Thursday, April 20, 2017

Costly Errors in Lie Detection

in the shadow of brilliant minds 
Recently, an investigator was charged with learning the truth about alleged abuse against a man who is in the "mental health system."

The man made some very serious allegations against a case manager in which the burden of proof is civil:  a 
preponderance of evidence" rather than the criminal,  "beyond a reasonable doubt."   Should the investigator find for the "preponderance of evidence" it is very likely the case manager will lose his job and face possible criminal charges.

The investigator laid out her reasoning:

She said she knows the subject is telling the truth  and she knows this from her training.

She knew it and was going to go after the alleged perpetrator.  

When asked, "How do you know?"

she said there were two reasons, from her training, that caused her, with the authority of the state, to conclude against the case manager.

1.  The subject used "lots of detail"
2.  The subject repeated his account perfectly to a witness.

Let's look at her assertions.

1.  Detail

2.  Repetition 

1.  Detail. 

An abundance of detail is something of concern.  We look at the necessity of such.  

For example: 

a.  The color of an object, within a statement, is often an indicator of personal connection.  Someone who "never stole the jewels" says, "I didn't see the red bag" (without verbal prompt) is now telling us that she personally handled it (she was the thief).  When the color is "unnecessary", it is very important.  An example of an exception is cars.  People routinely label the color of a car (especially when they have seen it). 

b.  human body posture of an inanimate object. 

"I saw the oxy's sitting on the desk..."

Narcotics do not sit, stand, walk or move around.  When an inanimate object is given a distinctly "human attribute", it means that the subject (speaker) may have given the inanimate object a human connection by handling it.  By using this language freely, we are not on alert for the subject physically handling the narcotics.  

c.  sensory language 

Sensory language, "his hands smelled like motor oil..." is a signal of experiential knowledge.  By recalling the smell, it is likely that the subject is going back to a memory in which elevated emotion existed and recall from a sensory interaction existed.  It is very likely an experience.  


By itself, we cannot say that it was experienced now, at the time of this statement, or perhaps, 20 years ago.  We need the rest of the statement to make the determination.  

Those who suffer various mental health and developmental delay often perseverate on events, and it can be very challenging to learn which happened yesterday and which happened years ago.  Even being on alert for perseveration allows the investigator to explore the event in detail.  

I was able to prove that a man had sexually assaulted a mentally retarded female, even though she had made false claims against others due to perseverating upon an assault from many years ago.  I "divided" the statement accordingly, and asked the alleged perpetrator questions based upon the descriptions from the current section of the statement.  (audio transcript).

Feeling trapped by the words, he confessed.  

                                 Abundance of Detail 

When an overabundance of detail is given (unnecessarily and freely), it is actually a signal of deception. 

It shows a "need to persuade" the audience, rather than report truthfully what one knows. 

Remember Casey Anthony "must be truthful" because "Zanny the Nanny had perfect teeth."

It was details like this that not only indicate deception (need to persuade) but give us insight into a pathological liar.  

Statement Analysis' lie detection is not guess work.

2.  Repetition 

The investigator interviewed a neighbor and said, "he gave the exact same account!" which convinced her of the truth.  Rote repetition is not an indicator of truth but this investigator "knew" otherwise.  

In this case, by telling us her reason for "knowing", perhaps she can be dissuaded by logic.  At least she had some basis, even if wrong, for her thinking. 

What is far worse is when one "just knows."  

Years ago I was on a radio program about the Casey Anthony trial in which I pointed out that Cindy Anthony knew where Casey had dumped the child she murdered. 

Cindy said, "George and I don't believe, you know, that Caylee's in the woods or anything."

Here, without challenge from the media, she offered to tell su where Caylee was not.  This is the "rule of the negative" in analysis.

A popular and frequent guest on the program said, "well, I don't believe that."

I said, "why not?"

He said "I just don't.  No.  No.  That isn't right..." and dismissed any possible discussion as to exploring why he did not believe it.  

The show was not a debate where I could say, 

"Well, what is your opinion based upon?"  to explore why guess work, feelings and intuition all pale in comparison to science.  

Caylee was found less in the woods, down the block from where Cindy was standing.  She was telling investigators, just as Casey had done earlier ("I know she is close") what statistics had already known. 

The dismissal of "I just know" is the ignorantly silencing of information.  It is akin to "you hate the McCanns!", rather than discuss the analysis.  Recently, one wrote that I needed to "stop defending United."  I had analyzed the words of a groom's lies  without defending nor attacking United.  

"You can't tell people are lying from their words" she wrote, though she agreed with telling that the McCanns and Casey Anthony were lying.  

What basis did she have to conclude that pointing out a liar was somehow defending United? 

 It was from she, herself and her history of illness and abuse. 

Projection:   It was her license to attack others.  

Her statement is very useful in Employment Analysis.  

Trauma in life effects us all.  People generally react in one of two ways:

1.  They become empathetic with others
2.  They attack others.  

Few people are left untouched by trauma.  

The former has been victimized and has deep empathy for other victims.  This person may see a company as "people" rather than a faceless corporate entity with endless money for write offs, so stealing is justified. Those with empathy who see a company as "people" are statistically less likely to steal. 

The latter is toxic.  This person believes they hold a monopoly on suffering and anyone who does not see her suffering as supreme is to be attacked.  When she is done bloodying her loved ones, she manipulates and forces them to take her back based upon pity.  Eventually, the toxicity will drive away family first, then friends, and then co workers and acquaintances.  Where is the last frontier of human interaction for someone like this?

