Monday, June 30, 2014

Statement of Leanna Harris

Does this sound like the language of a grieving mother?  
Does this sound like the language of a mentally ill coconspirator who is using religion to justify homicide?  

"First of all, Ross I love you and I'm doing this for you, OK. This is not where I expected to be here today. Two years ago when we welcomed a 6-pound, 8-ounce perfect baby into the world, this never crossed my mind. A lot of you know how much I prayed for a child and how much I worried about never being able to have a child," Leanna Harris said, adding that it happened in God's time.

"He was perfect -- he was and he is perfect. He changed mine and Ross' life. I've talked to you about the magnitude in which he changed it. As children do, he turned our lives upside down," she said. She described cleaning, changing diapers, dinner time, bath time, and finally what she called
"mommy time" and said she wouldn't trade it for the world.  

The article does not give full quotes.  

"Any of that time that I spend doing over and over and over, I would never trade that. Cooper's last two nights at home, he had trouble sleeping," she said, calling it unusual. During the last two nights, "he slept in between me and Ross snuggling in between both of us. I remember turning over in the middle of the night, his mouth was open and his full toddler lips just breathing right into my face. I will cherish that moment forever. Some of you might wonder how I'm even standing here today. I wonder that myself and I asked myself that question over and over the last week," she said.

Note that the location of where he slept is important to the mother.  

"I should be crumpled into a heap of snot and tears into the dirt, but the Lord is holding me up right now. He is holding Ross up. And he is holding both of us up when we can't hold ourselves up. I miss my son and I will miss him forever."

She then went on to list the things she was happy her son will skip: His first heartbreak, junior high and high school [the audience laughed as she said she didn't like either one of them], who to sit with at lunch in those awkward middle school years. She also said he will not have to suffer through the deaths of his grandparents and the deaths of his father and mother.

Did she and her husband end his life to spare him things that they suffered through, such as who to sit with at lunch??

"I miss him with all of my heart. Would I bring him back? No. To bring him back into this broken world would be selfish," she said. "Am I angry with God? No. This is part of His plan for Ross and I. 

It is frightening to read this language:  she would not bring him back.  Have you ever heard a parent say such a thing?
Note that this is God's "plan" for "Ross and I" but not for the child?
Police should carefully investigate this mother's "plan" for her son. 

Is this our purpose? I don't know. I'm still waiting on the Lord to reveal that to me. Am I angry with Ross? Absolutely not. It has never crossed my mind. Ross is and was and will be, if we have more children, a wonderful father. Ross is a wonderful daddy and leader for our children. Cooper meant the world to him. There was not a day that went by that we did not say how blessed we were able to have him in our lives."

There are two things that "never crossed her mind"

1.  That she would be speaking at his funeral
2.  That she would be angry with Ross, who checked the child at mid day. 

This baby was murdered and the mother's language indicates culpability 

Statement Analysis: Leanna Harris

Cooper Harris, not yet 2 years old, is dead.

His father, Ross Harris, buckled him into the back of the car and drove to work, 'forgetting' his son was there.  When he came out, 7 hours later, the child was dead.  Harris screamed, "I killed our child!"

We noted that he used the pronoun, "our" in his cry.  The overwhelming number of biological parents use the pronoun "my", unless they have a reason to share responsibility or guilt.  We have seen "our" child when both parents are together, speaking as one, but in general, the word "my" is used.  (A couple who are discussing divorce may begin to use "our" in their language.)

We also noted he used the word "child" and not "son" in his cry.  The word "child" is often associated with risk, such as "child abuse" or "child molestation" in language.

These two indicators led us to believe that Harris' story was not genuine, thus, the analysis was posted.  The word "our" shows a need to 'share' something.

Was it guilt he was sharing?

Next, we learned that a police officer was skeptical about Harris, but held his tongue.  This further strengthened the opinion that his cry was disingenuous.

The next day we learned that Harris had gone out to the vehicle at lunch time, and that he had researched how long an animal would live in a hot car.

At the funeral, his wife spoke.  Leanna Harris said, ""Am I angry with Ross? Absolutely not. It has never crossed my mind. Ross is and was and will be, if we have more children, a wonderful father. Ross is a wonderful daddy and leader for our household. Cooper meant the world to him."

Leanna Ross also told police that she researched how long an animal (or a child?) would survive in a car. 

Was it guilt that Ross Harris was sharing when he said "our" child?

Police should be very interested in the quote above, spoken at the funeral of Cooper. 

She is not angry with her husband.  This, itself, is not expected.  Even the 'accident' of forgetting her son, should provoke anger.  
She says he is a "wonderful" father, with "wonderful" being hyperbole, somewhat (now) expected since leaving her son would be neglectful, to those around her.  Hyperbole in parenthood is often an indicator of abuse, especially when one calls oneself a "wonderful" parent. We saw this with Billie Jean Dunn.  She was not, in her language a "good" mother, but called herself a "wonderful" mother.  This is more common among substance abuse mothers who often call themselves "wonderful" in motherhood, particularly when entering rehabilitation services, during the intake process. 

He is a wonderful "father" and then a wonderful "daddy."
The "father" is in regards to having more children. 
The "daddy" is for "our" household. 
The change in her language is noted.  
Yet, the word that jumps out at me is the word "leader" in her statement. 

Every household has a leader, even when people say it is "50/50" simply because one or other will dominate when a disagreement arises.  

Look at the context:

Ross is a "leader" to "our family" spoken while at the funeral of her son.  If he was the "leader", she was the follower.  Leaders must be trusted to be followed.  

                                               What did Ross take the lead on?

Who is the "family", now that there is no children?

Did they not have a baby sitter and they felt that they had done sufficient internet research to know how long they could let Cooper sleep safely in the car, only to have it backfire?  This would be the most benevolent of excuses. 
Cooper deserved a shot at life

Or, was there more to this?  

Insurance policy?  

Remember Justin DiPietro?  He bought insurance against one of his two children, and, surprise, surprise, 6 weeks later, she went missing.  

Did Justin "Ross" Harris take the "lead" and want to start with a clean slate (no kids) since he was not earning much money for the family?  Did they decide  to "place him in Heaven" so as to "spare" him the troubles of this world?  We've heard this before, too. 

Whatever it is, the above statement should be of great interest to the police in investigating the death of little Cooper Harris.  I would not be surprised to learn of some severe mental health issues between these two.  

