WEBVTT

1
00:00:30.480 --> 00:00:32.560
<v Speaker 1>So welcome back to our latest series of The Path

2
00:00:32.600 --> 00:00:35.880
<v Speaker 1>with Chili. We're recording this just a few days before Christmas,

3
00:00:35.880 --> 00:00:38.280
<v Speaker 1>and once again, since Ashley is busy, she has a

4
00:00:38.280 --> 00:00:40.920
<v Speaker 1>newborn baby and a family to take care of. Is

5
00:00:40.960 --> 00:00:43.240
<v Speaker 1>just going to be me and Jewles doing this particular episode,

6
00:00:43.240 --> 00:00:45.039
<v Speaker 1>but we're going to do something a little different from

7
00:00:45.039 --> 00:00:47.640
<v Speaker 1>the norm because I'm not going to say the case

8
00:00:47.640 --> 00:00:50.359
<v Speaker 1>we're covering right now, because at the moment, Jewles doesn't

9
00:00:50.399 --> 00:00:53.039
<v Speaker 1>even know it. I have deliberately not told her any

10
00:00:53.079 --> 00:00:56.280
<v Speaker 1>details about it except provided her with a statement that

11
00:00:56.479 --> 00:00:58.960
<v Speaker 1>was said by one of the people connected to this case.

12
00:00:59.039 --> 00:01:02.640
<v Speaker 1>Because Jewels is going to be performing a statement analysis

13
00:01:02.640 --> 00:01:05.159
<v Speaker 1>in this episode, Jules, you want to tell everyone what

14
00:01:05.239 --> 00:01:05.560
<v Speaker 1>that is?

15
00:01:06.040 --> 00:01:09.000
<v Speaker 2>Yes, okay, So statement analysis has been something I've been

16
00:01:09.040 --> 00:01:12.760
<v Speaker 2>interested in since I started Briddle Me That years ago.

17
00:01:13.000 --> 00:01:16.280
<v Speaker 2>I no longer do the podcast, but one person that

18
00:01:16.359 --> 00:01:18.640
<v Speaker 2>I had interviewed for one of my episodes was Mark

19
00:01:18.719 --> 00:01:22.920
<v Speaker 2>McLish and he was the most interesting person that I interviewed.

20
00:01:23.280 --> 00:01:25.840
<v Speaker 2>I thought it was so fascinating how you could break

21
00:01:25.879 --> 00:01:28.640
<v Speaker 2>down just simple words that we take for granted, how

22
00:01:28.640 --> 00:01:34.079
<v Speaker 2>they're put together and punctuation pronouns used time references and

23
00:01:34.159 --> 00:01:38.359
<v Speaker 2>you could deduce whether something is false or whether it's true.

24
00:01:38.560 --> 00:01:41.760
<v Speaker 2>It's a pretty simple system and when I was interested

25
00:01:41.799 --> 00:01:44.640
<v Speaker 2>in learning about the technique, I reached out to Mark

26
00:01:45.239 --> 00:01:48.200
<v Speaker 2>and he let me do the training for free. He

27
00:01:48.319 --> 00:01:52.120
<v Speaker 2>was incredibly supportive. He looks at statements for me whenever

28
00:01:52.200 --> 00:01:56.079
<v Speaker 2>I have something that I have a question when I'm practicing. Unfortunately,

29
00:01:56.159 --> 00:01:58.480
<v Speaker 2>for this one, our timing just didn't really align, so

30
00:01:58.519 --> 00:02:00.599
<v Speaker 2>he couldn't double check my work. So I want to

31
00:02:00.640 --> 00:02:03.120
<v Speaker 2>preface this and say I was certified, but I am

32
00:02:03.239 --> 00:02:05.799
<v Speaker 2>in no way an expert here. There could be some

33
00:02:05.879 --> 00:02:08.319
<v Speaker 2>of you listening who know far more than I do,

34
00:02:09.039 --> 00:02:13.159
<v Speaker 2>and that's okay. You can have your opinion on the

35
00:02:13.159 --> 00:02:15.560
<v Speaker 2>way that this is structured. And in the show notes

36
00:02:15.599 --> 00:02:18.039
<v Speaker 2>will provide the statement. So if you want to go

37
00:02:18.080 --> 00:02:20.719
<v Speaker 2>and do your own analysis, you're more than welcome to.

