Tuesday, December 18, 2018

Listening for Small Changes




A change of language indicates a change of the subject's perception of reality. 

When a word changes, something has changed. 

If said change is a commonly used phrase, take particular note if the law of economy is reversed. This means that it now takes longer to process the information and speak it. A reversal of the law of economy indicates:

there is more information to what is being said. 

Recently, I heard such a change. 

For many years, Heather has introduced me by saying, 

"This is my husband, Peter. He is from New York." 

This became common and habitual in her language. 

This past week at a charity held by a local Rotary, she said,

"This is my husband, Peter.  He is originally from New York."

Later, I asked her about it. It took but a few questions to learn what caused this change in her language. 

What do you make of the change?



Heather answered the question for us. 

A change of language reflects a change of reality.  If no such reality exists, it may mean the person is lying and has lost track of their own words.  This is something we see when language does not proceed from experiential memory. 

However, it is somewhat rare and most of the time we are looking at a change of reality. 

"Wait, what? Yeah, I checked out the necklace, but I gave the jewelry back to you." 

In theft, "jewelry" can be in the displace case, while "the necklace" was handled personally and is now  in the thief's pocket. The thief did not intentionally change his language, via pausing to consider; he just spoke out. (Someone is bound to leave a comment, "Hey, Peter, did you buy Heather a necklace for Christmas?")

An easy one for analysis, yet one that comes with practice in live listening, or discourse analysis: 

"I saw a car go off the road yesterday.  It was bad and the roads were icy. The driver was okay and left his vehicle in the ditch."

The reality that the subject verbalized was watching a car slip off icy roads.  It was experiential and sensory (sight). The next sentence also comes from experiencing the same road, while driving his own "car."

The driver was okay. 

There is now a change for the subject. 

He was in a car, and so was the driver. The icy roads were experienced, but the driver was "okay." This now allows for a new reality:

The car is abandoned by the driver, turning it from a "car" he and the driver both experienced while driving on icy roads, into a "vehicle" where, once back on the road, will "change" back into being a "car."

We drive our cars. 

For Heather, years ago, New York was a novelty.  

The first time we drove down, she was anxiety struck by the speed and density of traffic. To her surprise, I was comfortable with the higher speed and traffic.  "New York driver!", she said. 

There was a puzzling gap between us. 

She was raised on a farm in rural Maine, and the driving in Maine is much slower.  

Upon moving to Maine, I immediately got speeding tickets in Maine while going 20 years without one in New York.  

I had to make the cultural adjustment. 

It took time and patience. Eventually the kids took Driver's Ed and got their licenses.  They are much more patient drivers than their dad, and I am glad for it. 

I travel for work and enjoy meeting new people and new areas.  The Statement Analysis seminars are dynamic learning experiences and I've met some remarkable law enforcement professionals along the way.  

I love the seminars, especially if she can travel with me. At each locale, we always ask ourselves, "We would like to live here?" This was a deep conversation after the seminar in the "frontier" state of Alaska.  For us, the only draw back was distance to family.  We'd love to live in rural Alaska.  We did not see any bears, but a very special analyst from Kodiak Island will make sure we get the privilege on our next training seminar. 

We make observations and I love to "interview" locals.  I was fascinated by local native Alaskans' life styles and was warmed by their openness and friendliness. 

Port Saint Lucie, Florida, is beautiful, especially when interrupting the late winter cold of Maine and seeing Spring Training baseball. 

Geneva, Switzerland is also beautiful and like many Americans, there is much about European culture we deeply admire. 


Chaminox, FR
Arizona is exhilarating in its dry hot air; and like Florida, very appealing in the winter. The Grand Canyon had me back reading The Genesis Record. It is breathtakingly beautiful. Year after year, I've some very special people of whom I now call "friends." 

The women analysts and investigators, in particular, are sharp, strong and driven. They contribute more than they know to our trainings. Nowhere is this insight more efficacious than in identifying an anonymous author. They operate off the fuel of personal satisfaction in obtaining justice. It's who they are. I am grateful for the people, both in and out of law enforcement that I have just met this past year, trained and also learn from in the team analysis each month.  It is unpredictable, exciting, exhausting and exhilarating.  

Often, however, for seminars,  I travel alone and give Heather quite an account upon returning. 

She said that over recent years, each time I returned I commented how much I love Maine. 

I had not realized it, yet it is true. 

I love its weather as I enjoy four different seasons.  

I love its low crime rate. 

I love coming "home." 

 Due to constitutional carry, it initially surprised me how many citizens, especially women, are armed. For them, it is routine.   It is a safe place to raise a family. When I first moved here, watching someone walk down the street armed was alarming. 

 I recently told my son, "I consider it my civic duty to carry. I also donate blood four times a year.

The attempted humor fell flat. 


Heather and I talk about eventually getting a small log cabin in the middle of the woods.  

It is our dream for tomorrow. 

She said she watched the difficult cultural adjustment from New York to Maine change me over the years.  I did not realize how much resistance I exerted against the difference in pace. 

Without realizing it, she said that more and more I say, "Oh, I love Maine!" upon returning home.  

It took many years, but I was no longer  from New York but now "originally" (note the element of time in this word) from New York. 

In her verbalized perception of reality, I am almost a Mainer. It'll never reach that status, but she's seen a change in me. 

Including in my driving. 

Listen for small changes.  

The possibilities for learning are endless. Consider enrolling in training for 2019.  If you do, take the full 12 months and do not rush. It is insightful for all thinking people, whether or not in law enforcement. Plus, there's no substitute for working with others of likemindedness in growth. 

As to the farm girl trying to sound urban, Heather continues to try to say, "I'm walkin' here!" in a her faux New York accent, but her roots are the farm. 

Heather and I wish Merry Christmas for all, and a blessed, exciting and healthy New Year in 2019.  








70 comments:

Rachel said...

Aw! I love this! Merry Christmas Peter, Heather and family!! I consider it a privilege to know you and be a part of this great work! Thank You!

Tiffany Gerik said...

Thank you that is fascinating!!

Anonymous said...

I realized you are completely a numbnut since that post about who wrote that OpEd about being the leaker in the Trump WH. How you could think yourself to be clearheaded enough to perceive deception and support Trump are two things that don’t go together.

Unknown said...

Peter, another interesting post, thank you. One question from your post, not SA related, but you said:

The women analysts and investigators, in particular, are sharp, strong and driven.

Why is that? Different perspective then from men?

Anonymous said...

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to Peter, Heather and all readers of this blog!

OT: Hugues de la Plaza (cold case)

This past year, there was one case that I kept thinking about. It’s the murder of Hugues de la Plaza. Below I will post a short summary followed by some statements of De la Plaza’s ex-girlfriend for those who are interested. More info can be found at (a.o.):
- 48 Hours – A Case For Murder (including transcript)
- Hugues de la Plaza-blog
- Trail Went Cold-podcast
- Thinking Sideways-podcast
- several online articles

Short introduction:

Hugues de la Plaza was a 36 year old sound engineer with dual American and French citizenship living in San Francisco (Hayes Valley). On June 2, 2007 he walked out of a bar at closing time and headed to his nearby apartment. About six hours later, he was found dead in his apartment, having bled to death. Even though he had multiple stab wounds, the coroner ruled it a suicide. There was blood found on the stoop of De la Plaza’s apartment but no sign of forced entry, and both doors were locked. The front door was dead-bolted, but someone could have left through the back door. He walked around in his apartment and never used his cell phone to call for help. The interesting thing is: there was no knife found. According to the police he must have washed the bloody knife.