"There Was No Abuse"

"I didn't abuse my son" and "there was no abuse" are two statements we heard recently from the Detroit family in which the 12 year old was reported missing, but was put in the basement by his step mother, only to sneak out for food.

The father's initial denial, strong, yet was reflected language:  "I didn't know my son was in the basement."  It may hold up.

But other quotes will not.

"There was no abuse" is passive, which may indicate that the father knew that the treatment of his son, by his wife, would be considered abusive by some.

But what of the denial, "I did not abuse my son"?

This has all the hallmarks of a Reliable Denial:

I.    The pronoun, "I"
II.   Past tense verb "did not"
III.  Specific allegation, "abuse"

Yet, there is something missing. One fact that will turn this into a reliable denial.

Everyone of us has a personal, internal, subjective dictionary.  The language we choose is often subjective.  Two exemptions are:


These are both instinctive and universal, and are exempt from the principle of personal, internal, subjective dictionary.

Here, the word in issue is "abuse."

"Abuse" is subjective and must be clarified in order to be reliable.

Years in child protective services has shown me that the word "abuse" is not well understood.

For some, any discipline, including a spanking of a young child, is "abuse."

For others, extreme forms of discipline, including those methods which are more suited to satisfy the anger and rage of the parent, are not "abuse" to them.

Yet still for some, no discipline at all of a child is "abuse."

In fact, it is well known that the word "abuse" is widely interpreted, even from state to state, and family to family.  A 12 year old doing push ups in gym for talking out loud was said to have been "abused" by the teacher, while in other cases, leaving bruises upon a child was not abusive.

Where does this lead?

"I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky."

This is a truthful statement, but all that is needed is the definition of "sexual relations", which, Mr. Clinton said, was intercourse.  Most people consider "sexual relations" any form of sexual contact, but Mr. Clinton spoke to Ms. Lewinsky to share with her his personal, internal, subjective meaning of "sexual relations", allowing her to deceive, while technically not lying.

That's a talent learned in early childhood, and well rehearsed for his entire life.

Once the word "abuse" is defined by the 12 year old boy's father, we can then understand his personal, internal, subjective dictionary of what he considers "abuse."

We would need to know if isolation is considered "abuse" to him.  If so, how much isolation, since many people send their children to their rooms for discipline.

It may be that the father did not know his son was in the basement, but according to the boy, the step mother did.

This may explain why she took off so quickly.

"There was no abuse" is passive, which means not only is it vague, but it may be used to conceal the identity of the specific person accused of abuse.

In this case, it may be that he is concealing the identity of his wife.

This is a good example of complications within a news story as readers say, "yes, or no!  Is he lying?"

The father may have been truthful about not knowing his son was down there, but not truthful about knowing that his wife's 'methodology' in raising his son, was abusive.

Sunday, June 29, 2014

Mother of Dead Child ALSO Researched Death in Car

How could the mother of the dead child speak so lovingly of her husband, who is suspected of murdering their toddler?

Warrants Show Parents of 22-Month-Old Cooper Harris Researched Child Deaths in Hot Cars

Play Video

New Details in Toddler's Death

Newly released court documents show that the mother of the 22-month-old who died in a hot SUV in Georgia had also searched online information about kids dying in cars, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reports.
According to search warrant affidavits, Leanna Harris was also questioned by authorities and made similar statements about researching car deaths. The timing of those online searches and investigators' findings have not been released. The AJC reports Harris has not been identified as a suspect in the death of her son, Cooper.
Cooper's father, 33-year-old Justin Ross Harris, is in jail without bond and told police he used the Internet to research child deaths in vehicles and what temperature it needs to be for that to occur, police said. The warrant doesn't specify when he did the searches.
"Justin stated that he was fearful that this could happen," one of the four warrants released to The Associated Press stated.
Cooper died on June 18 after his father left the toddler in the vehicle for seven hours while he went to work at an Atlanta-area Home Depot. Harris has pled not guilty to murder and second-degree cruelty to a child, CNN reports.
The new information seemed to fuel investigator's allegations that Harris committed a "more serious crime" than simple negligence. But at the boy's funeral in Tuscaloosa Saturday afternoon, his mother Leanna Harris spoke publicly for the first time and painted a very different picture of her husband as a loving father who made a terrible mistake.
"Am I angry with Ross?" Leanna Harris said at the service. "Absolutely not. It has never crossed my mind. Ross is and was and will be, if we have more children, a wonderful father. Ross is a wonderful daddy and leader for our household. Cooper meant the world to him."
Harris is being held without bond at the Cobb County Jail, but he spoke at his son's service by telephone.
"Thank you for everything you've done for my boy," CNN reports he said to the audience via speakerphone. "Good life. (Inaudible) No words to say. Just horrible. (Inaudible) I'm just sorry I can't be there."
Harris told police he was supposed to drive his son to day care that morning but drove to work without realizing that his son was strapped into a car seat in the back. Harris put his son, Cooper, in a rear-facing car seat in the back seat of his Hyundai Tucson after eating at a Chick-fil-A restaurant the morning of the boy's death, the arrest warrant says. He then drove to work and left the child strapped into the car seat when he went inside, the warrant says.
At lunchtime, Harris returned to the vehicle, opened the driver's side door and placed an object inside before going back inside his workplace, the warrant says. It does not explain how the officer knows that.
Around 4:15 p.m., Harris left work and, soon after, pulled over at a shopping center and asked for help with his child, the warrant says. Harris told police he was on his way to meet friends after work when he realized his son was in the back seat and pulled into a shopping center to get help, according to the warrants.
The child was left in the vehicle for about seven hours, the warrant says. The ambient outdoor air temperature that day was 88 degrees at 5:16 p.m., according to the first warrant in the case, filed the day after the child died.
The Cobb County Medical Examiner's Office said Wednesday that toxicology results are still pending but that it believes the cause of death was hyperthermia and the manner of death was homicide. Hyperthermia is a condition in which the temperature of the body spikes due to the heat.
Police searched the Marietta, Georgia condo where the family lives, looking for a laptop, electronic devices documents, photographs and any "evidence of child neglect, child abuse." They also searched Harris' cellphone and the light blue 2011 Hyundai Tucson that Harris was driving when his son died.
USA Today reports that a total of 11 search warrants will be released this weekend and more information is expected to be released in the next 48 hours.
"They're definitely going to look at how healthy was the child, the family's previous history, whether dad was usually somebody who was very responsible," she said. "And the defense, if this reaches a trial, will be collecting their evidence that he was a good parent, a fit parent."
Cobb County Police Chief John Houser said Wednesday that he understands tragic accidents happen, but evidence indicates a "more serious crime" has been committed. He didn't elaborate on what the evidence was.
"The chain of events that occurred in this case do not point toward simple negligence and evidence will be presented to support this allegation," Houser said in a message released by the department.
But neighbors and acquaintances of Harris and his wife tell a very different story, describing them as loving parents. Harris is a native of Tuscaloosa, Alabama, and moved to Georgia in 2012 to work for Home Depot.
Their landlord, Joe Saini, told The Atlanta Journal-Constitution that Harris and his wife are "very, very nice" people who were in love with their baby.
"Everything was going right for this couple," Saini said. "They wanted to buy a house so they could have some space for their child to run around the backyard."
Cory Burns, a police officer in Tuscaloosa, said Harris worked for the department as a dispatcher. Burns said his wife, Valissa, worked as a dispatcher alongside Harris and remembers that he and his wife were eager to have children but had some trouble conceiving.
Cory Burns remembers Harris as "a pretty happy guy, always down to earth." Harris brought his son back for to the department a visit recently, Burns said.
"Everyone's praying for him and his family," he said. "It's tragic."
The Associated Press contributed to this report. 