Social media.  

There, the projected professional victim will attack others, receive some empathetic responses, be dissatisfied and attack some more.  When she finally is told off, she is back to her comfort zone, safe and alone.  She will eventually post how "humans suck" and only pets understand her. Although those who have friends must show themselves friendly, for this one, everyone else is wrong.  She is right. Her words are biting, but useful for teaching Employment Analysis.  

Employers who hire will find an abundance of complaints from co workers, and, depending upon  her level of thievery, a formal complaint that seeks money her hands have not earned.  She "deserves" this due to her suffering. 

In theft, it is the same:   one stolen from will either become empathetic with other victims, or turn and "get paid back" by stealing from others. 

Those trained in analysis can help companies avoid hiring such.  


When someone speaks, we have an opinion on whether they are telling the truth or not.  Our opinion is based upon scientific data so we do not engage in guess work, feelings nor intuition.  Invoking feelings is about the best way to pervert justice (see above).  

Those who excel in lie detection in training do so because they believe the subject's words.  They allow the statement to guide them.  They yield to the statement.  They tether themselves strongly to principle, and end up with a track record at or near 100% success rate in deception detection.  

A judge in child protective arbitrations said that children were incapable of lying.  

She was a judge who made decisions of permanent custody of children.  

I have been in cases where the child was truthful and in cases where the child entered the parent's language to harm the other parent due to coaching.  

This judge's personal experience (not being believed as a child) colored her opinion to the danger and ruination of lives as she perverted the justice she was sworn to uphold. 

The civil investigator must learn if the allegations are true. They may be, but the discernment will not come from "much detail" nor from intuition. This is dangerous and can lead to false allegations and much trouble. 

I have intervened on behalf of innocent parents falsely accused of child abuse, and the team of analysts with Hyatt Analysis will continue to.  

In one year, a new child protective caseworker removed 500% more children by herself than on average. In other words, if one child protective caseworker removed 10 children, less than one per month, over the course of a year in a specific district, this case worker removed 50 children from their homes.  This went from less than one child per month, to one child every week.   She was so proud of her work that she gave herself a knick name to describe what she did to children pulling them out of homes.  

She could not do this without complicity from her supervisor and from the supervisor's manager.  

Did they not question how, after years of a common pattern, a sudden 500% increase occurred?

Was this new caseworker now showing how negligent all others have been, for years?

Or, was there some new trend in severe abuse where "immediate risk of serious harm" was likely without 24 hours without intervention?

She falsified interviews, conveniently "ran out of battery" on audio recordings, and signed sworn affidavits of that which she invented abuse scenarios. 


Why would she do so outright deceptive things and drag children away from their parents?

What moral justification did she use?

She, herself, explained why, on average, she removed more children than 5 other caseworkers combined.  

It was because she "knew" the children were being abused and felt "morally justified" to "stretch things a bit" to "save the child."

This is what happens when "feelings" overrule science. 

She had been left in a home where she was abused and now would not let this happen to others.  She would not let truth stand in the way of her feelings. 

Today, she is a "counselor" advising people in vulnerable positions.  

Facts do not care about our feelings.  Politicians use this to exploit those who have a strong need to feel good about themselves, framing arguments in such a way as to say:

"if you agree with me, you are highly moral, too" and people fall in line.  They yield sacred religious beliefs, personal experience, and eventually, scientific proof, just to follow their leader.  This was the case of national socialism in Germany where, science be damned, "Jewish blood was not the same as ours."  

Politicians are doing the same thing today and those who resist are being not only silenced, but coerced into it via violence and the threats of violence, as America imitates nations it once described as corrupt. We ridicule the Nazis for stating that Jews were less than fully human, while we once held blacks as "3/5 human" (and personal property)  and children in the womb as not "human" and also personal "property."  Lives were destroyed as inconveniences to the elite, even while reaching great financial profit.  

 Islamic terror does not care if you are an atheist or if you know nice peaceful Muslims. 

Rape doesn't care how you are dressed.  

Theft does not care for your pigmentation.  

Deception, no matter how wrapped, has consequences that are far reaching.  

Truth seeking is just that; putting aside narrative and letting the words guide you. 

Those who commit to a year of study will be expert deception detectors.  By the time this year is up, where they have not only completed the course, but have logged a minimum of 60 hours of live continuing educational credits, they are running at 100% with the only exception being a contaminated statement.  


Peter Hyatt said...


Bill O'Reilly was fired for "unfounded" accusations.

We should believe him. They are unfounded ,but he does not say "untrue", nor did he ever harass.

When one is faced with an accusation, always judge the context. Here, the context is not only loss of job, but one of national publicity.

It is not just the perfect time to issue denial it is THE time to deny.


mom2many said...

OT: This mother's interview about her new book has almost convinced me that Sandy Hook is a lie. Please show me where I am wrong!

Article Intro: Alissa’s remarkable journey not only leads her to forgiveness of Emilie’s killer but also unexpected and joyous encounters with Emilie’s presence. Emerging from her deepest grief, Alissa has the stunning realization that Emilie’s life purpose is not over and that, most of all, she will always be happy. We spoke one-on-one with Alissa to learn more.

Emilie is deceased. How is she always happy? Nowhere in the article does the mother say that she thinks Emilie is in heaven, a better place, or anything like that.

For Her: As a mother myself, I had some fear learning about your story. What would you say to people/parents who may shy away from reading your book?

