Wednesday, April 30, 2014

Kyron Horman New Flyer

As June approaches, I often think of Kyron, and of course, his step mother, Terri, of whom deception was indicated with regard to his disappearance, leaving his mother, Desiree Young, bereft of all comfort and closure. 

In the very least, Terri could have mercy upon the family and anonymously communicate where Kyron's remains can be recovered.  

Terri Horman failed her polygraph.  

PORTLAND -- A sign posted outside of Terri Horman's home in Roseburg is raising questions.  The flier suggests an "unknown man" may be connected to her stepson's disappearance.
The flier title, "Find Kyron First" includes an age progression photo of Kyron Horman and the missing boy's description.
It also includes the following statement: "Kyron Horman was last seen at a public invited Science Fair at Skyline School in Portland OR by witnesses who saw him with an unknown man."
Investigators believe Terri Horman was the last one to see her stepson before he disappeared from Skyline School on June 4, 2010. She has not been charged in the case.
Terri Horman was not available for comment. It's not clear who created the flier.
The Multnomah County Sheriff's Office declined to comment on the new flier.
A spokesman said the public should rely on official law enforcement bulletins from the FBI or local police for information about the case.

Holly Bobo: 2nd Suspect Arrested

Second suspect charged in disappearance of nursing student Holly Bobo

from fox 
Jason Wayne Autry was also charged for his alleged involvement in the disappearance of Tennessee Nursing Student Holly Bobo.TENNESSEE BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
Authorities in Tennessee have charged a second person in the case of a Tennessee nursing student abducted from her family's home three years ago.
Jason Wayne Autry was charged with aggravated kidnapping and felony murder by the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation, authorities announced Tuesday.
At the same time, Zachary Adams, who previously was charged with murder and aggravated kidnapping in the case, was additionally charged with coercion.
The charges against both Adams and Autry--who has a lengthy criminal history and is currently incarcerated at the Riverbend Maximum Security Facility-- were handed down after evidence was presented to a grand jury.
Autry was charged after sworn witness statements said he was seen with Adams and Bobo after the time of her abduction. Investigatorssaid they anticipate making more arrests in the coming weeks.
“We believe there are others who have information and may have been involved,” TBI Director Mark Gwyn said at a late afternoon press conference. “This sends a clear message that we will be knocking on their door.”
Bobo, a nursing student at the University of Tennessee at Martin, was last seen at her home in Parsons on April 13, 2011, by her older brother, who reported seeing her being taken into the woods by an unidentified man dressed in camouflage.
A small amount of blood was found in the family's carport, where Holly was believed taken from while on her way to school, police sources told at the time of her disappearance. Despite extensive searches that included bloodhounds and high-resolution underwater imaging, authorities found no trace of the 20-year-old woman, who is presumed dead.
In late February, Adams, 29, was charged with murder and aggravated kidnapping in the case.
"We believe we can prove that she was taken forcefully from her home without her consent," District Attorney General Hansel McAdams said at the time. He said he will consider pursing the death penalty if Adams is convicted. 
Investigators would not get into details about why Adams was charged. His home, however, is about 15 miles from where Bobo lived in Parsons, a small town about 100 miles northeast of Memphis in Decatur County.
He has pleaded not guilty and remains in jail without bond.
Bobo's brother, Clint, reported to police that he saw a man in camouflage clothes leading his sister into the woods behind the family's home. He said he initially thought she was being taken into the woods by her boyfriend, but grew concerned when he saw the man's arm holding onto his sister. He called his mother, who then contacted 911.

Amanda Knox: Italian Court States Stabbed Victim

Knox, roommate argued over money before stabbing: court

Amanda Knox and her tragic roommate bitterly argued over money before “Foxy Knoxy” finished her off with a kitchen knife, according to Italian court documents unsealed Tuesday.
There was ample physical evidence to convict the Seattle co-ed and two others of murdering Meredith Kercher on Nov. 2, 2007, a court in Florence said in a 337-page ruling from January that declared Knox guilty in a retrial.
Kercher, 21, was killed “by multiple aggressors” who forcibly restrained her while stabbing her, the court ruled.
The British co-ed had no defensive wounds, which the court reasoned, showed she was overpowered and didn’t have a chance against knife-wielding killers.
Knox’s co-defendant and then-boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito used a small knife to stab the right side of Kercher’s neck and cut off her bra, according to the court.
Co-defendant Rudy Hermann Guede sexually assaulted Kercher before Knox “delivered the only mortal blow,” by butchering her roommate with a kitchen knife, the court said.
Knox, now 26, was originally convicted of Kercher’s murder in Perugia, where both women were exchange students, and spent four years behind bars, before Italy’s high court vacated verdicts against her and Sollecito in 2011.
Knox rushed home to Seattle after she was released and has vowed never to return to Italy.
She was retried in absentia and found guilty again by an appellate court in Florence in January. The court documents released Tuesday detailed that second guilty verdict.
“It is a matter of fact that at a certain point in the evening events accelerated; the English girl was attacked by Amanda Marie Knox, by Raffaele Sollecito, who was backing up his girlfriend, and by Rudy Hermann Guede, and constrained within her own room,” according to the court.
This appellate court backed away from the prosecution’s earlier assertion that Kercher was killed when she declined to have kinky sex with Knox and her boyfriend.
Modal Trigger
An undated photo of British student Meredith Kercher.Photo: AP
It was an earlier argument over money that prompted Knox’s “desire to abuse and humiliate the . . . girl,” according to the court.
Knox was sentenced to 28¹/₂ years in prison in January. She still has avenues to appeal January’s ruling and could string out the process for months, if not years.
And even if Knox loses and runs out of appeals, there’s still no guarantee that US authorities would honor an extradition request by Italy.
Sollecito’s lawyer, Giulia Bongiorno, ridiculed the court’s reasoning.
“Honestly the verdict is so full of errors, illogical elements and contradictions, that I strongly believe it will be overturned [on appeal],” Bongiorno said

Tuesday, April 29, 2014

Cursing in Statement Analysis

Why do people curse?

Why do we teach children not to curse?

Why is it shocking to hear a child curse?

Why the **** would it make a difference?

How should we view cursing, or swear words, in Statement Analysis?

I. Cursing and Society

"Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn" from Clark Gable's character, Rhett Butler, in 1939's "Gone With The Wind" was a quote that had to pass censorship.  Today, it does not rise to the level of discussion.

We teach children not to curse for a variety of reasons, including two important ones:

1.  Self restraint
2.  Respect for others
3.  Indulgence

It matters not what the word, itself, is, when we are dealing with self restraint.  It is easier to curse than not to curse; similar to a large sign, in a stone filled lot, where there is an abandoned building with a large sign that says:

                             "DO NOT THROW ROCKS AT WINDOWS"

Every 10 year old boy knows the adrenaline rush he feels when he sees that sign posted just below the targeted windows.  The statement, in the negative, is provocative; that is, it provokes the boy into wanting to throw rocks.  Had it said, "KEEP WINDOWS UNBROKEN" it would not have the same impact written in the positive.

It takes a measure of self restraint for us not to curse and self discipline is critical to responsible adulthood.  The lack of self discipline impacts every area of life from health to safety.

It matters not if the word is "Gobblegook" or any nonsense word:  it takes restraint to not say something.

Self Restraint is something that keeps society safe, and the lack of self restraint is what has led to an abundance of laws, to the point where Caesars from yesteryear would have drooled over the control government exercises today over its citizens.

Self Restraint is good for children to practice, just as it is good for us to practice it.  Where one, for example, refuses to curse in front of women and children, he is, perhaps, using self restraint as a means of respect.  If that self restraint is later put to the test, in a more serious manner, such as domestic violence, the man who, as a boy, was taught to govern his passions and temper, may escape the once unmanly assault of the weaker sex.

