Gannon Stauch: Tecia Stauch Media Interview

Tecia Stauch, Gannon Stauch Stepmother Interview

INT = Interviewer

TS – Tecia Stauch

INT: You are?

TS: I am Tecia Stauch, which is Gannons Stepmother.

INT: Mm hmm Ah, you’ve been a part of the investigation since the very first time, you were the last person to see him, is that right?

TS: Correct

INT: Ah, what, what did you see when you last saw him?

TS: Well, I’m not allowed to talk about anything with the case. I would more so be willing to talk about how the community needs to have faith and continue to work together and not make these false accusations like the things that have been said that I disappeared from the community, I haven’t been there to help but there’s lots of reasons behind that.

The subject reports not being "allowed" to talk about the last time she saw Gannon.

This is a perfect opportunity to describe Gannon and in particular, what he was wearing the last time she saw him. This would help facilitate locating Gannon as it alerts the public audience of what to look for. 

Please also note that the subject claimed to be "not allowed" to talk about the last time she saw him, but did this very thing, via social media, when video emerged of her returning without Gannon. 

In depth analysis of that statement forthcoming. 

INT: Ah, reasons like death threats, right?

Interviewer should not feed answers to the subject. 

TS: Right. Death threats are one of them, my families getting lots of death threats, we counted over twenty some death threats already umm two, my husband’s ex-wife is living in our home and of course, I’m not coming home to do these things and to help with the family when I was kinda like told I couldn’t umm and then many other things that happened with the El Paso County Police Department you know and in doing the investigation, I was told I wasn’t complying and ah, can I elaborate on that?

"Death threats" in another posting was given in passivity as was being "run off the road" and stalking.  The passivity is most unexpected in a fearful event. 

Consider that she cannot talk about her last interaction with Gannon, which could help the search, because "my husband's ex wife is living in our home"---

Note the focus upon self. 

Note she was told, in a missing 11 year old boy case, that she was not complying. 

Her social media posts reveal a combative contrarian; one who likely enjoys confrontations. 

She is a victim of being evicted from her home. 

She does not address what the 11 year old victim is currently experiencing. 

INT: Please do

TS: Yes, so, I asked for a attorney during the interview ah and I was denied that by them. 

She has claimed to be a victim of the police while Gannon is a child victim. 

Her language is useful in employment analysis for predicting high risk applicants who are the most likely to file fraudulent complaints or suits. 

Her victimization continues, with the lack of empathy for the victim. Even if treated unfairly, we expect to hear it in comparison to the priority of the missing child.  We do not.  

I was held because they were blocking the door 

alleging a type of kidnapping 

and I was told I couldn’t leave and that if I were to touch them they would have probably you know

The subject is familiar with the language of confrontational violence. This may be insight into what Gannon experienced.

Recall the short video/audio that she, herself, released in which she is heard psychologically abusing him.  She posted the clip in order to highlight her skills with children. This is a disconnect with reality. 

It is also indicative of more acute abuse of Gannon as what one is willing to show the public is to suggest far worse in private. 

Please note that the subject used to work with children. 

 said I still wasn’t complying or said I was you know, trying to run away or something 

It is very likely that law enforcement will respond with a much different version as she becomes acutely aware of the interviewer ("you know") at this point and "...or something" refuses to reveal what.  This is where law enforcement can fill in the missing information. 

The subject's lack of self awareness is evident in her posts and in this interview. 

Her perception of events is very likely her interpretation. 

She also may have been provocative (including physically) at the police station. 

but during the interview, I asked several times, could I stop the interview, could I get an attorney, could I stop the interview, could I get an attorney. I was denied, I was told I couldn’t get nothing to drink, I couldn’t go to the bathroom, I mean it was continuously that my constitutional rights were violated. 

She claims to be held against her will and her rights violated.  She perceives herself as a victim. This is evident also in her social media posts and her licensing complaint, which is public record. 