Statement Analysis, Hollywood and Mental Health in Language

Does the language of Marilyn Monroe reveal childhood abuse?

Did Marilyn Monroe suffer from a dissociative disorder?
Was she abused in childhood?
If so, is it in the language?

What about other Hollywood types?

Does it show up in language?
Could therapists benefit from Statement Analysis training in diagnosing?  What about counselors, teachers, and others who rely upon language to assist in life?

I'm not a fan of Hollywood gossip, other than it reveals human nature.  Kaaryn Gough has said she finds it demeaning to the dignity of Statement Analysis.  That's not an argument I'd oppose her upon, as I do not wish to trivialize our principles with short, and sometimes even foolish, self serving statements from gossip columns.

For those of you who do read such things, please keep a few tips in mind.  These tips may actually prove useful, as you become adept at spotting certain things, in 'real life' scenarios.

For those uninterested in the gossip pages, there are lessons still to be gleaned.

First, however, I have a theory on the profession of acting.  This will likely tweak the nose of a few readers, but some of you may find it interesting.

I openly wonder if successful actors have a form of personality disorder known as "Dissociative Disorder" is one of its varied forms.

I once read a study that concluded that an overwhelming number of Hollywood personalities suffer, in some form, from Dissociative Disorder.

Dissociative Disorder (DD) can be caused in childhood by childhood abuse, where the victim "disassociates" herself from the abuse and the abuser.  I have done extensive research on childhood sexual abuse and it makes sense.

The child of three, for example, who is being sexually abused, is in a most horrific state:

1.  The abuser is likely someone she has not only trusted, but has been created to trust.
2.  The abuser is doing something to her that she does not understand.
3.  The abuser's actions may not be painful, but actually pleasurable, causing a confusion in the brain that can never be rectified.
4.  The abuser may be imprinting (depending upon the age of the victim) patterns that will last a lifetime.
5.  The victim will suffer for the rest of her life, along with every single person who loves her.  The collateral damage is acute and broad.

While being abused, the victim learns to think of something else until it is over, as the brain
must shut itself down in order to survive this unnatural, evil activity.

As an adult, we hear this in the language, with the victim using words like "floating" (this is very common) and "watching" the abuse.

This little three year old is now many times more likely to:

a.  use drugs
b.  become promiscuous
c.  abuse alcohol
d.  self abuse
e.  depression
f.  poor grades
g.  illegal behavior


is many times more likely to attempt suicide.

These are stats.  I use stats in language, as readers know, to guide me to "likely" positions.  This is where the Statement Analyst's conclusion shines, as the stats, step by step, guide him.

Back to DD.

This ability to disassociate herself from the abuser, especially when practiced in such a young age, becomes something the brain can do, for some, at will.

Hollywood is a vile, disgusting place where many talented, but wicked individuals, exploit one another for their own personal gain.  One is "in" one day, and "out" the next.  The exploitation is seemingly unbearable, yet every day, thousands of young people show up at studios for a shot at fame.  The "reality" TV shows appear quite popular, though they have little connection with reality, themselves. Individuals appear willing to do anything for a moment of fame before a camera.

Granted, some behavior is explicitly done for media attention.  When a young woman from New York City goes to a NY Mets game, and lifts up her shirt to expose her breasts, while giving herself a ridiculous name ("gaga"), she is doing something most of us would not do.  She cares only that she will be on the news, to help her singing career.  It is not her voice that she was exposing.  It was her breasts, which will, with age, change.  This is why the word "vanity" is often interpreted as "passing away", or "lacking permanence."

Yet, the John Belushi's who abuse their own bodies and destroy themselves through substance abuse, gluttony, and a self destructive lifestyle, tell us that not all bad behavior is for show.

Over the years, I have read biographies of a few actors, including Cary Grant, Bob Hope, John Wayne...the stars of my parents' generation, of whom I grew to love watching.

Reading their own statements, however, is far more eye opening.

Think of what an actor does for a living.

"John Wayne, American hero."

Why is John Wayne an "American hero"?  What has he done?  Specifically, what has he done that was "heroic"?

I love some of his movies.  I think he and Patricia Neal were one thing, while he and Maureen O'Hara, in "The Quiet Man" were amazing.

But, what has John Wayne done?

He simply pretended to be someone else.

This is what actors do.

They pretend.

Recently, someone paid $2,000,000 dollars for a handwritten manuscript of a song from Bob Dylan.

2 million dollars for a piece of paper with song lyrics.  As a Bob Dylan fan, I would not have paid $10 for it on ebay, unless, of course, I believed it would increase in value.

2 million dollars.

Do you really think that 50 years from now it will be of any value?

Imagine someone spending a fortune on a piece of paper written 50 years ago by Cole Porter.

Would anyone today even recognize the song, no less who Cole Porter was?

Dylan said, of the song, that it was basically a bunch of song titles he had in his head that he wrote down and put into one complete song.

Two million dollars?

The public likes to part with money, just ask Charlie Rogers.  There sometimes appears little discernment.  Recently, the public was petitioning (and fund raising) for a father who is now accused of deliberately locking his son in his vehicle in order to end his son's life.

Can you get a refund?

