Shaniya Davis Statement Analysis

On Tuesday, November 10th, Shaniya Davis was reported kidnapped. The mother said, "I left her in front of the TV at 5:30. At 6:30, she was gone."

I did an analysis of this on Facebook, but have decided to repost it here, along with updates.

The word "left" is an unusual word and when it is used in a statement, it is red flagged as it often means that information has been withheld. This means that the mother is withholding some information about her daughter's disappearance.

Shaniya Davis' mother is deliberately withholding information from the police. This is the science of Statement Analysis.

Update: Thursday, November 12th, 2009. Police announce the arrest of mother's boyfriend. So, was sit the boyfriend and therefore, no information was left out?

Update: Friday, November 13th, 2009: The police release the boyfriend and arrest a man who was seen 45 miles away, by a video camera, with the little girl, by a hotel camera. Still no knowledge of where Shaniya is. Perhaps the mother did not withhold information?

Update: Saturday, November 14th.

We learn that the mother has had her other child taken into emergency foster care by State Child protective services. Perhaps they know something about the mother that has not been released to the public, but whatever it is, it is enough for a judge to sign an order giving the State custody of the child.

Update: Monday, November 16h.

The police arrest Shaniya Davis' motther and charge her with human trafficking and selling her child for the purpose of sexual slavery.

NOTE: I spoke to law enforcement in Fayetteville, who confirmed that they did check with federal statement analysis experts who had told them that the mother was, indeed, withholding information about her daughter, and is likely involved. This poor little child.

Her blanket was covered in feces; always a red flag for sexual abuse.

Let us hope there is a better end to this story than what is commonly thought. Our prayers remain with the child for a safe finding, and for the perpetrators to be brought to justice. Shaniya's dad spoke publically; pleading for her return. Let's hope they are reunited.

Casey and Jose Behind the Apple Tree?

Jose Baez has a very tough job. He has to come up with a defense for Casey Anthony, accused of killing her own child, because Casey locked herself into the "Zanny the Nanny kidnapped her" farce.

Even with parents who went along with the charade, inspite of the horrific smell of decomposition that the grandmother attempted to wash out of Casey's clothes and scrub out of the car, Jose Baez has had to hold the family's party line and "search" for a child who was never missing. Since then, George and Cindy Anthony have retired to a life of luxury, going from being behind on the mortgage to George's new diamond earrings and cruises. No job for either.

Since Casey reported that Zanny kidnapped the child and had police search, Jose Baez has been forced to keep to that defense. His endless filing of motions shows one thing:

He does not have any clue as to HOW to defend her.

Ask yourself: would you?? I know I would not. I think the best he can do is seek a plea, but in his position, taking a plea means a loss of fame and fortune. He may not always continue as a lawyer: see below.

On the Geraldo show, Mr. Baez was asked if he was involved in an “inappropriate relationship with his client. This was because he had been rebuked by prison officials on 3 occasions because he would not take his hands off of Casey. He was seen holding her very closely in public (on camera) many times and she was in his office, day after day, for up to 6 hours at a time.

When a person is asked a sensitive question, by not answering the question, they are giving you their answer.

Ask yourself this: If someone asked you if you had an inappropriate relationship with person A, how would YOU answer? “No, I didn’t” is the only truthful answer if no inappropriate relationship took place. It is short, it is easy and it is very low stress. It is what innocent people say when facing an accusation.

People do not like to lie. It causes internal stress. Instead, they edit their account, or deceive by avoidance. When a guilty person is asked a direct question, a positive answer will then result in unbearable stress, including disbarment for Mr. Baez. Yet, a lie causes internal stress so that if proof is later offered, his denial on Television can be entered into disbarrment procedings. His is a lawyer.

Question: There were 4 dogs sitting on the grass. One decided to run off. How many were left?

Answer: we do not know. We know that one decided, but we do not know if he went through with running off after he made his decision. Editing should not be interpreting.

“I tried to complete my work” in the past tense is an admittance that the person did not complete their work, but wants you to think they did.

Question: “Do you know about my surprise birthday party?”
Answer: “who me? I don’t know nothin’!”. This person has been asked a sensitive question and is seeking to avoid the answer.

Question: Did you smoke pot last night?
Answer: Who me? I am NOT a drug user.

This person may have smoked pot, and may have now made a vow to no longer use drugs, and is avoiding answering the question. They likely smoked pot last night. By saying "I am not a drug user" they are editing their answer. They may have stayed up late last night, and confessed to their partner, and now is enjoying Day One drug free. Yet, they skillfully avoided the answer.

"Did you have sex with Amy Fischer?"