Of all the things she could tell us about the interview, she includes "bathroom."

Please see "underwear" below. 

While being interviewed about Gannon missing, this is what was on her mind. 

"stop" is repeated.  This, too, is on her mind while being interviewed about Gannon. 

Why?

INT: And that’s why you say that they said then, you weren’t cooperative to...

TS: (Interrupting) That’s why they said I wasn’t cooperating at that time, correct.

INT: and why did you ask for an attorney at the time?

This question caused her to pause to think of an answer: 

TS: Well I asked for an attorney at the time because there was one individual, there was two really good detectives and so I’m not , you know going to talk bad about detectives, but the tactics they started to get when I would answer questions, they tried to, you know, they’re detectives, they’re supposed to twist, the one main goal is to find Gannon, but 

She attempts to indict police with wrongdoing. 

She refutes or minimizes their goal ("but") of finding Gannon. 

during that time some of those things made me feel uncomfortable 

How is Gannon's comfort level? 

the way they were saying things, so I immediately stopped and it felt like, felt like an attorney would help me with some of the vocabulary and things like that that I needed help with and understanding some of the things that they were asking.

She isn't being truthful ("and things like that") and her account is not what happened but what it "felt" like to her. 

"I immediately stopped" is concerning about why this entered her language concerning Gannon being missing. 

INT: I’m going to shift gears to what has become a huge online presence of people…

TS: (Interrupting) Right

INT: Obviously trying to do the right thing

TS: Mmm Hmm

INT: and help find Gannon but at the same time sometimes it just feels like we’re (inaudible) Have you seen any of those comments yourself? 

TS: We have. And see that’s one of the main things we haven’t ah been around in the public eye because we did, I didn’t want to expose my family to it if all these things were going on. You know, there was comments about Gannon getting pushed off the hike and there was comments about this and that’s just not true. I took care of Gannon for the last two years in our home because his mother didn’t want to do it and I would never, never, ever hurt this child and I know there’s some questions out there about, ok, so tell me what happened, that’s up to the investigations when they end up letting you guys know but I’ve cooperated with them, even to the point that we were held with a gun and my daughter a seventeen year old who serves our country in the United States Air Force who has never committed a crime or done anything wrong in her life was put in handcuffs over the keys that was in her purse so they could take her car. 

INT: And they weren’t in there? 

TS: They weren’t even in her car, I mean, in her purse

INT: And you

TS: (Interrupting) They were in my pocket. 

INT: You originally didn’t even know it was the ah, Law Enforcement Officer?

TS: I didn’t know it was a Law Enforcement Officer because when he came out, I guess he was putting his jacket on and it, it, it wasn’t necessarily his fault, he was adjusting and happened to catch me but I saw the gun and I panicked originally and kinda thought, oh gosh I got ah like, who’s this guy? And then once I realised it was the Sheriff’s Office, I was totally okay but they still had a gun and told me they were gonna shoot me but I was really concerned about my daughter asking why she was being detained in handcuffs and things like that when that shouldn’t even happen for a child. That shouldn’t happen for someone who was standing inside of a store shopping because we couldn’t have any clothes cos all of our clothes were here, so we came here and got clothes you know we would be harassed, so she went to purchase some underwear and things like that and was put in the handcuffs in the store you know and then brought out with men with guns and there was, that, that’s just not okay, you know, they could have approached me and said, Hi, I’m with El Paso County, can I please get this, instead of the way that it happened. 

INT: I’m just going to check your shot. You’re doing great. I wanna make sure that we’re, we’re good on recording, still can hear you ok. Okay, yeah, sounds like we’re good. Every once in a while, my mike will give out and I want to make sure it’s not going to happen here.