38
00:02:21.400 --> 00:02:22.719
<v Speaker 2>And I just want to give you guys a little

39
00:02:22.759 --> 00:02:26.560
<v Speaker 2>bit of information about who Mark McLish is. So he's

40
00:02:26.840 --> 00:02:29.599
<v Speaker 2>literally written the book. He's written three of them. One

41
00:02:29.599 --> 00:02:31.840
<v Speaker 2>of them is don't be Deceived, the other one is

42
00:02:32.039 --> 00:02:35.280
<v Speaker 2>I Know You're lying, and ten ways to spot a liar.

43
00:02:35.719 --> 00:02:38.039
<v Speaker 2>So he is a grandfather in the industry, he spent

44
00:02:38.360 --> 00:02:41.280
<v Speaker 2>twenty six years in law enforcement. He worked in the

45
00:02:41.319 --> 00:02:44.879
<v Speaker 2>Secret Service as well as the Marshall Service, and he

46
00:02:44.960 --> 00:02:48.240
<v Speaker 2>spent a great deal of time training in statement analysis

47
00:02:48.879 --> 00:02:52.080
<v Speaker 2>because he was the lead instructor on interview techniques and

48
00:02:52.159 --> 00:02:54.520
<v Speaker 2>that's where he developed the system of statement analysis. He

49
00:02:54.560 --> 00:02:58.039
<v Speaker 2>also worked on developing the software that would detect deception

50
00:02:58.159 --> 00:03:01.000
<v Speaker 2>and statements. So he retires hired in two thousand and

51
00:03:01.080 --> 00:03:04.599
<v Speaker 2>nine as a supervisory Deputy US Marshal, So he now

52
00:03:04.639 --> 00:03:08.159
<v Speaker 2>gets presentations on statement analysis as well as providing training

53
00:03:08.199 --> 00:03:11.919
<v Speaker 2>to military and law enforcement agencies. Another fun fact about him,

54
00:03:11.960 --> 00:03:14.759
<v Speaker 2>I think it's taekwondo that he's a black belt in.

55
00:03:15.080 --> 00:03:18.439
<v Speaker 2>I think he was like head of ground training techniques

56
00:03:18.520 --> 00:03:21.840
<v Speaker 2>or something related to that. So our own Ashley Wellman,

57
00:03:22.000 --> 00:03:24.240
<v Speaker 2>has a black belt in taekwondo, so I just thought

58
00:03:24.240 --> 00:03:25.400
<v Speaker 2>that was an interesting tie in.

59
00:03:26.080 --> 00:03:28.000
<v Speaker 1>I actually didn't even know that about Ashley, so that

60
00:03:28.039 --> 00:03:30.879
<v Speaker 1>don't be my surprise. So that's cool to hear. So

61
00:03:31.000 --> 00:03:33.400
<v Speaker 1>when you interviewed Mark McLish on riddle me that was

62
00:03:33.400 --> 00:03:35.840
<v Speaker 1>it in relation to any particular case or was it

63
00:03:35.919 --> 00:03:38.439
<v Speaker 1>just a general conversation about statement analysis.

64
00:03:38.639 --> 00:03:41.400
<v Speaker 2>No, I believe it was. This was like four years

65
00:03:41.400 --> 00:03:44.159
<v Speaker 2>ago or something at this point, maybe even five, But

66
00:03:44.280 --> 00:03:48.000
<v Speaker 2>I believe it was the Faith Hedge Peth case and

67
00:03:48.120 --> 00:03:50.159
<v Speaker 2>the nine to one one call I believe was what

68
00:03:50.240 --> 00:03:50.960
<v Speaker 2>we went over.

