The following are notes taken during a 6 hour session of ten experienced analysts and investigators looking at the murder of Amanda Blackburn.
Some are short abbreviations and thoughts while others are longer, complete sentences and analysis.
It includes Statement Analysis and commentary in the murder of Amanda Blackburn and is the summary works and thoughts preceded by the video of Amanda Blackburn's father. It is suggested that the video be watched which will provide a reference point for a closed loved one's words connected to a brutal murder, while maintaining the basis of faith.
Police have stated that 3 gang members have been arrested and the identity of the shooter is known. Police have also stated that Amanda's husband, Davey Blackburn, was not involved in her death.
The following is not limited to analysis as it includes external information, including information from the videos, media and the police affidavit.
First a video of what genuine emotional struggle sounds like from Amanda's father. This should be contrasted with the statements of the husband. He is:
a. Closely related
b. Faith based
c. A good example of "the expected versus the unexpected"
Note the reality; the struggle and the desire to protect, yet limit himself. Note the genuine emotion in light of Scripture, venus the language of Davey Blackburn. This is a good example of being hit with a horrible tragedy and seeking to trust God. The religious terminology is so different than Davey's that it sounds like an entirely different religion or different 'god.'
"She's the love of my life. "
The video is in stark contrast to the words of her husband.
Regarding some questions readers have had about language and analysis:
Mentally ill statements will not be cohesive and will lack a visible priority.
Delusional people will produce direct fabrications of reality. "I was talking to Satan last night who told me to kill my dog, Sam." This is a direct fabrication of reality, or, an outright lie.
DB's statements show clarity and a singular and powerful priority. They do strongly suggest mental health disturbance (general) including anti-social and narcissistic traits within language which often show the inability to have genuine emotion, rather they must mimic or copy others, including in language.
Pronoun Change
The change from "I" to "we" is a powerful, intuitive indicator of a need to place guilt in a context where there are others around me, which is then seen as 'reduced' overall impact. This is consistent from grade school on up.
Someone with anti-social and narcissistic traits knows what he is saying but may be incapable or have a reduced capability to have genuine emotion. This will trigger suspicion.
Pronouns are instinctive, intuitive and reliable. Entire cases are closed on pronouns. Accounts from more than 50 years ago can reliably pick the pronoun usage. Pronouns being in human speech from the earliest days, and the use is so extreme in repetition that they are "never wrong" and "incapable" of deception.
The change from "I" to "we" indicates guilt.
What is the source of guilt?
A . He knows the shooter
B. It is something else.
Police ruled out knowing the shooter. The experts in law enforcement insist that this is an ongoing investigation and they will be looking for any possible connection including:
*Did the husband meet any member of the gang through counseling?
*Does anyone in the church know
Universal Guilt
Universal parental guilt, or spousal guilt will not produce pronoun change.
It is not "universal guilt" that, for example, a parent would feel, terribly, if he let his 10 year old walk to school alone and was thus murdered. That guilt would be intense, but it is not likely to produce an immediate run to the plural "we" in a statement unless a specific circumstance existed:
It would produce "we", for example, if he had been warned, "DONT let her walk to school alone!"
This could produce "we decided" versus "I decided" due to extreme nature of murder.
But all parents feel guilt over children's death: Many feel 'responsible' when children die from illness such as cancer.
The guilt of Davey Blackburn is powerful enough to produce a pronoun change.When the pronoun "I" appears after a series of "we" it is also "strong" and important.
Allegation: Murder of Amanda Blackburn
I.
Initial
Public Statement after Murder This is important because it is his first thoughts (priority) and will not be impacted by news stories, analysis read, public, etc.
Elements of intrusion and Equality in Language
The level of intrusion will match language.
Ex. Baby Ayla kidnapping. Phoebe DiPietro's language revealed knowledge that no one broke into her house. "When someone enters your house and someone is casing your house..."
The pronoun "you" told us: there was no kidnapping. Home is a place of safety but also of vulnerability. It is very intrusive.
How powerful are pronouns?
Police were stopping black males when Susan Smith used one past tense verb about her sons. The road blocks and searching came to an end: the boys were dead and she, crying on TV, was the killer.
"Cayee loved the park." (Caylee is dead)
Experienced investigators trust pronouns.
"Hailey wasn't allowed to go out by herself..." said while missing. H was dead when the mother spoke this, allowing for people to continue to search.
The place of murder was the husband's own home.
The victim of murder was the husband's own wife.
The language should reflect this, even as Amanda's father's language showed his close relationship with his daughter.
Where we sleep (location) is a place of vulnerability. Sleep is mandatory. Home invasion destroys security and this is reflected in the language. We are incapable of protection while asleep making it most sensitive. We always flag location of sleep; often a refugee from trouble, and often in the language of both Domestic Violence and Domestic Homicide.
DB: murder in his home, of his wife and his pre born child. He was "one" with his wife, and this could not be more intimate. She was shot in the head. His language is expected to match this.
Even though media reported rape: DB did not use language of sexual homicide. If he had come in and found her and thought she had been raped, it would have been very difficult to keep this out of his language; it is too powerful for innocent people and guilty people alike. No matter the case, he did not have knowledge of sexual assault.
Coincidental Nature of the crime:
DB complained about his marriage, and stated that pregnancy made it worse. This was done publicly and repeatedly and often "the worst the pain the better the medicine" sales technique.
Wife 12 weeks pregnant while murdered. Investigators cannot ignore this. Video tapes give strong connection to how bad marriage was.
Video tapes: bad marriage, sexual drive, inadequacy of victim (disparagement) and powerful drive to succeed.
He even complained online: Number of 400 people more important than 16 souls saved. Numbers "coming" more important than anything.
Number of 6500 in attendance more important than wife's murder. This was a bizarre "intrusion" into his account. Amanda's murder is now "Amanda's story" even though no arrests were made at the time of statement. This is to telegraph future plans of "telling Amanda's story."
Will the language support this? Was he thinking of a book or made for TV deal while making this statement?
Expected Versus Unexpected.
Amanda's father: All expected language. No unexpected. Consistent, truthful, close painful language.
Davey: Most all unexpected. Sales pitch repeated. Deceptively withholding his emotions. Why? Does he feel them?
**Is Davey Blackburn incapable of feeling these emotions?
Expectation of
the first statement :
"My wife, Amanda, was brutally murdered and..."
"I love Amanda"
"Amanda loved me and Weston, our son"
List of expected words or themes from initial statement by investigators:
1.
Intrusiveness
2.
violated
3.
angry*
4.
possible
revenge (pastor)—vengeance but in subtle (conflict)
5.
horrific
6.
disbelief,
denial, bargaining
7.
shock
8.
extreme
language of emotion, sadness
9.
blame
1. FEAR –of killer return, fear for neighbors,
etc.
1. We MUST catch this killer
1. helpless
What do you
expect to hear about his wife?
“I love Amanda” not even “I loved Amanda” as it
is just too soon for this?
From Religious
background: I expect him to say “Amanda
is in Heaven”
Q. What would you think, if, he does not place
“Amanda in Heaven?”
Would this be
subtle insult of the victim?-----
Men process death faster. "I loved Amanda" although soon, is still appropriate. His statement is void of this. In murdered children, fathers go past tense quicker than mothers. Some mothers hold on to present tense for years.
Husband and Father is expected to speak personally for himself with:
1.
Emotions “I”
2.
Violent
Killer on the Loose must be caught, brought to justice--safety for Weston and neighbors
3. I
love Amanda; Amanda love (d) me
4.
Amanda
is in Heaven, or a better place or safe…’reward’ the victim or even ‘protect the victim’ even if the
husband feels guilty for not being home.
I. First Statement
I.
“It’s impossible to communicate all the emotions my heart has been forced to process.
The
statement does not begin with the pronoun “I”
which means the analyst should be on alert for possible distancing language. The context of home invasion murder of a wife
is “up close” and “personal.” This is not expected.
“all the
emotions”: He begins by telling us what he cannot do: express “all” the emotions in his heart.
Will he
give “some” of the emotions with the pronoun “I”? How about "I love Amanda with all my heart" as a single emotion?
What is
missing is the emotions, the pronoun “I” , and what “forced” this.
We listen
for “the murder of my wife, Amanda” in ANY terms…the “senseless death” or
anything close.
Rule of
commitment: Pronoun “I” directly
connected by a verb.
The first
thing someone says is always important.
The very first thing he says is in effect:
'I am not committing myself to any specific
emotion' which establishes priority. He signals here that he is not going to connect himself, personally, to Amanda.
Formula
for commitment is First Person Singular, past tense verb.