 Like it or not, self discipline is critical to society, even though the self-esteem cult has steamrolled past it, where everyone must be first, and the language of humility is as foreign today in a way a few generations ago would have thought impossible.

2.  Respect

a.  Respect for women.
b.  Respect for status or position
c.  Respect for location

This can also be a nonsense word, but its lack of use, in the presence of some, is a sign of respect, sorely lacking from society today.

I taught my sons not to curse in front of women, as it was disrespectful.  Again, it could only be the word "gobbledegook" or something like it, which is not the point:  the point is that if I could teach them, as boys, to take special care around their mother and sisters, one day, they would take special care of their wives, who would, in turn, thank me for teaching them manners.

It is like the kid who gets a new (for him) car and polishes it and cleans it every day.  He is not likely going to be reckless with it:  he has invested too much effort into it.  So it is that young boys can be taught, from an early age, to never hit a female.

We wouldn't have the Domestic Violence industry that we have today if this was still taught.  Sadly, egalitarianism says otherwise, and when my son refuses to hit a female in hockey, he is laughed at.

That's okay with us.  This too, shall pass, as what we embrace today as a society may be gone tomorrow, or the day after, as we grow sickened by the burgeoning jail population of brutish, effeminate men who think it is acceptable to hit women.  Masculinity sacrifices strength; it does not use it to exploit the weak.
b.  Respect for status or position

"Mr. President..." is a term of respect to be used when addressing the man who holds the office; it is appropriate for the office, no matter what you think of the man.  "Salute the rank" military says.

When a child uses foul language to his or her teacher, or coach, it is a signal of disrespect, not only for the person, but for the position the person holds.

It is almost unthinkable that children should stand when speaking to a teacher and say, "Good morning, Mrs. Smith" to start the day.

Tell a child to dress appropriately for school, in a manner that shows respect for the dignity of the learning facility, and the cries of "censorship" and "squelching freedom" are echoed everywhere.

I like to use the term, "Doctor" when addressing someone who has worked hard enough to receive a Phd in whatever profession, even though they may not be a medical doctor.  It shows respect for the hard work they put into their studies.  To hold a doctorate, for example, in history, deserves respect.

c.  Respect for location

Would you walk into the White House and spew out vile cursing?
How about church?
Would you walk into an opera, take your seat and start chanting, "hell yeah!"?
I have had job applicants come in for an interview, not only slovenly dressed, but littering the interview with four letter words.  Talk about first impressions?

We cannot stop people from judging us.  It is naturally done by the brain (as seen through our words) but we can influence that judgement by our appearance and our words.

I wore jeans and a polo shirt visiting Ben + Jerrys, but I would not wear that to the White House, nor would I go to a job interview in shorts.

Location matters.

Think of the great symbolism manifest in a Christian wedding, including the colors, and the high view of marriage as displayed in symbolism.  An American flag might be but a few square inches, as a symbol, but the reality is almost 300 million people and hundreds of years of history the symbol represents.

Language can be seen the same way:  in the reality it represents.

Statement Analysis seeks to enter into the reality of the subject's perception, through the understanding of communication.

Enter the language and learn the truth.  Here is such an example:

3.  Indulgence 

Some will simply refuse to self regulate and will indulge in whatever it is he wants to say.

When the LA Clippers owner said he didn't want his mistress bringing her black friends, the backlash was severe, calling for the NBA to remove him from ownership.

I have yet to read of anyone saying, "Hey, it's racist and stupid, but I defend his right to say so" or anything similar to this.  Instead, those who refuse to take personal responsibility in life are calling for laws and more laws.

What would I like to see happen to him?

I'd like to hear people defend his freedom of speech and then boycott the team until he sells off his interest and fades into oblivion.

No firing, no loss of employment forced upon him, but the simple force of him exercising his freedom to say he does not want blacks to come to the game, against the force of people of good will saying that they do not want to buy tickets to his team as long as he is owner, while defending his freedom to be a moron.

He is said to be a man who is so self indulged and so entitled, that he cannot see past his own needs and wants.

The nation now sees him as a moron. He may be said to be "spoiled", that is, rotten, and rotten by means of refusing to govern his mouth or even his heart.  When I looked at his team, I noticed that his money seems to come from the players' skill levels; most of whom appeared to be black.

Wouldn't it be something to see his freedom of speech defended while fans forcing him out by them exercising their freedom of speech?

It would be something to behold.

A child who is not restrained will likely become an adult without restraint.

I recall one day, years ago, in which I was called over to meet a 3 year old boy.  I noted co-workers trying to keep a poker face, so I knew it was something special.

"Who the f*** are you?" the toddler asked me.

I asked the workers, "Did he just drop the f bomb?"  I simply did not believe it. Some three year olds are hard to understand, so I knew I must be wrong.

One of the workers asked him about "Mommy" as a way to get him to talk again.

"Where is my f***ing mommy?", he answered.  He went on to describe his mommy in equally colorful language.

What was his future?

Perhaps his mother wanted to teach him freedom of speech.

II.  Cursing and Emergencies 

"Where the hell are you?  My son needs an ambulance!"

In statement analysis, there are times, like in a 911 call, when we expect to hear cursing within the urgency.

I recall reading a study that showed that some cursing was healthy, in emergency situations, as it released pent up stress.

In my work, I allow staff to come into my office, close the door, and vent.

This vent does, at times, have some pretty colorful words; words I don't normally use.  This same staff, now having vent out frustrations, often leave the office feeling better, and will not take out such frustrations on clients, or co-workers.

There is the expected just as there is the unexpected.

Recently I reviewed a 911 call in which I concluded deception where the perpetrator called with a greeting, and with the victim laying on the floor, not breathing.  "The gentleman", he called the victim.


That's way too polite.

The victim was not breathing because the 911 caller had assaulted him viciously.

We have even seen some appropriate use of cursing during interviews where the innocent person is accused by the interviewer and the subject becomes frustrated with the interviewer's inability to dicer.

"What would you say if I told you you were lying?"

I expect the innocent person to not take this lightly, and if I continue to push hard enough, I can expect (and have heard) some say "You're an idiot.  You need a new job" and so on.  The anger rises.

UPDATE:  The NBA has banned the racist owner.  I won't get to see the clash of freedoms in action, at least not in this case.  What is in the heart, comes out in the words.

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

The heart is the seat of the intellect and the affections; what we know and how we feel about what we know.

When Liars Are Lying They Choose Words

We have seen that liars hold the world in contempt.  This works its way out in the interview/investigative process (including interrogation) when the liar is challenged.

The liar does not like being called a liar.

This is more than just a presence to be noted; it is in the initial, pre-supposed language.

"I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky" has been shown to be a truthful statement, based upon statement analysis.

Everyone has a personal, subjective internal dictionary and to Mr. Clinton, "sexual relations" meant "intercourse."

Now, he obviously knew that this was deceptive, while being technically truthful, as he later said, in his semi-mea culpa.

But why did he do it?

If he knew it was deceptive, why did he even bother to make the statement?

This goes to the core of a liar:

holding others (the world, oftentimes) in contempt, the liar fancies himself better than others, and to actually be seen or exposed as a liar, undermines the very core of his nature. Liars will choose words in which, even when caught, can later defend against the charge of, "you are a liar!"

We saw this in the case of murdered 13 year old Hailey Dunn.

Billie Jean Dunn pathologically lied about what happened to Hailey, and she did so in abundance.  The more she spoke, the more we knew, while her partner in crime, Shawn Adkins, said little.

Billie Jean led the charge, and even talked the dim-witted Adkins into taking a polygraph.  ("MHMR" Billie called him, indicating that he had "Mental Health Mental Retardation"; not doing a good job identifying the initials as she attempted to sound like a professional while belying her lack of education).  She convinced him that they could beat it by using drugs, and when caught, she was forced into taking it, only to fail it.

When on the Nancy Grace Show, she was caught buying drugs, she said, "It was something I was prescribed" as if once prescribed a pain killer from a doctor, going out to the back alley to buy pain killers on the street from a drug dealer is perfectly acceptable.

