read it, and it was addressed to John. It said "Mr. Ramsey," And it said, "we have your daughter." And I -- you know, it just was -- it just wasn't registering, and I -- I may have gotten through another sentence. I can't -- "we have your daughter." and I don't know if I got any further than that. And I immediately ran back upstairs and pushed open her door, and she was not in her bed, and I screamed for John.

CABELL: John, you subsequently read the note. Was there anything in there that struck you in any sense?

RAMSEY, J: Well, no. I mean, I read it very fast. I was out of my mind. And it said "Don't call the police." You know, that type of thing. And I told Patsy, call the police immediately. And I think I ran through the house a bit.

The "ransom note" was a fake, and it was also foolishly lengthy.  There are many things that would "strike" any father.  Here he feels the need to explain why nothing "struck him in any sense" by two explanations:  1.  He read it very fast  2.  He was out of his mind.  

During the long hours of just waiting around, would he not have re-read it, discussed it, and considered the meaning of the money demand, which matched his bonus?

The answer lacks credibility.  Although it was about Jonbenet, he does not mention her in his answer.  

RAMSEY, P: We went to check our son.

Here she gives the reason why she ran through the house. Note she did not say they went to search for Jonbenet. 

RAMSEY, J: Checked our son's room. Sometimes she sleeps in there. And we just were --

"Checked our son's room" is missing a pronoun.   Who checked his room?  

RAMSEY, P: We were just frantic.

see above comment about scripting and rehearsing

CABELL: How did you happen later to look in the basement?

RAMSEY, J: Well, we'd waited until after the time that the call was supposed to have been made to us, and one of the detectives asked me and my friend who was there to go through every inch of the house to see if there was anything unusual or abnormal that looked out of place.

RAMSEY, P: Look for clues I guess.

"I guess" is a weak assertion, yet here, again, we find John pick up her words, as if scripted:

"Look for clues":  

RAMSEY, J: Look for clues, asking us to do that, give us something more to do to occupy our mind, and so we started in the basement, and -- and we were just looking, and we -- one room in the basement that -- when I opened the door -- there were no windows in that room, and I turned the light on, and I -- that was her.

Please note that there are two references in this one answer that are both strongly associated with sexual abuse, the opening of a door, and the turning on of a light.  

The turning on of the light may be a reference to motive (LSI)

RAMSEY, P: She was --

CABELL (off camera): You were asked shortly thereafter for a hair sample and writing sample, blood sample. Who else was asked for this?

RAMSEY, J: Well, Patsy and I, Burke, our son, who is nine, every family member.

He did not call her his "wife" with possessive pronoun "my" in the interview, while Patsy called him "my husband", indicating that Patsy saw her self as close to him, but he did not see himself as close to her. 

CABELL: Including your two elder children?

RAMSEY, J: Uh-huh.

CABELL: Any friends?

RAMSEY, J: I don't know.

CABELL: Now, did you give the samples?

RAMSEY, J: Uh-huh.

CABELL: Oh, really? Because the word was that they thought you were too grief stricken. So both of you, you gave samples?

RAMSEY, J: Yes.

CABELL: Were you offended by that?

RAMSEY, J: No.

RAMSEY, P: It was difficult. But, you know, they need to know -- I mean our hand prints are all over our home, so they need to know if there's -- if there are other ones --

CABELL: The police said a couple of days ago, to assure other residents of Boulder there is no killer on the loose here, you can be assured everything is under control. You believe it's someone outside your home.

RAMSEY, P: There is a killer on the loose.

RAMSEY, J: Absolutely.

John Ramsey says "absolutely" to the statement that there is a killer on the loose, yet he said he wanted to find out "why" this happened and not "who" the killer out there is. 

RAMSEY, P: I don't know who it is. I don't know if it's a he or a she. But if I were a resident of Boulder, I would tell my friends to keep -- keep your babies close to you, there's someone out there.

Not knowing is repeated, making it sensitive.  

Note that only "if" she were a resident of Boulder she "would" tell her" friends" which is a weak assertion. 

Would she not warn the residents of Boulder, only her friends?

CABELL: An FBI spokesman was quoted as saying at this point they don't regard it necessarily as a kidnapping. You think that's a wrong assumption?

RAMSEY, J: I don't know. I mean, there is a -- a note that said -- your daughter has been kidnapped. We have your daughter. We want money. You give us the money; she'll be safely returned.

He may be quoting the note; if not, it is distancing language and not expected. 

RAMSEY, P: It seemed like kidnapping to me.

RAMSEY, J: I guess that's what concerns me because if we don't have the full resources of all the law enforcement community on this case, I am going to be very upset.

He  is "going to be" very upset, spoken in future tense, conditional --"if we don't"

He is not "angry" that his daughter was murdered.  He will only get upset if...This very much sounds like a guilty speaker who struggles to condemn himself. 

CABELL: Inevitably, speculation on talk shows will focus on you. It's got to be a sickening --

RAMSEY, J: It's nauseating beyond belief.

But not untrue, just nauseating?

RAMSEY, P: You know, America has just been hurt so deeply with the -- this -- the tragic things that have happened. The young woman who drove her children into the water, and we don't know what happened with the O.J. Simpson -- and I mean, America is suffering because have lost faith in the American family.

We are a Christian, God-fearing family. We love our children. We would do anything for our children.

CABELL: Do you truly think the perpetrator will be found?

RAMSEY, J: Yes. Yes. Has to be found.

Not "has to be found"

CABELL: Do you think it's a single individual?

RAMSEY, J: Yes. In my heart I do.

CABELL: Do you take some comfort in believing that JonBenet Ramsey is in a better place.

RAMSEY, J: Yes. That's the one thing we want people dealing with us to know, to believe that, we know that in our heart.

RAMSEY, P: She'll never have to know the loss of a child . She will never have to know cancer or death of a child.

RAMSEY, J: We learned when we lost our first child that people would come forward to us, that sooner or later everyone carries a very heavy burden in this life. And JonBenet didn't carry any burdens.