Monday, February 27, 2017

Woody Allen Quote for Analysis

"Common sense would prevail. After all, was a 56-year-old man who had never before (or after) been accused of child molestation."

Although this is a single quote and Woody Allen has been analyzed before, it is a good example of the Hina Clause in analysis. 

It is sometimes difficult for new analysts to keep in mind: 

We are not analyzing reality.  

We are analyzing the subject's verbalized perception of reality and as such we "stick to it"; that is, we yield our thinking to it. 

This means we 'accept' the position given. 

The common example I often use as a reference is the analysis of the event in which a relationship is shown in a "void."

Consider a setting where something serious has taken place in the home, and the subject has been asked, by a criminal investigator, to write out what happened.  

Subject:  "So where do I begin?"

We do not tell him specifically where to begin as where one begins a statement is always important.  It can even tell us where the crime  began. 

The best answer is "Start at the beginning" while carefully avoiding a time period.  

"What, from like when I first woke up?"


Oh, ok.  So, let's see.  I woke up and then Sheila woke up.  I got dressed and..."

Here, we would conclude that the subject is not married to Sheila.  


a.  He is communicating with police who do not know Sheila. 
b.  Something happened
c.  He is not telling us reality, but his verbalized perception of reality. 

We conclude "he is not married", not for profiling sake.  His record will show, indeed, he and Sheila are married. 

This is a critical point in domestic investigations, including homicide and violence.  

In this verbalized perception of reality belonging exclusively to him, he is not married.  The investigation/interview is very likely to show us why he did not say "My wife, Sheila..." in this context. 

This is sometimes the "dual reality" of analysis.  

When we do threat analysis, we must learn the threat posed, which means specifically not projecting the case file into the scenario;  but believing the subject. 

Woody Allen was accused of sexually molesting his step daughter. 

Here, enter into his verbalized perception of reality: 

"Common sense would prevail. After all, was a 56-year-old man who had never before (or after) been accused of child molestation."

Here, you must agree that he 'didn't do it' because "common sense" prevails?  No, it is because common sense "would" (future/conditional) prevail. 

This is not only a long way from a denial, but it is the reason why he 'didn't do it':  

because he was not accused before (or after):  length of time. 

This means that if you are accused of robbing a bank, you may plead the number of years you have never been accused of robbing a bank, instead of denying it!

In fact, the length of years is vital.  Advanced analysis suggests that the subject is considering past sexual molestations in which no accusation arose to the public level.  

The need to explain "why" without being asked, indicates the subject anticipates being asked why, and wants to preempt the most sensitive question.  

Perhaps one unreliable denial that is not a denial that I have encountered the most is the following. 

When a man is accused of molesting a child, instead of issuing a denial, he says,

"I am a happily married man."

This is, in a sense, his 'hina clause' or his explanation of 'why' he would not (not did not) have molested the child. 

'Only those "unhappy" in marriage molest children'  

What is this?

This is the child molester's 'verbalized perception of reality.'  Not only is he avoiding denying the act, but is giving us insight into both his thinking and his state of marriage. 

His thinking is to 'normalize' pedophilia.  
His marriage is anything but happy. 

Only he relates the two together.  

Sunday, February 26, 2017

HIDTA: Training Opportunities

HIDTA (High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area) training is an intensive program for analysts, law enforcement and other professionals.

The High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area program (HIDTA) is a drug-prohibition enforcement program run by the United States Office of National Drug Control Policy. It was established in 1990 after the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 was passed.
The mission of the program is "to enhance and coordinate America's drug-control efforts among local, state and Federal law enforcement agencies in order to eliminate or reduce drug trafficking and its harmful consequences in critical regions of the United States."

In Phoenix, for example, it is staffed by dedicated professionals of decades of experience, who not only provide quality in depth training, but in the two week course, come to know the students, both young and old, and develop professional  ongoing relationships with them for career support and guidance.  

The training is invaluable, as its the support.  The building of a resume couples with the preparation for the future; unknown challenges.  Inquire of your superiors about eligibility. 

In Deception Detection, the class last week of 55 was sharp, intuitive, and engaging.  