They pretend to be someone else, with so much skill, that they make a fortune doing so.  In a sense, they are liars.

Now, think of the "casting couch" renown of Hollywood.

How did the Myrna Loys, Barbara Stanwicks, Heddy LaMars,  and others of Hollywood's Golden Age (the 1930's) survive such indignities at the hands (and bodies) of sleazy producers, owners, directors, etc?

Why does it seem that the profession of acting produces so much substance abuse?

Why does it seem that the profession of acting produces so many suicides?

What happened to "Norma Jean"?

I think that the study that found that many actors have DD is not only on the right path, but I think it may be more than even the study suggested.  I think that to, professionally, "become" someone else, may be rooted in childhood abuse.

Remember "Lie To Me" highlighted that many abused children learn to read faces, hence, pick out liars, because they had to, via survival?  The "natural" or "truth wizard" character had been abused in childhood, hence, she learned to quickly read a change in the face (micro expression).

I think there's some truth in this, while avoiding the "truth wizard" claims, for now.  

If you love old movies, don't read accounts of their lives.  Perversion, gluttony, cheapness, prejudice, and a trail of broken lives will only ruin the movie watching experience for you.  Heather has repeatedly said, "Don't tell me!  Just let me think Monty Wooley is a kind hearted professor" in "The Bishop's Wife" so she can enjoy it each Christmas.

Bing Crosby using his son's head as a punching bag, or Bob Hope making his maid bend over to pick up a dollar...

or how about this?

An actor plays a role that is "socially responsible" and suddenly, the one who "faked" being a ______, suddenly is in the news campaigning as an "expert" in this or that "socially responsible" cause.  Due to the recognition of his face, he may even get an audience in the United Nations, or in the White House.

Yet, he is no expert.  He has not lived it.  He pretended to, and pretended with enough skill that audiences believed it.

These "heroes" produce nothing.  They do not find cures, nor do they feed the masses.

Remember the actor who went to New Orleans to "save the black children" on a boat, but the boat sank because he had too many cameras and too many cameramen to film him?  There was no room for children, black or white, in his boat. It produced more than a few chuckles, but it highlights just how delusional one can be.

I liked "Marley and Me", the movie about the yellow lab from Hades.  The star, making millions, with a face recognizable all over the globe, made an attempt on his life.  The few quotes I read told me that it was not a publicity stunt.

How terribly sad.  How terribly tragic.

Marilyn Monroe was passed from man to man, beginning with a man who her mother brought into the house, who sexually abused her in childhood.  She seemed to have found relief in pretending to be someone else.

The language she used is strange, but indicative of childhood abuse.

She did not get to see her children's children at Christmas time.

What to look for?

1.  Note Passivity

Why?  Why would passivity be important?

Recognize that when a Hollywood or celebrity personality is speaking, the information may likely not only be deceptive, but deliberate.

Deliberate?  Why would a celeb deliberately give out information that is humiliating or degrading?

Passivity is often used to conceal identity or responsibility in statements.  Sometimes this is necessary (medical professions have to speak without revealing identity of patients)

What does Kim Kardashian do for a living?  She walks around NYC trying to get someone to take a picture of her rear end.  She produces nothing.  She does not contribute to life.  Why someone would care about her rear end isn't a puzzle I can solve.  This reminds me to remind you, if you are one to read the quotes:

2.  Go to the Least Common Denominator (LCD)

Human behavior will go to great lengths for the fulfillment of "self" more than anything else.  Stretching the points of history is an example of how far a thief will go to disguise his intentions.  This can be individualistic, or it can be the spirt of larceny in a nation, as seen in its elected official, who is doing the thievery on a larger scale.

Dylan:  "What was Hitler thinking with that mustache!"

I've read some things about the wearing of a gas mask but even if that was the origin, self promotion seems more likely as Hitler spent time in front of the mirror.  Whatever the reason, it was something that people noticed.

Cassius Clay, the boxer, was genius at self promotion.  The more people hated him the more people paid to go see him.  The context of some of his quotes will help you in analysis.

I hate to take away enjoyment of the "Andy Hardy" movies, but was there a more immoral abuser of women than Mickey Rooney, the "beloved" "American icon" of children's stories?  For every one Shirley Temple (who seemed to survive), there appears to be 100 Mickey Rooneys.

What of the accounts of Elvis Presley's depravity, with local mothers bringing their virgin daughters to him, in between half-pound butter and banana sandwiches?  What was it inside of him that desired to humiliate innocence?  Worse, what was within these mothers?

Can you listen to the language, with the possible context of least common denominator, in mind?

I spoke to a man who's business partner was approached by a Hollywood mother from hell, who's teenaged daughter with lots of talent, was fearful of the "casting couch" that awaited her.  The mother paid a camera man to "break in" her daughter, and desensitize her to the "inevitables" that her daughter would have to overcome to be a star.  The account was credible, but it was not unique.

We analyzed the account of Woody Allen's daughter.

She was truthful about the sexual abuse.  It was in her language.

This is something that you might want to consider about DD:

Those suffering from various dissociative disorders can sometimes mimic sociopathic behavior.  They can, at times, appear to be utterly calloused towards the suffering of others.

I once interviewed a woman about this very point.  I asked her how she had the ability to not share a single tear over the heartache she inflicted upon a close loved one.

She said that she simply disassociated from it, as she had done since childhood, to the point where "it did not exist" as if it "never happened,"

Frightening language.

This is from a 1962 article on Marilyn Monroe.  Those who exploited her kept her silence by medical restraint.

They drugged her into compliance.  You can read the article, but better, listen to the words she herself chooses.

What questions would you ask her?

There are signals in the language that may suggest the mental illness that would later surface, be medicated back down, only to rise again, until suicide finished her off.