"Never, Never, NEVER!" screamed Joey Buttafuouco. Never does not mean "no". Rather, it is something that liars like to use rather than a straight denial. Think of him before the judge: "100% NOT GUILTY!", rather than, "not guilty". His emphasis told Statement Analyzers (verbal polygraphers)...yep, he did.


When Jose Baez was asked if he was involved in an inappropriate relationship with Casey Anthony, he was asked a very straight forward question. If he did not engage in an inappropriate relationship, a quick 'no" will suffice. It is easy and without stress. Qualifiers are signs of deception.

Baez answered, “I’m not going to dignify that with an answer. I am not going to even dignify that with an answer.”

So, there you have your answer. (including the additino of the word "even", which is added.

What your eyes saw on TV and what you read about with the prison officials repeated rebukes of Mr. Baez was not lying to you. When someone walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and lands in your pond: go ahead and toss it a piece of bread. I don't think it is looking for Prime Rib.

If he (0r you!) did not have an inappropriate relationship then the best and most simple answer is the truthful one: “No, I didn’t”

When someone does not answer your question, remember: there is a reason why they will not answer a question.

When someone refuses to answer a question "based upon my lawyer's advice" know this:

It is not illegal for an innocent person to say "No, I didn't"

It won't mess up their case. It is not against counsel's advice. It breaks no rules and violates no laws.

Richard Jewel is a good example. He said "no I didn't". Why was he hounded?

Because law enforcement was split in two camps:

Statement Analysis: He didn't do it. Period.

Profiling: Yeah, he might have: he was white, mid 30's, lived with Mom.

This was really outdated. The S/A folks knew from his statements that he did not bomb anything. Verbal polygraphy is a science.

Another installment to follow. If you have suggestions for particular cases, please include them in the comments section, along with the ACTUAL transcripts or statements of the target.

911 Calls continued

As publicity surrounds those who perpetrate crimes, and as crime iteself becomes more and more profitable in the post OJ era, 911 calls can leave many clues for those who take the time to listen.

With OJ's trial, not only was a huge racial rift seen in our country, but careers were made on this murder. Since then, we have a new advent of "reality" television programs; entertainment that is projected as "reality" though it may be nothing close to reality.

A mom with 6 children undergoes a medical procedure to have 8 babies born so she can become a celebrity. "Octomom"'s life could be anything but reality.

Next, a man with a history of domestic violence, parades his children before the cameras and stages a "balloon boy" incident in which he hoped to gain media attention for his own reality TV station. He posted YouTube videos of his children using vulgarity in an attempt to promote himself. His 911 call to police should have been THE first indicator of deception.

When Balloon Boy's parents made the call, many said, "it is a hoax." The talking heads on that Friday were quickly rebuked by other talking heads (mostly attorneys) for being overly suspicious. Like you actually know a 6 year old who can hide for more than 5 minutes?? When was the last time you played "hide and go seek" with a child, anyway? by Monday, the world knew it as a hoax. I noticed that in the talking head shows, no one revisited the pundits on the previous Friday who were correct in pointing out the hoax.

911 calls are the first clues into what has taken place.

In a FBI study done of 100 911 calls, where later 50 were proven guilt by the 911 caller and 50 were done by innocent callers, statistics revealed much.

When a caller (like Misty Croslin) gives extraneous information, it is a likely indicator of guilt. Out of the guilty callers a full 93% of 911 calls with extraneous information were guilty of committing the crime they had called 911 for!

It is NOT at all unusual for a perpetrator of a crime to call 911. In fact, it happens often. When the caller gives extraneous information, it is the first clue. If the caller disparages or blames the victim, it is a strong indicator that the caller has caused the harm.

Remember, 911 Operators ask "What is your emergency?"

Here are a few examples:

Guilty caller: "I need help for my daughter. She threw up water. She...um...when she got off the stool..she was drinking water, and we told her to get down, and she threw herslf down off the floor, off the stool."

This man was convicted of killing his adopted 4 year old daughter after she disobeyed him and drank from his biological daughter's cup. He mentioned water twice. As punishment, he tied her hands behind her back and forced her to drink 64 ounces of water, effectively drowning her (hyponatremia).

Guilty caller: "I need help. I don't know what's wrong with her. Not a clue."
Dispatch: "Has she taken any medications?"
Guilty caller: "Maybe. She's very very sneaky. She threw a huge temper tantrum earlier. She might have taken something."

This man was insulting his daughter as she lay dying at his feet. He was later convivted of her murder.

A woman called to report her husband was in need of an ambulance as he had been shot.

Dispatch: Was this accidental or on purpose?
Woman: "We were having a domestic fight, and he threw me down on the bed and grabbed my purse so I couldn't leave."

She was convicted of intentional murder. Notice that she DID NOT answer the question?

Casting blame is a sign of guilt.

In the study, no innocent callers blamed the victim.