Nothing anyone would say to Billie Dunn could provoke her until she heard "liar" and threatened to sue.

Now back to President Clinton.

He knew he was going to lie, yet he did it in a way in which, if caught, he could say "technically, it was truthful" even though he would be seen as deceptive.

He was cheating on his wife, using the Oval Office for his affairs, had a history of disrespectful behavior towards women, yet...

he didn't want to lie outright?

Why is this important enough to write an entire article about?

It is because, at the core, the liar, that is, the person who, when all is on the line, will chose to fabricate reality, still, even while deceiving, will not tell a direct lie, in order to avoid being called...

a liar.

Clinton had been called a rapist, had been accused of selling military technology to the Chinese in exchange for campaign money, and left a trail of ruthless deceit from Arkansas to Washington, and barely blinked, yet cared enough to not only make this deceptive, but technically truthful statement, but did so on National television and used the finger wagging to gain emphasis (something body language analysts love to pounce upon).

He could not bear being called a "liar" even though there had been a stained blue dress in evidence, he still felt the need to go on television, as President of the United States, and point his finger into the face of the nation!

Liars hold the rest of us in contempt.  They have been doing it their entire lives and if you want to provoke one, label "liar" upon the forehead and watch the reaction.  It is one of the best interrogation tools when employed properly, and can cause the pride to go rushing to the top, and with just enough rope, cause the liar to hang himself, and in this case, so publicly that the entire nation saw it.

The liar chooses is words carefully, allowing himself the "out" of not being called a "liar."  Being called and labeled a "liar" utterly exposes the persona, something that the liar has hidden since childhood.

Call him anything but a liar.

Missing: Two Children in South Carolina Park

Crews Scouring for Dad, Two Kids Missing at Congaree Park

Dozens of searchers are scouring a swampy national park in South Carolina for a father and his two children who disappeared Saturday during a hike, officials said.
Congaree National Park in Richland County, S.C., was closed Monday as search crews combed through thousands of acres of parkland in search of Jerry Robert "J.R." Kimbler, his 10-year-old son and his 6-year-old daughter, said National Parks Service spokeswoman Dana Soehn.
Kimbler, 43, and his young children departed for the hike from the Harry Hampton Visitor Center around 5 p.m. Saturday, according to Soehn.
Soehn said the last known contact with the missing trio was a text message Kimbler sent to a friend at 9:30 p.m. Saturday. Kimbler told the friend that he was lost — and the friend quickly reached out to the mother of Kimbler's kids, who alerted park rangers, according to Soehn.
Search teams have already picked through 9,000 acres of the 27,000-acre park on foot, on boats and on helicopters as the frantic search mission came up on the 48-hour mark Monday with no sign of Kimbler and his kids, Soehn said.
Searchers gather Monday morning at Congaree National Park in Hopkins, S.C.
"This has been a very difficult search," Soehn said, adding that search crews faced high water, dense vegetation and obstructions like tree limbs topped by the winter's brutal ice storm.
"The terrain has been very difficult for the searchers. Some areas that would've been a 30-minute walk down the trail are turning into a 2-hour scramble over thickets," Soehn said.
The description reveals frustration as does the above.  The "very difficult" search may indicate that the subject expected better results sooner.  Sound does not travel well through thickets.  
In addition to emergency personnel, the missing children's mother, Tammy Ballard, walked the trails early Monday yelling her kids' names, according to NBC affiliate WIS 10 in Columbia, S.C.
"I can't sleep," Ballard told the station. "I can't do anything. I don't know where my babies are."
In context, the 10 year old and 6 year old are "babies"; that is, at risk, vulnerable.  Note ownership.  
Park officials had no idea Monday how the father and his children managed to veer off the park's marked trails.

Monday, April 28, 2014

Statement Analysis on Resumes

Human Resources is the core of a business in that the right employees or the wrong employees can be the difference between success and failure, and sometimes, the only one standing between the two is the human resources professional.

Human resources professional are often well trained in interviewing, and due to the volume of interviewing, often highly skilled at listening.  Statement Analysis only benefits them, especially those who are intuitively "doing" analysis work without having been taught it.

In trainings in the private sector, we have been showing businesses how to use Statement Analysis on resumes (although the shorter ones are difficult) even before they get to the application and interview stage.

One man listed himself as a _______ State Police Academy Instructor.


He instructed police?

This was a surprise.

A simple call to the Police Academy showed that he spoke at the academy on how to deal with a subject who has developmental disabilities; that is, what 800 number to call.

This became a "Police Instructor" on his resume!

He "shared" a few anecdotes on dealing with someone with developmental disabilities, but basically, he was there to give them the state's 800 number.

That was it.

He turned this into a State Police Instructor.

It is important to verify a resume, but it is time consuming, so what can be done is to "flag" certain resumes for the tedious verification process, rather than having to verify each resume submitted.

Look for consistency.

"No pronouns" is fine.

"Dropped pronouns" is different.

We look for patterns, and we recall that the building blocks of principle are made of clay, not cement. We make adjustments for emails, texts, resumes, and even annual reports.  Anywhere there is communication, Statement Analysis can, and should be applied.

If, for example, one uses the pronoun "I" consistently throughout, where it is dropped, becomes important.

If another does not use pronouns, where it suddenly appears now becomes dominant for us.

We need to know if the subject is a liar, and who is making claims that he ought not to be making.  We wish to weed out those who would damage business, or even morale, by being a "problem bringer" rather than a "problem solver."

Sunday, April 27, 2014

Have You Ever Stolen Anything?

Ethan has yet to tell a single lie

by Peter Hyatt

I ask this question, simply to weed out liars. Liars hold the rest of us in contempt and will cause problems for your company, your group, your team, your family, your marriage, and so on.  Liars believe themselves above others and will put their needs first, more times than not.  If this means stealing, so be it.  If it means cheating, it is for them, therefore, it is okay.

Liars for companies means trouble.  Everything from shrinkage to gaming the system to claim disability.

Since this question provokes thoughts of shoplifting at Walmart, I do the "prompts" system, giving prompts to the subject.

It goes something like this:

"Tell me about yourself..."  

This is very open ended and allows the subject to begin where he or she feels most important.  Here we learn anything and everything from childhood abuse to substance abuse, and anything in between.

"What is your favorite movie?"

This is the tangent question.  I secretly root for a Cary Grant movie, but hey, that's me.  Last week I interviewed a young female who talked about dancing.  I said, "Oh, like Fred Astair and Ginger Rogers?" to which she answered, "Who's that?"  

"Have you ever stolen?

Most answer "no."  This is where Prompt Number One enters:

"When I was 16, I worked at McDonald's, and when pretty girls came through the Drive Thru, I gave them free french fries.  It was stealing and it was wrong, but it is what I did. Have you ever stolen?"

This usually brings a signal of understanding and an anecdote of taking something that did not belong to them.  Remember, I am still using the morally charged language of "stolen" and not "taken."

If the answer remains "no", I go to Prompt Number Two:

"Last week I was in the bank and I walked out, inadvertently, with their pen.  You ever taken anything?"

Here is where the morally neutral language of "taken" is introduced.  Now the subject is ready.  Most only need one prompt, but some still need me to move away from "stealing" to "taken."

This produces many comical answers.

Two weeks ago, a subject brought me to Strike Three, I mean, Prompt #3.

"You've never taken anything that did not belong to you?  Never borrowed a book and not returned it to a friend?"

She stood her ground, "No, never. Not once have I ever taken anything that did not belong to me."

She was over 50 years of age.

She had never told a lie and never took anything that did not belong to her.  I was in the presence of deity.

I also did not hire her.

On the job application where I ask about honesty, she dropped pronouns right at the part of her story about never telling a lie.

Later, a worker approached me.

"Did you hire her?" she asked.

I just smiled as it is not something I discuss.  "Why, do you have any concerns?"