In 2009 his parents got the French authorities involved who, after a thorough investigation, concluded it was murder. The attack had started on the stoop of De la Plaza’s apartment. Something that was missed by the SFPD was: De la Plaza’s watch was found underneath him and had unknown DNA on it.

Melissa Nix, a journalist and former girlfriend of De la Plaza, played a major role in the aftermath of his death. She informed De la Plaza’s (French) parents of his death and helped them find answers in a foreign country. She started a grassroots movement to keep De la Plaza’s name in the forefront. She created a non-profit called "Justice For Hugues, Justice For All” and heavily criticized the SFPD for ruling De la Plaza’s death a suicide. Inspector Casillas of the SFPD, however, says that the real notion of a suicide started with Nix. He says Nix had told him De la Plaza was into Japanese culture and would watch a lot of Samurai movies. She had asked the inspector: “Can I ask you one thing. Was this a hara-kiri? Did he go into his stomach?”

Nix also started a blog in memory of De la Plaza (http://huguesdelaplaza.blogspot.com). The first post dates from June 1, 2007 which is one day before the murder. I found this strange at first but did some research and believe Blogger provides the possibility to backdate(?). The first two of Nix’s below statements can be found on this blog.

Autumn

Anonymous said...

Cont.

OT: Hugues de la Plaza

Statements by Melissa Nix (former girlfriend of De la Plaza)

Statement I :
”dearest dearest Hugues,
I do not know how to reconcile myself to your death. Can you help me?
Writing this is so very difficult because words cannot express the depth of my sorrow.
I only hope you know how much I loved you and how much I am wishing that you are at peace, where ever you are. At this time, I wish I still believed in God, so that I could pray for you – much to your chagrine, I know. You hated my Roman Catholic upbringing.
I think of how when we first began to date how much I wished to be yours only, how much I wished to hear you thought me beautiful. How you kissed me so hard on the stoop of my Brooklyn apartment I thought I would faint.
Things ended, to my endless regret. I caused you pain. I will never forgive myself for that.
I wanted so much for you - children, a love to love you as fully as you deserved. I wanted grandchildren for you - ones to carry on your passion for life and compassion for all forms of life, your endless curiousity, your relentless search for justice and understanding, your creativity, your beautiful eyes, your smile that lit up so many. I wanted you to grow old and be able to pass on your wisdom.
I only wish you knew, as you lay dying, how much I love you, how much others loved you, how many people you touched, so that you could feel in your very last minutes of life that you were not alone. I hope you went quickly, without too much pain and fear.
My life will never be the same. You touched me profoundly while you were alive. You have marked me profoundly with your death. I miss you so very much. What I would give to see you once more.
You were my one true love. I thank you for all the things you gave to me.
All my love forever, Hugues.
Your Bunny”
June 17, 2007 at 3:33 PM


Autumn

Anonymous said...

Cont.

OT: Hugues de la Plaza

Statement II (in response to several probing questions):
”Dear Anonymous,

This is Melissa Nix. I wish you would identify yourself, rather than hide behind your cowardice.

I have not willfully ignored your requests for any information, rather I have been very depressed and not checking the blog regularly.

But lets get to your horrific and hurtful questions.

How dare you accuse me or insinuate that I am the murderer or trying to cover for someone? Do you even know what it is like to lose someone you loved to murder and then to have an idiot like yourself like you rub salt in the wounds? Who are you? My email is common knowledge. You could have contacted me at any time rather than trying to publicly slander me.

If you want to know who called me the day Hugues was found dead here they are the following people, all common friends of mine and Hugues, all who live in NYC:

Kathy Lando
Jeanie Gosline
Amy Herzog

I was in Gloucester, Virginia visiting my family when I received these phone calls. About 20 people can verify that this was the case and that I was in Virginia.

One of Hugues neighbors, who was a common friend of one of Hugues work friends at Charlie Morrow Design Studios in New York called a Mark B. (also a former colleague od Hugues at Charlie Morrow) who then called Jeanie Gosline. Jeanie used to work at Charlie Morrow as well with Hugues. I did not know this neighbor, as I had not been in contact with Hugues for 6 months. However this person was savvy enough to know that the police probably had not contacted his parents.

Jeanie, not knowing what to do, called me on my cell. I did not pick up at first, as I was at the movies. Amy and Kathy called and left messages too. Once I talked with all of them, I then called SFPD dispatch to confirm Hugues was in fact dead. Then I called his parents.

I was in fact Hugues ex-girlfriend. We were together for 4.5 years, both in NYC and SF.

We broke up in 2003, but tried to get back together over the years. We finally broke things off for good, after a very brief reunite, in Nov. 2006. I was happy to hear that he had been seeing other people - wanted him to be happy.

The reporter told me when I asked why he wasnt covering Hugues death "that he doesnt write about suicides."

Obviously, you are not a reporter as you would know that when you cover the cops beat, you call police daily and/or the coroner to find out about any mortalities of the day. Police and/or the coroner will tell reporter whether the case is worth writing about, ie, its a murder, involunatry manslaughter, suicide. etc. The SF reporter did not make up what he told me, rather, he was repeating what the authorities had told him.

Now fuck off. If you want me to answer any more of your questions, identify yourself.

Melissa
February 9, 2010 at 6:01 PM”



Statement III:
”When you love somebody, they don’t die on your watch. I loved Hugues. If I could have protected him, if I had made sure he was OK, if I was still in his life, maybe he would still be alive.”


Statement IV:
”I think about the person who did it, and what kind of pain and suffering he must be carrying around with him for having murdered somebody - and that's not about Hayes Valley. That's about an individual who's really struggling."

Autumn

John mcgowan said...

Hi, Autumn

"The first post dates from June 1, 2007 which is one day before the murder. I found this strange at first but did some research and believe Blogger provides the possibility to backdate(?)."

I admit i only scanned through some of the responses, a lot are in french and i'm not savvy with the language. Is it possible for you to direct me to where you think the Blogger provides the possibility to backdate(?)."

And by "backdate", are you referring to her knowledge of his death and past tense language before his suicide/murder?

Thanks

Ps

How do you highlight your link in blue to link directly to an article without copying and pasting?

Again, thanks

John

Anonymous said...

Hi John,

First of all, I will post this link to the first post on the Hugues de la Plaza-blog (which only consists of photos). As you can see, the post is dated June 1, 2007.

By backdate I mean: giving your post an earlier date whereas in actuality you posted the message (in this case: photos) at a later date.

As to the question where Blogger provides the possibility to backdate, I looked at this a while ago. I think I read (scanned) this article, or something similar. I don't have a blog myself, so I can't try it out. At the time I also tried to find out when the Hugues de la Plaza-blog was actually created and I believe I found an indication that indeed the blog was not created on June 1, 2007 but on a later date (if I remember correctly: June 4, 2007). I'll see if I can find this information again.