INT: I, I should try and clarify here, not necessarily crime rates but the way that people are reacting online to rumours about you with the search

TS: (Interrupting) Oh, Oh yes, wow, the rumours have gotten so bad um I pretty much have been told at least ten different ways that these people have these conspiracy theories, I guess they watch a lot of law shows and maybe have all these theories on how um Gannon is dead and that’s what they’re saying. So, I’m like why are you saying Gannon is dead. He is not dead, we are gonna find Gannon and that’s the main goal we all have, my family has. Just because you haven’t seen us, we have that same goal, we’ve been out searching, my Aunt has been out searching, my family has been out searching, we all have been doing that together so that we could protect each other. 

INT: How does it feel when not only you have a lost child who you are in care of but then people blaming you for that child not being here. 

TS: You know, I, I’m just ready for Gannon to come home. Most importantly for him to see his family but second, I am going to be so ecstatic when I’m able to say to people that I hope they have a really sincere apology for all these theories that have came out online, for all the things they said that I had done or people have done and I just want everyone to know that we’re going to find Gannon and I love him so much, I have helped taken care of him for so long.

Note the volume of words dedicated to self justification.  This, like the short video she posted,  is insight into what Gannon experienced "the last two years" he lived with her.  

She's "just ready" for Gannon to come home. Was there a time she was not ready?

She then offers two reasons:

1. Gannon to see his family: 9 words followed by "but": 

2.  She gets her apology: 48 words. 

57 words dedicated here to the reason for Gannon to come home. 

85% of her words here to this question  are about herself; not the victim. More on this trend in her statements from another analyst. 

INT: Can you talk to me a little about him. I don’t know him.

This is an unnatural question---a parent should be talking about the victim non stop, with any accusations quickly answered reliably or made to fade in comparison to the plight of the victim. 

This question should not have had to been asked. 

TS: Gannon is so kind and he loves to play video games that’s one of his favourite things, he loves Sonic and Mario and you know, he’s always helpful an h, and that he was always so helpful with the dogs around the house and we have two little cute dogs and he was always like a person I could say Gannon can you go and do this and he would do it right away. You know sometimes with kids, we have to remind ‘em and things like that and that’s okay but he was so sweet and able to help anyone, he could notice when you’re sick and say, are you okay? And such a kind heart.

Here she slips into past tense language regarding not a past tense event, but his character. 

              She knows or believes he is deceased. 

It is unlikely that the police revealed anything to her that would cause parental or caretaker yielding at the time of this interview. 

When we flag the verb tense regarding a missing child, we look at the greater (overall) context and the lesser (within the sentences) context. 

A guilty parent will speak in the present tense, but, perhaps, inadvertently slip into a past tense reference.  

We look at:

how much time has passed;

the age of the victim;

weather; 

the relationship quality;

This interview was early on in the case and affirms the analysis that has shown Tecia Stauch's priority is Tecia Stauch.  

Most relevant is her past tense reference when describing Gannon's character. This is who he "was"; not "is"--- 

INT: Umm, I know you just said you can’t say anything about the investigation, so you can just say so again if you can’t answer this but is there anything we can hear about the hike, was there a hike, we don’t, that just seems like rumours right now?

TS: You know what, umm, d, could we bring ah my daughter up here cos she can per, she can go and say that, you know, she came home from work after the hike and she can verify that Gannon was at our home. 

She is not able to stand upon her own words. This is something to consider as to the reason why. 

Sometimes it is because there is falsehood but often this is something that provokes confidence in a subject because the subject has not been truthful in other points. 

Tecia needs to bring in a witness because her focus is upon herself, including what strangers on social media think of her. 

INT: Okay. Yeah, that’s fine with me. If she doesn’t want to, that’s okay but you’re allowed to (inaudible)

TS: That’s fine. 

INT: (Inaudible) ok so far

Voice: I’m fine

TS: I need Hartley, cos they want you to verify was Gannon at home after the hike?

The need to control. 

Hartley: Oh

TS: Cos you didn’t go to the hike, but you came home from work 

The need to control; the need to remind and state publicly---although she is talking to her daughter ("intended recipient") it is the unintended recipient (camera, public, interviewer) to which the more important message is conveyed. 