"I sure as *(*^ do!  I know her.  She is a walking law suit.  She is constantly filing law suits against anyone she can seeking payouts."

I thanked the worker for his input.

Thursday, April 24, 2014

Bill Gothard Statement

Here is the statement in full:
I have withheld this statement in order to honor the request of the Board of Directors to wait until an initial review has taken place. As the review continues, I now want to make this statement.
God has brought me to a place of greater brokenness than at any other time in my life. It is a grief to realize how my pride and insensitivity have affected so many people. I have asked the Lord to reveal the underlying causes and He is doing this.
For many years I have been building the Institute but losing my first love for the Lord. God warns "I know thy works, and thy labour . . . Nevertheless I have somewhat against thee, because thou hast left thy first love. Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent. . . " (Revelation 2:2, 4, 5). I was finding value and affirmation from the accomplishments of the ministry and those involved in it instead of filling this void in my life with God and His love. I have repented in deep sorrow. However, over the years many people have been offended in different ways because of my lack of genuine love.
I put the Institute and its goals ahead of people and their needs. Standards became more important than relationships. People who didn't "measure up" were cut off and those who were not seen as adding value to the ministry were treated as though they were expendable. The more I have listened to people describe their experiences the more grieved and sorrowful I have become.
My wrong focus produced a further consequence. Families were made to feel that they must "measure up." This resulted in some parents putting undue pressure on their sons and daughters in order for the family to be accepted. When there was a lack of love or consistency, sons and daughters saw this as hypocrisy and rejected it. Also, many felt that the expectations where so high that they could never measure up to them. This resulted in a feeling of deep defeat.
This emphasis on outward appearance was also manifested by bringing selected young people to serve at the Headquarters and causing others to feel rejected and offended by my favoritism. My actions of holding of hands, hugs, and touching of feet or hair with young ladies crossed the boundaries of discretion and were wrong. They demonstrated a double-standard and violated a trust. Because of the claims about me I do want to state that I have never kissed a girl nor have I touched a girl immorally or with sexual intent.
I have failed to live out some of the very things that I have taught. I am committed to learning from my failures by God's grace and mercy, and do what I can to help bring about Biblical reconciliation as Jesus commands: "Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee; Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift" (Matthew 5:23-24).
More than anything I want to make right what I have done wrong and deepen my relationship with the Lord. I trust in God's undeserved mercy and pray that those whom I have offended would find grace to forgive me. I know that I do not deserve this. I would certainly appreciate your prayers during this time that God would bring healing to those who have been so deeply affected by my actions. I am grateful for the opportunities I have had thus far to be reconciled with individuals and it is my goal to contact as many others as I can, fully hear them, and do whatever I can to bring about Biblical reconciliation.
My greatest offense has been against God. I have earnestly sought His mercy and forgiveness and have asked Him to allow me to experience more of Him and the power of His resurrection.
Bill Gothard

Wednesday, April 23, 2014

Unreliable Job Applications

                                                                        by Peter Hyatt
Not everything that is "unreliable" is untrue. Sometimes unreliable is noted due to deception, while other times,  it simply means that the statement is not reliable and that more information may be needed, via follow up questions.

The following is from a job application: 

Give me an example of honesty in your life:

"I found an expensive piece of jewelry and returned it to its rightful owner."

Describe a time in life when you made a mistake and how you learned from it:

"Charged in 2011 for an Operating Under the Influence.  Haven't had a drink since."

These two questions were on the same page of a job application designed to weed out liars and hire the truthful.

What has this applicant told you?  What has this applicant not told you?

1.  The applicant has told us that she found jewelry that did not belong to her, recognized it for its value, but returned it to its's "rightful" owner.

What does this tell you about her?

a. jewelry was "expensive"
b.  She, herself, would be an owner, but not a "rightful" owner.

The shorter way of saying this would have been:  "I found jewelry and returned it to its owner."  Additional words give us additional information.

She recognized its value and likely thought about keeping it, but did not.

Of matter of course in the interview, I will ask, "Did you think about keeping it?" hoping she will say, "yes", and not lie, as I seek to hire people who are honest and learn from their mistakes.

Who would not have thought about keeping it?  Think of this especially in light of how easy it is to pawn something and how expensive it was.  "Finders Keepers; Losers Weepers" some like to say, as a means of excusing the spirit of larceny.

2.  The applicant did not tell us that she was convicted of driving under the influence, nor has she told us that she has not had a drink since.

"Charged in 2011 for an Operating Under the Influence"

You will first note that "charged" does not have a pronoun.
You will next note that "charged" does not say "convicted" or anything like that.

Note "an" Operating Under the Influence and not "Operating Under the Influence", which will lead me to ask some questions:

a.  Who was charged?
b.  Were you convicted?

and most importantly:

c.  Were you ever charged prior to this one?
d.  How about after this one?


3.  She does not tell us that she has not had a drink since:

"Haven't had a drink since" with the missing pronoun.

Now, since it is "unreliable" information, it is necessary for me to ask these questions and it may be that she has had only one conviction and has not had a drink since, but due to the dropped pronouns and the additional wording, more questions are necessary.

Unreliable is just that, and we are playing percentages.  Sometimes it is unreliable because there is deception present while other times the subject simply needs more prompts.

Playing percentages is wise, as it allows for the most success.

Tuesday, April 22, 2014

Brittanee Drexel's Mother's Letter

The following is analysis of the letter Dawn Drexel, mother of 17 year old Brittanee, published in 2012.  Underlining, color, and bold type are added for emphasis with Statement Analysis in bold type.  Please note that much of this concerns Behavioral Analysis.  

Please share my announcement in honor of my daughter on what should have been her 21st Birthday….
This letter is being written concerning information that I am aware of that surrounds the disappearance of Brittanee Drexel, whom went missing in Myrtle Beach, SC. The past three years have been a heart wrenching experience, and I know someone has knowledge of what happened to my daughter.

The letter begins with the birthday, which is the occasion for writing, but the subject gives her own reason for writing:  "concerning information that I am aware of..." which is passive.  Passivity here suggests a varied source of information.  This is then shown in the letter, itself. 

On April 25, 2009 I received a call that no mother would ever want to receive, saying that my daughter was in Myrtle Beach and the caller could not find her; this is where my nightmare began. My frantic calls to her cell phone the days that followed went unanswered trailing straight to her voicemail.

Note the heavy use of the personal pronoun "my":

My daughter
My nightmare
My frantic calls

Yet, it is only "a" call, not "my call."  Note the closeness to the daughter, but distance from the call (emotional pain can cause distance). 

Note that she is not "our daughter" as the mother feels no need to 'share'; making this extremely personal and unclose for her. Follow the pronouns.  Compare this to letters by mothers suspected in the disappearance of their children and you will find very different pronoun usage. 
Once learning the identity of the people she went to South Carolina with on spring break, I began to make calls to them beginning first with Peter. I desperately sought any information from him concerning my daughter's whereabouts, and his reply was, and I quote, "I don't know and I am not her babysitter." I then requested if he could go out and search for her, again his response was negative. He refused to participate in anything concerning my daughter. I called Peter at least six or seven times that night, three different stories were told to me and never did I obtain any truth; I gave up.

Please note that "babysitter" is a disparagement of the 17 year old victim. 
Please also note that when the mother confronted Peter about the three different accounts, he did not respond. 

Disparagement of a victim is a red flag for guilt. 
As I found out more additional phone numbers of the people from New York Brittanee traveled with I called to no avail, those people would not answer my calls. In my frustration to get someone who could help, I contacted a friend of our family who was in the military hours away and requested of him to go there look for my daughter and to file a missing child report, and he did, immediately; I was already in route from my home with family and friends. 
Arriving in Myrtle Beach I learned Peter, a club promoter and his friends had left at 1:00 am to head back to Rochester, New York and that they had been asked to leave the hotel for remarks that were made to one of the hotel employees at the Blue Water Resort. He left his belongings and $100 deposit. 

please hear Peter's response about leaving at 1AM as he referenced "check out time" that was coming. 