You can create an active link in your comments by following these instructions. I would like to show you myself how to use the code, but I think Blogger will then turn it automatically into a link. If the instructions are not clear, just ask me again.

Autumn

John mcgowan said...

Thank you, Autumn

Anonymous said...

OT: Hugues de la Plaza

You're welcome, John. Further to my above comment, I have tried to find out when the Hugues de la Plaza-blog was created (again).

I have tried several methods based on this and this article.

According to the method in the first article, the first blog post dates from June 1, 2007. However, this method is said to be not always reliable. It is said to reflect the initial domain publication date rather than the publication date of the current content (in that case, it would still mean that the blog was created before the murder took place). However, I also wondered if Google search results just shows the date attributed to a post by the moderator of a blog (instead of the actual publication date). I have briefly looked into this but (so far) didn't find any clear indication that this is the case.

According to the method in the second article, the first blog post dates from June 4, 2007 (if you go to the first blog post, right click on View Page Source and look at lines 8 and 13 it says: 007-06-04T18:58:00-07:00. However, this may be an updated date (see the said lines)(?)

I'm not an expert so I don't know how to interpret it all.

Autumn

tania cadogan said...

Thank you Peter for anotherwonderful year of learning and humor.
I wish you and your family and every commentator and reader a very Merry Christmas and a Happy, Peaceful and Prosperous New Year xx

Amyl Nitrite said...

Merry Christmas to all!
Sorry about off topic!
Did Lawrence issue a reliable denial?
"My heart breaks for all the women who were victimized by Harvey Weinstein," reads Lawrence's statement. "I have never had anything but a professional relationship with him. This is yet another example of the predatory tactics and lies that he engaged in to lure countless women."

http://dlvr.it/Qv1CKG

Anonymous said...

OT: Harvey Weinstein / Jennifer Lawrence

Assuming the statement was worded by Lawrence and not an agent/representative:

What exactly does Lawrence mean by a professional relationship? Her statement leaves open the possibility that Weinstein came on to her and that she accepted his advances so as to get ahead in her career (i.e. she considered this to be part of a "professional" relationship).

She also uses a double negative of sorts ("never" had "anything but" a professional relationship) which seems interesting for some reason. Perhaps she feels the need to emphasize because it is a sensitive topic to her. Maybe she is (also) subconsciously hammering home that their relationship was never / anything but professional?

Autumn

Mike Dammann said...

I didn't carry when I lived in the suburbs of Atlanta. But my neighbors did and had signs on their lawns indicating they are armed. Though Atlanta was the crime capital at the time, nothing ever happened. So, I actually feel that for good citizens, being armed may not be a duty, but definitely something of social significance to help keep a community safe.

Merry Christmas, Peter. I run a community for people with rare blood types to help get those in emergency situations a donor if hospitals have a hard time finding one. Not surprised to hear that you donate.

Mike

tania cadogan said...

Hi Mike, I have a rare group A- with a factor D, sadly due to my having M.E i can no longer donate.
I had to carry a green card stating what blood group i had and what i could receive.
The first time i donated i didn't know my group and when i got my pass book to record donations, i had the green card in it as well. I thought everyone got it till bth my brothers donated and didn't get one.
One of my aunts had it and a distant uncle.

Merry Christmas xx

Anonymous said...

Off topic:

Could you guys analyze this:
(Nichole kessinger, the mistress of Chris Watts, the convicted killer, said this:) (the following are snippets from a YouTube video)

-„why would you wipe out your family to be with me?“

Question: „did you ever say anything to him about like...“
Answer: „never! Never!“
Q: „anything about his kids being a problem? Anything about his wife being a problem?“
A: „Never! Never!“

...“this shocked me just as much as I think it shocked the rest of the world“

-„ugh. He‘s so disgusting. I‘m so ashamed of him. Why why why how? I don‘t even understand how you can like bring yourself to do that to somebody who is like that big.“

Mike Dammann said...

Hi Tania.
I am also A-. Merry Christmas.
Mike

Habundia Awareness said...

https://youtu.be/kd6WRNtB0jQ
I came on this case through YouTube. I went to look for the emergency call
The man (Ben Butler) has been cleared.
Does the 999(UK) call show innocence or doesn't?

The call is full of screaming people and is difficult to follow. I someone is capable to write a transcript that would be great, I can't seem to hear a lot of what is said it's a mess
I know, tone of voice, volume, sound doesn't count for SA but it doesn't seem very effective if one is yelling like madness while asking for help and isn't clear in giving information. Or can it be seen as expected..? I could see how one could be in total panic and starts to yell and scream, but if help is what you ask for why does it take 10 minutes before the operator could get them to act? 10 minutes of not breathing seems like a long time....so why the delay? If one asks what to do but keeps yelling and screaming so they aren't able to listen to instructions...that seems not expected.
I only heared this call, I know nothing of this case besides this call.
I hear at least 3 to 4 people during that call. The operator doesnt seem to be interested in who those are. I cant remember having heared a call like this before.
I did hear someone asking "what happened?" besides the operator..
What has been ruled the cause of death? Children don't stop breathing without a reason.

John mcgowan said...

Hi, Habundia Awareness

I've listen to this call numerous times in the past. In the UK, it is very rare that we are allowed access to 999 calls (transcripts [public] of calls are unheard of let alone audio.

Thank you for bringing this up. I will, time allowed, transcribe said call.

John mcgowan said...

Ellie Butler Parents staged 999 call over murdered daughter BBC News


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aergNZDUGpI

Nadine Lumley said...

Merry Xmas Lobsters.

Habundia Awareness said...

Thank you John I appreciate that!
I've been listening a second time and watched a docu about the case.
What I made out it is that the child got scull fractures of which he was cleared of although he was the only one present when the fracture was caused because he was able to influence the judgement of a jury who cleared him of wrongdoing. Still the child was taken into foster care. Her grandparents fought to get custody and got it. They took care of her for 5 years when the court (a judge) decided that the child had to go back to her parents even though they never came to any of the appointments that were made to see the child with supervision for 2 years, still the judge ordered the child to go back to these strangers who clearly weren't able to take care of the child. 6 weeks after she was send back, i believe it was, that the fatal abuse took place and the girl ended up death.
I felt so sorry for the grandfather who also lost his wife to cancer months after the child was brought back to her biological creators.....and died by her father's hands and because she was not protected by her mother.


Some other thing I have mentioned before "the reliable denial"
I've been reading many blog topics the past months and this principle still confuses me because I see contradicting explanations about this.
The one topic it is said "I didn't do it" (even if it isn't specified) as reliable yet the other topic says it has to be 'specific'
It's confusing.
Or is it just me who thinks to difficult?

Anyway I want to wish you all a happy and loving Christmas with the ones you love!
Merry Christmas! :-)

Habundia Awareness said...

https://youtu.be/oaUcviqyHAY
The docu I saw yesterday about the case

Habundia Awareness said...

https://www.foxnews.com/us/fiance-accused-of-killing-colorado-woman-missing-for-month

The man has been arrested.....his actions already showed guilt...

Unknown said...

No wonder you are 'anonymous'..i would be if i were you.

tania cadogan said...

Merry Christmas and a very happy peaceful and prosperous new year xx

John mcgowan said...