Alissa Parker: I understand that people hesitate because they think this story is about how our daughter died. All they know is what happened at Sandy Hook that day. But Sandy Hook doesn’t define our family and it felt natural to not go into detail about how this happened to Emilie. We didn’t want her life defined by another person’s choices.
If people can get past that hurdle, they’ll see this book is about the life we discovered after Emilie’s death. People who have lived without such a tragedy will have things in common with our story. I really believe there is a lot of beauty here worth sharing.

All people know is the event, but this indicates mother knows there is more to know. However, she withholds from telling more. She skips detailing the event at all. She skips over the main reason people would pick up her book in the first place. She relates to the people who have lived without tragedy, without relating to people who have lived with tragedy.

Many people marvel at your forgiveness of the shooter Adam Lanza. Are there ever times you fall back on anger?

Yes, I do. I was one of these who was not in a hurry to forgive. I had it on the back burner, no hurry. I was content with my anger. But small miracles emerged regarding our daughter that led to more understanding of her. It challenged me to look at him [Adam Lanza] differently. I had been comfortable with anger. Letting go felt peaceful which felt very foreign and strange. I didn’t like it because, in a weird way, I felt I needed to feel pain forever for our daughter.
But forgiveness isn’t ‘one and done.’ I have to choose it constantly. Some days I am better at it. Others I wallow a little and then move on. It’s complicated and (laughs) I think I get more credit than I deserve. It wasn’t a quick choice. I still have twinges of anger and intense sadness. In the future, I will have to forgive him again. It gets easier the more I do it.

If there is a these, there is a those. Who are the “those?” “On the back burner” means on hold or suspended temporarily. That indicates something that has been begun, but interrupted. It is unexpected to begin forgiveness immediately after such a shocking tragedy, even if it is put on hold. Was it suggested to her to put it on hold? “Twinges of anger and intense sadness” is greatly minimizing the pain I would imagine a parent would feel after such a loss.

What was your forgiveness process? Did you get counseling?

A lot of counseling! Individual, couples, group therapy. I’m a firm believer that when something like that happens, it’s impossible to navigate our emotions correctly without help. I felt so lost. I wanted to be able to help and serve my family. I needed to do this for my family’s health and healing.

She distances herself from receiving counseling with lack of pronoun. She further distances herself from emotions by hiding in a crowd of “our”. What is “this” that she needed to do?

mom2many said...

I had been raised to forgive and I knew I would eventually. But I had to see him through Christ-like eyes, which was a slow process. I have my own imperfections and I still feel Christ’s love. Seeing Adam the way Christ would made me think of all the children who suffer with mental illness. Adam never had the resources he needed. It doesn’t excuse the act but it made me feel more compassion for him. I will never fully know why this happened but God does. He is the ultimate judge and I don’t need to carry that burden. Justice will be served. That’s something I can hand over to Christ.

How and why did she “know she would” forgive? Many people are raised to do things that they resist doing. It is unexpected to compare her imperfections with those of a murderer, one who murdered her own child. “More compassion” indicates at some point she felt less compassion, but no time did she feel no compassion.

Was your husband Robbie able to forgive? What role did he play in this process?

Yes and we both are sometimes in the lead together. And we both take steps back at different times. We give each other lots of leeway during those times because we understand exactly how each other feels. When one of us is stuck somewhere we give each other room. And that is hard for me to be patient with myself when I get stuck. I understand now there is no timeline for healing.

How can two be in the lead together? Who are they leading?

Have there been times when people on the outside do not understand your healing process?

There is a shorthand with people who have experienced the loss of loved ones which has been a great comfort. But with people who haven’t endured this type of loss, sometimes they may say something insensitive but it is important to me to not take offense. I often repeat to myself: ‘Their intention is not to hurt your feelings.’ I want to make sure not to respond to awkwardness because the truth is I was feeling awkward too. The most basic questions such as ‘how many children do you have?’ would leave me speechless. I had to learn to redefine what was comfortable to me. There were many times, the answers I gave wouldn’t sit right with me. So, then I’d try again until I felt it was right.

A “shorthand” indicates a code, a secret language, something a select group of people know.

So, how do you answer that question now—how many children do you have?

‘I have three daughters. The oldest would be 10, the other two are 9 and 7.’ I then leave it up to the other person whether they want to ask a follow-up question. It’s my sweet spot right now.

Sweet spot relates to games. What game is she playing? This answer creates a win, or a success, in what?

mom2many said...

Are there any ways you are a different person since before the shooting? More religious, less so?

I feel more in tune with my spirituality. Before this, I felt like I had faith. But I never had to so strongly apply it. It’s shown me how big God’s love is for all his children. Amazing people have sent thousands of letters to us. It felt like the world understood this one person’s evil act. I had felt consumed by that evil. But seeing how this touched other people’s hearts, His love overpowered the other. It was so important for me to see.

How could the world understand this (close) evil act? The event was beyond comprehension to most people. How could a person mow down innocent children with such accuracy? If the world understood it, how could that be a comfort?

In the book, you mention several instances where you have intensely felt Emilie’s presence. Why do you think this has happened?

I wish I had the answer! I’d love to know. In the beginning, I wanted it immediately. I was obsessed with it but nothing happened. But as soon as I made a change in my heart, of accepting God’s timeline, these small miracles started. I believe that until I put myself in a place to receive it, it couldn’t happen. But it doesn’t happen all the time. He does it when He knows we need it. And, it’s not always when we think we need it. Or how we want it. It goes against my natural grain to wait. I’ve had to learn to trust that He knows best.