Peter arrived in Rochester placing pictures on the Internet of him at barbeque and other fun activities, then he hired attorney, John Parinello. Brittanee had known him for five years and he displayed no empathy or concern of my missing daughter.

Dawn is referencing, quite naturally, Behavioral Analysis. 

-disparaged victim
-did not assist in search
-lawyered up immediately 
-showed no concern or empathy (see video)

In his appearance on the Dr. Phil Show, he was unwilling or unable to say he did not do it.  
The others who Brittanee rode with were still there, leaving two days later upon my arrival, but they only stayed that long due to the police questioning them. Not one person that was with my daughter helped me in any way, not one of them ever contacted me with concern or offered to any help, and not any of the  parents of these people to this day have reached out to help or console me in my grief. It was and still remains a hard thing for me to understand, most human beings have compassion for a total stranger, but not this group!
 I began to receive calls from my family and friends back in New York that these same people who were the last ones to see my daughter were posting nasty remarks about my daughter and mad because she ruined their vacation. 

Commentary:  It is difficult to believe that some can be this callous, but it is true. 

Their slanderous lies and horrible actions only aided the pain I was suffering along with all who love Brittanee Drexel

Note the use of the full name in context of defending Brittanee. This is very strong. 

But that is all they did, they have never told what happened or offered any additional help to my daughter's investigation, in my opinion. My daughter made mistakes and one of the largest ones she ever made was when she trusted this group of people with her life.

Brittanee was only 17 years old when she made this mistake; something that many of us, decades older, still make.  
I later found out that the girls in this group of people treated my daughter poorly and by Brittanee's text messages to her then boyfriend revealed how miserable she really was, Brittanee was also packed that day to leave.

Please note the context of contention and discord. 

 My daughter in well lit streets packed with beach vacationers from all over walked from the Bar Harbor to the Blue Water to get a pair of shoes she had left in a vehicle earlier that day. While walking, text messages rung in from Jenn wanting her shorts returned for the outing planned that night.  Then there is the infamous camera shot of my daughter entering the Blue Water and exiting, never to be seen or heard from again. My question is when she entered she went to the right, but the elevators were on the left? That has always bothered me because the only thing to the right is the hotel pool area.
Another item that has me concerned is supposedly my daughter went to the sixth floor to retrieve her shoes and that witnesses advised early in the investigation that they were watching the Red Sox Game and eating, but later I found out the game began at 4:10 pm that day ending at 7:45 pm this was way before my daughter went there. They claimed that was factual because Brittanee grabbed some food off a plate of an individual there. Brittanee was seen on the street camera in route to the Blue Water and the times just do not match up, period.
While my daughter was at the beach, her and this group visited a place called Club Kryptonite (now closed down). I fear only what may have gone on and many rumors over time have sent my imagination to some dark corners throughout my daughter's disappearance. Rumors alone have almost destroyed me at times. The fact that a body has not been found provides me a reasonable strength to press forward.
Did someone pick out my child that night? 

Please note the use of "child" in correlation to risk.  The word "child", (not "daughter") is connected with the risk of child abuse, and in context of mother, sadly, the "child" cannot be "protected", because she is missing.  This is the language of truth. 

Did the wrong person notice my beautiful daughter that night? Did a plan devise that night to take my daughter or a plan prior in place?  You see, this group of people had visited North and South Carolina before, Brittanee, although she wanted to think she was old enough, she was still just a child, not seeing the danger ahead.
How can my daughter arrive to a place and within sixty hours vanish? There were thousands of witnesses, yet not one person saw if she got into a vehicle, was forced against her will or even noticed her for the most part walking down the main road.
So many questions three years later that remain unanswered, leaving me and my family clinging to the hope that maybe after all the searches, all the media pleas and all the awareness campaigns, just maybe she could be alive? I am told to expect the worst, but how does a mother give up and not look for her child or ask the world to help her look.
Could my daughter be the next miracle story rescued from a human trafficking ring, or found by accident while being held captive by some freak or being used in some sort of sex slavery? Could someone with resources have taken my child on a plane or boat far away from the initial area and that is why no one to date knows anything of her whereabouts? These questions and a hundred more flood my late night thought and dreams.
Always note questions within a written statement. The subject may be asking herself this difficult question. 
Over the years I have had to deal with new announcements of what could have happened to my daughter; one year some local persons of interest possibly did something, to a registered sex offender possibility facing a clouded reality that my child may have been murdered.  No one can provide me facts, only possibilities. In any story the fact my daughter is missing is horrifying enough; the unthinkable projections eat at me daily. Some days I feel the need to be rescued!
In closing, I have to acknowledge through this horrible nightmare the one good thing is I have met so many wonderful southern community people, those who endlessly search for my child at the CUE Center for Missing Persons, all law enforcement agencies always giving countless hours in Brittanee's investigations, others that where total strangers, now almost like family (to all I am grateful for). My family and I could have never stayed the coarse with out each little and big act of kindness shown. I have been made aware that "good'' still does exist in the world.
But I want and need my child back, I am broken, my family and friends are broken, we linger in a constant trauma of the ugly "unknown" fate of a missing child, my daughter, Brittanee Marie Drexel.
Dawn Drexel
Mother of Missing, Brittanee Drexel

Note heavy use of the pronoun, "I"
Compare this to other mothers; specifically:
Deborah Bradley
Rebecca Celis
Billie Jean Dunn

These mothers clung to the pronoun "we" as strongly as Dawn clings to the pronoun, "I."

This is a truthful statement.  

Brittanee Drexel Disappearance

17 Year Old

Brittanee Drexel disappeared in 2009 while on Spring Break.

In the Dr. Phil Show, Dr. Phil gave Peter Brozowitz an open ended opportunities to say "I didn't do it" and he comes across obnoxious, high minded, and used distancing and calloused language regarding Brittanee, 17.

Is it:  Guilty knowledge, or just an obnoxious 20 year old?

The truly innocent (not just judicially) will say "I didn't do it" early and often.  They will produce the pronoun, "I", along with the past tense verb "did not" or the casual, "didn't" and then address whatever issue is being raised in the interview.

"I didn't cause Brittanee's disappearance" is the simplest and easiest of statements.  A de facto innocent will not hesitate to produce the pronoun "I" in the denial.  He may say "would never" but only in correlation with "didn't" or "did not."

A reliable denial has three (3) components.  If the denial has 2, or more than 3, it is "unreliable."

I.  The use of the pronoun "I"
II.  The past tense verb, "did not" or "didn't"
III.  The specific allegation

Examples of unreliable denials;

"Didn't do it"
"I would never harm her"
"I have no idea"
"I didn't do nothing"

Regarding the statements by Peter Brozowitz, he was unwilling or unable to, during the course of the video, to bring himself to say "I didn't do it" even though Dr. Phil asked him if he wanted to say something to "set the record straight."

Brozowitz did not issue a reliable denial.  It is sometimes difficult to get law enforcement to accept this principle, as it appears too simplistic, which is why Dillingham's research on law enforcement scoring poorly in detecting deception is so well evidenced and exampled.

Typically, a newspaper headline will say "So and So Denies Allegation..." but in the statements, there is no denial.

Statement Analysis does not interpret: it listens.

Statement Analysis Principle:

If someone is unable or unwilling to say "I didn't do it", we are not permitted to say it for him. 

There are not enough statements from him to make a conclusion about guilt or innocence.

1.  He did not issue reliable denial.
2.  He gave insult to the victim "not a babysitter" regarding the 17 year old. Disparaging the victim is a red flag for guilt.  We don't hang our hat on just one indicator, but when taken along with his other statements, particularly avoiding the reliable denial, it is very concerning.