Happy Crimbo and an adventurous NY to all. I hope your dreams and each new path you take will be a profitable (not financial, although it helps, lol) one.

Thank you's for your input, your research, your knowledge, iv'e learned so much from members here, both active and on the peripheral.

Last, and most important.

Thank you, Peter, Heather and other SA professionals for sharing your expertise even through your busy schedules.

Now, time for an Xmas Eve tipple me thinks, hehehe ;)


John
x

tania cadogan said...

Off topic

Kevin Spacey video transcript

I know what you want. Oh sure, they may have tried to separate us but what we have is too strong, is too powerful. I mean, after all, we shared everything you and I. I told you my deepest darkest secrets. I showed you exactly what people are capable of. I shocked you with my honesty. But mostly I challenged you and made you think and you trusted me even though you knew you shouldn't.

So we're not done no matter what anyone says. And besides, I know what you want you want. Him back of course. Some believed everything and I've just been waiting with bated breath for him he confess it all. They're just dying to have me declare that everything said is true and that I got what I deserved. Wouldn't it be easy if it was all so simple.

Only you and I both know it's never that simple. Not in politics and not in life, but you wouldn't believe the worst without evidence, would you. You wouldn't rush to judgment without facts , would you?

Did you? No, not you, you're smarter than that. Anyway, all this presumption made for such an unsatisfying ending, and to think it could have been such a memorable send-off. I mean, if you and I've learned nothing else these past years it's that in life and art, nothing should be off the table.

We weren't afraid. Not of what we said, not of what we did, and we're still not afraid. Because I can promise you this: If I didn't pay the price for the things we both know I did do, I'm certainly not gonna pay the price for the things I didn't do.

Well, of course they're gonna say I'm being disrespectful not playing by the rules, like I ever played by anyone's rules. But I never did and you loved it anyhow. despite all he animosity, the headlines, the impeachment without a trial despite everything despite even my own death. I feel surprisingly good and my confidence grows each day that soon enough you will know the full truth.

Wait a minute, now that I think of it, you never actually saw me die, did you? Conclusions can be so deceiving. Miss me?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6527619/Kevin-Spacey-charged-felony-sex-assault-one-year-accused-molesting-teenager.html


Merry Christmas and a very happy, peaceful and prosperous New Year to everyone, May it be all you wish for xx

General P. Malaise said...

Blogger tania cadogan said...
Off topic

Kevin Spacey video transcript

thanks for transcribing Tania. I wonder if there is an unintended recipient implied besides the victim and public at large. could it be a warning? could he name other big shots?

Habundia Awareness said...

I don't want to be rude. I heard some differences within the transcription in the first part.

Titel of the vid: LET ME BE FRANK
"I know what you want. Oh sure, they may have tried to separate us but what we have is too strong, is too powerful. I mean (And) after all, we shared everything you and I. I told you my deepest darkest secrets. I showed you exactly what people are capable of. I shocked you with my honesty. But mostly I challenged you and made you think and you trusted me even though you knew you shouldn't.

So we're not done no matter what anyone says. And besides, I know what you want, you want (me back). Of course, some believed everything and I've just been waiting with bated breath for (to) him he confess it all. They're just dying to have me declare that everything said is true and that I got what I deserved. Wouldn't it (that) be easy if it was all so simple.

And at the end is another sentence:
"Well, of course they're gonna say I'm being disrespectful not playing by the rules, like I ever played by anyone's rules (before)."

"Well, of course they're gonna say I'm being disrespectful not playing by the rules, like I ever played by anyone's rules (before). But I never did and you loved it. Anyhow, despite all the animosity, the headlines, the impeachment without a trial despite everything despite even my own death."

The three most disturbing sentences I find are:
"But mostly I challenged you and made you think and you trusted me even though you knew you shouldn't."
"Anyway, all this presumption made for such an unsatisfying ending, and to think it could have been such a memorable send-off."
"If I didn't pay the price for the things we both know I did do, I'm certainly not gonna pay the price for the things I didn't do.

As long people around this kind keep excusing themselves by saying 'it's not for me to judge', new victims will continue to be made and this kind get their 'memorable send-off's'.

To me the 'you' seems someone close to him (us and we) and this vid seems to be refering to someone specificly close to him but I do not see how he is talking to the victims.
There is no reliable denail in the vid, he seems to continue his manipulative behaviour in showing how 'smart' he is and was able to disappear Hudini like.
He didn't disappear because he had nothing to hide.....sometimes things are much simplistischer then they are made out to be. Confussion is caused to hide the truth.

Did he assume or was being told people thought he had died because he hadn't been seen for a long time and was able to hide for a great lenght of time? Or have there been people aware of his staying, there have been spoken different scenario's of were he could be, but no one seem to know it (or they say)

Why didn't he tell about that 'full truth' in the vid? What more time does he need to tell about 'the full truth'? Or is someone else gonna be the one that will let 'you know 'the full truth'?
What are the things he didn't do?
Have people been excusing his behaviour and giving him 'free cards'?

To whom did he send this vid?

Anonymous said...

OT: Kevin Spacey

General P. Malaise said: "I wonder if there is an unintended recipient implied besides the victim and public at large."

I wonder the same thing. The following is speculative and purely my own (uneducated) opinion.

Maybe Spacey is subconsciously talking to his father ("you and I").

Spacey's brother (Randall Fowler) has revealed their father was a sexual predator who would rape him (i.e. Fowler) throughout his adolescence and their mother knew about the abuse. Fowler said he sacrificed himself to protect Spacey who tried to avoid what was going on. Spacey may be alluding to that in the following statement:

“I know what you want. Oh, sure, they may have tried to separate us, but what we have is too strong. It’s too powerful. I mean, after all, we share everything, you and I.”

I.e.: His father wanted something from him and Spacey knew it. “They” (Fowler? His mother?) tried to keep his father away from him (“tried to separate us”) but in the end (“after all”) they “shared everything”. What they had was strong and powerful: a blood bond. And: his father was too strong and powerful for him.

In other words: maybe Spacey wasn't successful in avoiding his father? On that note (as Peter has pointed out in one of his tweets): Spacey begins the video with water and washing his hands.

By allegedly sexually abusing young men/adolescents Spacey may have been reenacting a childhood trauma. I don’t say this as an excuse but as a possible explanation. Perhaps he felt totally annihilated by his own (possible) childhood abuse. He may be alluding to that by the repeated references to his own death in the video (I know he was killed off in House of Cards but there may be a deeper meaning). If so, said abuse/annihilation must have enraged him. His reenactment was a revenge: he did onto others what was done onto him. On that topic: I find it interesting how he uses the word “despite” three times in a row near the end of the video:

"Despite all the poppycock, the animosity, the headlines, the impeachment without a trial. Despite everything. Despite even my own death. I feel surprisingly good.”

Maybe Spacey feels surprisingly good because his secret is finally out in the open. Perpetrators deep down all want to confess (and I think that’s what he does over and over between the lines of his monologue). However, there may be an even deeper meaning. Maybe he is telling us his behavior was out of spite (despite=the spite) over his childhood abuse (“poppycock” may be a metaphor for that), the animosity and even the annihilation (“my own death”) by his father. And this revenge felt “surprisingly good” to Spacey.