Note that some words have been emphasized to assist.  Note "raw" and "human nature", and design questions you would ask, (LCD that she refers to)

"Sometimes wearing a scarf and a polo coat and no makeup and with a certain attitude of walking, I go shopping or just look at people living. But then you know, there will be a few teenagers who are kind of sharp and they'll say, "Hey, just a minute. You know who I think that is?" And they'll start tailing me. And I don't mind. I realise some people want to see if you're real. The teenagers, the little kids, their faces light up. They say, "Gee," and they can't wait to tell their friends. And old people come up and say, "Wait till I tell my wife." You've changed their whole day. In the morning, the garbage men that go by 57th Street when I come out the door say, "Marilyn, hi! How do you feel this morning?" To me, it's an honour, and I love them for it. The working men, I'll go by and they'll whistle. At first they whistle because they think, oh, it's a girl. She's got blond hair and she's not out of shape, and then they say, "Gosh, it's Marilyn Monroe!" And that has its ... you know, those are times it's nice. People knowing who you are and all of that, and feeling that you've meant something to them.
I don't know quite why, but somehow I feel they know that I mean what I do, both when I'm acting on the screen or when if I see them in person and greet them. That I really always do mean hello, and how are you? In their fantasies they feel "Gee, it can happen to me!" But when you're famous you kind of run into human nature in a raw kind of way. It stirs up envy, fame does. People you run into feel that, well, who is she who does she think she is, Marilyn Monroe? They feel fame gives them some kind of privilege to walk up to you and say anything to you, you know, of any kind of nature and it won't hurt your feelings. Like it's happening to your clothing. One time here I am looking for a home to buy and I stopped at this place. A man came out and was very pleasant and cheerful, and said, "Oh, just a moment, I want my wife to meet you." Well, she came out and said, "Will you please get off the premises?" You're always running into people's unconscious.
Let's take some actors or directors. Usually they don't say it to me, they say it to the newspapers because that's a bigger play. You know, if they're only insulting me to my face that doesn't make a big enough play because all I have to say is, "See you around, like never." But if it's in the newspapers, it's coast-to-coast and all around the world. I don't understand why people aren't a little more generous with each other. I don't like to say this, but I'm afraid there is a lot of envy in this business. The only thing I can do is stop and think, "I'm all right but I'm not so sure about them!" For instance, you've read there was some actor that once said that kissing me was like kissing Hitler. Well, I think that's his problem. If I have to do intimate love scenes with somebody who really has these kinds of feelings toward me, then my fantasy can come into play. In other words, out with him, in with my fantasy. He was never there.
It's nice to be included in people's fantasies but you also like to be accepted for your own sake. I don't look at myself as a commodity, but I'm sure a lot of people have. Including, well, one corporation in particular, which shall be nameless. If I'm sounding picked on or something, I think I am. I'll think I have a few wonderful friends and all of a sudden, ooh, here it comes. They do a lot of things. They talk about you to the press, to their friends, tell stories, and you know, it's disappointing. These are the ones you aren't interested in seeing every day of your life.
Of course, it does depend on the people, but sometimes I'm invited places to kind of brighten up a dinner table like a musician who'll play the piano after dinner, and I know you're not really invited for yourself. You're just an ornament.
When I was five I think, that's when I started wanting to be an actress. I loved to play. I didn't like the world around me because it was kind of grim, but I loved to play house. It was like you could make your own boundaries. It goes beyond house; you could make your own situations and you could pretend, and even if the other kids were a little slow on the imagining part, you could say, "Hey, what about if you were such and such, and I were such and such, wouldn't that be fun?" And they'd say, "Oh, yes," and then I'd say, "Well, that will be a horse and this will be ..." It was play, playfulness. When I heard that this was acting, I said that's what I want to be. You can play. But then you grow up and find out about playing, that they make playing very difficult for you. Some of my foster families used to send me to the movies to get me out of the house and there I'd sit all day and way into the night. Up in front, there with the screen so big, a little kid all alone, and I loved it. I loved anything that moved up there and I didn't miss anything that happened and there was no popcorn either.
When I was 11, the whole world was closed to me. I just felt I was on the outside of the world. Suddenly, everything opened up. Even the girls paid a little attention to me because they thought, "Hmmm, she's to be dealt with!" And I had this long walk to school, two and a half miles [there], two and a half miles back. It was just sheer pleasure. Every fellow honked his horn, you know, workers driving to work, waving, you know, and I'd wave back. The world became friendly. All the newspaper boys when they delivered the paper would come around to where I lived, and I used to hang from the limb of a tree, and I had sort of a sweatshirt on. I didn't realise the value of a sweatshirt in those days, and then I was sort of beginning to catch on, but I didn't quite get it, because I couldn't really afford sweaters. But here they come with their bicycles, you know, and I'd get these free papers and the family liked that, and they'd all pull their bicycles up around the tree and then I'd be hanging, looking kind of like a monkey, I guess. I was a little shy to come down. I did get down to the curb, kinda kicking the curb and kicking the leaves and talking, but mostly listening. And sometimes the family used to worry because I used to laugh so loud and so gay; I guess they felt it was hysterical. It was just this sudden freedom because I would ask the boys, "Can I ride your bike now?" and they'd say, "Sure." Then I'd go zooming, laughing in the wind, riding down the block, laughing, and they'd all stand around and wait till I came back. But I loved the wind. It caressed me. But it was kind of a double-edged thing. I did find, too, when the world opened up that people took a lot for granted, like not only could they be friendly, but they could suddenly get overly friendly and expect an awful lot for very little. When I was older, I used to go to Grauman's Chinese Theatre and try to fit my foot in the prints in the cement there. And I'd say, "Oh, oh, my foot's too big! I guess that's out." I did have a funny feeling later when I finally put my foot down into that wet cement. I sure knew what it really meant to me. Anything's possible, almost.
It was the creative part that kept me going, trying to be an actress. I enjoy acting when you really hit it right. And I guess I've always had too much fantasy to be only a housewife. Well, also, I had to eat. I was never kept, to be blunt about it; I always kept myself. I have always had a pride in the fact that I was my own. And Los Angeles was my home, too, so when they said, "Go home!" I said, "I am home." The time I sort of began to think I was famous, I was driving somebody to the airport, and as I came back there was this movie house and I saw my name in lights. I pulled the car up at a distance down the street; it was too much to take up close, you know, all of a sudden. And I said, "God, somebody's made a mistake." But there it was, in lights. And I sat there and said, "So that's the way it looks," and it was all very strange to me, and yet at the studio they had said, "Remember, you're not a star." Yet there it is up in lights. I really got the idea I must be a star or something from the newspapermen; I'm saying men, not the women who would interview me and they would be warm and friendly. By the way, that part of the press, you know, the men of the press, unless they have their own personal quirks against me, they were always very warm and friendly and they'd say, "You know, you're the only star," and I'd say, "Star?" and they'd look at me as if I were nuts. I think they, in their own kind of way, made me realise I was famous.
I remember when I got the part in Gentlemen Prefer Blondes. Jane Russell - she was the brunette in it and I was the blonde. She got $200,000 for it, and I got my $500 a week, but that to me was, you know, considerable. She, by the way, was quite wonderful to me. The only thing was I couldn't get a dressing room. Finally, I really got to this kind of level and I said, "Look, after all, I am the blonde, and it is Gentlemen Prefer Blondes!" Because still they always kept saying, "Remember, you're not a star." I said, "Well, whatever I am, I am the blonde!" And I want to say to the people, if I am a star, the people made me a star. No studio, no person, but the people did. There was a reaction that came to the studio, the fan mail, or when I went to a premiere, or the exhibitors wanted to meet me. I didn't know why. When they all rushed toward me I looked behind me to see who was there and I said, "My heavens!" I was scared to death. I used to get the feeling, and sometimes I still get it, that sometimes I was fooling somebody; I don't know who or what, maybe myself.