69
00:03:51.439 --> 00:03:53.400
<v Speaker 1>And what's interesting is that's a case there has since

70
00:03:53.400 --> 00:03:55.360
<v Speaker 1>been an arrest and it turned out not to be

71
00:03:55.479 --> 00:03:58.080
<v Speaker 1>face roommate who made the call, but rather a completely

72
00:03:58.199 --> 00:04:00.919
<v Speaker 1>random predator who was never on the rate as a suspect.

73
00:04:01.039 --> 00:04:02.840
<v Speaker 1>So if you kind of interesting to go back and

74
00:04:02.840 --> 00:04:05.039
<v Speaker 1>listen to that and see how much is analysis was

75
00:04:05.080 --> 00:04:06.199
<v Speaker 1>close to the facts.

76
00:04:06.439 --> 00:04:07.879
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, and I think there can be a lot of

77
00:04:07.960 --> 00:04:11.199
<v Speaker 2>different things that can go into why somebody is reacting

78
00:04:11.280 --> 00:04:13.360
<v Speaker 2>the way that they are with a nine to one

79
00:04:13.439 --> 00:04:15.599
<v Speaker 2>one call. But I think a lot of us, when

80
00:04:15.680 --> 00:04:18.639
<v Speaker 2>looking at that case, were wrong. I know I was wrong.

81
00:04:19.000 --> 00:04:21.560
<v Speaker 2>I thought that there had to have been some involvement

82
00:04:21.600 --> 00:04:24.240
<v Speaker 2>of the roommate, given her behavior, the fact that it

83
00:04:24.279 --> 00:04:27.000
<v Speaker 2>was unlocked, and the way that she spoke on that

84
00:04:27.079 --> 00:04:29.639
<v Speaker 2>nine to one one call, and then what seemed like

85
00:04:29.680 --> 00:04:32.319
<v Speaker 2>a lack of cooperation with law enforcement. I don't know

86
00:04:32.360 --> 00:04:34.199
<v Speaker 2>if it was a lack of cooperation or just the

87
00:04:34.240 --> 00:04:36.959
<v Speaker 2>fact that she wasn't talking to the press, she wasn't

88
00:04:37.000 --> 00:04:39.920
<v Speaker 2>giving any statements, and so we were left to wonder

89
00:04:39.959 --> 00:04:42.279
<v Speaker 2>and all we really had to go off of was

90
00:04:42.279 --> 00:04:44.360
<v Speaker 2>that nine one one call.

91
00:04:44.560 --> 00:04:47.240
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, And it's been different in varying cases, where sometimes

92
00:04:47.279 --> 00:04:49.399
<v Speaker 1>a nine one one call er was guilty and other

93
00:04:49.439 --> 00:04:51.800
<v Speaker 1>times they were completely innocent. You just kind of can't

94
00:04:51.800 --> 00:04:53.959
<v Speaker 1>react to how people are going to act and that

95
00:04:54.800 --> 00:04:58.319
<v Speaker 1>particular situation. But the good news about the case we're

96
00:04:58.360 --> 00:05:00.439
<v Speaker 1>going to talk about is it's still on SOLT, So

97
00:05:00.480 --> 00:05:03.879
<v Speaker 1>we still can't technically know if jewels statement analysis is

98
00:05:03.920 --> 00:05:05.920
<v Speaker 1>going to be right or wrong, because the truth is

99
00:05:05.920 --> 00:05:09.120
<v Speaker 1>still murky. So what we did is I deliberately didn't

100
00:05:09.160 --> 00:05:11.720
<v Speaker 1>tell Jewels any details about the cases. I just gave

101
00:05:11.759 --> 00:05:14.959
<v Speaker 1>her a one paragraph statement that was made by someone

102
00:05:15.000 --> 00:05:18.040
<v Speaker 1>connected to this case in a police interrogation room, and

103
00:05:18.120 --> 00:05:21.160
<v Speaker 1>without knowing any of the context of what he was

104
00:05:21.199 --> 00:05:23.920
<v Speaker 1>talking about any details of the case, she performed a