Autumn

Anonymous said...

Interesting video about a possible mole (or moleS?) surrounding president Trump:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQxjA9sfGas

Autumn

Anonymous said...

OT: Dr. Christine Blasey Ford and abortion guilt

http://www.andrewghodges.com/forensic-thoughtprints/christine-fords-secret-pain-abortion-ptsd-explains-kavanaugh-accusation

http://www.andrewghodges.com/forensic-thoughtprints/christine-fords-secret-unconscious-tells-continue-before-the-senate-part-one

Autumn

General P. Malaise said...




Anonymous said...
OT: Kevin Spacey

I don't think Spacey is referring to his father. there isn't a connection in his language outside of contemporary. below is a line from the video.

..........Only you and I both know it's never that simple. Not in politics and not in life, but you wouldn't believe the worst without evidence, would you. You wouldn't rush to judgment without facts , would you? ..........

a) "only you" only is a comparative word meaning it requires at least one other thing for it to make sense. Spacey is probably thinking of at least another person, "you" is not the universal "you" in this case.

b) "Only you and I both know it's never that simple." this is a short sentence without qualifiers and probably reliable. what is he referring to as "simple"? which is presented in the negative indicating elevated sensitivity.

c) "Not in politics and not in life," politics comes before "life" and "politics" is presented in the negative.

d) "but you wouldn't believe the worst without evidence, would you? You wouldn't rush to judgment without facts , would you?" ..........."but" refutes or minimizes by comparison what came before. what came before? "know" "simple" "politics" life", ... what does Spacey refute or replace what came before with? "evidence" in the negative preceded by "the worst". Spacey then doubles down on this with a second rhetorical question, "rush to judgement" and "facts" again presented in the negative. very sensitive. is he saying to his "you" I have "evidence" and "facts" so that "you" don't "rush to judgement". it is Spacey who brings "politics" "evidence" and "facts" into his language.

is Spacey threatening someone or some people?

Anonymous said...

OT: Kevin Spacey

With regard to the following statement:

Only you and I both know it's never that simple. Not in politics and not in life, but you wouldn't believe the worst without evidence, would you. You wouldn't rush to judgment without facts , would you?

I may be wrong about Spacey subconsciously addressing his father (I'm not very familiar with official Statement Analysis rules). However, if Spacey's brother is speaking the truth, Spacey grew up in a household where severe sexual abuse was going on. In that case, the abuse by his father would probably be an important cause for Spacey's alleged behavior and it would seem only logical that traces of this would somehow seep through this important, very public statement (made just after the announcement that he faces a felony sexual assault charge). But, like I said, it's speculation.

Anyway, as to the word "only": I think Spacey uses the word "only" as an alternative for "But" or "It's just that" and not as an alternative to "Just". I don't get the impression that he is thinking of another thing or person.

I think perhaps we should read through Spacey's denials here. What he is subconsciously telling us is: there is no evidence that I sexually assaulted that boy but, nevertheless, you can believe the worst (because it's true). And: there are facts so there isn't a rush to judgment in this case.

I'm not entirely convinced of Spacey secretly warning other big shots who he could name. If he wanted to do that, it seems much simpler and safer to pick up the phone or talk to these big shots one on one. Issuing a veiled warning/threat in front of the entire world would seem incredibly risky, all the more since Spacey is facing a felony sexually assault charge.

If I had to guess, I would say the superficial reason why Spacey made the video is: he wants to reingratiate himself with the public (and he wants his Frank Underwood role back). His story is very weak, however. He cannot say: I'm innocent (because he isn't). Therefore the only thing he has left to say is: there's no evidence and don't rush to judgment. The deeper reason why Spacey made the video, I think, is: he want's to publicly confess and do public penance for his sins (even though he may not be aware of this). When I read the reactions on twitter, I get the feeling that many people get this: the video shows his guilt.

As to the introduction by Spacey of "politics", in the video he takes on the role of his former character, the politician Frank Underwood. I don't think this video is primarily about politics. It's about his life

Autumn

General P. Malaise said...

With regard to the following statement:

Only you and I both know it's never that simple. Not in politics and not in life, but you wouldn't believe the worst without evidence, would you. You wouldn't rush to judgment without facts , would you?

I may be wrong about Spacey subconsciously addressing his father (I'm not very familiar with official Statement Analysis rules). However, if Spacey's brother is speaking the truth, Spacey grew up in a household where severe sexual abuse was going on. In that case, the abuse by his father would probably be an important cause for Spacey's alleged behavior and it would seem only logical that traces of this would somehow seep through this important, very public statement (made just after the announcement that he faces a felony sexual assault charge). But, like I said, it's speculation.
---(if you want to analyse his brothers statement then analyse it, this isn’t his brothers statement) ---

Anyway, as to the word "only": I think Spacey uses the word "only" as an alternative for "But" or "It's just that" and not as an alternative to "Just". I don't get the impression that he is thinking of another thing or person.
--(only and but are not substitutes for each other. Both are statement analysis principals, not interchangeable) ---

I think perhaps we should read through Spacey's denials here. What he is subconsciously telling us is: there is no evidence that I sexually assaulted that boy but, nevertheless, you can believe the worst (because it's true). And: there arefacts so there isn't a rush to judgment in this case.
---(Spacey does not make any denials) ---

I'm not entirely convinced of Spacey secretly warning other big shots who he could name. If he wanted to do that, it seems much simpler and safer to pick up the phone or talk to these big shots one on one. Issuing a veiled warning/threat in front of the entire world would seem incredibly risky, all the more since Spacey is facing a felony sexually assault charge.
--- (I don’t think Spacey is secretly warning, I think he is publicly warning) ---

If I had to guess, I would say the superficial reason why Spacey made the video is: he wants to reingratiate himself with the public (and he wants his Frank Underwood role back). His story is very weak, however. He cannot say: I'm innocent (because he isn't). Therefore the only thing he has left to say is: there's no evidence and don't rush to judgment. The deeper reason why Spacey made the video, I think, is: he want's to publicly confess and do public penance for his sins (even though he may not be aware of this). When I read the reactions on twitter, I get the feeling that many people get this: the video shows his guilt.
--- (he is facing criminal charges and he is trying to get in front of it, there is no remorse shown so unlikely a confession and definitely not penance. He linguistically justifies his actions) ---

As to the introduction by Spacey of "politics", in the video he takes on the role of his former character, the politician Frank Underwood. I don't think this video is primarily about politics. It's about his life.
--- (I think it is an appeal to political people he may have evidence of malfeasance against) ---

Autumn

General P. Malaise said...

Autumn, I think you would enjoy the course. It is a rewarding experience.

Anonymous said...

To: General

Thanks for responding to (refuting) my comments. I am sure I would enjoy and benefit from the course and want to follow it when I have more time (hopefully in a year or so)

I listen to real crime shows while working and that’s how I stumbled upon statement analysis. I follow two experts: Peter and Andrew G. Hodges. They use different methods, although there seems to be some overlap. Peter teaches the linguistic rules of Statement Analysis. Hodges shows how we all have a super-intelligence (or: subconscious) that communicates verbally using symbolic language beyond denial and cover up (more akin to leakage). It’s all brilliant.