“I
thought” “I think” “I felt” “I feel”
He is
speaking for himself, as his wife is dead.
“Forced” while in context, speaking of a very
violent intrusive crime. A "circumstance" (unexpectedly soft for a violent crime) is "forced" upon him by whom? Life? God?
"Force": was force used to break in to the home? (no, door was not locked?)
My wife was such a beautiful, gracious, loving woman of God.
1. ISI: “my wife” lacks her name. This is not a complete social introduction,
but it is also not a terrible one either.
Without a CSI, we cannot say = good relationship. Something is 'less than good' here.
Some analysts had not heard the videos where he complains about her and commented that there is something amiss in the relationship.
That he takes ownership of her as "wife" is positive, but
what is the context? While his wife was
the victim of a brutal intrusive murder, he does not use her name here with
ownership.
Context: “of
God” she is “beautiful, gracious, loving woman” is this for him, or for God? We want to hear, "I love Amanda" and "Amanda was a good wife to me" and "Amanda was a good mother for Weston..."
Will she be the same when he, himself, is the
context, as seen with the pronoun “I”? With "God" she is these things, but what about with the subject, himself?
"Such": ‘comparative’ --- what might this be compared
to? Other woman?
“My wife, Amanda, was a beautiful…”in her walk with God, compared to with me, the subject, what was she?
Next, he introduces his ministry or "career", or "work."
Question for analyst: What is more important, his career or Amanda?
I have not only lost my
ministry partner and support, but also my very best friend.
“I” and “very best friend” are far apart,
with “ministry” coming before personal.
He has introduced “ministry” ---“company” or “career”
---one and the same first.
Be on alert that one who has not
committed to emotions, has now introduced his career to the statement.
Difference in the language of “loss”
between cancer and murder. "Lost" with sickness of cancer spreading out over time, but murder is always shocking, always unexpected (?) which means that this element will be in the language.
It is not.
“I, I, I” Discussed as principle. No "stuttering we" because "we" already provides safety by number which will act as protection from anxiety.
LSI…”stuttering pronoun” I indicates an increase in tension stress, and
anxiety, if it hits “9” by a non-stutterer, it means immediate hospitalization
and an entire central nervous breakdown and is ONLY found in spousal murder—
I have not encountered a stuttering
“we” before this case. The public speaking DB did not find 'solace' or comfort while 'hiding' in the crowd of "we" in the statement.
There is no way to
prepare yourself for circumstances
like these.
1. The
use of the 2nd person pronoun in a personal murder is not expected
and is distancing language. This is not
a common, universal event. This is "unexpected" pronoun use.
2. ""Circumstances": is soft, minimizing language and it is not
expected (inappropriate)
3. “These”
is plural. Are home invasion murders of
pregnant women something that commonly or universally happens?
Also, “these”, being plural,
tells us that there is something else that was a “circumstance” BESIDES the murder.
4. “Prepare” is in the negative
“there is no way…” making it elevated in importance.
This is an unnecessary statement. Everyone knows that you cannot prepare for a
home invasion murder.
Which then leads us to ask:
Why did it enter his language?
When we do not have an answer, the analyst should
consider the possibility that leakage is presenting itself. This is subjective and the word “prepare”
should be noted and put off to the side for future reference.
Did these circumstances have “preparation”? Police
have said that they have not found anything to connect this man to the
murder.
The subject has introduced
the topic of “preparation” for murder in his language.
This is not expected. No one "prepares" for murder unless they know about it already and have prepared a "story." The word "story" so close to the UNSOLVED murder should not be in the language.
As deeply as I am hurting, I am hopeful and confident that good things will come of this.
1. The
subject’s statement is written in a way which you must presume he is hurting in
order for you to understand his communication.
He does not tell you he is hurting, instead he goes directly to the
‘degree’ of the emotion. This is an
assumptive statement and does not directly connect himself to the emotion. What is behind this "hurt"? He still does not say.
2. He
avoids any specific designation of actual emotion. We saw in the first sentence a lack of
commitment to any specific emotion, stating that it was impossible to tell
“all”, but how about some?
3. “The
word but being missing, yet the topic, or theme, included, via comparison.’
4. Scripture
does not ever teach nor example, the exclusion of human emotions. “Jesus wept”/ David mourned the loss of
Absolam, his son…”
5. therefore,
is this an advertisement?
6. Is
this a hint of narcissism in language? Psychological expert: We must consider both anti social and narcissistic elements in this language.
In the “higher life” ideology, he is
“selling” a product that promises people various cures. Amanda Blackburn's father expressed getting through this, not 'celebrating' or 'laughing.'
What is the sales pitch?
It is that the deeper the pain, the greater the relief.
The worst the marriage the better the marriage counsel he offers.
People that are in pain, have reduced discernment and open to suggestibility. Davey will "do whatever it takes" and no matter how bad life is, "the best is yet to come" slogans.
I rest in the truth of Romans 8:28 that God works all things together
for the good of those who love Him and who are called according to His purpose.
Appropriate use of Scripture if he assigns God as in control, even of death.
“Amanda made
it her life’s calling to love and serve everyone she knew.
Amanda—her life calling, or ‘career’ is to “love and serve everyone
she knew.”
Q. does this include Davey?
Q. does it include the living
child, Weston?
Q. Will he mention the pre born
child? he does not mention the
child.
Q. Does it exclude those she did not know?
Q. Is he back to "selling" and advertising?
Is “everyone”; yet, he qualifies this to be people she “knew.” Will this be consistent?
Even more, she has made it her life’s
mission to see as many people as possible come to know Jesus as their
personal Savior.”
“Even more” raises the level in comparison to loving everyone “she
knew” to people she does not know.
Regarding the subject’s career, what do you think of this statement?
'16 people
came to know Jesus as their personal savior but I am disappointed that you did
not reach the goal of 400 people in attendance...' from video --not exact quote.
These people would come to his church or his company. Nothing about Amanda's life work being to love him, or be loved by him, or Weston.
Setting makes it even more troubling:
This is a few days after his wife’s brutal murder, he let people know that his work
was going on.
IS THIS EXPECTED?
Who does Amanda love?
1. People she
knows
2. She wants
people to come to his 'company'
Is he going to say, more importantly, that Amanda loved me, and our children?
“I
know that in her death and legacy even
more people will come to a saving faith in Christ.
Why did Amanda die?
Is Amanda some form of sacrifice?
Is he using Amanda's death to prop up his business?
Outside info from video: Amanda said that the marriage went bad the day the honeymoon ended because he went "to work" and was so involved in his work that she was thinking of leaving him to go home to family.
“even more” is to compare WHAT? What number of people “coming” is he
comparing it to?
Is this word in any way associated with
“preparation”?
We do not know. We are listening. We are taking notes. We are asking questions, but why did he mention "preparation"??
*Will he keep using her death to advertise his
business?
I know beyond a shadow of a doubt her desire for me would be to continue
This is an expression used when pushing back against doubters. He is owning that at least one person disagree about Amanda's desire: it is likely Amanda, herself. Will this be affirmed or weakened as we go forward?
“I know” is weak and “shadow of a doubt” is weaker
because in order to be necessary there would have to exist doubt.
“beyond
a shadow of a doubt” which introduces the word “doubt” into a statement
about his murdered wife. This is to acknowledge the need to persuade a doubter or doubters. It is about his career, again.
It is to weaken the
assertion of his wife’s desire for him.
He is introducing the fact that Amanda brought
doubts to him regarding him continuing his ministry.
*outside this statement he spoke to a group of NON
PASTORS and NON pastoral candidates and “warned them” how wives can harm
ministries or they can "sling shot" ministries.
*Projection noted. He 'told ' the audience that Amanda in life was more interested in him Davey, which hindered his work.
There were doubts about him and his work from her.
*outside info:
She stated that his work almost caused the disintegration of the
marriage and that had her family lived closer, she would have left him.
*outside info; his mentor noted something "wrong" with him, called him "Crazy Davey" but only felt better about him with Amanda's presence. Did this cause him to envy her?
*He insulted her, humiliated her subtly and over talked her on the video. Disrespectful and competitive towards her.
He told us the marriage got worse from pregnancy
and he was under sexual temptation at the gym and she could not or would not
meet his needs.
“…people
generally only say “beyond a shadow of a doubt” when someone is questioning…”
what
we’ve started here in Indy.
The word “we” here is about his ministry and
started speaks to the beginning when it was him and Amanda. This suggests unity at the beginning of the
work.
Did he need a “fresh start” ?
He has a fake poverty story he tells...again, the worse the pain, the greater the medicine selling technique that he uses.
