II Husband Statement:
We consider the context of the allegation: A sheriff has been accused of assaulting his wife, which is not only criminal, but it is a public issue as he is entrusted with setting an example of upholding the law; not breaking it.
In analysis, we consider an expectation of what an innocent person will say.
We view every statement as truthful, not as a moral or ethical perspective, but as a scientific methodology that serves us well. This is statistics-based thinking and is applied to our work.
We have the expectation that an innocent person will say state this and the formula for the Reliable Denial is a statistical point. It has three components:
1. The pronoun "I"
2. The past tense "did not" or "didn't" (only Reid makes a distinction between the two and this is not supported by the data)
3. The allegation answered.
If a subject alters, drops or adds to this formula, the denial is statistically "unreliable."
Here are some common examples: Allegation of stealing from work of a petty cash fund.
"I didn't take the missing money." If this person is brought to look at this denial and assert, "I told the truth" it is more than 99% likely to be truthful.
"I never stole the money" = Unreliable
"I never took the missing money" = Unreliable
The word "never" is vague and avoids the past tense "didn't" in speech.
"Didn't take the missing money" = Unreliable as it drops the pronoun "I"
"I didn't take no damned money!" = Unreliable as "money" is now changed to "damned money." Any alteration, addition or subtraction is Unreliable.
"Hi folks, I'm Sheriff Ron Bateman.
Here is where he begins his statement and is of importance to him.
a. He addresses the public at large, where no such address is needed.
b. He addresses the public in a friendly manner, where no such friendliness is needed to assert that he did not hit or assault his wife.
c. He addresses the public from his public position of Sheriff, giving himself the social introduction with his title. This, too, is unnecessary.
Priority: Being a sheriff is a priority in this statement. This is likely an elected position giving way to the political introduction.
I want to start of by saying. That I love my wife very much and she loves me very much.
Note that he "wants" this to be his saying, that is, instead of saying it, it is something he "wants" to say. This is distancing language.
Note that he says "I" love my wife very much. Note the lack of using his wife's name, although he gave his first name, last name and his title. She gets her title and the possessive pronoun.
Next note that this "love" he has for her is to avoid denying striking her.
Then, note that he states that his wife loves him very much. This is to also avoid denying hitting her.
He is giving a reason "why" he did not strike his wife, without being asked for a reason. This is akin to one who, when accused of child molestation says, "but I am happily married" as if this would be a reason why he did not molest the child. To profess his love for her is something unnecessary and here, he feels the need to persuade his audience that he, "Sheriff Ron Batemen" holds his position as his priority, followed next by the emotion he has for his wife and she has for him.
This is to avoid issuing the simple "I did not strike my wife" statement. If someone is unwilling or unable to say it, we will not say it for him.
Anyone that knows us.
Here he holds on to "proof" of something: he does not prove he did not hit her, instead, seeks others to affirm his own assertion about love. This is to further avoid the denial, while weakening the assertion of the love. This is "NTP" or "need to persuade" and he is calling in reinforcements, rather than allow his language to hold the truth.
Please note that this is a signal of one who may be habitually deceptive.
And especially if you follow Elsie on Facebook.
Here he uses his wife's name, "Elsie" associated with Facebook. His assertion about "love" for her and from her, has:
1. his own assertion
2. proof of those who know them
3. proof from those who read Facebook
This is to further weaken the assertion of love between them, not by her, but by the subject, himself.
She posts everything on Facebook, you'll know this.
This is a signal of trouble; the need for public affirmation of their love. Please see part one of this analysis, the statement of the alleged victim. Many people profess their love publicly on Facebook, yet those who do so repeatedly show a sensitivity about it, and it can be a signal that something is wrong in the relationship. Here he says that she posts "everything" on Facebook.
The reader/analyst should consider how the "Sheriff" (public figure) feels about this. If her posts do, in fact, go into detail and repetition about her love for him, it may not only be a need to persuade others, but possibly herself.
a. Is this her declarations of love on FB that signals weakness?
b. Is it a public relations tool?
How does he feel about her posting?
But let me say this.
The word "but" refutes or minimizes by comparison the assertion of love on Facebook in compared with what follows:
I Never ever ever assaulted Elsie.