Hartley: Um, tell ‘em I’m here?

TS: Hmm?

Hartley: Do you want me to just say, yes 

The daughter knows her mother. 

TS: No, just answer the question yes, you, you came home from work and you ray, you can verify that Gannon was at home.

Hartley: That’s it?

TS: Yeah. 

TS: I thought if she didn’t have to be to in depth cos, she is still, you know, a child but I want to make sure that someone knows that there’s another person to verify that Gannon…

Her daughter (17) is a "child" when verifying Tecia's statement about hiking. 

INT: Sure.

TS: Does she need to hold this? 

INT: Nah

Hartley: Yes, so I came home later that evening. I was at work and I can verify that he was there that night.

INT: So, there, there was a hike that you guys went on but then you guys came home.

Hartley: Yes.

INT: Where did you guys go hiking?

TS: Garden of the Gods

INT: Ah yes. Okay. Umm, I guess…

TS: (Interrupting) And then we ate Burger King afterwards so, you know

INT: There you go.

TS: Yeah. 

INT: Umm and then it just was, I’m going to go play at a friend’s house

(Scene edited as Hartley is no longer in shot.)

INT: And then it was just ah, I’m off to go to a friends at a friend’s house?

"just"----The interviewer has something else on his mind. 

TS: Unfortunately I’m not able to like comment on that anymore and for that reason is cos some things have been turned and twisted and you know, that was one of those stories you were talking about where people say things umm we had to hear things like who would let their child go out at dark and and things like that and that and that’s just why I don’t wanna answer that umm if I had to give n, a, I’m not going to say that part.

She is not "able" to comment because things have been turned and twisted. This is a good opportunity to straighten the turns and twists using truth of experiential memory. 

INT: That’s okay.

TS: Never mind.

INT: It’s alright.

TS: I can take that out 

INT: I understand that it gets tricky 

TS: Yeah.

INT: With the whole stuff.

INT: Do you feel like I asked you what I need to? Do you feel like this is gonna help kinda turn the tide of, it, what, it feels like a witch hunt in my opinion?

It is foolish to feed words to the subject. He is trying to get her to talk, which is appropriate, but best is to carefully listen to words the subject uses, and use those same words. We are most comfortable in our own vocabulary. 

TS: I hope it, am I on camera now?

She is aware of her surroundings.  In prior and upcoming analysis, the psycholinguistic profile reveals one who is manipulative and who  overestimates her intellect. 

INT: You are still

TS: Okay, okay. Umm I think that a lot of people can see that I’m not missing 

Gannon is missing. The positive Linguistic Disposition towards his plight is absent. 

and see that I am being cooperative and but to me, it’s okay that they think those things because 

is it "okay" to think those things about her because at least it is keeping Gannon's plight in the public arena?

Her answer: 

my, the way someone thinks about me, I don’t have a problem with that. My main thing is I will never want someone to think that I would hurt Gannon or any of the children in our home cos that’s just not the case. 

It is not for Gannon's cause but because she wants to protect her reputation. 

What follows affirms the video she released. Here she moves away from Gannon, away from the last two years and expands her context to her "whole entire life."

This is the language of guilt which needs to be erased or mitigated by measuring it against a much larger context. 

It is similar to a cheating athlete who wants to talk about all his hard work, or a thieving politician who wants to talk about his many years of "service."

It is to compare much time to little time; to grade "on a curve."

When in the face of an accusation, one would rather talk about the good, while avoiding the reliable denial, it is an indication of how impactful the guilt is. It also indicates the need to influence and change the conversation. 

This is the "good guy" principle which reveals to the contrary: 

I have spent my whole entire life working so hard in education umm there is even things online that was talking about my education license and I shouldn’t even be a teacher and they just didn’t know that like we moved on a military move and I didn’t finish up my contract so I gave up my license in that state umm it had nothing to do with any criminal activity you know or any of those things and it just got blown out of proportion all my professional status, you know and

Those who listen to her posted video of her taunting of Gannon, and making the 11 year old  responsible for potential homelessness are likely to agree with the subject here: she should not be a teacher. 