“we were broke” and “very poor” lived on mac and
cheese,
This means that in some areas, “we” is indicated as
positive.
I hold firm to the belief that God is still
good, that He takes our tragedy and turns it into triumph, and that the best truly is yet to come.”
“our
tragedy”
“our”: Who
is plural here? Amanda is gone. There is no "Weston" here in context so...
does he have a girlfriend?
does he see himself and the church as married?
does he have messianic or messianic like complex?
does he see himself as married to the church?
“tragedy”:
this might be acceptable, much later down the road, right now it is a brutal unsolved murder with a dangerous killer on the loose.
With the plural:
Is he sharing this “tragedy” not murder, with
someone else??
“The best is yet to come” is a published slogan of
“resonate” church, that resonates with young people ---if you can, during lunch break, take a
quick peek at some of the videos.
“The best is yet to
come”
“truly”
adds emphasis
Analysis Conclusion:
It is his priority which comes forth plainly: his career and work.
He used his initial statement to advertise
the church.
What is missing?
Love, and the death of
his unborn child, and Amanda in Heaven.
Question for us: Did Amanda NOT deserve heaven? 12:45PM
“still good” --- because His “goodness” might be in
question if He “allowed” this to happen.
Is this part of Davey’s actual theology, however??
His mentor gets 16,000 people each week and changes the language with faux claims of knowledge of Hebrew. They "do whatever it takes" and success is measured in numbers.
He went to the memorial service and said this about
Davey:
“There was something very wrong with this young man. “
Random thoughts of analysts listening:
‘jesus’ ---“whatever it takes….” “the best is yet to come”
“higher life movement” ---------
“negation or suspension of human faculties in rising above life’s
problems”
Sex & money
“resonate”
Gnosticism ---Stoics
Is he “selling” and “advertising” so much so that it will continue?
“100% not a suspect” the need for emphasis by police while they knew his bizarre statement was attracting more than raised eyebrows. Fox News called it "narcissistic" and focus on self. They said he wants the public to know that while his wife has just been murdered, he is going on with his work.
*Anti social traits examined. Inability for genuine human empathy.
Highly intelligent public speaker.
Analyst: "his
life with her wasn’t that good" drawn only from statement as analyst did not see any videos. ---Video 3 weeks prior to Amanda’s death. He and Amanda did “Q & A” for the
church. Detective: body language obvious.
Subject's complaints about her as both agreed bad marriage:
–Amanda did not meet my sexual needs
disparaged her. “Date
night” “Davey”had to have sex first otherwise he would not concentrate on Amanda's conversation. This is bullying, controlling behavior, that is highly insulting to her.
He reduced her to body parts; “depersonalization”
of his wife
“Controlling language”
Videos show "performances, including choreographing, costumes (sex appeal) and doing to the Gospel "whatever it takes" to make it "appealing" or to "resonate" to young. Everything is about sex.
Narcissitic language and extreme focus on his
“career”
audience is young---late teens, early 20’s
“corrects” her
mocks her modesty
“bring the butter” in a “sermon” in a “church” alarming --many churches teach sex but ministers do not use themselves as examples and do not humiliate their wives publicly. Had he been a licensed therapist he would have had formal complaint against license.
The videos show a man obsessed with “numbers”
“salvation of one person in ten years, they
rejoice! versus DB drive for numbers.
Davey, using the pronoun “I” speaks of his
disappointment.
16 people were “saved” eternally ---but, ' got
to tell you guys, I am disappointed because I set a goal of 400 people and you
did not meet the goal…'
She said:
The marriage went south when the honeymoon ended and he went “to work”
He said: The
trigger for the marriage getting worse was pregnancy.
He whipped out a gun for
a prop and pretended to shoot someone.
He then said, ‘I warn
you about marriage and the ministry. A
wife can slingshot you towards success or destroy it’
Less than one month later, she is murdered while
pregnant and he does not grieve?
***The first analysis went on the blog. Another statement was made by DB. There are significant changes in the next statement, at first but then:
Dear Resonate Family,
I cannot thank you enough for
the unbelievable outpouring of love that you have shared with my family over
the past few days.
negative – elevated, but it began
with “I”, so we should expect him to continue in the first person
singular.
As many of you know, my wife Amanda Grace
and our unborn baby have been tragically killed.
1. complete social introduction
2. mentioning of the unborn child
3. “killed”
These were the three first concerns mentioned earlier.
“Parroting language.” Did subject become influenced by suspicion, criticism, analysis, etc?
“I did not kill my daughter, Jonbenet.”
unnecessary introduction for an
artificial entry, or ‘use’
We are going to have church this Sunday, just like we always
do.
“normal”: this will be, IN HIS LANGUAGE anything but
normal. Even young children know that when a story is told, "It was a day like any other", they recognize something extraordinary is about to happen.
“We” : himself and the church. This is an appropriate use of “we”
"Dear Resolute Church" is to directly address them. This is NOT NECESSARY and it is, therefore, very important. The analyst should be on alert that the subject is aware that his audience is larger than just the church! Will the rest of the statement affirm this concern, or deny it?
Is he really addressing just them?
In addition to meeting
together at our normal service times, we are going to focus on celebrating
Amanda’s life later Sunday afternoon.
“Celebration” very close
to the murder;
It is a positive term
Would you celebrate while a killer
is on the loose?
Is this just an advertisement for
the “higher life movement” or does he have a reason to celebrate?
Would you expect a murdered life
to be celebrated:
a. so soon?
b. while the murderer is still on the loose?
Where is the shock, anger, rage,
fear, denial?
Please join me at Traders Point Christian Church at
5:00pm.
invitation at new location that
holds many more people.
Does he expect many more people
than “like we always do” to attend?
Remember, he specifically
addressed this to people of whom he did not need to address, making it
‘sensitive’ to him.
Does he know something that the
people do not know?
We are going
to worship, share the gospel through sharing Amanda’s story, laugh together
and cry together.
1. worship
2. share
3. laugh
4. cry
Analyst: 'It strikes me, personally, as
very inappropriate, and most unexpected.'
all agreed.
"celebrate" so close to her death? "laugh"? Is this more slogan-ism selling? It is unlike Amanda's father.
Her heart would be that you invite as many people as possible to
this celebration service that do not know the Lord.
Amanda’s heart wants numbers is the "perceived reality of DB"
Amanda while alive, loved people
she knew;
Amanda while dead, wants people
she did not know to come.
'Amanda, while dead, is doing what she should have done while alive, for me, Davey: bring me new customers for my growing business'
Question: Is Amanda a commercial for his company?
This is not “Amanda” but “her
heart”
Is this what Amanda did not want,
but her “heart” did?
Another gnostic view: 2 different people in one package.
“I have a thin person inside of me dying to get out!”
Amanda’s story has attracted national news.
Here we have the hint from "Dear Resonate Family" inclusion in his statement. He is talking to resonate family but has one eye on the "nation"
*Amanda is an “unsolved murder”,
not a story. Story is a soft term of a ‘created’ element.
We write and create and tell stories. It takes time and it takes preparation.
Think of leakage: “preparation”?
I know that Jesus is going to make good come from this,
What would be, in his personal,
subjective dictionary, that would define “good” in this situation? What would be “good” from the murder of his
wife and unborn child, leaving him without his “partner” and “very best friend”
and his son, Weston, without a mother, (which, by the way, nothing of her as
“mother” was in his original statement.
I pointed this out and his NEXT statement addressed “mother” too!
What “good” will come?
Let’s see if he answers this for
us:
so in the event someone
from the media tries to speak with you, simply respond by asking everyone to
join us in prayer for my family.
*Control. He will now tell people what to say to
media. Don’t answer their questions,
just ask them “all” (everyone) to pray for “my” family.
This is very important that he
has now used the term, “my family” which he has consistently avoided and will
consistently avoid it going forward.
This may be the only
time I have heard this expression, “my family” and it is about “prayer” from
the media.
You can let them know
that we have extremely heavy
hearts and although we are hurting tremendously, we are still
hoping and believing that great things are still yet to come.
Davey
“my family” needs prayer, but “we” have extremely
heavy hearts.
He avoids saying how he, himself, feels.
He feels the need in a murder case to emphasize
this with “extremely”, as if a murder could produce anything else;
anti-social/narcissistic traits within language (control)
"We" instead of "I" is vital:
The use of "we" when he should use only himself:
This is to “run away from commitment” regarding how
he, himself, feels about the murder of his own wife.
His initial statement prepared us for this.
Does he not feel what other humans feel? Must he mimic, imitate or borrow language?
Question:
*Did the 2nd
statement affirm or deny his use of commercializing his wife’s death?