Here we have, finally, the denial.
It is unreliable, but it is more than just "unreliable", it pushes towards deception indicated.
a. The word "never" is unreliable. This is weakness number 1.
b. The word "Never" is given a capitalization which is to increase the attempt to emphasize or persuade. This is weakness number 2.
c. The word "ever" is added to "Never", making a third weak element.
d. The word "ever" is repeated, making it even weaker. (4th element)
e. That "never" is not only used but used in emphasis "Never"which is not only an indiscriminate element of time, but in context, it suggests that this incident may not be the only incident of Domestic Violence and may include a pattern.
Things were said to the Police caused high emotions high stress,
"Things were said" is passive voice and avoids crediting the speaker.
Next note that these things that were said (without identifying the speaker) "caused" high emotions and high stress.
a. emotions first
b. stress second.
c. Nothing about the assault, or "incident" or "event" that took place between him and his wife.
Note that he does not yet identify what emotion was caused to appear, or even who experienced the increase in stress. Passivity in speech conceals identity and/or responsibility.
Note that what was said to the police caused the high emotions and high stress, but not the fight.
i anger that this was blown out of proportion.
"this" indicates closeness (rather than "that") and "this" is not wrong, or incorrect, but it is correct except for its proportion.
Sentences that begin with "And" indicate that there is missing information between sentences.
By using "And" (with pause) "not true" becomes an after thought.
Which were they?
Blown out of proportion or not true?
And soon you will read that she has recanted everything.
This is a truthful statement: you will read that she has recanted everything. This is to state, in an honest form, his awareness of her statement; but nothing more. He does not deny the assault, instead only that she has recanted, not something, but "everything."
By introducing "everything" rather than just an assault, he is telling us that there is more to what happened than just an assault, which is consistent with her written statement in which she, too, gives indication that there was far more to this than just what "every married couple" experiences.
We are embarrassed by this.
Here we see something 'positive' about them; something of unity about them from his verbalized perception: they share embarrassment. Yet even here he gives a slight refutation with the word "but" following:
But i can tell you..that were're going to get through this with counseling.
In her statement, there is a sense of a possible threat. She does not "wish" to file charges rather than saying, "I will not file charges."
She may be coercing him into counseling. Yet, if nothing happened, what is the need for counseling?
And..i wonna ask you this.....If you could please give my family Elsie and I ..The respect of our privacy and especially our children. So we can work through this...i..as a family and as a husband and wife. Thank you all very much.
the public official, with "Sheriff Ron Batemen" ends with the public figure wanting the publicity to go away.
The subject assaulted his wife, Elsie, in a serious criminal manner. The subject also reveals that he is not only deceptive but is habitually so, and likely the domestic violence is long term.
He is deceptive about his response not only showing an inability to deny what happened, but expresses concern about his position as sheriff.
In taking both statements together, it is likely that Domestic Violence, that is, either violence or coercion through the threat of violence, is something that has been ongoing in this home.
Her language is the language of a victim. Generally, a single act of violence, even in the home, doesn't produce a language that shows familiarity with violence. It is a violent relationship that impacts certain elements of language.
Any assault, in or out of the home, will show itself in language, but it is the familiarity with coercion through violence or its threat, and long term impact (post trauma stressthat is continual) that shows itself in the language.
Ron Batemen is deceptive about this event, and it is likely not the first time. We await the results of the internal investigation.
There is more to be gleaned from both statements, as this is an analysis that calls attention to truth and to training for law enforcement, business, therapists, and so many other professionals who need to discern truth from deception.
Seminars are available for scheduling as well as courses to be completed at home, with 12 months of ongoing e support.
I. Statement Analysis
This is a complete course in analysis; not a "101" introductory course. Successful completion of all assignments and final allow for the inclusion of monthly training with some of our nation's best analysts and investigators.
II. Advanced Statement Analysis
This is a lengthy and challenging course in advanced techniques and profiling, including profiling to the depth of actually identifying anonymous authors.
This includes the same 12 month e support and a thesis statement of which by the time the student completes this and the monthly training, they are equipped to conduct trainings and analyze professionally.
Tuition information, enrollment, as well as accreditation
information is found at Hyatt Analysis Services