She doesn’t know why she has felt Emilie’s presence? She can’t give any reason for it at all? What is “it” she wanted immediately? She doesn’t say. She doesn’t give any example of the small miracles, either.

Now that you’ve moved away from Connecticut to Washington, do you ever return for visits?

I hadn’t been avoiding going but I also wasn’t trying to get there until we just visited recently. I love, love, love the people of Newtown. However, there are a lot of triggers associated with that place. Going back was bittersweet. It was not easy and I experienced feelings I hadn’t had in a long time.

What is said in the negative is important. It would be natural to avoid returning to the site of such tragedy, but she feels the need to deny avoiding it. She triple loves the people of Newtown...need to persuade.

What is your daily life like now?

First, and foremost, I am a stay-at-home-mom. Our life is pretty simple. We live near a bunch of farms. Life is quiet and tranquil, with a slow pace. Then there’s our non-profits Safe and Sound Schools and The Emilie Parker Art Connection. We love working on those. And I speak around the country about spirituality and talk with so many people. It’s pretty amazing. Overall, we are very happy out in Washington.

She distances herself from the non-profits by the missing pronoun.

Please tell me about the book cover: the girl on the swing, with the light shining on her.

It was important to us to have a picture that is reminiscent of Emilie, but not actually her. From the beginning, I’ve been very conscious of protecting the integrity of the story. The cover is her essence. It is not about tragedy, but about hope and light.

It’s important to not actually use a picture of Emilie on a book about her. The final kicker is her need to “protect the integrity of the story.” How does keeping Emilie off the cover protect the story? (This article was full of family pictures and assumably pictures of Emilie) Why is it a ‘story’? In what way does it need ‘protecting’?


AnneGuedes said...

I wonder what is the meaning of you being photographed in front of the Geneva Mur des Réformateurs ?

Hey Jude said...

Mom2Many - if you don't already know of it, Alissa Parker's personal blog, begun a month after Sandy Hook, is a most curious thing - your post led me to it.


Just to step into the twilight zone for a moment, I noticed almost every child victim of Sandy Hook could just as easily be of the opposite gender ascribed to them - it is more evident in the girls, so many of whom look like boys with girl's hair styles. Perhaps one could say that of any school class, IDK. I thought to look because Alissa said, in different blog entries that her daughter didn't like to play pretend, was good at reinventing, and had had worn a dress every day for two years. Those may be all perfectly normal things to say, and I just need to step out of the twilight zone - I find 'what happened' and the daughter herself, to be strangely absent. Also, after several weeks, one of her other daughter's said she had forgotten what her sister looked like - only at that point, apparently, did Alissa realise there was not a photograph of Emilie , nor even any family photographs, on display in the house. Her daughter died, and she and her husband did not think to look at a photograph of her in all that time, or that it might help her other children, or already have any on display in the house? It is a strange blog, some unexpected writings - for sure. I think there is so much not there, so far (I am about four months in) which I would have expected her to write about and reflect on, as she had set up that blog a month following her daughter's murder. What else would it be for? IDK, though - how do I know what I might think to do or write if my six year old daughter had been killed in a school massacre? Not that - but I am not her. I would be out of my mind - perhaps, reasonably, that is her out of her mind. The little girl seems not to be there though, meaning she is not the focus - the event is not the focus. It is all so muted, it seems unreal- could that be due to depression?

mom2many said...

No, I had not discovered her blog. I found this article through Facebook post, and it was so surprising to read! If it hadn't been accompanied with family photos, I would question whether the child ever existed based on the mother's statements. It is even stranger to hear the mother was writing that way from the beginning.

Hey Jude said...

For anyone interested, here is the blog - scroll to the foot of the page for the first entry.


I have to admit to being a bit of a conspiracy theorist, sometimes - but some things, such as the possibility of Sandy Hook being a false flag, can be too much to think about very much, much less admit to thinking about - 'How dare anyone question it, or have any doubt those children died?' I agree, how dare I, or anyone, if it did happen? - yet I still would like to know if Sandy Hook was a false flag event, the nature of which was so horrendous by design in order to prevent people feeling able to doubt or question it. Different age, different culture, but as the incident was much the same, and the trauma would be the same - the contrast between the parents of Sandy Hook and those of Dunblane Primary in Scotland, 1995. was marked. The blog I linked is not assuaging my doubts, thus far - maybe I am not approaching it in the right way, due to already having doubts.

Was the school really closed as unsafe and out of use at the time? It's difficult to know what to believe, as it seems it obviously would or should have been picked up by the media, and already known by local media, at the time of the incident, that the school was not in use.

Hey Jude said...

I think you will find the blog interesting, Mom2Many - I don't know what to make of it.

Colin said...

"By using this language freely, we are not on alert" I think you have a typo there. Did you mean "Now on alert"? where you were discussing body posture of objects. It confused me for a moment.

Brilliant article again Peter. When the analysis confirms preconceived opinion it feels great but the first time the analysis goes against a preconceived opinion it is more challenging and this is where I personally found myself confronted by the science. With all the previous analytical reports and the 100% accuracy behind it I was able to move past the opinion and move on with the science. It is interesting to watch your own mind choose a path.

mom2many said...

Thanks for the link. I'd found it, but had to leave to pick up my kids before reading much. Now they have possession of my desktop.

I find most conspiracy theories foolish. This one, though I'd read that the school was closed, I'd passed off as implausible, too. Just considering the number of people required to preserve the conspiracy, seems a big hurdle. Then I read this interview and it has got me doubting the official narrative. There was also the inconsistencies of the initial reports which went on for awhile. Lanza's mother was a teacher, she was not, she was a secretary or aid, she was not, she died at the school, she died in her home, lanza went to the school, lanza has no connection to the school.