105
00:05:23.959 --> 00:05:26.839
<v Speaker 1>statement analysis and what he said. So what we'll do

106
00:05:26.959 --> 00:05:29.199
<v Speaker 1>is we'll read the statement and then Jewels will give

107
00:05:29.199 --> 00:05:31.879
<v Speaker 1>her own statement analysis, and when she's done, I will

108
00:05:31.920 --> 00:05:34.439
<v Speaker 1>provide her the context when this statement was made and

109
00:05:34.480 --> 00:05:37.879
<v Speaker 1>then share all the details about the featured case, and

110
00:05:37.920 --> 00:05:39.879
<v Speaker 1>then we'll find out at the end if Jewels has

111
00:05:39.959 --> 00:05:42.199
<v Speaker 1>changed her opinion or not, or if she still thinks

112
00:05:42.199 --> 00:05:45.439
<v Speaker 1>she's right on the money. So I'm just going to

113
00:05:45.519 --> 00:05:49.319
<v Speaker 1>read the statement out word for word now, and I'll

114
00:05:49.399 --> 00:05:51.519
<v Speaker 1>just say is that this is made by an individual

115
00:05:51.639 --> 00:05:54.120
<v Speaker 1>while they're in a police interrogation room. So let me

116
00:05:54.199 --> 00:05:56.439
<v Speaker 1>just pull it up here. So here it is word

117
00:05:56.480 --> 00:05:58.800
<v Speaker 1>for word. Oh, I think it was in the original

118
00:05:59.040 --> 00:06:01.000
<v Speaker 1>one you sent me yesterday, so I'll just pull that up.

119
00:06:01.040 --> 00:06:03.439
<v Speaker 1>I just got your final one now that I just

120
00:06:03.439 --> 00:06:06.959
<v Speaker 1>want to get the word for word one. Okay. So

121
00:06:07.000 --> 00:06:08.600
<v Speaker 1>I'm going to read a word for word, and I'm

122
00:06:08.639 --> 00:06:10.639
<v Speaker 1>going to bleep out the name of the victim here

123
00:06:10.680 --> 00:06:14.959
<v Speaker 1>because we don't want to give that away quote. Okay. Basically,

124
00:06:15.360 --> 00:06:18.199
<v Speaker 1>the truth of the matter is me and Blank went

125
00:06:18.240 --> 00:06:20.079
<v Speaker 1>to the old College and we got in a big

126
00:06:20.160 --> 00:06:22.639
<v Speaker 1>argument and fight, and it was over money that she

127
00:06:22.639 --> 00:06:25.040
<v Speaker 1>wouldn't give back to me. It was some change of

128
00:06:25.040 --> 00:06:27.600
<v Speaker 1>a twenty dollars bill. She hauled off and punched me.

129
00:06:28.120 --> 00:06:31.720
<v Speaker 1>I then, not thinking, pushed her. When she fell backwards

130
00:06:31.720 --> 00:06:33.920
<v Speaker 1>her head and paled on something sharp sticking out of

131
00:06:33.959 --> 00:06:36.879
<v Speaker 1>the ground. I then said, are you all right? I

132
00:06:36.959 --> 00:06:39.240
<v Speaker 1>run over to her, and she just mined a little bit,

133
00:06:39.399 --> 00:06:42.720
<v Speaker 1>and there was nothing else. I hollered out for help too,

134
00:06:42.800 --> 00:06:46.480
<v Speaker 1>because Holmes Boulevard is right there. Nobody came, nobody yelled

135
00:06:46.519 --> 00:06:49.040
<v Speaker 1>back or anything. I didn't want to leave her. I

136
00:06:49.160 --> 00:06:52.279
<v Speaker 1>freaked out. I didn't. I said, I don't know what

137
00:06:52.399 --> 00:06:55.160
<v Speaker 1>to tell you all. I couldn't tell you all. I

138
00:06:55.279 --> 00:07:00.240
<v Speaker 1>just freaked so not thinking, I freaked, I tripped. I

139
00:07:00.319 --> 00:07:02.720
<v Speaker 1>just didn't know what to do. I buried her. I

140
00:07:02.720 --> 00:07:04.839
<v Speaker 1>didn't know what to do. It was the wrong thing

141
00:07:04.879 --> 00:07:07.480
<v Speaker 1>to do. I agree, but I was fourteen years old.