Many of them are 'sitting on a gold mine' of deception detection without realizing it. 

Here is why:

Some analysts work within incarceration.  They may monitor prison correspondence, for example, both in writing and in discourse (letters/phone calls).

By doing this, hour after hour, they develop a natural intuition to listen and observe. 

Imagine the possibilities when coupled with formal training in deception detection (both statement analysis and discourse analysis)!  

The pace is intense for them, and incessant, which forces a 'sink or swim' position.  The professionals keep their heads above water. 

Consider this: 

Once in formal training, they are now trained, in the beginning, to stop and highlight pronouns, for example.  As they do this hour after hour, day after day, consider the potential for high-expertise level of proficiency under training.  

It is immense. 

Although we do not know what future positions we may hold, training in Complete Statement Analysis holds value wherever communication exists. 

To enroll, please visit Hyatt Analysis Services

The training is done in your home, at your pace, with the complete course needing a minimum of 3 months (at full time) or 6-12 months part time pace.  

The training comes with 12 months of e support, which means you will be assisted each step of the way.  

Many within law enforcement find their tuition reimbursed, as do some in corporate; particularly as superiors see the immediate results.  

For law enforcement seminars as well as human resources and corporate seminars, please visit the link of "opportunities" for training.  

Friday, February 24, 2017

Analysis: CBC Statement of Two Year Old

Can we analyze the words of a two year old?

Or, is it better to analyze main stream media?

From the CBC:  

Please note the headline at the link.  

'I want to die,' 2-year-old refugee said during hours-long walk to Manitoba from U.S. Increasing number of refugees making their way to Manitoba via Minneapolis, immigration lawyer says Media placeholder A two-year-old member of a large group of refugees who walked into Manitoba from Minnesota on Saturday told his mom he wanted to die instead of finish the walk, a refugee from the group says. 

 Abdoul-Aziz Abdi Hoche, 21, was part of the group that made the two-hour journey on foot along a frozen river from 2 a.m. to 4 a.m., as temperatures dropped below –20C. The walk through the snow was difficult for everybody, Hoche said, but it was especially hard for a toddler making the trip with his mother.

 "He say he cannot protect in the snow," Hoche said Wednesday. 

"He say, 'Mom, I want to die, you can go in the Canada. I want to die in the snow, you can go, mom, in the Canada.'" 

Here, the two year old was able to articulate suicide ideation, as well as discern the notion of nation states.

He is also indicates a willingness to see his mother's life preserved.  

The link is here:

Thursday, February 23, 2017

Murder of Amanda Blackburn Crime Wire

Peter Hyatt on "Crime Wire": The Murder of Amanda Blackburn 

February 23, 2017, Peter Hyatt will be a guest on "Crime Wire" live broadcast, and will be taking your calls and questions at 9am to 1030AM EST.  

Amanda Blackburn was a victim of a sexual homicide in which arrests have been made. 

Questions, however, remain in one of the most bizarre 'solved' murder cases of recent years. 

Peter Hyatt will share analysis of the case, including deception detection techniques, and what this may mean for justice.  

Imagine Publicity Blog  :  broadcast of the show on Madeleine McCann 2016.  

Wednesday, February 22, 2017

Crime Wire: The Murder of Amanda Blackburn

Peter Hyatt on "Crime Wire": The Murder of Amanda Blackburn 

February 23, 2017, Peter Hyatt will be a guest on "Crime Wire" live broadcast, and will be taking your calls and questions at 9am to 1030AM EST.  

Amanda Blackburn was a victim of a sexual homicide in which arrests have been made. 

Questions, however, remain in one of the most bizarre 'solved' murder cases of recent years. 

Peter Hyatt will share analysis of the case, including deception detection techniques, and what this may mean for justice.  

Imagine Publicity Blog  :  broadcast of the show on Madeleine McCann 2016.  

Thursday, February 16, 2017

Ibtihaj Muhammad: Suffering Persecution or Fake Hate?