Look at the TOPIC of the call. What is the call about? Remember from Misty Croslin's call how important the order was? Innocent callers get RIGHT to the point.

Examples of innocent callers:

1. There is a man down who is not breathing.
Dispatch: check his pulse.
Caller: There is a pulse. I thought it was a man, but it is a woman.

Innocent callers correct any errors.

2. Innocent callers go RIGHT to the need:

"There's someone in the hall shot. Hurry!" rather than,
"I was coming home late from work, I am usually here by 9, but this time it was 11PM and I found this man shot..."

What does the above tell you? There is something amiss. It may be that the caller is guilty of shooting, or that he was somewhere that night where he was not supposed to be. The extra information shows guilt; but guilt over what would need to be established. Later it is learned that the man was at his girlfriend's apartment, not at work.

3. The callers' modulation

Rude, angry and demanding callers are almost always innocent callers. Those with low affect, those who are polite, calm, and patient are more likely to be guilty callers.

Innocent Callers:

Request for help for victim
Give relevant info
show concern for victim
Correct mistakes

Guilty callers will often:
not even request help for victim, but rather for themselves
give extra information (attempt to persuade rather than report)
Insult or blame victim

Innocent Callers:
trouble accepting a death

guilty caller: acceptance of victim's death

Innocent caller: focus upon victim's survival
guity caller: focus on caller's problem, caller's need for help

Innocent caller: will cooperate with dispatch
guilty caller: will politely resist cooperation

Of course, there is the caller who may have guilt, but not necessarily of the crime itself. This is seen when the caller witholds information. Perhaps they are calling 911 for an amubulance, but know who caused the injury and want to protect that person. Or, they want help, but want to protect someone else. When this complication arises, it means that more questions need to be asked.

Listen to the 911 calls made by Balloon boy's parents. Watch the video. Then ask yourself what you would have done had your son be in that situation. Would you have kicked at the balloon in "anger" rather than grab the rope?

If you came home from work and your 5 year old was missing, what would you say? Would you scream for help because your child is missing? Or, would you explain how you were sleeping, and how you found the door open with a brick, and oh, by the way...

a child is missing??

A most often used guilty response is this:

You don't know how you'd react! There's no book on this sort of thing. There's no textbook answer unless you've first had a missing child..."

Not true. There is a textbook. It's called "Research" and is shows how innocent parents sound and how guilty ones sound. Many crimes have been solved by a simple view of verb tense.

Casey Anthony: "She loved the park." The past tense told us, immediately, that mom knew her child was dead. Would you describe your missing child in the past tense? In fact, studies have shown that EVEN when an innocent parent is told that the child is dead, the parent will continue to speak in the present tense, unable to accept the death.

It is similar to Statement Analysis. Rather than being deceived by an answer, just ask yourself how you would answer a question.

"did you harm the child?"

It is very simple and straightforward. "No, I didn't" is the simplest and most straightforward answer. When you get a long, complicated response, or when the question is not answered, it means that a sensitive question has been asked. Now comes the biggie: Why is this sensitive??

Commonly used deceptive answers:

"I'm not even going to dignify that with an answer."
"How can you even ask me that!"
"That's disgusting; I'm not talking to you..."






For further analysis, see Dr. Susan H. Adams, FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin

Statement Analysis of Misty's 911 Call

Misty Croslin, 17, was the live in girlfriend of Ronald Cummins, 26, and watching his two young children while he worked the night shift.

We know that she was on a 3 day drug binge prior to the day that Haliegh was reported missing at 3:30AM. We also know that she and Ronald had a fight where he called her cell phone, from work, about 20 times, and finally, at 10PM, called Misty's brother to go to the home and check on her. The brother went over at 10PM and no one was home.

We know that this family has been reported to be troubled in substance abuse and domestic violence, and that allegations of abuse and neglect of the children have been made.

Let's look at the 911 call from the point of Statement Analysis. Ron came home at about 3:30AM and Misty informed him that his child was missing and he had her call the police.

The question posed to Misty is "What's your emergency?"




911: "911, what's your emergency"

Misty Croslin: "Hi...umm...I just woke up...and our backdoor was wide open and I think...and I can't find our daughter"


The first thing we notice is the order in which Misty addresses the 911 operator. Order is important. We will name things in the order of importance; the order of birth, the order of attachment. In Statement Analysis, you may ask yourself, "What would I say?" Before Misty answers the question, we find her speaking about herself.

1. I just woke up.

The 911 operator did not ask Misty if she was alseep. To Misty, this is the most important aspect of her call and it is what she says first.