142
00:07:07.680 --> 00:07:10.800
<v Speaker 1>I wasn't thinking. I then I came home after that,

143
00:07:10.879 --> 00:07:13.759
<v Speaker 1>but she was dead, definitely dead before I buried her.

144
00:07:14.319 --> 00:07:16.519
<v Speaker 1>That I know because I checked her stomach and all that.

145
00:07:17.160 --> 00:07:19.839
<v Speaker 1>Then after that, I sat there for about thirty minutes,

146
00:07:20.319 --> 00:07:22.680
<v Speaker 1>thirty eight to forty five minutes, just didn't know what

147
00:07:22.759 --> 00:07:25.600
<v Speaker 1>to do. I went home, I got cleaned up. I

148
00:07:25.680 --> 00:07:28.839
<v Speaker 1>regret it. I'm sorry it did happen. I regret pushing her.

149
00:07:29.199 --> 00:07:30.839
<v Speaker 1>I wish I could go back in time and not

150
00:07:30.920 --> 00:07:33.160
<v Speaker 1>have done that. I wish I could turn time. If

151
00:07:33.199 --> 00:07:35.680
<v Speaker 1>I could turn time back, I wouldn't just you know,

152
00:07:36.399 --> 00:07:38.600
<v Speaker 1>it was all over money, and you know what money

153
00:07:38.600 --> 00:07:40.879
<v Speaker 1>will do to you when you're a kid. I don't know.

154
00:07:41.079 --> 00:07:43.120
<v Speaker 1>You were a kid, you had a certain amount of money,

155
00:07:43.360 --> 00:07:45.920
<v Speaker 1>the money was valuable to you then, you know. But

156
00:07:46.000 --> 00:07:47.600
<v Speaker 1>that's the way it was with me when I was

157
00:07:47.639 --> 00:07:51.000
<v Speaker 1>a kid. Every dime I got I depend on because

158
00:07:51.040 --> 00:07:54.079
<v Speaker 1>most stuff like that I had to work for. So, Jules,

159
00:07:54.160 --> 00:07:55.839
<v Speaker 1>let's hear your statement analysis on this.

160
00:07:56.600 --> 00:08:00.879
<v Speaker 2>Oh, this is just the most bizarre statement right from

161
00:08:00.959 --> 00:08:05.360
<v Speaker 2>the jump. As soon as I started reading it, I'm like, Okay,

162
00:08:05.439 --> 00:08:10.480
<v Speaker 2>it starts with okay basically, so like we're already looking

163
00:08:10.480 --> 00:08:13.480
<v Speaker 2>at a problem because we're not just hearing the truth.

164
00:08:13.519 --> 00:08:18.639
<v Speaker 2>We're hearing basically what happened, And so I'm gonna analyze. Okay, basically,

165
00:08:18.879 --> 00:08:22.040
<v Speaker 2>the truth of the matter is me and Blank went

166
00:08:22.079 --> 00:08:26.639
<v Speaker 2>to the old college that part first, Okay, So okay,

167
00:08:27.279 --> 00:08:29.959
<v Speaker 2>the subject is taking time to think about what they're

168
00:08:30.000 --> 00:08:32.960
<v Speaker 2>going to say. So statements like I swear to God

169
00:08:33.320 --> 00:08:36.080
<v Speaker 2>or like the subject used here the truth of the

170
00:08:36.080 --> 00:08:40.200
<v Speaker 2>matter often indicate deception. There's an obvious need to convince,

171
00:08:40.360 --> 00:08:44.639
<v Speaker 2>and it doesn't always mean deception. If someone feels as

172
00:08:44.679 --> 00:08:48.600
<v Speaker 2>though they aren't being believed, they may use these declarative statements.