Hat tip:  John
Fake News

Islam's power has changed western travel, adding billions of dollars and long and often intrusive vetting at airports.  On a cross country trip, at O'Hare, I was pulled aside and subject to an intensive search.  The delay was about one hour.  I answered questions "yes or no" and only stated the time of my departure.  My cooperation made it go smoothly.  

Fake Hate via Islam is very popular today. 

Here we get the statement to analyze.  

Olympic Fencer Ibtihaj Muhammad

Muhammad, a lifelong American citizen, claimed in an interview last week that she was detained “just a few weeks ago” by U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents. She said she was held for two hours without explanation.
Her remarks on Feb. 7 earned her an entire news cycle, as several journalists ran with reports suggesting, and alleging outright, that the American Olympian had been ensnared in the president’s executive order temporarily barring immigration from seven Middle Eastern countries.
When asked if she knew anyone directly impacted by the travel restrictions, Muhammad responded,
“I personally was held at Customs for two hours just a few weeks ago. I don’t know why. I can’t tell you why it happened to me, but I know that I’m Muslim. 

Always note the additional unnecessary wording.  
Note what is told to us in the negative as an elevation of importance.  We expect to hear straight forward sentences of what happened, what was said, and so on.  

She was "personally" held; there is no other way for her to be held for a security check.  It is a routine flagging, and the TSA is looking for weapons.  The TSA did not need to tell me what they were looking for.  With the rise of Islam, this is now done throughout the western world due to an ideology that is political, social, sexual and religious, which uses violence as a conquest.  

She said she "can't" tell us why it happened to her.  This is to be restricted ("can't") which is immediately 'challenged' in her language by the word "but."  What follows "but" is elevated above that which preceded it:  "but I know I am a Muslim."

Did you notice that she did not say, "I am a Muslim"?  In Statement Analysis, she did not tell us that she is a Muslim but told us what she "knows."

She has now just created some distance, unnecessarily, from being a Muslim.  You may interpret her words, but in analysis, we do not.  We believe what one tells us unless they talk us out of it.  I believe her when she avoids saying she is a Muslim, reducing it to only what she "knows." 

Next, she makes a similar statement, without any distancing language:  
I have an Arabic name. 

And even though I represent Team USA and I have that Olympic hardware, it doesn’t change how you look and how people perceive you.

She frequently poses in Islamic covering with an American flag behind her. 

“Unfortunately, I know that people talk about this having a lot to do with these seven countries in particular, but I think the net is cast a little bit wider than we know. And I’m included in that as a Muslim woman who wears a hijab.”

The seven countries known for exporting Islamic terror were named by Barak Obama.   Note that she does not say she "knows" the net is "cast a little bit wider", as she goes to the plural pronoun "we":  this is a very strong indication that she is influenced by someone else, and an activity outside the airport vetting.  This is confirmed by the unnecessary 'addition' of "And I'm included."

She strongly relates to having an Arabic last name, but she does not strongly (linguistically) relate to being Muslim.  

This should cause us to ask about her Muslim beliefs here, in context.   "As a Muslim woman" is what we classify as "passive voice" (though it is not the same as "passivity") in particular, if the subject has avoided a close connection to being Muslim.  This is something reserved for Advanced Analysis.  

A Customs official confirmed that she was detained in random vetting; less than one hour.  The TSA is also aware of the boarding time and will not cause someone to miss a flight unless they have very strong suspicion of weapons.  
Even though this is a plane booking, with dates confirmed verbally, electronically, and on the ticket, Muhammad refused to commit to the date she was detained by Customs.  "I don't remember" is the number one deceptive response in courts and we find it in language.  The article did not give the quote, but only to say that she would not give a "hard date"...not only do we know our plane ticket dates,  but we are to believe she had a memorable experience.  If the date was long ago, it could be forgotten, but if it was since the January 27th mandate, the date will be known.  This is our 'expected.'  

She is an outspoken Trump critic, and that she is extremely displeased with his immigration order.
Leftist media including  Motto, the Independent, the Daily Mail, the New York Daily News, the Hill, Sports Illustrated, and  ESPN all published outraged articles stating or heavily implying that Muhammad was subjected to this horrific inconvenience as a result of Trump’s travel ban, which was instituted on January 27, 2017.  