Though, I suppose, if it was all a lie from the start the story would be consistent from beginning to end, right?

I'm with you, I don't know what to make of it. Maybe the Parker mother was detached from this daughter?

Esme Phe said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Esme Phe said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
VegasFirebrand said...

Mom2Many ... I caught this too which struck me as quite odd:

"A lot of counseling! Individual, couples, group therapy. I’m a firm believer that when ****something like that happens****, it’s impossible to navigate our emotions correctly without help. I felt so lost. I wanted to be able to help and serve my family. I needed to do this for my family’s health and healing."

"Something like THAT" ... wouldn't the language be "something like THIS" ... losing a child is DEEPLY personal, especially to a mother. Why the distancing language of that vs this?

Thank you guys for linking the article and the blog. I will be reading both.

Anonymous said...

Mom2many, Nothing you highlighted suggests deception, just things you don't like that the Mom said.
One example, you didnt like she said that when she received lots of supportive letters it felt like the whole world understood this persons evil act. I think she is just suggesting the she felt people understood the act was evil. Why she would forgive or have compassion? Impossible to know. I know the individual who did very evil stuff to me, I despise this person and cannot comprehend how they could do such evil stuff, and I will never forgive them (also they are not sorry) but very rarely I will have a tiny flash of compassion where I understand, if only momentarily that that persons mind sucks, they know no better emotions/qualities than what they manifested in action. A sick, desperate person made so by their own choices and who knows maybe shit that happened to them in their life. And all the anger and hatred in the world towards people like that does nothing...these people are already so debased they would just love the anger and hatred.
"Something like that"--she distances because it is a horrible thing that happened and also probably because when she's picturing it shes picturing it happening at a distance from her which was at the kids school.
This Sandyhook Conspiracy thing is ridiculous....they would have to be muzzling the entire town who would have all known the school was shutdown if it had really been shut down!

Hey Jude said...

I would say so, Mom2Many - she said she did not know Emilie's reading age/level - Emilie could not have been reading for very long at six years old - as she was the only one of the three children who was of reading age, it is strange the mother had already lost track of it.

Hey Jude said...

I think the idea is they set the whole event up with paid actors, so it was all fake, no children were killed. The claim is that the school had been out of ordinary use for safety reasons for months or years - there was no real school operating on the site at the time. IDK, does sound unlikely.

Anonymous said...



I don't think many people understand that.

About pets, nothing wrong with retreating from the world and enjoying company of pets.
Good for mental and physical health.

Speaking of which, a GoFundMe was made by recently by a supposed pet owner to raise money for his cat who apparently set on fire.

I feel like details are missing and important info is lacking.

Does this seem bad? Like the owner himself did this to raise money ??

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

Anons OT


Contains graphic images!

Help Save Bo

My cat Bo went missing on April 3, 2017. He returned home two days after, and it appeared that he had been tortured and set on fire. He is missing teeth, and he has third degree burns over 70% of his body, including the flats of his feet. He could barely walk when he returned home; he immediately went for water as he was breathing heavily. I've since made several visits to the animal hospital, and I will have to make many more. He has a long road of recovery ahead of him, moreover the financial aspect of it will be overwhelming. I myself am a kidney dialysis patient. My treatment and medication are very expensive even with medicare, and I can barely keep up with that alone. Any help in this devastating situation would be greatly appreciated.
Please help save Bo!

Thank you,
Paul Cook

Anonymous said...

Freed to kill more police: Isis terrorist who shot dead policeman and wounded two others on the Champs-Elysees was jailed for 20 years for trying to kill officers - but released early

By Dave Burke For Mailonline and Peter Allen In Paris for MailOnline

Anonymous said...

Does anyone know whether european tourism has declined due to terrorism the past few years? By now most of the world should know about the danger.

Hey Jude said...

OT - Bo

I noticed - There is no anger toward the perpertrator, and the language is passive.
'It appeared he had been tortured and set on fire'
'He is missing teeth and he has third degree-burns over 70% of his body.'
He does not say he thinks somebody did that to the cat, yet he 'appeared to have been tortured and set on fire' which requires the involvement of at least one person.

He has made several journeys to the animal hospital - he does not say he took his cat for,treatment, only that he had been there himself.

'The financial aspect of it will be overwhelming' - how is it not already overwhelming, if he has taken the cat several times to the animal hospital already. Would he not be expected to say, 'The financial aspect of it is overwhelming'? - as hemshould already have an estimate of how much the long-term treatment will cost?

No concern is expressed for the cat, only the 'devastating situation' which is financial hardship.

Thanks for the warning - I would look if it was necessary, but I'm a wuss - I have no doubt it is a pitiful sight, as the perpertrator intended.

Hey Jude said...

Come to think of it, and as the gofundme man has no money for treatment, wouldn't the vet advise euthanisia for third degree burns over seventy percent of the body? It would be kinder. I am not convinced he took the cat to the animal hospital - maybe he went to buy something to treat it, or just to visit to ask questions - though he could mean he went to visit the cat at the hospital. That could make sense of why he said he visited but did not say he took the cat. Well, even if he did take him and was visiting, he does not care about the cat.

Reader said... info on Operation Gotham Shield, on topic of discussion here on Sandy Hook. A Nuke drill coming.

tania cadogan said...