*He did not say “I love Amanda” or “Amanda loved
me”
He has not placed her in heaven, yet.
Did Amanda so hinder his ministry that she did not
deserve Heaven?
Free
Editing Process where he answers questions on his own.
Note any disruption in the speed of transmission,
including pauses, “ums” and “you know”, etc.
Stuttering is only observed in non-stutterers.
II. Interview Transcript
I: Pastor Blackburn, thank you for joining us this morning,
we’re so sorry for your loss.
DB: Thank you George, thank you very much.
I: I know the community came together in a memorial service
for Amanda over the weekend, what do you want the world to know now
about your wife?
a.
recognition of the huge service, but the question is personal and moves away from what interests Davey (crowd) to the real issue: violent unsolved murder with killer on the loose:
b.
What do you want the world to know about your wife?
Males: all state this is an easy question to answer and the language will include "love" and "I" and child.
**It is an "easy question"
*Would
this question be easy if he had hired someone to kill his wife?
Or,
if the subject has an intense guilt that is powerful enough to impact language, would it become a difficult question?
DB: Oh my gosh, I wish I could tell the world
everything about her, I wish I had the time to but, um,
Before he gets to time, he speaks of
limitation.
He does not have the time. Why not? What does he have the time to talk about? We will listen to learn the answer.
“but” is used to compare his lack of time
and wish with what follows next:
I think what I would really
want the world to know is that she loved Jesus with her whole heart.
a. He
speaks for himself, which is good. This
is commitment.
b. “think”
is to immediately reduce commitment and allow for himself, or others to think
differently.
c. “really”
want
d. “she
loved Jesus with her whole heart”
“jesus” is
his product which is sold at his company. His 'jesus' and Amanda's father from video 'Jesus' seem different.
Psych : Is
he talking about himself? (Messianic
complex)
“story telling?"
And she loved people,
Does this
sound strange coming before mentioning “loving me”? Or, she loved her son, Weston? She loved her family??
This is
not here yet…
and she spent her life pouring her life out to people.
“to people” not to me, not to her son…not to her family, but to
“people” and this is not even "for people":
What is DB building here?
She served people,
She served “people” and not “our son” or “her family” or “me”
The advertised “story” is in full bloom here. We will now listen for any planning he leaks out about selling or using this "story"
she uh, loved the people
She loved “the people” now, which is “specific” via the article, “the”
This is not the language of
a husband but the language of a non-sexual relationship and we must explore the
possibility of the language of selling her story.
Since
“people” is now specified, which “people” does he refer?
that were un loveable,
She loved the un loveable people.
I do not know if they would appreciate this title, but it is his
language. Who were these "un lovable" people? What made them "unlovable"?
Question: Would Amanda describe them as unloveable?
Observations from those who have seen videos: Amanda was loving, Godly, genuine Christian wife and mother.
Is this assertion that Amanda loved the "un lovable" people fictional story telling on the part of her husband due to plans to "sell" this "story" far beyond just using it to get on Inside Edition, GMA, Fox, etc?
gave hope to people who um, didn’t have hope,
“gave hope to people” and these “people” are those who did not have
“hope” which is the language of “story building.”
Is he signaling a book, made for TV movie, Hollywood, a reality TV show, and so on…?
“Amanda saves the world!” by Davey
“others” is only used when someone else, like FAMILY is priority.
It does not seem from the statements made by Amanda that she would have classified "people" as unloveable. This appears to be classic story building language by one about to cash in on her death. Sales from such a book would far outweigh any monetary gain from life insurance and he has no emotional connection (using "I") to Amanda.
didn’t think they had a future, and um, she just absolutely
gave everything she had to her Lord
and Savior Jesus Christ.
Amanda’s love gives “futures” to un loveable and those without hope. Who are these people who are said to be without futures? How did Amanda give them futures?
This is ^&O*(U$$*() (unprintable)
Is this guy a slick salesman who is 'pushing the right buttons' with the public? He has insulted people and ascribed Messianic like qualities to a young mother who was likely so busy with a child and a demanding narcissistic husband that she did not have time to give futures to the world of unloveable people.
This is the language of hyperbole, which will get stronger as he goes on and he will show what it means to "get pronoun strength" coming up...
Question: Who is an “un
loveable” person?
Answer: Murders, child
molesters, killers, etc…. “Davey”?
Psych : projection from
childhood?
But, after giving “absolutely” to people, un loveable, hopeless,
futureless what eve was left, she gave it to JC, but…
nothing for Davey?
“Perhaps he was envious of her relationship with God.”
“homicide” ---envy.
Cain sacrificed and it displeased God.
Abel sacrificed and it pleased God.
Cain took Abel to the “field’ (where disputes were often heard in
private) and something was said that caused him to kill his brother.
Question: is 'envy' in the language of DB towards Amanda?
Answer: See what he praises Amanda for: not stealing the spotlight from him.
Also note “her Lord and Savior” and not “our Lord and Savior (from a husband)” may suggest that Davey disagreed with her
philosophy of practical, hands on worship, which is often seen in helping
others as maybe she did not agree with his "numbers first" mentality of success.
I: We know
the police in, have released surveillance photos, some surveillance videos
overnight, what else have they been telling you about who might have done this
and why?
What have police told you?
Police reveal all or most
all to family they KNOW are not involved, but withhold information from anyone
who might talk, or might be suspected…
DB: Um, ya know, the ah
investigators um, haven’t given me ah, a, ton of details that um, they’ve
given me the details that they’ve released to, to the public as well,
The
public speaking subject halts on a sensitive topic and reveals that the police
have not shared with him ANYTHING about the case.
an, an so we,
we’ve been really tryin’ to do over the past week is um, is, is,
kinda figure out , we, ya
know, how to grieve the loss an,
Grieving
the murder: It is not “I”, nor “me” but
“we”
The
murder is not “my loss”, nor even “our loss” but it is “the loss”, which is so
distant that it sounds like he is counseling someone in his church.
Is
he incapable of feeling emotions? (sociopathic
imitation of emotions)
Something
caused a powerful change to cause him to go from “me” to “we” at a most
personal point. (Grieving)
an
how to, how to move forward from here an how to work thru all of this ,
From
his first statement: he wanted to move
forward before there has been a moment to yet grieve. This was noted initially, too.
it’s devastating to the family
"the family" is not "me" or "my family."
We cannot say that Davey Blackburn is devastated by his wife's murder because he himself will not say it.
This
is distancing language that suggests a need to explore if he:
a.
is incapable
of emotion
b.
or has guilty
knowledge of the crime
------has extreme guilt in something, enough to eject "I" from his language.
Question: If he was having an affair, is this enough guilt to produce pronoun ejection?
psych please consider that the affair would cost him his career if recovered....
c.
It is not “devastating to me”
The disconnect
comes in the use of complex language AND a consistent priority.
Clinical: like a professional treating unrelated
clients or patients. There is no connection to the pain or loss.
an
, and um, ya know the fu, funeral this past Sunday was just an amazing
celebration of, of her life an, we just um, we were so
grateful for, for friends and family comin’ to show support, and the
nation um, there were over 6500 people
tuned in across the world um, and, and, what was so great about Amanda
is she was so selfless, that she didn’t want here life to be put on display
ever, but she wanted Jesus to be put on display. We feel like that’s what
happened at the celebration service, that Jesus was lifted up and people’s lives
have been changed because of that.
In
statements where he has no connection to grief, fear, or Amanda, he can
accurately quote the number of people who came to see his company online.
(This shocked those who had no knowledge of the case) ---how could the murder victim's own husband even care about such a thing?? how could he be so crass as even mention it?
Then,
what is so “great” about Amanda is that she did not steal his thunder. (his spotlight, his attention) “Amanda was so selfless that there was only
me to soak up all the attention.”
“Display” He is telegraphing his plans to capitalize on
her death.
:
And it was such
Here
is cross talk
DB: and, so , um , we’ve been …
I: It was such an outpouring of…
DB: Go ahead George..sorry
I:
I’m sorry, sorry, I apologize
DB:
Yes.
I:
"Do you have any idea why anyone
would want to hurt Amanda?"
Police
said at this point: the reason why is
because she disrupted a home invasion robbery.
DB: "There's
not, Amanda did not have an enemy in the world. Um, I, I can't,
I cant imagine any reason why, that's why this has baffled us as
much as anybody and so we are trusting the investigators who have been
so good to us through this process um, trying to keep us up to speed on what
they have and we trust, you know, that they are they are doing the
best they can and have all the resources at their disposal right now
to catch who did this."
a.
he avoided the
motive police stated
b.
Stuttering on
“I” increase in anxiety
c.