Is this "fake news" again?  

We rely on the language to guide us.  

Muhammad elaborates on her ordeal, and here we are given insight into why she used distancing language as to being a Muslim:  
“It’s really hard. My human response is to cry because I was so sad and upset and disheartened — and just disappointed. At the same time, I’m one of those people who feels like I have to be strong for those people who may not be able to find that strength.

Here we see the narcissism.  She did not say she cried, but it would be her "human response"; which is to be "human."  She gives a rebuttal about being human, however:

"I'm one of those people..."

"human response" is now "people", separated by the word "but", which relegates being "human" to the lower side of comparison.  

She wants us to know her strength is superior to her human side.  

She is not one of "these", herself, but she is one of "those."  This, too, is distancing language. 

She does not keep herself from crying for herself, or for her religion, but for "people who may not be able to find that strength. "

 Note "that" strength is distancing language as well. She does not say "for people who may be unable to find the strength..."

In a security vetting, it is a passive position.  Agents search your person and belongings for items used to harm others.  

Here we are given insight into why she did not give in to her human side to cry.  We know she has a "human" side and some other side, hence, the narcissistic language.   

“I feel like I have to speak up for those people whose voices go unheard. It was a really hard two hours, but at the same time, I made it home. I try to remember to be positive and to try to leave all these situations, even if they may be very difficult, with love.

She puts herself in 'messianic' status:  she was given a security check by TSA and did not cry for others.  

How does her not crying, while separated from others, for a security check assist people?  This is the language of narcissism. 

Next:   Who are the "people" that she refuses to be human for?  

We now see why being a "Muslim" produced an instant weakness of distancing language.  When we see "I know I didn't shoot him", analysts immediately flag the statement for what he "knows", not what he did.  Here, we flag it the same way. 

With "voices go unheard", I would be very interested in obtaining her childhood background under Islamic males. as a female.  

There are many Muslims who are not religious and not interested in jihad or coercive conquest; they are Muslims by culture, but not religious.  This is similar to many who may have been raised as Christian but do not consider themselves Christian.  This is why analysis views the cultural impact of religion upon language.  We are all impacted by our culture.  In Islamic lands, Muslims are target by the Islamists but in confrontation, resistance quickly dissipated (Bat Ye'or) historically, and freedom fell.  When Islamists settle in western lands and do not integrate, the host natives deal with increased crime, "no go zones", and the increasing aspects of civil war.  As violence increases against host citizens, demands are made by the guests, and when the welfare finances become unsustainable, conflict is inevitable.  A huge step towards this conflict is when police are targeted.  This is an attack on authority in general; a glue that is necessary for any society to survive.  When police are out-gunned and flee, the criminal mindset is filled with resolve.  In the states, it is the "Ferguson Effect" where officers fear being labeled racist, and having their own families  attacked by "protestors."  Baltimore politicians taught police that they had to preserve their own employment first in order to protect and serve.  Their service has been targeted since 2008.   This video is similar to others and is disturbing.  As Angela Merkel invited Islam into Europe, she and Obama told the public that they were "refugees" and were "women and children" in need of protection.  They were actually 80-90% male, age 18-35.  

100,000 troops now patrol France, yet their politicians claim that there is no foreign enemy present as in past wars.  The elite who imported Islam refuse to name those of whom protection is needed. 

Children are growing up with this as a norm, with armed guards posted at Jewish schools.  One French police officer allegedly snapped and the result has been rioting, looting, burning cars; night after night, even though he faces charges.  

Lying by Muslims, especially CAIR, exasperate the American public.  "Fake Hate" has consequences.  

Discernment via deception detection is critical. 

Why did she distance herself from being a Muslim? 
I think that we will come out on top as women, as people of color, as Muslims, as transgender people, as people who are part of the disabled community — I think that we’ll come out on top.”
She pulls out the popular political identity victim list that politicians use to exploit, of which Islam's direct teaching and practice are contrary to what the west believes as basic human rights.  

Islam executes homosexuals, as well as men who claim to be women, and it subjugates women.  