When a denial is parroted from an Interviewer, it is not reliable.  It must come from the Free Editing Process in which the subject is speaking freely, choosing his own words.

If the denial has four components (more than three), it is unreliable.  The innocent leave it alone, simply, as a denial, as they do not feel the need for emphasis.  It is the strength of knowing that something cannot be proven because the subject did not do it.  This is the underlining confidence, that even in the polygraph, the nervous person will not experience fluctuation in results:  they are nervous all the way through, whether answering their address, or the allegation.

Linguistically, it is the same.

Have You Ever Told A Lie?

I ask this question, "Have you ever told a lie?" knowing that anyone who says "no" is not truthful, and I know from both experience and research that one who claims to have never lied, nor ever stolen something, even inadvertently, is going to trouble me, one way or another.

We are fallen creatures and all prone to make mistakes.  What makes us better people is the ability to learn from our mistakes.

What can one learn from a mistake if one never makes a mistake?

"Have you ever stolen anything?" is next up in the job application and interview procedure, as I help companies weed out liars.  (see next article)

Liars trouble companies. Liars put themselves first and foremost, before all, and bring trouble in for companies, in creative ways...ways that most HR have heard, but sometimes feel that upper management will not always believe.

Chiefly, liars put themselves first, and this means...

my back hurts...

I'm being sexually harassed...

So and So is doing such and such...

and on it goes.

The bottom line is that the liar does not hold the company's best interest at heart, and may even think that others exist for his benefit.

Recall the articles (and examples!) of tweaking the pride of the liar?

Call her a murderer, or call her a neglectful mother, and she could care less.

Call her a liar and she will rush down to the police station and take that polygraph, only to utterly fail it!

Liars hold the world in contempt.

They believe, from childhood, that they can pull the wool over the eyes of anyone, hence, the contempt.

This same contempt in the work place leaves the liar believing that the company owes her a living.

Remember the haughty attitude of not only Casey Anthony but her brother?

Remember the ad he put in the newspaper for a "personal assistant"?

It was an unpaid position, but the assistant had to have a college degree.

Something Lee Anthony did not have.

Liars are troublesome in all life.

Have you ever told a lie?

Yes, and I have regretted it. It was selfish and cowardly.

Monday, April 21, 2014

Haleigh Cummings: Misty Croslin 911 Call

"I loved that little girl like she was my own" said Misty Croslin hours after making the 911 call to report Haleigh Cummings missing.

We note that Haleigh was supposed to be "missing", Misty in speaking to a reporter, already referenced her in the past tense.  Not only did she say "loved", but also used the distancing language of the word "that" with regard to Haliegh.  We saw the same thing from Patsy Ramsey, as guilt can cause one to distance oneself from a child.

As we continue to look at the case, we not only see signals of deception in Misty Croslin's language, but what do you make of Ronald Cummings?  

Statement Analysis: Misty 911 Call
911 transcript for missing Haleigh Cummings .

911: “911, what’s your emergency”

Misty Croslin: “Hi…umm…I just woke up…and our backdoor was wide open and I think…and I can’t find our daughter

Note the call begins with a greeting.  Most guilty callers in homicides begin with a greeting where innocent callers have an urgency that bypasses politeness.

Note the order in which she speaks. Order is important to note. Whether it is the chronological order in which you name your children, your siblings, or even the names of friends, order has reason. It an "excited utterance", order speaks directly of the importance.

Here, Misty tells the 911 operator 3 things:

1. That she was asleep. This is THE single most important element for the caller: that the police know she was asleep and has now just woke up.

2. That "our backdoor was wide open".

Notice that the 2nd most important thing for the police to know is about the backdoor being wide open. Misty says "our" backdoor; not "the" backdoor. Pronoun gives us ownership. "the backdoor" would be a common phrase used by any caller since the caller is from the residence. For Misty, the most important fact for the police to know is that she was sleeping; secondly, that the backdoor was open; not just the backdoor, but "our" backdoor, plural.

3. Thirdly, and lastly, she reports a missing child.

It is commonsense to suppose that if your child was missing, it would be the very first thing out of your mouth. It is a reflex by not only a parent, but a step parent, a relative, a caretaker, a babysitter. In Misty Croslin's mind, it is low on the list of priority.

We deem this 911 call to be deceptive; even from the onset.

Why did Misty say "our daughter"?

When a parent says "our" daughter, or "our" son, this is an indicator that a step parent, (or step caretaker, etc) is likely involved. When biological parents speak, it is not the norm for them to say "our daughter" as they, even when speaking together, still use the natural, "my" daughter.

The exception may be when parents have already discussed divorce and will lead, eventually, to step parenting because one of the parents may have been involved with another love interest.

President Clinton, after the Monica Lewinsky scandal, said he need to repair things with his mother, his wife, and "our daughter"; a strong indication that he and Hillary had discussed divorce. (Another strong indication at that time was the black eye that President Clinton sported after he told the country that his definition of sexual relations was not the same as most others; Hillary included).

Why did Misty rely upon the plural in both "our back door" and "our daughter"?

Had Misty already considered herself a step parent, it makes sense. She said, "them kids loved me like they was my own..." (past tense language noted).

But why "our" door? The norm would not have been "my back door" unless the person lived alone. Even then, the common: "the door".

Note: When someone says I must make the bed, they are likely married. When someone says they must make "my bed" they are likely single. When a married person says, "I must make my bed" they are likely headed for divorce and are already taking ownership. For married couples, "the" is the norm. "The" dog is a family dog, but "my" dog is taken care of by one person more than the others.

Since Misty is in her residence, it is a red flag that she does not use the norm.

This leads to the question: why?

could it be that Misty has been coached? This would explain the plural use here and with "our" daughter.

Misty also began a sentence with "I think..." but did not complete it. Fragmented sentences show stress as they are fragmented thoughts. What did she think? Was an explanation of what she thinks happened about to follow?

911: “you can’t find what?”

Misty Croslin:”our daughter”

Misty revisits the plural language of step parenting, or a prepared or coached call.

911:” OK, what’s your address?

Misty Croslin: “(inaudible)”

911: “OK, what’s the numerical?”

Misty Croslin: “The numerical…what’s that?”

911: “the number…green lane?”

Misty Croslin: “Yes”

911: “OK when did you last see her?”

Misty Croslin: “Um, we like just, you know…it was about 10 o’clock- she was sleeping- I was cleaning…
Here is another indicator of deception. The 911 operator asked about the last time Misty saw Haleigh. This is a sensitive question. Misty was asked when was the last time "you" saw her. Misty is unable to take ownership and begins with "um" stalling to think (a parent on high alert has adrenaline pumping overtime and has VIVID recall) and then weakens her statement with "we like just", "you know" ("you know" is often a phrase, but it is also employed to convince rather than report. This is supposed to be an informative call; not an editorialized story nor a building of an alibi. Misty began the call building her alibi; not reporting)

Misty said she was sleeping, but did not answer the question precisely, but immediatley changed the subject back away from the missing child to herself:

"I was cleaning"

NOTE: cleaning, laundry, bathing, showering, washing of hands: when enter into a statement further exploration for sexual abuse must begin, as these phrases are commonly used in cases where sexual abuse has taken place. In a child's language (or an adult recalling childhood abuse) we often have the mentioning of blankets, coverings, opening of doors, and closing of doors

What would Misty's cleaning have to do with Haleigh's disappearance. This is building of an alibi for Misty, even if it does not appear sensible. Look at the number of sentences that Misty spoke reporting a missing child.

How many sentences were about the missing child?
How many sentences were about Misty?

911: “OK- how old is your daughter?”

Misty Croslin: “She’s five”

911: “Ok…what was she last seen wearing? Maam…”

Misty Croslin: “She was in her pajamas- she was sleeping…”
Misty mentions now, for the 2nd time, that Haleigh was sleeping. The question was answered, but additional information is given. When information appears unimportant, in Statement Analysis, we consider it doubly important. It is vital that the 911 operator understand, from Misty's viewpoint, that Haleigh was sleeping.