173
00:08:49.240 --> 00:08:51.840
<v Speaker 2>I don't know the discourse between the interviewer and the

174
00:08:51.879 --> 00:08:55.720
<v Speaker 2>subject prior. But to me personally from the jump, we're

175
00:08:55.720 --> 00:08:59.759
<v Speaker 2>looking at like a high high probability of deception. As is,

176
00:09:00.000 --> 00:09:02.919
<v Speaker 2>this isn't a good start. The use of the word,

177
00:09:03.000 --> 00:09:06.679
<v Speaker 2>like I said, basically it's suspect. Is this what happened?

178
00:09:06.840 --> 00:09:10.519
<v Speaker 2>Or is it basically what happened? It could potentially indicate

179
00:09:10.519 --> 00:09:14.360
<v Speaker 2>withholding of information or that this isn't at all what

180
00:09:14.519 --> 00:09:18.799
<v Speaker 2>happened and it's just a fabrication. The subject mentions the

181
00:09:19.080 --> 00:09:23.000
<v Speaker 2>old college. What's the old college? We know this is

182
00:09:23.039 --> 00:09:27.240
<v Speaker 2>familiar since he used the definite article with the rather

183
00:09:27.360 --> 00:09:32.679
<v Speaker 2>than a so is this his old college? The location's vague,

184
00:09:32.720 --> 00:09:36.519
<v Speaker 2>but perhaps this is somewhere known to everyone in the area.

185
00:09:36.720 --> 00:09:40.600
<v Speaker 2>But the lack of where within the college that they

186
00:09:40.679 --> 00:09:44.200
<v Speaker 2>ended up it just isn't giving enough details. There's withholding

187
00:09:44.240 --> 00:09:47.399
<v Speaker 2>of specifics such as where did you go in the

188
00:09:47.440 --> 00:09:49.960
<v Speaker 2>old college and what was the objective?

189
00:09:50.799 --> 00:09:52.919
<v Speaker 1>Well, and I started sharing details about the case, I'll

190
00:09:52.960 --> 00:09:55.919
<v Speaker 1>go more into what the old college was, and you'll

191
00:09:55.919 --> 00:09:58.759
<v Speaker 1>find out that this was a place that was close

192
00:09:58.919 --> 00:10:02.799
<v Speaker 1>to where h this supposed crime took place and that

193
00:10:02.879 --> 00:10:05.360
<v Speaker 1>the police did check out the site of this supposed

194
00:10:05.399 --> 00:10:09.080
<v Speaker 1>old college but found no corroborating evidence to support this

195
00:10:09.159 --> 00:10:12.240
<v Speaker 1>person's story. But yeah, it is kind of a bad sign,

196
00:10:12.559 --> 00:10:14.720
<v Speaker 1>especially when you learn the full context that he's starting

197
00:10:14.720 --> 00:10:18.080
<v Speaker 1>it off by just using phrases like basically and the

198
00:10:18.120 --> 00:10:19.799
<v Speaker 1>truth of the matter, and you just kind of feel

199
00:10:19.879 --> 00:10:23.080
<v Speaker 1>like he's trying to find the right words to explain

200
00:10:23.120 --> 00:10:25.720
<v Speaker 1>what happened, even though if he's telling the truth, this

201
00:10:25.799 --> 00:10:27.200
<v Speaker 1>probably shouldn't be needing to do.

202
00:10:27.120 --> 00:10:30.240
<v Speaker 2>This, And unfortunately, I feel like this sets the tone

203
00:10:30.480 --> 00:10:31.720
<v Speaker 2>for the entire statement.

204
00:10:32.559 --> 00:10:35.279
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, exactly, because I remember watching it for the first

205
00:10:35.279 --> 00:10:37.799
<v Speaker 1>time because I covered this one on the Trail Went

206
00:10:37.840 --> 00:10:40.600
<v Speaker 1>Cold several years ago, and when I watched the interrogation,

207
00:10:41.080 --> 00:10:43.240
<v Speaker 1>I had these feelings that you did immediately.