Why are Muslim women taught to cover themselves up?

 O Prophet! Tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks (veils) all over their bodies that they may thus be distinguished and not molested. (Koran 33:59)

Here is an article that explains why the coverings are symbols of sexual violence and they identify those who can be targeted.  The hina clause tells us "why" they are to cover themselves.  

Note the word "think" as a weak assertion for someone who is above human emotions.  She does not say "we will come out on top" but she only "thinks" this to be so.  

This sheds light on why she identifies more as Arab than Muslim.  

You should be able to identify her statement as "fake hate" but if confirmation is needed:

Research into why she refused to give a date showed that she was detained  before the 2016 election, while Barak Obama was president. 

Journalists ran with her deceptive story without checking out dates or corroborating it with Customs.  This is an example of "fake news"; as it fits a narrative.  

It is not an error by a journalist, but a pattern of deception by the political elite and main stream media in criminal conspiracy against the people.  

Thursday, February 9, 2017

Analyzing Corporate Statements

We regularly analyze corporate statements, annual reports, sales reports and other business related material.  In it, we learn content, but we also learn 'spin' that is, information that seeks to change communicative meaning without being technically deceptive.  This insight can prove valuable to investors.  

Target had major expansion plans.  

Target boldly took advantage of political correctness and the main stream media/celebrity push, in stating that a man could use a woman's bathroom "of his own choosing" if he "identified" as a woman.  

This did not go well with parents of young girls.  A man's mental heath being so singularly in jeopardy as to convince him he is not who he is, by itself, is alarming, but to allow him access to little girls in a bathroom was all too much for parent shoppers.  

When the public reacted with anger stating that this could be putting children at risk, Target doubled down and further divided customers with its "identity politics"; the single most divisive technique used in America today.  Target took to lecturing and insulting Americans on this 'new morality' where someone who was in need of mental health intervention, is now a "cause" for celebrities.  Given the main stream media predictions on the elections, Target's CEO likely felt great confidence in lecturing Americans on the new morality.  

When threatened with a boycott, Target responded harshly.  

A boycott ensued and since that time, Target has had more than 10 billion dollars in reduced stock value and had major plans for new stores, manned by robots, which had been long planned and invested in.  

Here is the announcement canceling it.  

Target has denied that their same store sales losses have been due to the boycott.  

At Target, we regularly pause to evaluate our business and have to make tough choices about where our company is best served to invest our time and resources. We recently made some changes to the innovation portfolio to refocus our efforts on supporting our core business, both in stores and online, and delivering against our strategic priorities. Target remains absolutely committed to pursuing what’s next. We see a tremendous opportunity to drive innovation in areas that will fuel our growth both in the short and long-term in areas such as digital, technology, supply chain and merchandising.

Here is the statement again:

At Target, we regularly pause to evaluate our business 

Here the use of "normal" begins the statement.  We have two principles in play:

1.  Priority of the opening sentence
2.  The use of "normal" in analysis.  

1.  Where the statement begins is always important and sometimes it is so important that it tells us why the statement is being made.  

2.  Next, we have the issue of "normal" and here it is in a "hina clause"; that is, a need to explain why.  When someone is dealing with something very "not" normal, in which they wish to conceal, they will openly portray it as "normal."

This signals to us that it is anything but normal.  

3.  Explanation of why the "regular pause" is made: 

and have to make tough choices about where our company is best served to invest our time and resources. 

Companies do often pause to re-evaluate but it is the need to call the pause "regular" here, coupled with the need to explain "why" the pause is being made that greatly increase the sensitivity of such.   When we add the principle of "priority" to the statement, it becomes outstanding for the analyst.  

We recently made some changes to the innovation portfolio to refocus our efforts on supporting our core business, both in stores and online, and delivering against our strategic priorities. 

Note minimization.  This was a major 'groundbreaking' plan is now labeled as "some changes" to the "innovation portfolio.  

Target remains absolutely committed to pursuing what’s next. 

The weakness is seen in the need to make the commitment sensitive with "absolutely."

Shareholders should now be aware that leadership is very likely divided in their commitment to the program of new robotic stores.  