Who is
“us”? Who is “we”? This change of pronoun comes after grieving
and the motive for the crime.
d.
He tells us in
the negative that she did not have an enemy in the world, causing us to ask,
“did he know of someone who, himself included, that may be considered an
enemy?”
e.
He cannot
“imagine” even though police have told him the answer.
The question
is not who would hurt Amanda, but “why” that causes great sensitivity to the
subject.
I:
"Investigators have also said that there is a code of silence
that may have prevented people from coming forward even if they have
information that might solve this crime. What do you want to tell
those people who might know something about this?
Fear
of gang violence and retribution. Maybe
Amanda was killed because she recognized or could identify the killer.
The
Interviewer recognizes code of silence –fear of gang?
Davey has not said anything about fearing the killer. Not once has DB expressed fear of the killer. This is not natural when an unknown killer or killer who entered his OWN home and killed his OWN wife is on the loose!
DB:
well, I mean, I, we would beg them to give any
information that they have. Uh, we'd be extremely
grateful for for that, you know, uh, it is really hard to sort
through the emotions of what we are feeling about all this, absolutely we'd, you know, it, we we
are confused, you know, we don't
understand why, we, you know, um, we are angry we we;re not really sure what to do but I read Amanda's journal
What "topics" produced which pronoun?
Topic: information produced “we”
Topic: gratitude produced “we”
Topic: emotions over murder produced “we”
Topic: confusion produced “we”
Topic: understanding produced “we”
Topic: anger produced “we”
Topic: what to do, produced “we”
Topic: Story telling brought back the confident non
stuttering salesman who not only read his wife’s journal, but is now telling
the entire nation what was in it.
The
power to change pronouns is very strong.
Davey Blackburn is writing a story to sell.
Example of Hillary clinton: it took 6 years and countless affair so eject "I" from her language. It is a powerful thing to have "I" avoided or ejected from English humans: We say "I" so many millions of times that there must be a powerful reason (guilt) to change it.
He
runs away from commitment.
Did
you do it??
entry
just a few days before as she journaled
every day of her life just a few days before she was killed and she
put something in there that just spoke volumes to us that we are
deriving strength from she said we
don't know what the future holds but we know Who holds the future and
that's Jesus, and so we are drawing
our strength from that and Jesus holds the future and we can't see it clearly
now but she can see it clearly now as she is in heaven with Jesus and we will
see her soon."
This
is crass commercialism for his upcoming book, made for TV movie, and ultimate
success that drives him
it is not just that he read her diary but that he felt the need to tell the nation!
I:
Thank you (cross talk) can you mention how you are holding up through
all of us, hey hey there've been you know, when you look at these photos and
see all this has there been any other problems in the neighborhood did you did
you or any of your neighbors recognize uh, that person , its kind of hard
to determine who that person might be, that person in the photo?
DB
Yeah, Yeah, I mean it was such an obscure photo its I mean
its extremely difficult to say anyone recognized it I mean our fam, our
neighborhood was so close and it was such a seemingly safe
neighborhood that this devastated all the neighbors, you know we knew all the neighbors we had just lots of cook outs with them
recently and uh, and so, you know, we're
we're we're we're just as confused as everybody else...at this
point.
This
is to run away from commitment.
What
is “it”? “It” and not “him” in the
photo??
Question: Is it possible that Davey met one of these
gang members in a counseling session?
I:
"Your little boy Weston is just 15 months old he won't grow up
with his mom. What are you going to tell him about her?
All: easy question. "I will tell him how much his mom loved him and how much he meant to her and how she loved his smile every day..." (on and on)
Very easy question.
Extremely telling response:
DB:
"Yeah, yep. I think that thats probably one of the hardest
things in this whole process
is knowing
He
tells us that this is a “process” (which may speak to his future plans)
This is to affirm the "story building" and the story selling. This could lead to millions of dollars.
that he is not going to grow up with Amanda,
Distancing
language note.
"Amanda" is not even his mom. Yet, he changes her into "mom" but only when he moves away from personal Weston, and on to the "world", further telegraphing his plans to sell this deceptive story to the world:
because
she was the perfect mama, every mom in the world could have learned from her,
Hyperbolic
language noted which is often associated with criticism of one’s motherhood up
to even CPS intervention or threats. It is not likely that Amanda experienced CPS, but the increase is likely that the subject complained and criticized her, perhaps for "only" being a mother.
It is very likely that Amanda loved being a Christian mother and the subject was not pleased. Being a Christian mother is not 'world wide' and is not 'inviting people to come' and so on. It is very much the impression Amanda Blackburn left with the nation:
Genuine
Humble
Mom
Wife
Servant
Modest
not flashy, story telling, company building...
More hyperbole that is associated with deception and need to persuade: Every wife in the world should learn from her what he, himself refuses to personally say about her:
I
wish every wife in the world could have learned from her and I
know that there is going to be some stories that we're going to tell Weston as he grows up but I do know one
thing that through all of this Amanda's hope and um her prayer
is that Weston grows up and sees Jesus in all this and falls in
love with Jesus.
And
that would be her hope through all of this and so as we're dialoging with him and trying to shepherd
his heart as he grows up we're
just going to continue to point to the fact that his mom loved
Jesus and loved people and that's contagious and we just believe
that that the Lord is going to do a great work in his life as well.
note
there was no social into of Weston
note
the word “with” between people indicates distance
note
the “dialoging” (clinical language with a two year old)
note
the plural “we”again
Is he and the book going to 'shepherd' Weston? Why not just say "I will tell Weston (not "we") that Mommy loved you with her whole heart and wanted you to walk in faith of Christ, too, so that you will be with her again, in heaven"??
Perhaps
he is going to just give Weston an autographed signed copy?
Loved
Jesus and loved people, but not me…and…
what
about Weston? Not “your mother loved you
very much, Weston!”
"Thank
you very much, Pastor"
DB: "Thank
you very much, George."
IV.
Denial
Fox News gave him opportunity to address suspicion and deny.
The interviewer
said that this was difficult to ask but police must start with the husband and
this must be very hard for him to deal with as a man of God but they must first
clear the husband and then move out to other suspects:
This was the time for him to say “I
didn’t kill my wife Amanda, and I don’t know who did.”
Had he said this, we would have
concluded: one selfish narcissistic
heartless crass cold saleman who did not have guilty association with his
wife’s death.
"I
certainly understand that's always the first place they're going to
investigate. I guess that was to be expected on some level," he said, adding that
it was "difficult to swallow" at first.
“difficult
to swallow” ---could she breathe?
"to understand" is to accept. This is not something we expect from innocent people. HIS WIFE was murdered and there is nothing to understand! Police, go find my wife's killer, now before he kills again!
Praise of police -ingratiating.
Some
info from the affidavit or media?
Police
reiterated that he is not involved and they have the shooter and two
accomplices in custody. She was not
raped. Her clothes were moved a bit, but
rape now excluded.
**Did Davey Blackburn wait outside for an hour on the phone while his wife struggled to live?
Or, is this another false report from media?
"For us, we don't have anything to hide.”
“I
have nothing to hide” is to invite searching. The ‘I have a turd in my pocket’ sort of
thing.
For him it was “We have nothing to hide” but
he felt the necessity of emphasizing the plural with “For us,..”
1. Who
is “us”
2. Who
is “we”
3. The
lack of hiding is connected to at least one other person
4. When
someone says this, they are often thinking of something they do not wish to be
known.
IF Davey counseled one of the gang members, he
could be arrested. But if he is not
involved in her death he certainly is not upset by it and he intends to profit
off of it.
She died at the hospital. She was unconscious at the home and might she
have survived had one hour of lying bleeding not happened? 3 gun shots to the head.
Is it possible that the guilt he feels, being
something strong enough to change pronouns, came from:
He was having an affair?
If so, is this enough to produce change in language?
1.
Man
is driven for success.
2.
Man
says marriage is really bad and pregnancy makes it worse.
3.
Marriage
not helping success.
4.
Man
tempted while at gym. Man uses gun in performance + language of violence
Wife is murdered.
Wife was pregnant
Man was at gym during
murder
Man expresses no fear
of killer for himself
Man avoids saying I
love wife; wife loves me
Just a bizarre coincidece?
Question for detectives: How long would it take for police to definitively clear him of any association with shooters?
Answer: Weeks, at earliest, months at latest. Possible cold case issue: this is where police fail to find a connection, case is closed, and later reviewed by 'fresh eyes' in cold case. Something sticks out to detective and he begins to dig and gets case re-opened. This has happened many times. Subjects who have passed polygraphs have confessed and been convicted years later.