208
00:10:44.960 --> 00:10:46.840
<v Speaker 2>So the next part that we're going to cover. The

209
00:10:46.879 --> 00:10:50.159
<v Speaker 2>next line is we got in a big argument and fight,

210
00:10:50.600 --> 00:10:52.960
<v Speaker 2>and it was over money that she wouldn't get back

211
00:10:53.000 --> 00:10:56.440
<v Speaker 2>to me. So the use of the word we indicates

212
00:10:56.440 --> 00:10:59.440
<v Speaker 2>the partnership of some kind. So I'd say that there's

213
00:10:59.440 --> 00:11:02.679
<v Speaker 2>a high problem ability that they didn't just meet that night.

214
00:11:02.919 --> 00:11:06.480
<v Speaker 2>If they are indeed acquainted, they were known to each

215
00:11:06.519 --> 00:11:09.039
<v Speaker 2>other prior to the events that would end her life.

216
00:11:09.919 --> 00:11:12.759
<v Speaker 2>And I find this interesting that the subject says big

217
00:11:12.879 --> 00:11:16.840
<v Speaker 2>argument and fight. Typically one would say one or the other.

218
00:11:17.600 --> 00:11:21.320
<v Speaker 2>It's possible that in this person's personal dictionary, an argument

219
00:11:21.480 --> 00:11:25.399
<v Speaker 2>is verbal and a fight is physical. The interviewer should

220
00:11:25.399 --> 00:11:29.039
<v Speaker 2>definitely probe further here. And the subject says that the

221
00:11:29.080 --> 00:11:32.759
<v Speaker 2>woman in question wouldn't give back money, but never says

222
00:11:33.159 --> 00:11:36.120
<v Speaker 2>how she came into possession of that money. He never

223
00:11:36.159 --> 00:11:38.639
<v Speaker 2>says that she took it from him or stole it,

224
00:11:38.759 --> 00:11:41.000
<v Speaker 2>or even that he lent it to her. We are

225
00:11:41.039 --> 00:11:43.360
<v Speaker 2>only getting part of the story here, and don't you

226
00:11:43.399 --> 00:11:44.519
<v Speaker 2>find that a little bizarre?

227
00:11:45.720 --> 00:11:48.000
<v Speaker 1>I do, yes, because once we learn the background of

228
00:11:48.039 --> 00:11:50.759
<v Speaker 1>this person, it just seems very odd that they would

229
00:11:51.000 --> 00:11:54.159
<v Speaker 1>be in possession of money at this particular time. And

230
00:11:54.440 --> 00:11:56.360
<v Speaker 1>that's one of the story that has always been kind

231
00:11:56.399 --> 00:11:58.879
<v Speaker 1>of a red flag to me. And I do see

232
00:11:58.879 --> 00:12:02.000
<v Speaker 1>this sometimes where or if someone confesses to a murder

233
00:12:02.039 --> 00:12:04.320
<v Speaker 1>and they always say, well, I didn't intend to kill

234
00:12:04.360 --> 00:12:06.200
<v Speaker 1>this person. It was just a thing where we got

235
00:12:06.240 --> 00:12:08.799
<v Speaker 1>into an argument in a fight and they fell over

236
00:12:08.840 --> 00:12:11.399
<v Speaker 1>and hit their head. And there was one case that

237
00:12:11.399 --> 00:12:12.919
<v Speaker 1>I covered on the Trail and Cold a couple of

238
00:12:12.960 --> 00:12:16.440
<v Speaker 1>years ago about the disappearance of a woman named Bethany Decker,

239
00:12:16.519 --> 00:12:19.600
<v Speaker 1>who was killed by her boyfriend Ronald roll Dan and

240
00:12:19.960 --> 00:12:22.519
<v Speaker 1>they never found her remains, but there was a compelling,

241
00:12:22.559 --> 00:12:26.279
<v Speaker 1>circumstantial evidence against him to charge him with murder, and

242
00:12:26.320 --> 00:12:28.080
<v Speaker 1>one of the terms of the plea deal that was