The word "absolutely" is not necessary and weakens the commitment by 'attempting to seal off every area of weakness.'

Stronger?  "We will..."

This commitment is not to building the announced plans but to pursuing "what" is next; with "what" being undefined. 

This suggests to shareholders that Target leadership is uncertain about the future.  

We see a tremendous opportunity to drive innovation in areas that will fuel our growth both in the short and long-term in areas such as digital, technology, supply chain and merchandising.

Note the order as important.  What do they see?

Do they see growth?


They see not only an opportunity to drive innovation (the focus is on innovation, not growth) but "tremendous" opportunity.  

They do not see tremendous potential in growth, but in innovation.  This is very different and it puts distance between what they "see" and "growth." 

Note that "tremendous" and "growth" are in the same sentence quite purposely.  It is by design.  

In the faltering stock price, this is intended to have an impact, particularly on portfolio managers who's buying, selling and holding of large portions of stock, have impact upon the value.  

Identity politics continues to divide and enrage Americans as the list of "hyphenations" grows as does the alphabet lettering.  Eventually, identified groups recognize the exploitation by politicians for political gain, and by celebrities for publicity, and a backlash of anger results.   

How powerful is moral narcissism?

Target may have identified less than .000001 % of a customer base, and chose to taunt and insult their client base upon it.  

Listening to hearings shows the absurdity of identity politics.  Eventually, those who are being used as pawns by politicians are likely to become angry.  

'With military upgrades and weapons technology showing missiles can now be fired from off sea ships, Admiral, and more than 3 billion dollars investment, can you tell me how this new technology is going to impact  transgendered Americans?'

Statement analysis is used in law enforcement, business, social sciences, journalism and wherever deception detection and content analysis is needed.  

Wednesday, February 8, 2017

Theresa Forbes: The Murder of Karina Vetrano

When we speak, the words we choose reveal us.  They reveal:

A.  Our background

B.  Our experiences

C.  Our priority

D.  Our personality traits. 

These four elements are the profile of the subject.  This is how we identify anonymous authors.  

Statement Analysis training begins with:

1.  Deception Detection and moves on to
2.  Content Analysis.  From there, we seek to learn the four elements (above) regarding the subject:
3.  Psycho-linguistic Profiling.  

For law enforcement, given an allegation and a statement, the investigator can know:

If the subject is lying;
What really happened; and

How the subject should be interviewed.  

In a shaken baby case, a lengthy interview and interrogation produced nothing, as the investigator lost patience (overnight hours) and screamed in the face of the suspect. 

What he did not consider was the suspect's profile:

military background.  

The investigator gave up, frustrated, but convinced the suspect (boyfriend of mother) did, in fact, shake the baby, who was brain dead. 

I very quietly asked the subject to tell me what happened. 

He confessed.  

Katrina Vetrano was allegedly raped and murdered by a Chanel Lewis,  now in custody.  From the NY Post:  

The sister of Karina Vetrano’s accused killer said Monday that her sibling was framed—and that he was only arrested because he’s black.

“I think the cops framed him because he’s a black person. They couldn’t find anyone else to pin this on, so they pinned it on my brother,” Theresa Forbes, 36, told reporters.

Here, readers may say "race card!" or "she is blaming police" but to listen to her, note her language:

"I think the cops framed him because he’s a black person. They couldn’t find anyone else to pin this on, so they pinned it on my brother..."

First, notice that she reveals weakness in her own assertion.  Does she believe he didn't do it?  
She can only say she "thinks" they framed him.  This is a weak assertion, which allows for her, or others, to "think" differently; that is, to change her mind.

Yet, we have two high sensitivity indicators very close together with the need to explain "why" she "thinks" they did this.  

The need to explain why means she anticipates being asked, 

"Why do you think the cops framed him?"

What does her answer show?

a.  First, because he is black.  

Here is where we see our deception.  It is not only in the weak assertion (which, by itself, does not conclusively indicate deception), but in something else:

it is not in the need to explain why (racism), either.  

It is only natural that in making an assertion, one might anticipate the need to prove it. 