Analysis Conclusion:
Analysis shows intense guilt,
deception about emotions and priority of business success including the intention of exploiting Amanda Blackburn's murder for personal gain. At the time of the statement, the subject expressed no personal connection to the victim, and no fear of the killer at large.
Anti social, narcissistic
personality can produce signals of guilt because the feelings are not
real and must be borrowed and mimicked.
Yet, we have one driven for
success who is capitalizing on her death and signals planning and intention for the future of "Amanda's Story" which, at the time of the statement, was an unsolved murder.
He is commercializing her death.
He signals plans to capitalize on the murder and has, within a week of her death, already changed the language of murder (which he softened) to "Amanda's Story" while no arrests effected and killer on the loose.
He does not say "I love Amanda", "Amanda loves me", nor does he say that Amanda loved Weston. Instead, he only attributes Amanda's love to
"people"
"other people"
"un lovable" people
"people without hope"
"people she gave futures to"
and other "story building" lines that indicate deception and ascribes no love to himself, nor his son.
The analysis also shows the acute coincidental nature of the murder and questions the use of the word "preparation" when combined with the distancing language, and future plans of "Amanda's Story" and how this will unfold.
The analysis reflects his performances, including the disparagement of the victim, the obsession with sex, but predominantly, the obsession with "numbers" coming to his church. The analysis shows this as the priority, while expressing no fear of the killer.
That just weeks prior he complained of the bad marriage and connected the negative to pregnancy only to have her murdered weeks later while pregnant is the strong coincidental nature of the case.
Some of the most bizarre aspects:
In a sermon he did mention “life insurance”
In one video he pulled out a gun and fired it (air gun or pellet gun?)
Both he and Amanda give strong terms on how bad marriage was
He uses his own sex drive, while dressed in a 'hip' manner to 'resonate' with young people
His obsession with numbers is noted in the "6500" number quoted in the same interview in which he will not connect himself, linguistically, with Amanda.
His language did not show the language of sexual
assault. This suggests that if she was sexually assaulted, he had no knowledge of it, from any source, including police.
The source of his guilt is not clear, but it is not 'universal' guilt that parents and spouses feel generally. It is a much more powerful guilt.
The guilt is strong enough to
cause him to "flee" to the pronoun "we", while then, upon its removal (topic, contextual) causes the pronoun "I" to reappear.
Would guilt over an affair be powerful enough to change language? Analysts were mixed on this with all agreeing that it would if the murder was the result of the affair, while the possibility of such would produce guilt if an affair would destroy the career.
In cases where this is indicated, we sometimes fine attempt to persuade of "great love", which is absent here.
Psychological impact upon language:
Anti-social personality (or traits) along with narcissism:
Inability to feel remorse; love, but can mimic the language
of others.
His language showed a man un phased by tragedy.
Psch: He may see this as a bump in the road of his career that
will be behind me;
Pronoun “we” was produced in specific areas which he was not
strong, but in the area of his greatest strength; advertising: “I”
It is fascinating to see, in relation to Amanda, what he 'ran' from and what he 'owned' with the pronoun I. Each topic produces a pronoun:
As husband of Amanda, “we”
As father, this triggered the pronoun “we”
Grieving? This triggered the pronoun “we”
Emotions? This, too, though vague, produced, “we”
Even motive produced “we” and he stutters on "we" which is most unusual. "We" provides safety in numbers, therefore the anxiety should have already been reduced AND he is a public speaker.
The change
When someone consistently uses "we" but suddenly switches to "I" in Statement Analysis, it is always a call to "take note" of something very important. It is a signal of instant importance and instant confidence or "ownership" and is always vital:
The pronoun "we" is engrossing the murder, the motive and the emotions associated with the murder, but when making this unsolved murder into "Amanda's Story" the pronoun "I" immediately returns.
Therefore, this portion is his least sensitive and his most confident portion of his statement. This statement about "Amanda's Story" was made before the dangerous killer was arrested. This is something most unexpected for quite some time after the murder's resolution and significant grieving time has passed.
Anti social and narcissistic indicators are evident within the language.
237 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 237 of 237Andrew - I like to read your posts. I don't agree that Peter's analyses are 'contaminated' by his personal views, because, as he says quite often, statement analysis is never wrong (though that can only apply when done properly by those who have been trained); sometimes we get Peter's strong views accompanying the analysis, and then - if you want to, you can filter out what is his personal opinion and stated in addition to the analysis. I am pretty sure the conclusions would remain the same because they are drawn from applying the principles of analysis, personal opinion and bias does not change the principles - I don't agree therefore, that the analysis are 'contaminated' by it - I do get what you are trying to say, though - you'd prefer a straight analysis. You'll find plenty of those elsewhere on the blog, :)
The comments are a very different kettle of fish, of course because there are those who know statement analysis, those who know a bit, and those who don't - so there is all all sort of correct and incorrect application, speculation, and those of us who keep trying to make our favourite theories fit (which I tend to do, whilst trying not to do that - should try harder) and all the 'irrelevance' of personal opinion and judgements on the lifestyles of the subjects etc. Still, it's interesting - I admire Peter's patience and persistence in keeping an open comment section as it surely creates a lot of additional work at times, especially on cases which attract hundreds of comments, including from those who have no idea, or little idea of what SA is, or how reliable it is in solving crimes.
Your posts are very interesting, I hope you stick around, too.
Interesting comment about possible 911 misinformation/minimizing.
There is a new post up btw so I'm moving over to that one now.
Those of you new to Statement Analysis who came to this site because of the interest in the Blackburn murder:
I was asked to analyze a transcript of a case I had not heard about.
Take a look at the language:
http://statement-analysis.blogspot.com/2015/11/murder-suspect-timothy-madden.html
Do you see similarities to DB?
Or, is it most unlike DB?
This is a good transcript for learning.
It will help those of you struggling with suspicion as to why you have been suspicious.
Peter Hyatt
"In some ways, it actually makes it harder because there's actually a face and a name to the events," Blackburn said of the arrests.
Perhaps it makes it harder for him because now the connection between him and the killer will be able to be made
In the interview with Amanda's father, he sounds like a preacher but he also sounds like a father who if not for God, would be so filled with rage, hatred and vengeance. In other words, he sounds normal. Strong man.
Anon, re your post @ 12:10, yes I am female. I am a professional, have owned and operated my own business for many years. I am widowed and have raised two sons, both professionals, and a granddaughter. Of late I have had some serious health problems so am not nearly as active in the business as I once was.
One of my sons passed on last Sept 20, 2014, of a massive heart attack. He had long term congestive heart failure and was born with a heart defect. I had felt for sometime that he would not live to be an old man, yet it was the shock of my life and my heart when I walked into his room and found him lying dead on his bedroom floor at about 2:00 am, after his girlfriend awakened me and told me she could not awaken him to get up off the floor.
I will never forget the horror of seeing him in death or recover from my loss. He was so precious to me. His girlfriend "said" she had been lying across the bed looking at his aquarium where she had fallen asleep leaving him up and on his computer. I believed her story at the time, now I have many questions, for good reason, as it concerns what went on in his room after my granddaughter and I went to bed earlier in the evening, and I'm not talking about sex. I have come not to believe her story entirely; I don't know if or how she might have had a hand in it but based on unanswered questions and lies, that possibility definitely exists.
I may have his death looked into further, as I caught her in some serious huge and unnecessary lies and sneaky shenanigans over the next few days and weeks. I haven't decided. It would be very costly now to have him exhumed and an investigation performed, when I had no autopsy done at the time and should have, nor did I allow any body parts salvaging for transplant. I was so stunned and in such a state of shock at the time I wasn't being realistic about how he wound up dead on the floor when he had been fine that day and evening. It made sense to me at the time that he had a massive heart attack since he did have a bad heart.
But to answer your query, yes I am female. As for me rattling the chain of some of Davey's little pals? ta da.... then go for it. (Guarantee you I am a good 90% right in my observations). ABB
John,
Respectfully, I ask you to look at the context of my statement . I meant no offense, and I apologize if I gave offense unintentionally.
Phil Byars, “I have seen the men and I do know their names”
DB: "In some ways, it actually makes it harder because there's actually a face and a name to the events.
Events?
events
Why minimise a horrific assault and murder of his wife and the murder of their unborn child?
Why not call it what it was, a murder?
Why not call them what they are murderers
Why the singular A in relation to the men who assaulted and murdered his wife and unborn child?
Actually is used to compare something with something else.
Every time he opens his mouth he sounds more distant, more guilty.
He is his own worst enemy
@JohnMcGowan
One more perhaps small point: if SA is, as you describe it, "proven science," then why would any practitioner of it take offense on behalf of the practice itself?