Since I don’t know much about the (what I call) linguistic rules of Statement Analysis yet, I am more focused on leakage. I say all this to explain that I probably looked less at how Spacey built up his sentences and more at the (possible) symbolic meaning of his words. I think ALL perpetrators invariably want to confess and subconsciously do so in a symbolic language WHENEVER they talk about their crime/case. It’s fascinating.

Just as an example: Look at my comment of December 19, 2018 at 4:55 AM. In line 8 of her short statement, Melissa Nix (the ex-girlfriend of the murdered Hugues de la Plaza) says:

How you kissed me so hard on the stoop of my Brooklyn apartment I thought I would faint. Things ended, to my endless regret. I caused you pain. I will never forgive myself for that.

Nix made this statement on June 17, 2007, i.e. two weeks after De La Plaza’s death. It only became known in 2009 that De La Plaza did not commit suicide but was stabbed to death on the stoop of his SF apartment.

The average native English speaker’s vocabulary is said to range from 20,000 to 35,000 words. Nix and De La Plaza had been together for years. She could have chosen any memory to illustrate how deep their love had once been. Instead, she chose words that EXACTLY match De La Plaza’s murder: something “hard” happened between Nix and De la Plaza on the stoop of an apartment, someone nearly fainted, things ended, Nix caused De la Plaza pain and she will never forgive herself for that . That’s not a coincidence i.m.o. but a replay of the murder.

In a few lines, without being aware of it, she laid all her cards on the table (remember Spacey: “nothing should be off the table”). Starting with the first sentence: I do not know how to reconcile myself to your death. In 2006, Nix moved from the east coast to San Francisco in an effort to reconcile with De La Plaza. These efforts were ultimately fruitless. I believe that’s what she’s unwittingly alluding to and she is subconsciously linking this failed effort to De La Plaza’s death. A death for which she cannot forgive (reconcile) herself. I think this case is Jodi Arias/Travis Alexander 1.0 and at least as interesting.

Autumn

Anonymous said...

Cont.:

Back to Kevin Spacey:

Some additional remarks on your latest comments re Spacey:

- (only and but are not substitutes for each other. Both are statement analysis principals, not interchangeable) -
I thought Spacey used the word “Only” as short for “The only thing is” (or: “The only problem is”). But maybe “only” is not used that way in English language? In my native language the equivalent of "only" can be used that way.

---(Spacey does not make any denials) ---
I didn’t word that precisely enough. What I meant is: read through the negative.

--- (I don’t think Spacey is secretly warning, I think he is publicly warning) ---
To me a movie star publicly warning politicians via youtube seems sth that only could happen in movies and books. But who knows. You might just be right and I may be hopelessly naïve in that respect. In any case, I DO feel his body language shows veiled anger.

--- (he is facing criminal charges and he is trying to get in front of it, there is no remorse shown so unlikely a confession and definitely not penance. He linguistically justifies his actions) ---
He is definitely trying to get in front of it i.m.o. But I remain convinced that on a deeper level he badly needs to get sth off his chest. All perpetrators do and Spacey is no exception. Look at the many references to confession between the lines of Spacey’s first few statements (and there are MANY more):
- share everything;
- tell you my deepest darkest secrets;
- I show you exactly what […] capable of;
- shock you with my honesty;
- believe everything
- I’ve just been waiting with bated breath (maybe also a subconscious reference to an abusive childhood?) to confess it all;
- just dying to […] declare that everything said is true;
- I got what I deserved.

Autumn

John mcgowan said...

OT Update:

Hailey Dunn’s father: ‘2019 will be the year for justice’

Snipped:

It was my ex-wife. She told me to call the police and report Hailey missing”.

What she said’ was, “You have to call the police and report Hailey missing”. I asked her what the hell she was talking about. She told me Hailey had been missing since yesterday, and I needed to call the police”.

I was in shock”, Dunn said. “I started asking a million questions, and she kept telling me to call the police. I told her she needed to call the police and tell them exactly what was happening, and I was going to look for Hailey”.

“I couldn’t accept it until years later — when I began working with other families — that she never once asked me if I had seen Hailey. She never asked me if I knew where Hailey was. I work with parents of missing children, and they always ask their ex if they have the child. But she never did. She never asked me because she already knew. Billie Jean wanted me to make that call, because she was scared to death to make that report”.

More:

http://victimsnewsonline.com/missing-persons/hailey-dunns-father-2019-will-be-the-year-for-justice/

John mcgowan said...

OT:

Was she happy at home?
.....


Girl, 16, has been missing for a week after failing to come home from school as stepfather fears she 'may have been taken by County Lines drug gang'

The family of a missing 16-year-girl who fear she may have been taken by a County Lines drug gang have revealed they spent Christmas sleeping near the front door waiting for her to return.

Andrea Bardas hasn't been seen since December 21 when she went to school in the morning and didn't return home or contact her parents.

Her stepfather Philip said they have endured a desperate search to bring their daughter home safely, with him searching in Barnet, North London, and Andrea's mother handing out thousands of missing girl leaflets in Manchester.

Philip said: 'She is a 16-year-old girl who has a happy family home and nothing to worry about in life other than the usual things a 16-year-old might be concerned with.

Would a stepfather use this type of language?
He doesn't use her name.
There is a lot in the negative.
Is he trying to convince us things are "Happy" at "home"?
"nothing to worry about in life"
What does this mean?
"the usual things"
What are "the usual thing in life"
"might be concerned with."
What does he believe she "might be concerned with."?

Was she happy at home?

'Christmas was two days of her parents sleeping in our lounge close to the front door in the hope that she would come back home.

'We have never left the house empty at any time [so someone is there if she comes homes] and just want her to return safely.'

Andrea went to school on Friday, December 21 and left her house at 7.30am. She was supposed to be home by 1pm that day.

But it got to 4pm and her family saw she had left her mobile phone at home. Philip's worst fear is that Andrea has been taken in by a so-called 'County Lines' drug gang.

Such gangs can use young and vulnerable people to help with their drug dealing networks across county lines.

'I think that's what may have happened,' he said. 'It all stems from social media. When they [young people] have social media at that age that is the catalyst for things like this.

We have been astounded by the social media activity of children today. Hundreds of pointless Snapchats, Instagrams. Most with what can honestly be said as useless and bad meanings.'

Philip said they had taken her phone away at 10pm and gave it back to her for school, while at weekends she is never away from the house for more than a few hours during the day.

'She is a lovely daughter and has an incredible future ahead of her and we are so worried about her having been drawn into another world until this week we did not know existed,' he said.

Police are in close contact with the family and Philip says they have been great, but now the family needs the wider public's help to keep an eye out.

If Andrea is reading this, she can text or call charity Missing People on 116 000 for free at any time of the day or night. If you see her or know anything about her whereabouts, let police know on 101 or contact Missing People on 116 000.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6535565/Missing-girl-16-taken-County-Lines-drug-gang.html?ito=social-facebook

John mcgowan said...

But it got to 4pm and her family saw she had left her mobile phone at home. Philip's worst fear is that Andrea has been taken in by a so-called 'County Lines' drug gang.

Such gangs can use young and vulnerable people to help with their drug dealing networks across county lines.

