|Justice for Hailey!|
There has been recent discussion about past tense references and mothers of missing child. Let's review the principle.
When the parent of a missing child makes a past tense reference, it is an indication that the parent knows or believes the child is dead.
This is a simple precept.
When we speak of someone who has died, we say things like, "She was a wonderful person", indicating death, that she is no longer a wonderful person. When a child goes missing, the innocent parent will speak as if the child is alive. "She is a wonderful person" is in the present tense, ongoing.
Casey Anthony actually caught herself in this slip of the tongue. "Caylee loved the park", she said, adding, "Caylee loves the park." Yet, it was this single slip that told us that she knew Caylee was dead.
Recently, a guest on The Nancy Grace Show attempted to reference this principle, but got it backward saying, 'The parent is innocent. We can know this because she speaks of her child in the present tense.'
This reminds me of Lance Armstrong and Marion Jones: 'I have passed 100 drug tests" instead of saying, "I did not take testosterone." This is like the man accused of robbing his bank who says, "I have made withdrawals once a week, 50 times a year, for 10 years at this bank and have never been caught stealing" instead of saying "I didn't take the money."
The deceptive parent, with guilty knowledge of the child's death will attempt to always speak in the present tense, for the purpose of continuing the deception. It is the rare and occasional slip that reveals the guilty knowledge of the deceptive parent.
This must be viewed in context:
1. Natural parental denial.
Parents have a natural denial within them; oftentimes mothers have a steeper acceptance curve and will refuse to give up hope longer than fathers. It goes against every fiber of a mother's being to accept that her baby is dead. Fathers can give up hope earlier. This denial can last for a very long time.
2. Have the police given indication to the parents that their child is dead? In a case, for example, where the child is missing and the police are thinking that she is a runaway, or met someone on line, there is no reason for the parent to lose hope.
3. How much time has passed?
The earlier the reference in the past tense, the more alarming. If a teen, for example, has been missing a week, an innocent mother will not likely accept anything but hope. In the case of missing 7 year old, Kyron Horman, a year passed and Desiree Young still did not use past tense verbs.
|Not forgotten by us|
4. Has evidence or circumstance taken away hope?
This may be where blood is found, and the parent loses hope, yet, the mother will still struggle to accept that the child may be dead, and will, because of the powerful God-given instincts, believe that even with this much blood, her child would have survived.
Here are some examples where the parent slipped into past tense verb usage, without any indicators from police that the child was dead:
Susan Smith: "My boys needed me", she said, while the search had only just begun. As a mother of missing sons, did her boys no longer need her?
Casey Anthony: "Caylee loved the park. Caylee loves the park" correcting herself as she slipped out knowledge that she had killed Caylee, put duct tape over her mouth, and stuffed her into a garbage bag. Casey Anthony's words are useful for studying and teaching deception detection.
Deborah Bradley wanted people to search for the 'kidnapped' Lisa when her language revealed, from the beginning, that she knew Lisa was dead. Lisa infringed upon her "adult time" and, in a likely moment of anger, Lisa met her fate in the home, which quickly became a cover up, like so many others. Death was not likely intended, but came just the same, and rather than risk arrest, she concocted an implausible story, but it was the words of the story, rather than the implausibility, that showed her deception.
Sergio Celis and Becky Celis used past tense language even while telling others to keep searching and have hope. Sergio Celis' 911 call showed indicators of deception, speaking from a script, and an attempt to persuade that he was not involved. He utterly failed. His language brings sexual abuse to mind.
Justin DiPietro, like the Celis', refused to call out to the missing child, via media, and was provoked to come out and referenced Ayla in the past tense. We knew, early on, that there was no hope for Ayla. DiPietro, with a likely underlining thought, purchased life insurance, not for Ayla, but against her. Even though he has another child with another woman, he did not purchase life insurance against his other child. Can we imagine the other mother's relief?
Billie Jean Dunn did so on the Nancy Grace Show while attempting to portray herself as a caring mother. Some have written that she did so because she was answering questions from people prior, therefore, she went out of bounds of the question, "How far did she have to go to the sleepover?", which is an excellent explanation:
She felt the need to explain herself. Deceptive people anticipate such things and seek to preempt them. They think to themselves, "I better explain this before it is asked..." not realizing that it indicates clear deception. We note not only that she went outside the boundary of the question, but the need, itself, to go beyond, as critical information.
When it was learned that the home had serial killer literature, among so much else, Dunn defended herself by saying she had downloaded and printed a story from Nancy Grace's crime library.
|desperate to control information|
This highlights that even lies have a genesis. Words do not come from a vacuum, and it is why when humans speak, they give themselves away.
Billie Dunn's amateurish lies have not been difficult to discern and her contribution to society is that her interview on The Nancy Grace Show is now used around the country to teach deception detection techniques.
"Don't Shake Jake!"
I attended a seminar on medical indicators of child abuse and was treated to a lecture about Shaken Baby Syndrome by a mother who's son, Jake, had been shaken to death by a babysitter. The innocent mother used her son's death to educate society to the dangers of Shaken Baby Syndrome. I took careful notes during her speech. She repeatedly spoke of Jacob in the present tense, though he had been long deceased, and instead of the pronoun "him", she called him terms of endearment with the possessive pronoun, "my." She said, "My Jake" and "My special guy" and so on. Her natural denial, in spite of the very setting in which she was speaking, was still in play. She left a life-changing imprint upon me.
Take a moment to read this story HERE. I will never be able to thank this courageous mother enough for her work, in her son's name. He, being dead, continues to 'speak' and warn parents about that momentary loss of control.
His death was not in vain.
Innocent mothers will struggle, even when police break the bad news to them, to accept their child's death. The natural denial overpowers reason and the mother will, even upon viewing her deceased child, shake her head 'no' and speak to her child, as if alive. It is something deep within a mother's heart, and it is from this place where the intellect and emotions meet, that the mouth forms its words.
Many innocent mothers will continue, even for years, to speak of the deceased child in the present tense. The denial within them is very powerful, even as maternal instincts were highlighted by Solomon in his maternity decision from ancient Israel.