When my kids were in hockey, we often went to "Play It Again Sports: Used and New". Can you guess which items were sold more often? It was used equipment. Name your children. You likely do it in age order. "Moe, Larry and Curly" who was the dominant figure? Likely it was Moe. "I'd like to order steak and salad." The steak is likely more important than the salad. Who runs the country? You'd likely answer "Barak Obama and Joe Biden" rather than "Joe Biden and Barak Obama". The order in which a person speaks shows the importance placed by the speaker. If you asked the same question of Mrs. Biden, or Joe Biden's kids, the answer may be different.

Misty, first and foremost, wants the police to know that she was asleep. This is the most important thing to Misty.

2. Next: The backdoor was wide open.

Secondly, she wants the police to know that the backdoor was wide open. She has two things to tell the police before she reports that a young child is missing. This tells us that her alibi is foremost in her mind, more important to Misty than the missing child.

Ask yourself:

What would you say to a 911 operator if you woke up to find your child missing??

You'd say "my child is missing!" before anything else. Everything else is incidental to you because you are consumed with one thought: your child is missing. It would be the most important thing to you; not your sleep, and certainly not a door.

In excited utterance, the 911 call shows precisely what the person is thinking. Remember Cindy Anthony's 911 call? "It smells like a dead body in the damned car." Cindy smelled the unforgettable odor of decay. In her mind, the car is "damned" because she knew her missing grandchild had been in it. 911 calls, excited utterance, are recorded because of their importance to a case. If you were the police officer responding to an alleged missing child case and you heard Cindy's exclamation, the first thing you would do is go to the car, and then call in a cadaever dog. Florida police appeared to have made the appropriate initial reponse in the Casey Anthony case.

3. Misty finally answers the question, "What's your emergency?"

"our daughter is missing".

Notice how she went from the first person pronoun "I was asleep" to now the plural? Any change in language is significant. Why the pronoun change? Pronouns show ownership.

"left the car there. Went to the store. Met some friends." The absence of the personal pronoun may indicate a subconcious "distancing" of the person.


Later, we learned that Misty failed up to 3 polygraphs and a stress analyzer test.

In an interview with media later that day, Misty referred to Haleigh in the past tense. "...she loved me...".

Parents and caretakers never speak of their children in the past tense unless they know they are dead. Some mothers are unable to speak of their dead children in the past tense for quite some time after their child's death. It is an unbearable thought.

Before this investigation even began, it would be evident to Florida law enforcement that the 17 year old knows what happened to Haleigh, and later, that she is likely deceased.

911 calls often leave important clues to investigators.



Updates to follow

Time for a Haircut!

Heather was not pleased when Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill (or is it Spencer Leonard?) came home, unlike a Coton De Tulear, or a bloated, cigar chomping leader of a dying empire, like a Maltese! She just wanted a puppy cut, not a BUZZ cut!

What will the Kaiser say about this haircut? What about the neighborhood dogs? Will Christina put a bow on him?? This is crisis Defcon 2!

Bar Harbor in Mud Season

Mud Season is in full bloom here in Maine.

What I had often thought was a joke is anything but. Mud is everywhere. As of today, we still have most of the ice rink and about 2' of snow around it, and a foot of snow in some parts of the yard. The melting snow, as well as the run off from King Mountain, means mud is everywhere.

Everywhere I go, I bring boots. I now have adjusted to the point where I instinctively know where not to drive the car, and where to get out and just walk.

Mink oil does a great job protecting leather and cleaning several times a day is a must.

But, Mud Season is also a great time to get away and there is no better place to go than to Bar Harbor in Mud Season.

Bar Habor is still basically "closed down" as it is a seasonal resort town, but it is during this time of year when bargains about. A Bed and Breakfast may be at 75% discount from peak (if you can get a reservation in the summer!) yet the walk around the area is just as beautiful as it is in the Summer, but so very peaceful.

A great place to visit downtown is the tiny music store "Song of the Sea" where the owner will demo everything from Bagpipes to the Irish Tin Whistle for you. A great shop.

Winter Skating!

With walls now reaching 5', and temps as low as -28, the ice rink is stunning! The kids are learning to skate well and Sean should be ready for a hockey league next season.

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!

With a beautiful ice rink with 5' walls, Winter is beautiful here in freezing Maine! Temps hit -28 below here, which was quite remarkable. I was able to add a new layer of ice every 2 or 3 minutes. Sean has his new guitar (a Marin!) and Joseph is now taking guitar DVD lessons. Christina continues with her ukulele lessons and she and Heather will be doing vocal lessons together. Pete is teaching us how to use the Iphones; which, in spite of being used to marvelling at technology, cause us to marvel anyway. It is stunning what they do! I was one of the first to get an ipod, but things have changed dramatically.
Sarah is doing well in school, as is Pete, Joseph, and Jonathan. Congrats to Pete on his next step! Pete, Joseph and Jonathan have all been spending a lot of time on the ice, and Sarah has started skating...Heather is next!