'I think that's what may have happened,' he said. 'It all stems from social media. When they [young people] have social media at that age that is the catalyst for things like this.

'She is a lovely daughter and has an incredible future ahead of her and we are so worried about her having been drawn into another world until this week we did not know existed,' he said.


Why does he come up with the theory of "been taken in by a so-called 'County Lines' drug gang."?

Have LE alluded to the possibility?
Has someone else mentioned it to him?
Why does his mind go there?






Anonymous said...

John, strange that she left her phone at home, especially since she seemed so into social media. Maybe she didn't want to be traced?

Also:

'We have been astounded by the social media activity of children today. Hundreds of pointless Snapchats, Instagrams. Most with what can honestly be said as useless and bad meanings.'

This seems such a general statement. Almost journalistic. Was he astounded by the social media activity of Andrea? I do not "honestly" believe most snapchats, instagrams have "bad meanings". Maybe they discovered chats, etc with bad meanings on Andrea's phone though?

Indeed, he must have more info on Andrea's possible involvement withe the said drug gangs. Why else raise this possibility.

Autumn

Anonymous said...

Also, if they suspect that she is in the claws of a drug gang, why say that she has "nothing to worry about in life", etc? Maybe the stepfather meant that she has nothing to worry about in her home/family life?

Autumn

John mcgowan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
John mcgowan said...

So may questions, Autumn

'We have been astounded by the social media activity of children today. Hundreds of pointless Snapchats, Instagrams. Most with what can honestly be said as useless and bad meanings.'

Does he include Andrea in this?

If so, then we have subtle demeaning which is not expected when someone goes missing. It's tantamount to blame. For example, if she (Andrea) didn't behave like this then, this would not have happened. It's like a parent/guardian blaming the baby for crying, if they (babies) were not crying all the time i would not have a shook them so hard, it's all the babies fault.

it does seem like all is not happy at home. This is not to suggest foul play re step - father. His language, however, does concern me about her welfare at home.

Anonymous said...

I hadn't thought of that (subtle demeaning). That's very perceptive. I do not suggest foul play either. They (the family) contacted the Daily Mail themselves from what I understand. I don't think I would do that if I had done something wrong.

Autumn

John mcgowan said...

Re Hailey Dunn’s father:

Yesterday, Clint Dunn, the father of Hailey Dunn, posted a video telling everyone that 2019 meant justice for his murdered daughter. Hailey Dunn was 13-years-old when she went missing from Colorado Springs, Texas in 2010.

Emotional viewing

Duration 14:30

http://www.missingpersonsofamerica.com/2018/12/28/clint-dunn-posts-video-about-new-justice-for-hailey-dunn-campaign-reveals-new-info/?fbclid=IwAR0-DD2fue3faiv90lmQ3VzGdNniu5-Pwt9CtK6LM5ZOhQZnYQHsaDp9VeA

John mcgowan said...

Andrea went to school on Friday, December 21 and left her house at 7.30am. She was supposed to be home by 1pm that day.

Did Andrea go to school alone?
Did she meet up with friends on the way to school.?
Did she go to school?
Have the school verified she did indeed show up?
Did anyone else see her after she left for school?

Her stepfather Philip said they have endured a desperate search to bring their daughter home safely, with him searching in Barnet, North London, and Andrea's mother handing out thousands of missing girl leaflets in Manchester.

Barnet North London to Manchester - 3 h 42 min (194.4 miles) via M1 and M6

Why did her Mum go to Manchester to hand out thousands of missing girl leaflets in Manchester" when they live in Barnet?
Do they have family there?
Is this where they originate from?
Is Andrea known to visit Manchester?
Why Manchester?
Have they gone to other counties and cities?


But it got to 4pm and her family saw she had left her mobile phone at home. Philip's worst fear is that Andrea has been taken in by a so-called 'County Lines' drug gang.

Such gangs can use young and vulnerable people to help with their drug dealing networks across county lines.

It's interesting to note "County Lines" is in quotation marks, yet, these words are not assigned to the Step-Father. It does not read Philip said his worst fear is that Andrea has been taken in by a so-called County Lines drug gang.

Do we have contamination?

Is he reflecting back what has been said to him by a journalist.?

'I think that's what may have happened,' he said.

Is this in response to a question?

We then have a change in language.

Such gangs can use young and vulnerable people to help with their drug dealing networks across county lines.

Now we have the suggestion she has been taken across county lines.

Who is saying or putting this theory forward?

Willow said...

I was stopped, at the first, by

"safely".

Unnecessary word. To produce more time and distance.
Philip is making a speech to imaginary and real audiences and wants to appear genuinely concerned and respectable.
There's a tone of contempt and underestimation of audience's intellect here.

Victim-blaming

It's not certain if the words in the text are P.'s or the reporter's, as,John says. Some of it very likely are.

1. "They have revealed they spent Christmas sleeping near the front door (lounge, some interviews say) waiting for her to return". This is window-dressing intended to create an appearance of care.

2. Philip said they "endured a desperate search to bring their daughter home safely". It's not about the victim, it's their desperation.
P isn't expressing worry about her welfare at the moment, not about her fear. He doesn't address directly with pleas the suspected culprits, even though he goes as far as naming them. She's not woth it.

3. What's more, P. doesn't condemn the 'County Lines' culprits for allegedly taking Andrea.
Instead (if the words are his) he says:

- "Such gangs can use young .. to HELP with their .. NETWORKS across county lines.

It's as if P. is saying the young and vulnerable 16 yrs old Andrea had gone to give a helping hand to the network during the hectic holidays. Now the gang is using her assistace for their benefit. The fact that step-dad doesn't show real emotional effort towards the victim's well being supports this notion.

4. She has "a happy family home, nothing to worry about, in the life..." Everything is ok at home and young A. rewards the provider step-dad by exchanging him and his offerings for the drug gang.
The reason why P. needs to explicitly describe and name the drug gang and give them and the internet, snapchat and social media a lot of space in his interview, is perhaps because they are important for him personally.

The step dad is unable to speak outright disdainfully with condemnation of the drug gang and the internet, that are:
"pointless", "useless" and have "bad meanings" and are "another world".

Conspicuously neutral.

"She is a lovely daughter and has an incredible future ahead of her and we are so worried about her having been drawn into ANOTHER WORLD until this week we did not know existed,' he said.

It may be of interest to look into step-dad's internet habits. There may be patterns of use and contacts that could shed light on A. disappearance.
Step dad Philip most likely knew about the existence of snapchat, instagram and other ways of using the internet.

Did step dad control Andrea's mobile and internet-use heavily?
Did A. find out about step dad's internet-life?
Did that escalate the situation at home?

Does Andrea live with step-dad in London and does mother live in Manchester?
What's going on in the happy family home?
Friends of Andrea might know, and the mother wheter in Manchester or London.

John mcgowan said...

Willow said

It may be of interest to look into step-dad's internet habits. There may be patterns of use and contacts that could shed light on A. disappearance.
Did step dad control Andrea's mobile and internet-use heavily?
Did A. find out about step dad's internet-life?
Did that escalate the situation at home?


Hi, Willow

Excellent points of interest.

Anonymous said...

Willow said:

Did A. find out about step dad's internet-life? Did that escalate the situation at home?