I've always felt toward the slightest scene, even if all I had to do in a scene was just to come in and say, "Hi," that the people ought to get their money's worth and that this is an obligation of mine, to give them the best you can get from me. I do have feelings some days when there are scenes with a lot of responsibility toward the meaning, and I'll wish, "Gee, if only I had been a cleaning woman." On the way to the studio I would see somebody cleaning and I'd say, "That's what I'd like to be. That's my ambition in life." But I think that all actors go through this. We not only want to be good, we have to be. You know, when they talk about nervousness, my teacher, Lee Strasberg, when I said to him, "I don't know what's wrong with me but I'm a little nervous," he said, "When you're not, give up, because nervousness indicates sensitivity." Also, a struggle with shyness is in every actor more than anyone can imagine. There is a censor inside us that says to what degree do we let go, like a child playing. I guess people think we just go out there, and you know, that's all we do. Just do it. But it's a real struggle. I'm one of the world's most self-conscious people. I really have to struggle.
An actor is not a machine, no matter how much they want to say you are. Creativity has got to start with humanity and when you're a human being, you feel, you suffer. You're gay, you're sick, you're nervous or whatever. Like any creative human being, I would like a bit more control so that it would be a little easier for me when the director says, "One tear, right now," that one tear would pop out. But once there came two tears because I thought, "How dare he?" Goethe said, "Talent is developed in privacy," you know? And it's really true. There is a need for aloneness, which I don't think most people realise for an actor. It's almost having certain kinds of secrets for yourself that you'll let the whole world in on only for a moment, when you're acting. But everybody is always tugging at you. They'd all like sort of a chunk of you.
I think that when you are famous every weakness is exaggerated. This industry should behave like a mother whose child has just run out in front of a car. But instead of clasping the child to them, they start punishing the child. Like you don't dare get a cold. How dare you get a cold! I mean, the executives can get colds and stay home forever and phone it in, but how dare you, the actor, get a cold or a virus. You know, no one feels worse than the one who's sick. I sometimes wish, gee, I wish they had to act a comedy with a temperature and a virus infection. I am not an actress who appears at a studio just for the purpose of discipline. This doesn't have anything at all to do with art. I myself would like to become more disciplined within my work. But I'm there to give a performance and not to be disciplined by a studio! After all, I'm not in a military school. This is supposed to be an art form, not just a manufacturing establishment. The sensitivity that helps me to act, you see, also makes me react. An actor is supposed to be a sensitive instrument. Isaac Stern takes good care of his violin. What if everybody jumped on his violin?
You know a lot of people have, oh gee, real quirky problems that they wouldn't dare have anyone know. But one of my problems happens to show: I'm late. I guess people think that why I'm late is some kind of arrogance and I think it is the opposite of arrogance. I also feel that I'm not in this big American rush, you know, you got to go and you got to go fast but for no good reason. The main thing is, I want to be prepared when I get there to give a good performance or whatever to the best of my ability. A lot of people can be there on time and do nothing, which I have seen them do, and you know, all sit around sort of chit chatting and talking trivia about their social life. Gable said about me, "When she's there, she's there. All of her is there! She's there to work."
I was honoured when they asked me to appear at the president's birthday rally in Madison Square Garden. There was like a hush over the whole place when I came on to sing Happy Birthday, like if I had been wearing a slip, I would have thought it was showing or something. I thought, "Oh, my gosh, what if no sound comes out!"
A hush like that from the people warms me. It's sort of like an embrace. Then you think, by God, I'll sing this song if it's the last thing I ever do, and for all the people. Because I remember when I turned to the microphone, I looked all the way up and back, and I thought, "That's where I'd be, way up there under one of those rafters, close to the ceiling, after I paid my two dollars to come into the place." Afterwards they had some sort of reception. I was with my former father-in-law, Isadore Miller, so I think I did something wrong when I met the president. Instead of saying, "How do you do?" I just said "This is my former father-in-law, Isadore Miller." He came here an immigrant and I thought this would be one of the biggest things in his life. He's about 75 or 80 years old and I thought this would be something that he would be telling his grandchildren about and all that. I should have said, "How do you do, Mr President," but I had already done the singing, so well you know. I guess nobody noticed it.
Fame has a special burden, which I might as well state here and now. I don't mind being burdened with being glamorous and sexual. But what goes with it can be a burden. I feel that beauty and femininity are ageless and can't be contrived, and glamour, although the manufacturers won't like this, cannot be manufactured. Not real glamour; it's based on femininity. I think that sexuality is only attractive when it's natural and spontaneous. This is where a lot of them miss the boat. And then something I'd just like to spout off on. We are all born sexual creatures, thank God, but it's a pity so many people despise and crush this natural gift. Art, real art, comes from it, everything.
I never quite understood it, this sex symbol. I always thought symbols were those things you clash together! That's the trouble, a sex symbol becomes a thing. I just hate to be a thing. But if I'm going to be a symbol of something I'd rather have it sex than some other things they've got symbols of! These girls who try to be me, I guess the studios put them up to it, or they get the ideas themselves. But gee, they haven't got it. You can make a lot of gags about it like they haven't got the foreground or else they haven't the background. But I mean the middle, where you live.
All my stepchildren carried the burden of my fame. Sometimes they would read terrible things about me and I'd worry about whether it would hurt them. I would tell them: don't hide these things from me. I'd rather you ask me these things straight out and I'll answer all your questions.
I wanted them to know of life other than their own. I used to tell them, for instance, that I worked for five cents a month and I washed one hundred dishes, and my stepkids would say, "One hundred dishes!" and I said, "Not only that, I scraped and cleaned them before I washed them." I washed them and rinsed them and put them in the draining place, but I said, "Thank God I didn't have to dry them."
I was never used to being happy, so that wasn't something I ever took for granted. You see, I was brought up differently from the average American child because the average child is brought up expecting to be happy. That's it: successful, happy, and on time. Yet because of fame I was able to meet and marry two of the nicest men I'd ever met up to that time.
I don't think people will turn against me, at least not by themselves. I like people. The "public" scares me, but people I trust. Maybe they can be impressed by the press or when a studio starts sending out all kinds of stories. But I think when people go to see a movie, they judge for themselves. We human beings are strange creatures and still reserve the right to think for ourselves.
Once I was supposed to be finished, that was the end of me. When Mr Miller was on trial for contempt of congress, a certain corporation executive said either he named names and I got him to name names, or I was finished. I said, "I'm proud of my husband's position and I stand behind him all the way," and the court did too. "Finished," they said. "You'll never be heard of."
It might be a kind of relief to be finished. You have to start all over again. But I believe you're always as good as your potential. I now live in my work and in a few relationships with the few people I can really count on. Fame will go by, and, so long, I've had you fame. If it goes by, I've always known it was fickle. So at least it's something I experienced, but that's not where I live.