Off topic

Investigators have released an chilling 911 recording of a Phoenix mother charged with murder allegedly lying about how her nine-year-old son was shot in the head.

Wendy Lavarnia can be heard saying her younger son found a handgun she had left on the bed and accidentally shot his older brother, but she and her husband Kansas were later charged with his murder.

During the frantic phonecall during which the operator attempts to talk the suspected killer through reviving her son Landen, Lavarnia said: 'He was shot in the head - he is nine years old - by his baby brother. I got my gun down and left it on the bed like an idiot. And my son - I didn't think he could fire it, and he shot it.'

Police became suspicious when they found inconsistencies in the mother's account.

Authorities say the parents were charged with first-degree murder because they delayed medical care for the child while they cleaned up evidence in the house.

During the four-minute emergency call last month, a Fire Department operator told Wendy Lavarnia to apply direct pressure on the child's wound.

After she said she didn't think her son was breathing, the operator instructed her to put the child on his back so she could do chest compressions.

The call ended with another operator saying it looked like authorities were just pulling up at the house.

Landen Lavarnia was brought to a hospital, where he died.

tania cadogan said...


Transcript of the phonecall to 911

Operator (O): Phoenix 911, where is the emergency?

Wendy Lavarnia (WL): I have a nine-year-old. He was shot by his younger brother. I need someone to my house.

O: Okay, take a deep breath and tell me what happened.

WL: He was in my room. And I put my gun on my bed. And my two-year-old got the gun and...

O: Okay, okay - I can barely hear you. Do you need the paramedics out there?

WL: Yes, it's an emergency. My son's shot my son's head.

O: Okay - let me get you through to the fire department, don't hang up.

WL: Hurry. Please hurry.

Fire Officer (FO): Fire department, what's the address?

WL: *muffled instructions and crying*

FO: Okay - I'm going to need you to calm down and talk directly into the phone.

WL: My son. I have. He...

FO: Listen to me. Listen to me. Tell me what the emergency is. Slowly.

WL: My son. He is nine year's old. He was shot in the head.

FO: Okay - how did that happen?

WL: He's nine year's old. His baby brother. I got my gun out. I put my gun down on the bed like an idiot. Then my son, I didn't think he could fire it, but he shot it. I thought someone was playing video games. That's what it sounded like.

FO: Okay.

Police Officer (PO): We're on the way as well.

FO: Thank you. Is he breathing?

WL: I don't know.

FO: What I want you to do is get a dry, clean cloth and put direct pressure to the wound, okay? What caliber weapon was it?

WL: A 9mm.

FO: A 9mm handgun?

WL: Yes.

FO: Alright, ma'am, can you hear me?

WL: Yes.

FO: Okay, try to put direct pressure to the wound to try and control the bleeding. Is he still awake?

WL: *muffled noise*

FO: Ma'am, I can't hear you. I don't know if you're away from the phone or...

WL: No, I'm here. I have it up against my ear. Between my head and my ear. His lips are turning a little blue and his eyes are a little open, but he's not responding though.

FO: Okay, what I need you to do is take that dry, clean cloth and put pressure directly onto the wound to control the bleeding. Put your ear to his mouth - is he breathing?

WL: I don't think so.

FO: Okay. He wasn't holding the gun when it happened, correct?

WL: No, he wasn't holding the gun. My two-year-old did it.

FO: Okay, so it was the two-year-old who picked it up?

WL: Yes.

FO: Okay, we'll be there shortly, but what I want you to do is put your ear to his mouth.

WL: I'm trying.

FO: And you don't think he's breathing? Is he breathing? You don't hear him breathing?

WL: No, I don't.

FO: Okay, what I want you to do is get him flat on his back. Get him flat on his back now.

WL: I'm sorry. He's very...

FO: Get him flat on his back and I want you to put both your hands in the center of his chest and I want you to start pressing deep, hard and fast in the center of his chest. That's half the length of his chest, at least two inches down, okay?

WL: Yes.

FO: And I want you do go deep, hard and fast - one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten.

WL: I don't...*loud wailing*... he's already asleep.

FO: Okay, keep doing those compressions. Get someone else to help you put pressure on the wound if you can. Repeat the address.

PO: It looks like we're about to pull onto the scene.

tania cadogan said...


Police previously said the lack of visible blood and the extent of blood residue at the home implied that a significant amount of time had passed before authorities were called.

Police have declined to say whether they believe the boy would be alive had authorities been alerted sooner.

Investigators said they became suspicious of Kansas Lavarnia after he showed up at the house with a crudely bandaged gunshot wound on his upper arm.

His wound looked to have been punctured multiple times, possibly with a screwdriver, to mask the injury, authorities said.

Wendy and Kansas Lavarnia have pleaded not guilty.

After the shooting on March 20, police called the case one that 'shocks your conscience'.

Police declined to say whether they believe Landen would be alive had authorities been alerted sooner.

But a probable-cause statement filed by police says the lack of visible blood and the extent of blood residue implied that a significant amount of time passed before authorities were called.

'We have a nine-year-old critically wounded, shot in the head, in dire need of lifesaving efforts and care, which was delayed and not provided to this young man,' police Sgt. Vince Lewis said.

'It definitely shocks your conscience.'

Lewis declined to specify the efforts taken to clean up evidence in several rooms at the house.

The father's appearance at the home three hours after officers started investigating was suspicious because he was injured, Lewis said.

Police say they found evidence of blood in the trunk of the vehicle that Kansas Lavarnia drove to the house.