That or they may have argued over Andrea's social media activity. They (P. and natural mother?) had taken away her phone at 10.00 PM and gave it back to her for school (according to DM article). It's not clear to me whether this happened every night or just the night before the disappearance. Maybe P. had looked into A's phone and found out A. complained about him in hundreds of "pointless", "useless" chats, etc. with "bad meaning"? It's just a wild guess.

P. says in so many words that things escalated (catalyzed) over or due to social media:

It all stems from social media. When they [young people] have social media at that age that is the catalyst for things like this.

Social media is sensitive/important. Of course P. may simply mean that A. was contacted by a drug gang via social media (I have no idea how such gangs recruit). In any case, this statement gives me the impression P. has more information about what happened ("It all stems from" / "things like this").

Autumn

John mcgowan said...

Did she leave it, (Phone) ? Or was it taken away from her?

I suspect it's the latter given this statement,.

'I think that's what may have happened,' he said. 'It all stems from social media. When they [young people] have social media at that age that is the catalyst for things like this.

We have been astounded by the social media activity of children today. Hundreds of pointless Snapchats, Instagrams. Most with what can honestly be said as useless and bad meanings.'

It then goes on to say

Philip said they had taken her phone away at 10pm and gave it back to her for school.
Did they?

Again, this is not a quote.

Also, consider her age, 16. Most teenagers this age would fight tooth and nail with whomever tried to take it away.

In the UK. If you're 16 and over you can leave home without your parents' or carers' consent never mind take a phone away.

Oh, and who are "they"?

As we are aware, if he doesn't tell us we can't say it for him.

At present, there is nothing in his language to suggest foul play from either guardian (though we haven't heard from mum yet). It's his distancing language that concerns me. As iv'e said. I don't think all was/is well at home before Andrea went "missing"

Anonymous said...

I don‘t think that Kevin spacey wrote this, he portrays his character Frank, so someone wrote this monologue for him. It‘s concerning though that he is creating an identification between him and his character frank, a criminal who is getting away with major crimes.

Anonymous said...

The first information he gives about Andrea is that she is a girl. <— gender female, sexuality
She lives in a happy family home. <— portrayal.
She has nothing to worry about. She isn‘t concerned. (Repetition, plus in the negative, very sensitive)
She is concerned with the usual. ( what is an unusual concern of a 16 year old girl? There is something unusual on his mind.)

She is in another world. (Death?)

Polly

Anonymous said...

Re: Andrea Bardas

The stepfather has spoken to My London (see this article) and other newspapers seem to have gotten their info from there.

According to My London:

Philip said they take her phone away at 10pm and give it back to her for school, while at weekends she is never away from the house for more than a few hours during the day.

The way this is worded, makes me think "they" take her phone away on a regular basis (e.g. every night). Andrea lives (at least part-time) with her stepfather (I deduce this a.o. from P.'s above statement and the following: “Christmas was two days of her parents sleeping in our lounge close to the front door in the hope that she would come back home."). Looking at these things combined, chances are that her direct caretaker(s) took away her phone every night.

Of course this is not 100% certain. And we cannot be sure that My London's above quote accurately represents what P. said or that he said it all. But we cannot be entirely certain that My London accurately and completely transcribed P.'s statements either.

I do not conclude to foul play either (nor do I mean to suggest it). Things possibly being not happy or escalating at home, would not equal foul play. Escalating can also mean: arguing and running away from home.

Autumn

Buckley said...

Why are we getting nothing from Police?

Willow said...



We are not getting anything from the Police, from mother, from Andrea's school-mates or friends.
We only have Andrea with a surname.
Philip has no family-name.
Mother has no identification at all. She is connected with only Manchester for certain.

There is some reason to hide the names so that we are not able to identify Philip, and the mother, at the moment.
Is there a third adult or are there other siblings or something that needs to be a secret so far.

With whom does Philip live in London? Is it the mother?

Anonymous said...

Re: Andrea Bardas

More info in this article from ITV News including a video featuring the stepfather (Philip Murray). Her parents have seen messages on her phone which have led them to believe she is being groomed by criminals (also based on information from the police). They fear she could be forced to work in the drug or sex trade. In this article her first name is spelled Andreea.

Autumn

John mcgowan said...

Buckley said...

Why are we getting nothing from Police?

Hi, Buckley

i don't know if you're from the UK.

Over here it is very rare for the Police to come out and make a statement, be it a written statement released to the press, or a piece to camera statement.

Indeed, what does surprise me, is the lack of media attention attributed. ( Not the mccanns i guess. Sorry, i couldn't help that, lol)

Where is bio dad?

More important, where are the appeals to whomever (allegedly, if this is the case) has her, to let her go

Buckley said...

don't know if you're from the UK.

Over here it is very rare for the Police to come out and make a statement,


I’m not, I’m in Tennessee, USA.

That makes sense.

John mcgowan said...

Thank you for the link, Autumn

We're a middle class family, we're a normal family, we've never seen anything like this before in our life and it is horrific to put any family through" said Mr Murray.

Why is status important?
We are confronted again with "a normal family"
This is not universal.

Child x2 is noted

Willow said...



TY Autumn.
Philip Murray, at the end of ITV news-video:

"... one call, one text, that's all we need to know, just that you're safe. Obviously there's no trouble at all, we just need to know.."

The child has been lost 8 days and nights. The trusting tone that nothing major is wrong with Andreea at the moment is not in harmony considering the very clearly expressed worry by step-dad P. of drug gang, grooming, sex, etc.
The neutral note sounds specially disharmonious as the parent, P., expresses frightening speculations, saying they have found text-messages as proof of grooming procedure of A., that has been going on - seemingly a period of time without their knowledge.

Is the colorful finger-pointing that continues, coming from the parents or the media?

In many parts of world a child may be late going to school. Coming home from school is not equally by the time-table.
The step-parent P. wants to give an impression of impeccable supervision, by the clock, now a surprise has taken place as the measures taken have not been enough to protect young A.

The culprit has been pointed out. Be afraid, every parent, of social media.



Hey Jude said...


Good news - Andrea is safe and well. I wonder was she punishing her parents for their control of her phone/social media as those seemed to be issues with the step-father.



http://news.met.police.uk/news/missing-girl-from-barnet-344556



'Officers from the North West Command Unit were appealing for help to locate Andrea Bardas, 16, who was missing from Barnet.

Andrea presented herself at a north London police station this afternoon. She is safe and well.

Our thanks to the public and media for their support.'


Anonymous said...

Thanks, Hey Jude. Good news indeed.

Autumn

John mcgowan said...

Thanks, Hey Jude

Thanks fantastic news

Willow said...


Thank you for the good news, Hey Jude.

I hope the parents and Andreea have access to counseling or some kind of professional guidance to go on from here.

John mcgowan said...

Thats my concern, Willow

Hey Jude said...

Well, they *should* have plenty of help as she has not run away before and was not in local authority care - the protocols are set out here - 28 onwards. The link wording is misleading - the guidelines are also for children who run away from home, not only those who go missing from care. Children who run away from care don't necessarily get that level of follow up or attention - they tend to run away more often than anyone keeps up with them.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/307867/Statutory_Guidance_-_Missing_from_care__3_.pdf