It is in the second need to explain:  "so they pinned it on him" is a different reason than race:

b.  Secondly, it is police incompetence she identifies. 

She gave us two reasons why she only "thinks" he is framed:

Racism and police incompetence. 

The order is important.  

In less than a millisecond of time, her brain went to "racism" first, and then "incompetence" in an attempt to support a contention she herself refuses to commit to.  

 Chanel Lewis, 20, was charged Sunday with murdering the Queens jogger in August based on DNA evidence and two videotaped confessions, authorities and law-enforcement sources have said.

Asked about the alleged forensic evidence against her sibling, Forbes said,“The DNA lies sometimes. They wanted to get confirmation so they framed him for murder.

Here, she feels the need to give us a third reason, this third reason is the weakest of all:  "confirmation."

Confirmation of what?

Although this part is missing from the article, we learned that he has confessed.  

Note her use of the word "lie" regarding DNA; rather than 'error' in any form.  This is the word of her choosing.  Consider it while considering her use of "coerce."  

Next, she seeks to issue a denial.  We expect her to say "he didn't kill her.
“My family, we are God-fearing people. The Bible tells us ‘Do no kill’—we do not kill,” she said.

Here we have the invocation of Deity (-) and we have present tense language (-) and we have the plural "we" rather than her brother (-).  This gives us 3 negative marks, on this alone yet, there is more. 

She needs to explain why they are God fearing:  The Bible tells us. To be "God fearing" is to suggest fear of negative external consequence for murder.  

As for his alleged confessions, “I think they coerced him into a confession. They tricked him,” Forbes added.

We have another weak assertion with "think" but we have a change of language:

a.  coerce is to use force or threats.  It changes to
b.  trickery, which is to use cleverness.  

Analysis Conclusion:

She knows her brother killed Karina Vetrano, and she likely knows his motive as well.  

We do also know a bit about her.  In spite of her status (plural) of "God fearing", we know she is not afraid to lie, and to bear false witness against innocent police.  

There is one last thing to consider regarding the subject:


We later learned that her brother refused to speak to a white investigator but confessed to a black investigator his racial motive.  

“I’m sorry for their loss, but they have the wrong person in custody,” Forbes said.

It is interesting that she calls him "person", gender neutral.  Here may be the reason:  
She added that her brother “did not have any problem with women.”

This assertion, given in the negative, is very important.  She goes from "women" to: 
“He has nieces, and he played with them,” Forbes told reporters.

This is an indication that the subject knows her brother  "problems" he has with women.  "Nieces" for the 20 year old, is not likely a reference to "women" but to female children.  

This is very concerning

Lastly, she reveals his serious history from school:  
She said his behavioral issues in high school consisted of “regular stuff. He made regular problems.”

This is, within analysis, the principle of "normal" which tells us that she is aware that he was anything but "normal" in high school. The need to minimize is computed with this theme.  When one says "I am a normal male", it is likely due to either the subject believing himself not to be normal, or that he is aware that others consider him not normal. 

We sometimes hear this from pedophiles and child molesters as a 'defense':

"I'm a happily married man!" rather than "I didn't do it."  This subject wants us to believe he did not molest a child because his sexual desires are fulfilled in marriage.  

It is also not the thinking of normal men.  Innocent men do not feel compelled to defend their sexuality.  There is no need to justify.  This is akin to a pragmatic view that says 'if I were not married' or 'if I were not happy in my marriage...'  

The Post reported:

Lewis had a history of threatening female students in high school, telling a teacher’s aide at the High School for Medical Professions in Brooklyn in 2011 that he wanted to “stab all the girls.”

Besides racism, there may be an element of humiliation as the final 'trigger' to the murder .

That same year he “cursed at a female student and threatened both her and her family,” according to law enforcement sources.
Lewis also told authorities that he had gone to Spring Creek Park to cool off after fighting with family members the day of the murder.
He became “startled” by Vetrano’s presence and took his anger out on her, Lewis told cops, according to sources

For training opportunities, go to and on to "training", including exploration of some cases covered.  
In at home training, tuition payment plans are offered for Law Enforcement only.