He is accused of first-degree murder, child abuse and hindering prosecution, while Wendy Lavarnia is accused of first-degree murder, court documents said.

Prosecutors have not yet charged them.

In a court appearance before her son died, the mother asked a judge whether she could go to the hospital to see the boy, but the judge said she could not leave jail without posting bond.

Kansas Lavarnia's only statements in court were responses to questions about his name and date of birth.

They are being held in lieu of $1million bond each.

He had originally been booked on weapons misconduct.

He was barred from having a gun in the home because of three 2009 convictions for theft and possession of burglary tools.

He completed a three-year prison sentence in 2012.

He blamed his convictions on a longstanding addiction to pain medications, saying he started taking the drugs after he broke his back in an ATV accident when he was 15, according to court records.

He said he was sober from 18 to 21 but later resumed using pain medications.

Once such drugs got too expensive, he turned to cheaper illegal drugs, using cocaine and heroin for a few years, records say.

Neighbors of the couple said the children could sometimes be seen outside wearing only a diaper.

'Their kids were always running in the front with their diapers on,' said Marie Mosley, who lives next door.

'They always yelled and cussed at them, which I didn't think was right, to cuss at little babies like that.'

Mosley also was surprised when she saw the mother emerge from the house showing little emotion, considering her child had just been shot in the head and taken away by paramedics barely alive.

tania cadogan said...


The couple's three surviving children are in the care of the state's child-welfare agency.

The Arizona Department of Child Safety says it investigated the parents on two occasions after two of the children were born exposed to 'substance'.

A second case was closed in June 2016 after the family successfully completed services.

Kansas Lavarnia's first conviction stemmed from a January 2009 arrest when he was seen crouched down in a car outside a home where $480 in property had been stolen.

The victim recognized the driver as Lavarnia, who used to clean fish tanks for the victim, authorities said.

Seven months later, police say Lavarnia tried to steal a sports car in his apartment complex and used tools in a bid to tamper with the vehicle's ignition.

A month later, Lavarnia used a friend's stolen driver's license to withdraw $4,500 out of his bank account, investigators said.

Lavarnia told authorities he was abusing drugs at the time and wasn't thinking clearly, court records said.

The school district where the nine-year-old attended the second grade says he was a kind, smart and creative boy who was friends with all.

Washington Elementary School District said in a letter to parents that Landen was enrolled at Sahuaro Elementary School. They said he was 'a very sweet' and kind boy who was also very smart, creative and helpful to his classmates.

tania cadogan said...

off the top of my head and it is very late/early morning.





Alibi building is her priority when asked what happened
She put the gun on her bed and her two year old got the gun...
The operator then has to ask if a paramedic is needed since she hasn't said where her son was shot and because she is talking quietly.
Only then does she say where her son was shot, "in the head" and it was her son who did it.
Even then note her priority:
Who shot whom
Where her son was shot.

WL: *muffled instructions and crying*


WL: My son. I have. He...



The operator is struggling to find out what happened as they can't hear the mother.
Is this deliberate speech by the mother to delay saying what happened (slowing down the event) or is it genuine and she is panicking about her mortally injured child?
Eventually after prompting by the operator to speak slowly she ytells who was injured and how and where.

FO: Okay - how did that happen?


FO: Okay.

Here we have almost disjointed language.
Note she blames the baby brother before saying what happened.
We have her taking ownership of the gun as she uses the pronoun I
She doesn't say where the younger son was in relation to the bed and gun as in he was in the bedroom.
Note the change of language in that she didn't think he could fire it but he shot it
Would it be more appropriate to have said he shot his brother/him as that is what he did rather than what she literally says which is he shot it(the gun)?

WL: I'm sorry. He's very...
This is always a red flag and noted for sensitivity.
It doesn't mean admission of guilty, it warrants further investigation to see why there is sensitivity.

This is a new one to me, i have never heard someone in such a situation use the phrase "asleep"
This makes me wonder if he had been asleep when shot?
What is her definition of asleep?
She also self edits here, what was she going to say after she said "I don't..."

tania cadogan said...

Another off topic, my apologies.

A man whose mother is presumed dead after their boat sank in the Atlantic Ocean is asking a Connecticut judge to seal from public view a search warrant that disclosed that he was a suspect in the 2013 slaying of his millionaire grandfather.

A hearing on Nathan Carman's request is set for Thursday in Middletown.

The Vernon, Vermont, resident left a Rhode Island marina with his mother Linda Carman on a September 17 fishing trip. He was found in a life raft eight days later south of Martha's Vineyard, Massachusetts, but his 54-year-old mother was missing, presumed drowned.

Carman - who suffers from Asperger’s Syndrome, a form of autism - wants a warrant to search his former Middletown home looking for the gun that killed his grandfather, John Chakalos, sealed. His lawyer said it contains damaging, unproven allegations about the 22 year old.

'The facts contained would seriously threaten Mr Carman's reputation and ability to seek and maintain employment,' wrote his lawyer Trent A LaLima in his motion to seal the warrant.

'Mr Carman is a very young man. These documents, if not sealed, could be discovered by potential employers, business partners, or others, for decades to come,' LaLima added.

Carman was 19 when his grandfather was fatally shot on December 20, 2013, in Windsor, Connecticut, the Hartford Courant reports.

Chakalos kept a collection of vintage World War II guns that could have matched the murder weapon and only Carman, who was the last person to see the wealthy real estate and nursing home magnate alive when the two had dinner, knew exactly how many weapons Chakalos had — and whether any were missing.

The next day one of Chakalos's daughters found the 87 year old dead.