Analytical Interviewing: Baden-Clay Interview with Police Transcripts

Upon request, analysis sought here:

regarding the missing wife of Baden-Clay.

On occasion, I put out calls for assistance in transcribing videos, or even transcripts, into a "copy and paste" mode that I can use on the blog.

Due to full time work, as well as my volunteer work for families of missing persons, my time is limited.

The above was requested for analysis.

If you'd like to volunteer for transcription for the blog, please contact me via Facebook.

The transcription should be in

Copy/Paste format

Contain no commentary or emphasis.  This creates confusion and slows down the work.

No color coding, underlining, or anything added.

No editorializing nor body language added.

No voice inflection.

Stuttering:  stuttering, from a non-stutterer, is very important.  See teaching on "The anxiety scale of the Stuttering Pronoun, "I" in the blog.

What we look at is the words the brain chooses to use.

The link above when copy and pasted comes out like this:


If you'd like to be on a list of volunteers, please let me know.

Regarding analysis:

If you read the transcript, know that the interview is conducted while she is missing.

Note how many people enter and leave the room.  This is foolish.

Note the leading questions.

Note the lack of open ended questions.

What would you have asked?

1.  "Mr. Baden-Clay, tell us about your wife..."

This would allow him to pick and choose his own words.  I then take his words and ask about them.  I want to know when they met, how they met, and anything and everything he wishes to tell me.  Remember: if he caused her disappearance, what he did will be on his mind, and the words he chooses will all be words that he uses to avoid

2  "Tell us about your marriage..."

The transcripts reveal he had an affair, and that they were in counseling.  An affair can have a deeper psychological impact upon the victim than a death or divorce.  The victim, if the marriage was good, is left with an inability to trust, and often with PTSD like symptoms such as hyper-vigilance, which can wear down the adulterer with constant worry, questions, tears, etc.

Most people consider in missing person cases in which the marriage was poor that the husband may have gotten "rid of her" in order to re-marry without the cost of a divorce.  This is certainly something we have seen, but since he mentioned affair, the impact of it should have been explored in depth.

The Interviewer asks about medical conditions, other than depression.  Note how he asks it, suggesting heart problems.  This is to be avoided.

Objection:  What if the police record shows a heart condition?


Analytical Interviewing goes in a specific order.  It is not difficult to follow but it takes concentration and patience, presupposing efficiency in Statement Analysis in FOUR PARTS

1.  Open Ended Questions

"What happened?"  "What happened, next?"   "Tell us about your wife..."

2.  Questions based upon the words used in open ended questions.  As these questions are answered, any introduction of new language is pounced upon in the same manner.  REMEMBER:

THE GUILTY PARTY HAS THE GUILT IN HIS LANGUAGE.  It is the Interviewer's job to find it.

3.  Questions based upon Statement Analysis of the Written Statement

4.  Finally, questions based upon evidence, including the police report.

Here is an explanation about it.

Let's say a man is suspected in killing his wife, who is missing.  He should be told, upon arrival by police:

"We are here to help find your wife.  Please sit down and write out everything you can remember from the time you woke up until now."


If the subject is reluctant, he is to be reminded that his help is so appreciated by police.  If he continues to stall, he is to be reminded how important it is that he write as much detail as possible, because, after all, "we know you want to find her..." and so on.

There is always a risk of lawyering up, which then increases suspicion.  But in the "honeymoon" phase the most information can be gleaned.

There is one question that can be used on a reluctant spouse that might get him writing:

"Do you have suspicion of anyone? " (along the lines of suggesting someone else's guilt).  If this does not work, the Interviewer should then try to subtly blame the victim (outside the earshot of her family)...

"Would she take off on you?" as if he is too great to leave, appealing to both his ego, and the guilty conscience attempt to blame the victim, giving him an mental "out" for his inner stress.

If he refuses to write, get him talking and take the fastest notes imaginable, even if it means capturing any unique words only (with pronouns), as he might refuse a recording device.

Some will hit the record button on the iPhone in the pocket, but this is not legal and his rights should be protected.

Once talking, Mr. Sapir of LSI teaches that there are "magic words" to keep someone talking.  He says that this is remarkable in its success rate, especially when we, as Americans, are reluctant to be impolite:

"I'm listening."

I have used this over and over, in interviews where there was a lull or hesitancy, and socially, even as I am gathering information...just because.

"I'm listening" appeals to our ego.  It tells us that someone finds us interesting, or cares enough about us, and it would be "rude" to not oblige him.

It works.

Mr. Sapir is rare genius in his observations and scientific profiling of language.

Back to the interview:

note the "cut myself shaving" would be something I would not only note, but ignore.



I would ignore it only to ask later, otherwise, suspicion will arise.  I consider it part of Part 2, using his language, but I would put it down as "evidence" (it is) and hold on to Part 4.

"You mentioned you cut yourself shaving.  What kind of razor do you use?

Now, as a "Straight Razor" man, a la Teddy Roosevelt, I've gone to work with my face pretty cut up, particularly when I switched from Safety Razor to the old fashioned Straight Razor.  I am familiar, intimately, with razor nicks, and what they look like, how long they bleed, how they are treated, and how they heal.

His answer?

"Cut myself shaving" which does not say "who" cut themselves shaving, or "when" someone cut themselves shaving.  Unfortunately, the Interviewer introduced it with suspicion.  Not wise.