I believe from Misty's emphasis that Haleigh was, at this time, not sleeping. For Misty, Haleigh being asleep is too important. I do not believe that Haleigh died in her sleep.

911: “OK…alright…You said your back door was wide open?”

Misty Croslin: “yes- it was bricked- there was a brick on the floor…when I was asleep it was not like that.”
Here, in Misty's language, enters a brick. "it was bricked"; not "it was open" nor even "it was held open by a brick". For Misty, being "bricked" means the brick had control over the door. But as quickly as Misty mentions the door and the brick, she immediatley states again that she, Misty, was alseep, and that at that time, there was nothing "bricked". I believe that this language may suggest the manner in which Haleigh died or was disposed of. It is in Misty's language for good reason.

When Texas Equasearch Tim Miller went to Casey Anthony's home, Cindy would not cooperate with the search, as she insisted Caylee was alive. "George and I don't believe Caylee's in the woods, or anything". Caylee was found less than a half mile from her house, in the woods. "George and I" rather than she, herself, reduces committment to the statement, as she does not wish to own this statement alone. The "woods" was in her mind likely because she knew that Caylee's remains were out in the woods, subject to wild animals and bug life.

911: Ok…the back door…listen to me…your back door was wide open…what are you talking about a brick?”

Misty Croslin: “(inaudible)”

911: “what is a brick?”

Misty Croslin: “it’s almost like– on the stairs- we have a walkway…”

911:” uh huh….and there was a brick laying there?”

Misty Croslin: “yes…it’s still there”
Misty identifies the cinder block for the 911 operator. She now identifies where a block may be found, at the crime scene.

(background) tell them they’ve better come on…

911: “we’ve got em coming- tell him we’ve got them coming”

Misty Croslin: “they’re coming”

911: “Ok what’s the color of your house ma’am?

Misty Croslin: “blue”

911: “blue, OK
OK- what does she look like? How tall is she? Give me some description of her.”

Misty Croslin: “How tall she she? Like long hair like curly…with curls..
Misty answers a question with a question, meaning that this is a senstive question to her and she needs time to think. Even with Turner's Syndrome and doctor appointments, Misty likely does not know Haleigh's height and weight. The parent that brings a child repeatedly to a doctor knows this instantly. Usually one parent knows and the other doesn't, as both generally cannot make regular doctor appointments, but Haleigh was a special needs child and the height and weight is likely taken at every appointment. Misty will struggle if asked for specifics. Misty does not answer how tall she is, nor eye color, or hair color. All she can say is that her hair is curly. This is the excited utterance and reference for Misty: seeing Haleigh's curly hair. Was Haleigh wounded in the head? Was the head used to attach a brick? Was she hit with a brick and "shut up" by someone? Was she face down in the bed with curly hair showing? Curly hair is the answer Misty gives to how tall is Haleigh. This is what was in her mind. 

911: “long curls…what color?”

Misty Croslin: “(inaudible)”

911:” ok- what color hair? Brown hair?”

Misty Croslin: “Yes…oh my gosh….”
The 911 operator struggles to get answers. Misty appears to be in a panic over these questions, but was not in a panic when she first reported Haleigh missing. These are specific questions but they are not difficult questions. The 911 operator is now asking compound questions; likely out of frustration. Compound questions are to be avoided. They allow the subject to answer any question that is easist to answer. It is often done by television hosts who enjoy hearing their own voice more than the answers by the subject. Here, it is a sign of frustration as questions are not being answered in a timely manner.

30 April 2010 UPDATE.

Here are some follow up comments from others:

I think Misty's "I don't wanna. ..." may be "I don't wanna do this..(go along with the lies) or maybe "I don't wanna go to prison for the rest of my life."

The lack of height and the hair issue. Sounds to me the last thing she saw was someone carrying Haleigh out the door in their arms, limp, with her hair hanging down.

Leads me to still think Haleigh ingested something, Misty told Ronald this, she wanted to take the child to the hospital, he said no, then Haleigh died. Maybe Ronald did try to call her and maybe she didn't want to pick up because she didn't know how to tell Ronald his kid was dead.

I wonder if someone was dropping off drugs while Ronald was at work and he blames them for leaving them in the house assessible to Haleigh.

As to the birth date, I don't think Ronald wanted to remember her birth date...if she hadn' been born, then this shit wouldn't have happened to him. F@(K her birthdate..."

Interesting comments!

911: “OK- how tall is she about? Or how much does she weigh…do you know that?”

Misty Croslin: “huh?”

911: “about how tall or how much she weigh?”

Misty Croslin: “24 sounds about right- I don’t know- she’s not that tall….”

911: “OK-wait- tell your husband we’ve got them coming, ok?”

Misty Croslin: “OK”

911: “How much does she weigh- do you know?”
Misty Croslin: “huh?”

The 911 Operator gets it. She understands now that Misty does not know and she must slow down and ask questions in a more simpler fashion. Do you know?? This shows te frustration.

Misty has yet to answer the specific questions about Haleigh, even though the 911 operator has been asking repeatedly. Misty is in a sensitive area. She was able to report the open door, the brick, and sleeping, without a problem. Now the focus is solely upon Haleigh and Misty is stumbling badly. If it was nerves, it would have showed itself from the beginning. Misty's responses are distinctly troubled now.

911: “How much does she weigh?”The 911 operator skillfully goes back to simple questions; one at a time. She is not going to get "she's about 4' tall, 41 lbs, blue eyes and brown hair" from Misty Croslin, as she would have from any parent, step parent, aunt, uncle, friend, or babysitter.

Misty Croslin: “um…like 40-50 pounds- 60 pounds?

911: “40-60 pounds?”

Misty Croslin: “yeah”
This is a huge spread for a 5 year old child, who has Turner's Syndrome, has to be under a doctor's care, and is tiny due to her growth problems. 40 lbs is one answer, but 60 lbs is a large percentage swing. It would be like saying that an adult female is between 120 lbs and 180 lbs. It is not credible, as a parent could attest. For a parent, who's tiny child may be 41 lbs, a jump of 10 percent would be a reason to celebrate; as it is noteworthy, given her condition.

911: “OK- let me get your name and phone number. Spell your last name…

spell your last name?

Was your back door locked do you know?”

Misty Croslin: “Yes…(inaudible)”

Ronald Cummings: “Man, I need somebody to get here now!”

This is a more normal response, "I" first person singular. The first person singular is what we would expect to hear from a biological parent, from the beginning.

911: “OK, let me speak to him…”

Ronald Cummings: “I just got home from work, my five-year-old daughter is gone- I need someone here now.”

Ronald says 3 things also. The order is important. What is first and foremost in the mind of Ronald Cummings that he wishes the police to know?

1. That he was at work ,and just came home.
2. his 5 year old daughter is missing.
3. He (singular) needs someone (unspecified) to come to his home.

911: “OK, listen to me…listen to me…we’ve got two officers…”

Ronald Cummings: “if I find whoever has my daughter before you all do, I’m killing them…I don’t care- I will spend the rest of my life in prison….you can put that on the recording…I don’t care.”

This is understandable for any parent who believes his child is kidnapped; to see vengence. It is only problematic for the reason that we do not know that Haleigh has been kidnapped. How does he not know that she simply walked off? Most kids are found near the home, wandering away. Is it the open door that leads him to believe a kidnapping has occured?

He makes a fatalistic sounding statement: He will spend the rest of his life in prison. Why? For killing? Isn't Florida the death penalty? Does he think a jury might not have mercy on a father who rescued his kidnapped child?


does he have reason to believe that he will spend the rest of his life in prison? Why did this unusual statement cross his mind?

Statistics and studies are done on 911 calls, and in specific, missing children, and domestic homicide. This call has begun with deception. Why does a 911 call to report a missing child NEED to be deceptive?