A search of Carman's apartment on July 18, 2014, found a Remington tactical shotgun, a rifle scope and several boxes of ammunition, but the rifle did not match the caliber of the gun used to kill Chakalos, according to the warrant.

Carman denies any wrongdoing and has not been charged.

A hearing is scheduled for April 20 on the motion to seal the warrant and a court order for Carman to forfeit his gun.

Nearly four years later no-one has faced charges in the high profile case and the Chakalos family has offered a $250,000 reward for information.

Carman remains ‘a person of interest in the case,’ Windsor Police said. He had been due to meet his mother at 3am on the day after his grandfather’s death to go on a fishing trip, but he did not show.

In September, Carman was picked up 100 miles out to sea, by a Chinese freighter, the Orient Lucky.

He said his boat, the Chicken Pox, had gone down in Block Canyon.

Carman claimed that while he was grabbing supplies of food and water for the life raft, he lost sight of his mother.

Nathan and Linda Carman had set sail from the Ram Point Marina in South Kingstown, Rhode Island, around 11pm on September 17. Linda had told a friend they were going to an area around Striper Rock, 80 miles closer to shore and in much shallower waters.

Police are investigating to see if Nathan had deliberately made his boat less safe by removing trim tabs and failing to correct problems with his bilge pump.

Fellow boater Mike Iozzi told the Boston Globe that Carman had told him the tabs ‘don’t make the boat respond well.’

tania cadogan said...


Iozzi said Carman had fixed the boat with sealant, and that he had warned him not to go out too far at night. ‘I don’t know what happened,’ said Iozzi. ‘The guy upstairs probably knows what happened.’

Carman has denied being responsible in the deaths of either his grandfather or his mother, who, along with three sisters, was left the bulk of Chakalos’s $42 million fortune. He told the Associated Press he did everything he could to find his mother.

‘What happened on the boat was a terrible tragedy that I am still trying to process and that I am still trying to come to terms with,’ Carman said.

‘I don't know what to make of people being suspicious,’ he added. ‘I have enough to deal with.

‘I would not have taken my mom out fishing with me had I not believed the boat was seaworthy.’

Carman said Chakalos, his grandfather, was ‘like a father to me and I was like a son to him.’

‘He was the closest person in the world to me, and I loved him and he loved me, and I had absolutely nothing to do with his death,’ Carman said.

His father Clark Carman, also insisted Nathan was not responsible for either death.

‘There were only two people in his life, his mother and his grandfather, the older Carman told the Hartford Courant.

Peter Hyatt said...

Anonymous said...
April 20, 2017 at 7:46 PM


I have read reports of it that show dramatic drops.
Chinese tourists to Paris, for example, have been reportedly dropped more than 70%.


Habundia said...

So how you explain those victims showed up at the super bowl and sang togheter after this tragedy happened? How could these "victims" be there if they died? Can you tell me?

Habundia said...

Its like under cover detectives, cia,and stuff, there are many of them but all are able to be secret about their job, so i dont think it would be that hard to pay a bunch of people to make up a tragedy.......the germans also told the people there were no concentration camps.....still millions died in it, so i dont think its very hard to fool people, these days we see lots of stories that in the end were all set up...

Hey Jude said...

Well, a first responder interview from Sandy Hook was interesting:

Smell of gunshots was overwhelming, yet doesn't mention other smells or even the sight of blood..

Interviewer did not suggest it was a joke, fake or not real - police officer says:

I knew this wasn't a joke,
This was real.
You want it to be fake.
Your mind keeps telling you that this is not real.

Another video:
Police Chief
I felt a little bit of anger towards the person who had done this.

mom2many said...

There is a jump cut video edit when the officer is in the middle of taking a breath after making the statement about the smell. He may have further described the scene, but the producer decided to cut whatever came next. The video is very heavily edited. We can't assume we have all of the interviewers questions.

I'm not dismissing the weirdness of those statements, but it isn't possible to come to a conclusion without the raw footage or complete transcript including all questions. They mention the last of the funerals, so there is likely the "false flag" rumors already started that the interviewer may have asked directly about, but questions were cut to meet production time limits.

Hey Jude said...

Yes, just because I don't hear the interviewer asking if it was for real doesn't have to mean she didn't, and it was edited out. i think that would mean the answer was contaminated by the question, if it, or something similar, had been asked?

I think the pathologist press conference was off the scale of weird - especially when he said he'd seen a lot of things in his time, and this was the worst, but he hadn't broken down so far, or something like that, as if to suggest he'd seen worse than the massacre of twenty six year old children and six adults. It is very strange, he is so blasé, and he got really ratty about the 'Not a tent' thing with Velcro, and I thought he went off into tangents from the beginning, which seemed unreal in the circumstances.

Habundia said...

"I knew this wasn't a joke,
This was real.
You want it to be fake.
Your mind keeps telling you that this is not real.

Another video:
Police Chief
I felt a little bit of anger towards the person who had done this."

It's easy to let people believe undo this believe is almost impossible for many.......

So how many kids died during that tragedy? And they only feel a little bit anger towards the person who's responsible? Really? I've seen lesser tragedy where even strangers felt more angre towards the person responsible of the crime and yet they don't feel that angre while they are experience it closeby?

And it's was real, it wasn't a joke it really happened.......there were only no real victims (they didn't say there were real victims, they talked about 'it', which was the "tragedy", not the people who got 'victumized'.......sorry I just don't buy it.......
Look at this vid and say again.......did this really happen? I am not convinced at all