That is the sort of thing that one sees when dealing with belief systems, not established science.
Physicists do not take offense "on behalf of physics" when a novice questions their conclusions.
Biologists do not take offense "on behalf of biology."
Mathematicians do not take offense on behalf of mathematics. Etc. etc.
To borrow from Statement Analysis itself, your response suggests a rather weaker belief in the unquestionable veracity of Statement Analysis than what you profess.
I realize this will probably offend you as well, but I felt I had to point it out nonetheless. I hope you understand and can accept it in the spirit of intellectual debate.
When I started following this I saw a couple of comments about the babysitter which I was curious about but never heard any more of. I then saw that her Etsy shop is called NothingIsWasted and her slogan is 'The Best Is Yet To Come'. Has it always been called that or recently changed? Either way it's odd.
ABB, I happened to have loved your comment and wanted you to continue on. Do you think or believe law enforcement have really dropped the ball with regards to Davey? I will be stunned if law enforcement bought the whole gang thing, hook line and sinker. It can't be that perfect of a crime, not with how he spoke about Amanda in the past. But given all the terrible things Davey has done in the past, I think the most disturbing thing he's done is to sit out in the driveway and yap on the phone for an hour while Amanda was bleeding out. Most people would be curled up in a fetal position, drooling and sobbing for a long time had they thought their spouse was brutally raped, punched and murdered, knowing he sat out there for an hour and left the door unlocked. But not Pappy Davey, he's just thrilled about the future.
Anon @ 3:37
We can expect to see Amanda's furniture makeovers in Meg Griffith's Etsy shop soon. Or to see her running Amanda's shop as well. Count on it!
Tania,
DB has been minimizing since his first call to Noble where his words indicated she might have had an accident. Accident?! When he had seen his wife half naked on her face in a pool of blood? The ACCIDENT is now an EVENT in his head.
I fear that we will soon hear he is visiting the creators of the event in jail to counsel them. Wait for it!
ABB,
I'm so sorry for the loss of your son and your pain in not knowing. I have a friend who grieved to the end of her life about her son's death possibly being an uninvestigated murder. It is a hard burden to bear.
As to the Davey Defenders on here, just shake them off. At least they're reading enough to make them on guard for his slip-ups. Some of the more vicious comments may be from DB himself as indicated when he slams femininity. As SA says, the mouth (or typing fingers) are going to speak what the brain thinks.
I'm thankful that at least when some future employer or girlfriend or potential church-goer Googles DB, he/she will know to be wary whether DB proves to be guilty or not. Narcissists can bring a lot of grief into people's lives. Maybe some innocents can avoid that with Internet info.
Anonymous @ 11:40 p.m. Nov. 24 said..
"At 10:03 p.m., Foolsfeedonfolley said: I have a question- Given the violence inside the house, surely Weston should have been awakened and screaming/crying hysterically. Given that a neighbor heard a woman's scream from inside her own home, doesn't it seem logical that Davey, parked in the car in the driveway for an hour, should have heard Weston screaming and crying hysterically? If Weston slept through that, I'm crying foul-that somebody was drugging Weston with Benadryl or something.
Are you seriously suggesting that DB drugged the baby?
I've lurked here for a couple of years, and I love Peter's blog, but many of the comments on the posts for the Blackburn case are gross. "
This is a Statement Analysis blog. Did I say Davey drugged Weston? Of course not! Let me see if I can walk through this.
Davey said the best thing about Weston was that he slept "all the time". Davey said his 15 mo. old sleeps 12 hours a night, plus daytime naps (plural). Many parents found this a little difficult to believe based on their own experience, as well as that of other parents they know/have known.
This is also the same Dad that plans to "dialog" with his 15 mo. old. He is also the same dad that did not speak to Weston's loss until prompted in interviews.
Many parents "help" their children to sleep with Benadryl or something similar, as terrible as that is. I assume it's because they are unwilling or unable to deal with the crying/fussing that comes with putting babies/toddlers to bed and transitioning from two naps to one to none (not to mention Daylight Savings Time adjustments if the child is light-sensitive, as I am) and the child's developing self-will. So many parents are so inclined, that every year Pediatricians across the U.S. warn parents against the practice, drug manufacturers carry warnings on labels, and childcare and sleep help books plainly advise against it. People from all walks of life do it, from physicians on down.
I am simply trying to put myself in the scene at the moment. Unless Davey & Amanda regularly engaged in knock-down, drag out, knock the furniture around, screaming /cussing/yelling, shooting in an occupied delling kind of fights, Weston would have been awakened and extremely frightened. Frightened, hysterical babies are very loud, shrill babies, especially one whose mother always comes to comfort him and does not come ever. If a neighbor could hear Amanda scream, it seems logical that someone sitting outside in the driveway could possibly hear Weston. My question was did they? If not, what prevented them from hearing Weston? Logical, reasonable questions...no accusation present. Was Weston asleep? If so, how normal/probable/expected would that be given the Probable Cause document? We don't know if Weston was asleep or awake. We do know that his father was sitting right outside in the driveway for nearly an hour and did not come in. If Weston was not asleep , he would have been hysterical, inconsolable, clingy, and there's a very good chance he would have vomited from the emotional distress- we're talking a 2 hour terrifying ordeal. Weston was well bonded to Amanda.
Anon at 4:03
I expect to hear that he and Perry will be footing the bill for their legal representation. They are just that forgiving.
What if LE knew the moment that they walked into the crime scene that DB was behind it? I think the clue is in the 911 tape. DB incorrectly stated the situation to the 911 operator intentionally. Therefore, police were not dispatched. DB said something to the effect there was an "injury", when it was plain as day that it was a crime scene. That's why LE said "You're not as smart as you think you are." I former fireman mentioned this discrepancy in an earlier post.
I think it's because all the mounting evidence on my the suspects and the ATM receipt after they disguised themselves in the stolen pink sweater that ended up giving DNA.
For those saying a child will not sleep 12 hours without medication, this is not true. My friend who had a child the same age as my child swore by a book Happy Sleep Habits, Happy Child (or something like that)
Her son would go to bed by 7 and not get up until 7. I think when he was an infant he would go to bed even earlier. On top of that he took naps during the day. I thought it was a little rigid but she would not do anything that interfered with his sleep routine. Even when he was in elementary school he went to bed at 7 pm. Her second child slept just as much!
A big "huh?" (among many) for me: Neighbors heard GUNFIRE and no police calls???
This investigation is not making credible sense to me. My impression is that "higher - ups" somewhere are attempting to script the case. Very simple, basic questions, raised by numerous posters here, remain without clear answers. What I've heard/read sounds characteristic of a cover-up. To me, the context of Amanda's life and death -- including the behavior of her husband -- does not fit the context of the crime the police are reporting.
I would like to know about possible connections between investigators (or their supervisors) and DB's church-enterprise leaders.
Money is not the only string-puller when "God," sin, or church commitment is involved. Motives and explanations for bizarre reactions/behavior abound within cult-like church organizations. (Facts herein shared convince me that DB presents more as a personality cult leader than as a Bible-based pastor-type. His "ministry" isn't much about truth, that I can discern, anyway - for whatever my two cents worth of knowledge about him is worth.)
Previously clueless, my awareness of "church" as high-stakes, high-revenue business is increasing daily. "Leaders" in lucrative church venues don't even pause for crimes of child sexual assault within their organizations. Evidence in this tragedy indicates to me that "church" empire-building doesn't even slow for murder, either.
Honoring Amanda includes exposing the truth about her murder. I hope people who care about her and who care about justice, especially neighbors and those close to Amanda and her life, keep talking, comparing notes, even disclosing bits of knowledge they have, or facts that don't add up (maybe even through crime tip venues outside the immediate circle of investigators), raising questions, addressing inconsistencies, until a more believable account of the incident emerges. Amanda Blackburn deserves better than to be used as a marketing ploy.
I re-iterate. I have admittedly expressed merely my personal impressions based on information acquired at quite a distance from the people involved. My level of "huh?", however, compels me to speak.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S64tyQ7_E7M
Apparently,this is all we have left, as far as videos. All early interviews (George Stephanopolis and Inside Edition) have been removed. By some miracle, we still have this one, merely a compilation of those and other stuff, very VERY early after the crime.