INT: Do you feel like these are just internet detectives who think they know what they’re doing?

The interviewer  shows empathy to keep her talking:

TS: It definitely is, and you know, here’s the thing that kinda saddens me. 

Will she here talk about how "saddened" she is because she does not know who has Gannon, where Gannon is, if he is warm, if he has clothing, how fearful is he...

It’s like, if you’re gonna talk about someone like that and have a witch hunt out for them, why would you even care like about doing those things because this is a child. You’re telling me that you’re just as mean, you’re just as hateful to talk about someone else like that. That’s how I feel, like we just should not, we should all come together and wait until the end and it’ll and see what happens because Gannon's gonna come home.

This response is beyond the scope of a blog. Suffice to say she is projecting the combative contempt she holds for others. 

She wants the social media public to think well of her and praise her for posting the video.  She is likely both upset at the lack of sympathy (and attention) while perversely enjoying the negative attention she has received. 

Gannon coming home is what will cause the public to support her. 

INT: Any message for Gannon?

At the end of the interview about 11 year old boy missing, she must be prompted to address him. 

TS: The message for Gannon I have is, Gannon, when you get here, you’ll be able to truly tell what happened and then I really hope I get a sincere apology from everyone who has made all those things, especially from my husband.

There is no human empathy for Gannon's plight. It is about her and rather than see if he is alright, healthy, harmed in any way, or traumatized, Gannon can facilitate a sincere apology for her. 

She should not be around children. 

TS: We just wanted to add a message to Gannon from my family is that we love you, we miss you and we hope  that you come home soon, and Gannon I can’t wait to you can come home and let everyone know that you are okay. We love you.

Analysis Conclusion:

The subject is not telling all she knows about what happened to Gannon. 

The subject gives indication that she believes or knows he is deceased. 

The references to "bathroom" and "underwear" are very concerning. This can be for a variety of reasons --- consider, however, the context. 

She went into a lengthy tangent about her daughter and could have left it at "clothing" but still felt the need to highlight one specific article of clothing. 

She did not need to tell us that, in her perception ("felt") , the police would not let her "stop", yet she went further to include "bathroom."

Concerns:

It is not possible to separate this concern from the audio of the video she posted. 

It is also to be considered in another statement she made regarding her husband and Gannon. (more to come)

Why the focus on "underwear"? 

Possibilities ---

Some children will become incontinent due to acute psychological distress: Anxiety 

It can become a cycle of abuse---the step parent terrifies the child (listen to audio) and burdens the child to the point where the child breaks down (incontinence).

The child messes his underwear and the step parent escalates in rage, further exasperating the suffering and building a pattern. 

Note that Tecia, unlike the mother, did not address what Gannon was experiencing while missing. 

The imagination of a parent or caretaker can be the worst enemy, as a parent fears what might be happening---it comes out in the language. 

The mother scolded the public who might be afraid to make a call, by thinking of the fear that a little boy was experiencing.  

This is parental instinct engaged. 

Was Gannon terrorized?

Was Gannon sexually assaulted by the step mother?  (more to follow). We see more news stories of female teachers sexually abusing students. Might this have been part of a taunt? 

Was Gannon poisoned?

Was Gannon goaded into running away to which he has met with either foul play or the winter elements? 

She did not even bring a description of what he was wearing to the interview. 

What happened on the hike?

What happened that his blood would be spilled in her description? 

Tecia Stauch has revealed her cruelty and her indifference to the suffering of Gannon and the suffering of others, including Gannon's father and mother. 

Her priority remains herself; not Gannon.  

She has indicated belief or knowledge that Gannon is deceased. 

To study Deception Detection, please visit Hyatt Analysis Services