Is Ronald just beside himself with grief? It would appear that he is aware that the 911 call is being recorded and it is important enough for him to not only think it, but to actually speak it to the 911 operator. Is Ronald Cummings thinking that he is going to get life in prison? Why? Is he wild with anxiety over a missing child, or is he burning with anger?

When a child is reported missing by family who is not involved in the disappearance, the family is reported to be in a state of shock and even denial, for a period of time. The innocent do act like the parents who take polygraphs immediately, answer quesitons quickly and honestly, and then go out and search without delay. They appear to be almost like andrenaline junkies who's survival hormones and protective capacities are on full alert and have all the energy in the world to run and search for their child. They are often coached by law enforcement to sit still while others search, stay near the phone, and provide as much information as possible.

Ronald is not in the shock stage and has moved way past denial and is now seeking vengence. What does he know that he speaks this early in the case, of vengeance?

911: “It’s OK sir, we’ve got them on the way…ok- can you give me…what kind of description of pajamas was she wearing? “

Ronald Cummings: “I don’t f%$ know!”

Cummings:” Hello”

911:” OK sir let me just talk to your wife. Let me get some information from her. “

Misty: (inaudible) crying. “I don’t wanna…(inaudible)”

We don't know what Misty said, but by judging how she did under specific questions, it is not unreasonable for her to say "I don't wanna talk to them again!" meaning the 911 operator. Misty was fine when giving her possibly prepared speech, but when it came to questions, she buckled and couldn't even give a simple, basic and general description of Haleigh. Misty has the exact opposite reaction of a parental rush of adrenaline: she doesn't want to talk; she doesn't want to assist. Misty has a reason not to help locate Haleigh Cummings.

911: “Can I talk to her? OK”

Misty: “inaudible”

Cummings: (inaudible, in background ) “Where my daughter at?”

Is Ronald asking this presupposing that Misty knows where Haleigh is?

911:” Ma’am. OK listen I need you to answer some questions. Does the door look like it was pried open?”

Misty:” Umm… (inaudible)”

911 Operator is frustrated by this point and begins to make mistakes. She is actually coaching Misty on how to answer. This is why we ask open ended questions and seek to NOT introduce language to the subject: let her speak her own words at all times. Direct quesitons teach a subject to lie; as we teach them what WE know, and where WE are going with our questioning.

911: “Does it look like you had to sorta…like someone tried to enter your house.”

Misty: “Umm. Hold On.”

This is a major red flag.

Does she need to check with Ronald to see if this line is where she wants to go? Why would she need affirmation? She already said the back door was "bricked" open.

911:” And another thing, make sure you and your husband don’t touch the door anymore. Don’t mess with the door or anything. “

Misty: “No it doesn’t. “

It isn't what? We don't know. Misty did not answer questions as they were asked, as simple as they were. "it doesn't" what? We don't know the answer. We can guess: "it doesn't look like someone tried to enter?" We do know that Misty appeared to need Ronald's guidance for an answer to another simple question; much like we saw on the TV interview where Misty, unable to answer, just looked up to Ronald for guidance.

911: “it doesn’t look like it is?”

Misty: “No”

911: “Ok, now listen, tell your husband, do not touch anything- because we are going to get a k-9 out there”

Misty: “ok….she said don’t touch anything because they are bringing a k-9 out here”

Ronald Cummings: “they better bring f’ing something out here- because if I get my hands on that mother f’er I’m going to kill him…I don’t give a f%*)@# about prison…mother F’ing prison doesn’t scare me.”

Ronald is a violent man and is speaking his own language. This is his norm; his way of life. He threatens the "whoever" has his daughter, he threatens the police, and reiterates that he is going to prison.

Why would a distraught, disbelieving, shocked father of a five year old child continue to speak about prison?

"Out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaketh"/

It is fair to ask yourself, how would I handle this? Would you be threatening? Would you have the bravado to say that prison doesn't frighten you? Would you even be thinking of prison, or being unafraid, or anything other than your missing child?

When pictures of Casey Anthony partying while her daughter was "missing" surfaced, Jose Baez floated the soon to sink "ugly coping" defense (she celebrated). But Cindy, in defense of Casey said, "there's no book on greiving, you know".

Actually, there is.

There is lots and lots of data collected, including how innocent and how guilty parents react when their children are reported missing. Federal law enforcement articles (the FBI Law Bulletin) and research (LSI) from thousands of polygraphs exist to guide us. There is a "book" response.

For innocent parents who find their children have gone missing? It is shock, and disbelief. Their hope sometimes continues even into denial, when they learn their child is deceased. Then they grieve, but anger is not the initial response.

Ronald is way past shock, disbelief, denial, and energetic searching. He is angry and his mind continues to go back to prison.

911:” ok, we understand- we’ve got them on the way

What’s her name…{redacted}…how do you spell her first name…{redacted}…what’s her middle name? …{redacted}. And the spelling of the last name is? …{redacted}.”

Misty: “well, that’s my last name”

911: “What’s her date of birth?

This question is way too much for Misty Croslin. What every parent would know, immediatley, is not for Misty even though she, on the same day said, "I loved that little girl like she was my own." Not only did she speak of a missing child in the past tense (an indicator that Misty knew already that Haleigh was dead) but that Misty was likely, and sadly, telling the truth. She likely would have raised a child in the manner of neglect that her parents raised her. I wouldn't be stunned to learn that Misty's father didn't know Misty's own date of birth.

Ronald Cummings: “i’m going to f’ing kill somebody”

Ron has made this abundantly clear. He is all about the rage and anger and is actually not convincing people he is a distraught dad, but is speaking the language that may be more familiar to him than loving parental protective instincts:


911:”Tell him we understand- we need to get her date of birth.”

Misty: “what’s her date of birth?”

Ronald Cummings: “F her date of birth- we need to find her- f her date of birth.”

Even in the most vulnerable position of needing help from others, Ronald is hostile and uncooperative with the law. Why would he not cooperate with them? Is he simply running out of patience?

911: ” Ok Listen to me, I’m getting this information- I’m not the officer driving out there ok? - they are coming out there to handle that situation. I need to gather all the information from you over the phone…it has nothing to do with me driving out there…ok? They are coming out there…ok?”

Misty: “ok”

911: “ok, I’m going to stay on the phone with you ok? Until they get there…ok?”

Misty: “ok”
(backgroud noise)

911: “tell him we’ve got them coming, he’s got to calm down a little bit. The officers are going to come out there and do what they can. We can’t have him screaming and yelling at the officers whenever they get there ok?”

By now, the 911 Operator has already warned the officers that they have a violent man, likely high on drugs, and may need to protect themselves. Local responders may already be well familiar with Ronald Cummings.

Misty:” Uh huh…”

Ronald Cummings: “where is my f’ing phone…we’ve got better people to talk to then some mother f’ers who ain’t coming.”

"How you let my daughter get stole, bitch?"
Ronald has the wherewithall to remind Misty of her substatus of "bitch" and is able to still maintain control by fear over her, subordinating her with the common language of domestic violence.

To him, Misty let his daughter get "stole".

Why doesn't he think Haliegh just wandered off? Why "stole"? Why does he blame Misty now, but shortly after, would marry her?

On its whole, the 911 call's intent is to alert police of a missing child.

It is deceptive. It is not only deceptive, but it appears to be setting an alibi and possibly a staged emotional reaction from Ronald.

Ronald's rage may be indicative that he knew his drug dealing had brought trouble to his home; or it could be something worse; that he is actually staging his reaction, after coaching Misty on how to report this to police.

It appears from Misty's pauses that she was being coached by Ronald Cummings.

Why would he coach the person responsible for letting his daughter get "stole"?

Why would he marry her?

Why would he reveal to her that Texas Equasearch had someone speaking to Misty to help find Haleigh?

What motivated Ronald Cummings to protect Misty from revealing the truth about his daughter, who's own name appears so difficult for his lips to frame and say?