I find it a bit much, when it's immediately assumed a baby who sleeps well, and through noise must have been drugged. Also, how do they know Weston is not a baby who plays in his crib when first he wakes, and would only cry if no-one went to get him up before he became bored and hungry? There may not have been a great deal of voice noise from downstairs - he may not have been disturbed, or woken. If, say, he is a baby who sleeps through fireworks, and the family dog barking, then he may not have woken even at the gunshots and Amanda's scream. (do people really not report such things?) or the dog barking, if it did. It seems unlikely he would not have been awake by around seven, but if he had slept through the murder, and if he is content to play in his crib when he wakes, he would likely not have been distressed so long as Davey had gotten him up at his normal time. I don't think there's any reason to assume he had to be awake, heard, and was traumatised by anything, or everything, that went on,or that he was screaming in his crib the whole while Davey sat in his car outside. I think all that can be said about Weston with certainty is that he will be wanting and missing his mommy - and his daddy has big plans for him to do something dramatic for Jesus.
I hope Weston was in his crib when the murder took place. Someone asked why the intruder/shooter would go back into the house, and why Amanda didn't do something when they went out to give the other guy her bank cards. Possibility - Amanda was knocked out when the gun was smashed into her mouth with enough force to knock out a tooth - she maybe did knock her head on a cabinet or counter when that happened (or no gun was smashed into her mouth - maybe she really did have that 'accident' when she was shot). He maybe had to search round for the MacBook Pro/blue book bag (why not sling the books - they were probably about Jesus rather than Tupac - were they Amanda's journals and laptop?) Still a long while to wait in the house. Was the baby downstairs - had Amanda already got him up? Was the guy worried the baby would come to harm if left alone, or was he trying to comfort the baby if he was hysterical, was he maybe waiting for Davey to come back or for someone to tell him what to do with the baby? Did he put the baby in his crib - or was he told to wait until Davey was five minutes from home before leaving the house, so the baby, if wandering freely downstairs, would not be left alone for more than a few minutes? Is that why the front door was closed (burglars don't shut the door behind them) - so the baby could not wander outside when the assailant left? Did Davey go in and either check on the baby in his crib, or take him up to his crib before he called to report Amanda!s 'accident'? I can't think of many reasons why the guy would hang around for so long that his mates would be afraid of getting caught and threaten to leave him there - unless he felt compelled to stay and watch that no harm came to the baby - but also would not pick him up or take him up to his crib himself, in case he left DNA on the baby. If he had been told to make sure no harm came to the baby - well, if Weston was toddling round, he might have come to harm. The intruder may have found an unattended baby, and, if it was a hired hit but he was the one sent to do it by another gang member, he may have called the person who sent him, to ask what to do about the baby. What else would cause him to stay in the house, when a neighbour could call 911 at any time? I should think, only being told to stay there. Who, involved, having killed the mother, might actually be worried very much about the baby being left alone? Weston is of an age where he might be able to climb out of his crib - what if he had gone downstairs, either found Amanda's body before the 'shooter' arrived, or witnessed the murder, when he was meant to be in his crib?
Justvwonderitp
Anon @3:37, which one of my posts was it that you questioned? Sorry, I had to go out for a bit, but will be glad to get back to it if you like, I just need to know which one you are referring too precisely.
Thank you Anon @4:14 for your kind words. No, I will never get over losing my beautiful son. I loved him dearly. It just isn't humanly possible. I know that we are not our own, we do not own our children nor do we own each other. We belong to God and he has the right to send for us at his choosing; I do not question God; I know that this earth is not our home, that he has a better one prepared for us.
I know that it is the hand of God in his tender loving mercy who takes one of his souls out of here in a case of murder, rather than leave them suffering in agony caused by satan. Satan is responsible for all pain and suffering, God has no part in the works of satan. I do not question this and fully accept it, and thank Him for the time He gave me with my sweet son, and thank Him for rescuing my son from his pain and giving him peaceful rest that I could not give to him. I have complete faith in His divine wisdom, but this does not lesson my sorrow, grief and longing for my son.
Thank you again for your caring words. ABB
1. I don't think DB is very smart
2. He is clearly off, in that he thinks he is above reproach and inherently loved by all
3. #1 and #2 are common among pastors
4. Has anybody considered that his odd optimism is caused by his faith and we literally just don't understand the depth of it from his perspective?
5. Those charged seem extremely stupid, not at all professionals, the opposite of professionals.
6. Why the F would ANYONE hire those wombats to do anything?
7. AB's death is alluded to by DB prior and after as prophetic and sacrificial.
8. Is that Quora account hers? If so, WOW. She was planning her escape.
9. Too many coincidences align to suggest DB's guilt.
10. Too many coincidences align on the other side to suggest it was a random gang/thug thing.
11. BIZARRO
12. Makes me wonder if I just don't understand the peace Jesus can offer.
13. Whole thing seems much larger.
14. Anybody considered that LE instructed DB not to give out any specifics on the scene and investigation? Would make sense that they wouldn't want him blabbing about the details of what he walked into at crime scene! He's not too bright, so to do that he may have had to steer clear of addressing his REAL emotions.
15. He opted not to pursue career in MLB.
16. He thinks he is a rock star, as do many pastors who are inundated with praise constantly and constantly told by parishioners of the positive difference the make in their lives. Big deal.
17. There is way too much that we don't know. No way to make solid sense of any of this without the facts. Probably doing an injustice to all involved by continuing to conjecture.
18. The unknown unknown is where we run into problems.
19. We all know what happens when you assume.
20. Wrong assumptions based on incomplete information is a foundation of drama and comedy.
21. Be thankful for your loved ones today.
BB at 9:14
#8 What Quora account? I've missed this detail.
Weston was in his crib.
The "burglars" are kinda funny hey
Didn't back up their vehicle
Walked with purpose straight past other houses to go to the Blackburns
Almost like they'd been told
"cover your face in the street, No. 2899 has a camera"
and
"wander about with your face covered - be SEEN"
There is not a burglar alive who hangs around a culdesac in Rush Hour, wandering about in their Blackness in a White Neighbourhood, pants slung ganglike around his pelvis, being seen by panicky white folks and filmed by their cameras, strolling about for an hour until he Murders Amanda.
No reports of a flat screen missing eh...
That'd be because he didn't drive his suv up! Couldn't stroll down a White street being black AND carrying a flatscreen eh!
These guys were TOLD to make themselves seen.
Amateur hour.
Weston was said to be in his crib, and was in his crib when the police arrived - we can't know for sure he was in his crib the whole time', or at the time Amanda was murdered. Amanda was up - so she may have gotten him up already. She died defending him? He was upstairs in his crib - what burglar, or hit-man, is going to go out of his way to shoot a fifteen month old baby who couldn't identify him, anyway? She would have been trying to defend herself, or Weston, if Weston was downstairs with her. How was she defending him - why did that police say that - where was he at the time of the shooting? Why do they think she was defending her baby? I thought maybe they meant her unborn baby, but news reports said she was defending her son.
Still, they say stuff, and have their reasons - they said Davey was 100% in the clear after a couple of days, and that could not have been true.
Yeah and I'd like to know what 50% innocent looks like....90%...80%...
Saying someone is 100% innocent is like saying theyre 100% pregnant
Degree doesn't come into it
You're either pregnant or you're not
You're either innocent or you're not
The fact that LE declared "100%"at such an early stage when it could not possibly be known 100% = they were speaking to DB himself.
Yep Db we have fallen for your plan.
Not.
Louise - also, they made themselves heard - a neighbour said one was walking down the street speaking loudly on his phone - you're right, they were meant to be noticed, so no-one else would fall under suspicion, perhaps - but there must also be a reason why the neighbours did not call the police. It's very strange.
Quite. :) he!s not clever as he thinks he is...
DB had a gun.
We don't know if he made it a habit to fire off a few rounds in his backyard.
Gunshot from the Blackburns could've been a common thing to hear...
That pic of Pastor Davey waving a handgun on stage - I mean, what Man of God owns a handgun?
Seriously?
You either think God has Got This or you don't...!
Juliet -
I suggest that these guys were walking all over without a care in the world.
The Murderer was certainly walking about WITHOUT a burglary kit.
Walking down the street is still not illegal in America
Even if you're black...!
Also we don't know what sort of folk DB had in his house frequently...I know he did Outreach work...
If I saw a little hood strolling casually into the Pastors House at 8am, I doubt I'd suspect anything murderous either.
Hmmm at 12:06 I do t k ow how to find out if this is AB or another AB. Read what this AB has "up voted."
https://www.quora.com/profile/Amanda-Blackburn-1
Apparently I don't know how to type either.
BB,
It is not this Amanda Blackburn. If you look at the questions she answered/edited, one of them is about being the spouse of a medical student/resident and she talks about what it was like to be married with an infant while her husband was in his residency.
I didn't realize that was her answer. Thanks, Hmmm!
Post a Comment