I would have:

Rubbed my face and talked about my personal shaving, at this point, to watch his reaction, careful to use bland or plain language.  Remember the type of razor he uses is easily verifiable.  If it is one of those expensive "mach iii cartridges", cuts are rare and generally only in a very curvature part of the chin or neck.  (See?  shaving like your grandfather can pay dividends)

The Training for Analytical Interviewing is exciting and fun.   I use a video camera and a bell.

Each time the Interviewer asks a question that introduces new words that should not be introduced (particularly nouns, unless it is unavoidable), I hit the "bell" sound, which, like the "gong", signals mistake.

I keep the Interviewer going, however, and it can be quite unnerving to hear that stupid bell going off repeatedly.

The video is reviewed and the mistakes are highlighted.  This does several things:

Causes the easily discouraged to bail out of the training.

Pricks the pride of those with a few years under their belt.


it excites the eager to learn and says to them, "This is something new, exciting and is not like trainings I have taken in the past!" and spurs them on.

These are the types who believe that their brains will be more useful in getting information than their guns, uniforms, or any bullying tactics that are all too common.

I've watched street bullying in action with officers who will smugly walk away thinking they've gotten the information necessary, not knowing they've missed and missed badly.  The shear volume of information not gained, but seen in just the few words given, reveals to the trained analyst:

The subject withheld information here, and here, and here, that should have been followed up upon, but was not.

The shaving question was asked with suspicion.  It did trigger the hyper sensitive blue we use in analysis as the need to explain why, though since the Interviewer triggered it, it might reduce the sensitivity somewhat.

He reads his emails on the toilet, and was rushing.  This need to explain is sensitive, but since he was rather challenged as the cuts "consistent with scratching", we might lose a bit of information here because the Interviewer influenced the answer.


If you are wondering how badly the affair impacted her, note that he reveals that the affair was a year ago, and the counselor advised 15 minutes of her venting each night.


One Interviewer repeatedly interrupts the subject.  This is a major mistake and is maddening to read.


Police are often taught to "gain control" of the interview.

This is another mistake.


"Scratches" is now introduced and has set a defensive posture for the subject.


I grasp that when time controls are placed upon us, it changes the interview, but where a murder or domestic is suspected, forget time.

I once interviewed a man for 5 1/2 hours in which he 'regaled me' with stories of high school football glory.  It was terrible.

My blood sugar level fell, and had no lunch.

Yet, what he revealed in this theft case, was the feeling of not getting what he thought he deserved in life.


he helped himself to a company safe.

If this was a 30 minute interview, he would have gotten away with it.  (A lawyer actually taught a group of investigators to keep interviews to 30 minutes, 60 max, by asking direct questions, controlling the interview, and keeping the focus on the topic at hand.  Seriously.)

The police had finished their investigation with interviews of all, fingering print taking and had completed the investigation with no conclusion to send to the DA.  I took written statements from the 7 employees, and found the guilt within the statement (along with a few personal details about romance in the workplace).

The 5 1/2 hour interview ended with a signed confession.

I was exhausted, mentally and physically, but it was worth it.  Staying true to the principle of Analytical Interview allows for a strong structure to exist and guide for the investigator.

No interview is perfect.

Every interview is a lesson.

"Sometimes you give a lesson, and sometimes you get a lesson."  (Bobby Fischer)

Sometimes you just have to break a rule when an opportunity presents itself.

I will post some more transcripts to highlight Analytical Interviewing.

Mother of Deceased Child Speaks At Funeral

The father gave two indications that something was very wrong and has been charged with murder.  
"I've kiled our child" (see prior analysis)

(CNN) -- The mother of a Georgia toddler who died in a sweltering SUV emphatically told a crowd at her son's funeral she loves and stands by her husband, even though he was charged with murder in the child's death.
"Am I angry with Ross?" Leanna Harris said at the funeral in Tuscaloosa, Alabama. "Absolutely not. It has never crossed my mind. Ross is and was and will be, if we have more children, a wonderful father. Ross is a wonderful daddy and leader for our household. Cooper meant the world to him."
This was the first time she's spoken publicly since June 18, when her husband, Justin Ross Harris, was charged with murder and second-degree child cruelty in the death of his son, Cooper Harris. He has pleaded not guilty.
Police said Harris, 33, told them he forgot to drop his 22-month-old son at the day-care center before going to work. The boy died after spending seven hours in a child safety seat in the back of an SUV.
Suspect speaks to funeral by phone
Toddler's dad calls funeral from jail
Earlier in the funeral service at University Church of Christ, Harris called from the Cobb County Jail outside Atlanta, where he's being held without bond, and addressed the crowd by speaker phone. He wasn't allowed to leave the jail for the funeral.
"Thank you for everything you've done for my boy," he said. "Good life. (Inaudible) No words to say. Just horrible. (Inaudible) I'm just sorry I can't be there."

note that he is sorry for not being there, not the death of his son. 
Then Leanna Harris spoke.
"First of all Ross, I love you and I'm doing this for you, OK?" she said. "Two years ago when we welcomed a 6-pound, 8-ounce perfect baby into the world, this never crossed my mind."
Note she brings to the deceased child what never crossed her mind:  "this"

Child 'was perfect'
Leanna Harris said she worried about not being able to have a child and was joyous when Cooper was born. The couple had been married since 2006.
"He was perfect, and he is perfect," she said of Cooper. "He changed mine and Ross' life. I've talked to you about the magnitude in which he changed it. As children do, he turned our lives upside down. ... I wouldn't trade it for the world."
The last two nights of Cooper's life, he had trouble sleeping and ended up in bed between her and her husband, Leanna Harris said.
"I remember turning over in the middle of the night, his mouth was open and his full toddler lips just breathing right into my face," she said. "I will cherish that moment forever."
'The Lord is holding me up'
Religion has helped her and her husband cope during this stressful time, she said.
Police released search warrants showing that Ross Harris searched the Internet for information on child deaths in hot vehicles. The international media scrutinized the couple's life.
"Some of you might wonder how I'm even standing here today. I wonder that myself, and I asked myself that question over and over the last week," she said.
"I should be crumpled into a heap of snot and tears into the dirt, but the Lord is holding me up right now. He is holding Ross up. And he is holding both of us up when we can't hold ourselves up."
Leanna Harris followed her son's casket out of the church, still on the phone with her husband.

Before hanging up, she said, "I love you."