243
00:12:28.120 --> 00:12:30.279
<v Speaker 1>offered is that he would have to make a statement

244
00:12:30.279 --> 00:12:33.120
<v Speaker 1>in court, a full confession about what happened. And even

245
00:12:33.159 --> 00:12:36.519
<v Speaker 1>though he did, the victim's family was not satisfied because

246
00:12:36.519 --> 00:12:38.240
<v Speaker 1>he used the whole thing, well, we got into a

247
00:12:38.279 --> 00:12:40.360
<v Speaker 1>fight and I pushed her and she hit her head,

248
00:12:40.399 --> 00:12:43.320
<v Speaker 1>and I didn't mean to. And they've always been skeptical

249
00:12:43.360 --> 00:12:45.399
<v Speaker 1>of that because this guy was known for having a

250
00:12:45.519 --> 00:12:49.639
<v Speaker 1>history of violence and abuse. But because they couldn't find

251
00:12:49.639 --> 00:12:52.360
<v Speaker 1>her remains, they can't really prove or disprove his story.

252
00:12:52.639 --> 00:12:54.440
<v Speaker 1>But they still kind of feel that, yeah, that's his

253
00:12:54.480 --> 00:12:57.279
<v Speaker 1>way of like deflecting responsibility, where he tries to say

254
00:12:57.279 --> 00:12:59.000
<v Speaker 1>that he didn't mean to kill anyone and that it

255
00:12:59.039 --> 00:13:01.519
<v Speaker 1>was only an accident, and that could very well be

256
00:13:01.600 --> 00:13:02.639
<v Speaker 1>the case here as well.

257
00:13:03.399 --> 00:13:06.679
<v Speaker 2>I mean I will say here, like I've gone back

258
00:13:06.720 --> 00:13:10.039
<v Speaker 2>and forth for sure on whether or not this is

259
00:13:10.720 --> 00:13:13.639
<v Speaker 2>this is completely fabricated at a false confession, or this

260
00:13:13.799 --> 00:13:18.799
<v Speaker 2>is completely fabricated and this person is indeed responsible. By

261
00:13:18.799 --> 00:13:20.639
<v Speaker 2>the time we get to this, I may change my

262
00:13:20.720 --> 00:13:25.279
<v Speaker 2>mind again because there's so much in here that says

263
00:13:25.679 --> 00:13:28.480
<v Speaker 2>this is all fabricated. But there is just a few

264
00:13:28.519 --> 00:13:32.279
<v Speaker 2>little nuggets that give me pause, and we'll get to that.

265
00:13:33.039 --> 00:13:37.000
<v Speaker 2>But the money thing is definitely one of them. If

266
00:13:37.039 --> 00:13:40.919
<v Speaker 2>he is indeed responsible, that money is not the motivation,

267
00:13:41.480 --> 00:13:43.960
<v Speaker 2>because there's just the lack of specificity, and you'd think

268
00:13:44.000 --> 00:13:46.879
<v Speaker 2>if money was so important, you would give us an amount.

269
00:13:47.360 --> 00:13:49.320
<v Speaker 1>Yes, And I've always felt the same thing about this

270
00:13:49.360 --> 00:13:52.039
<v Speaker 1>particular person. I don't have a concrete opinion on whether

271
00:13:52.120 --> 00:13:54.440
<v Speaker 1>or not they're guilty, but I do believe that if

272
00:13:54.480 --> 00:13:56.919
<v Speaker 1>they are, then the statement that they're making here is

273
00:13:56.960 --> 00:13:58.639
<v Speaker 1>not the truth about what actually happened.

274
00:13:59.279 --> 00:14:03.080
<v Speaker 2>And think about when you're telling a story, a true story,

275
00:14:03.120 --> 00:14:06.159
<v Speaker 2>it should flow for memory. But this story has a

276
00:14:06.320 --> 00:14:09.639
<v Speaker 2>lot of pauses. Like when you're looking at the transcript,

277
00:14:09.639 --> 00:14:12.919
<v Speaker 2>there's a lot of dot dots and there isn't a flow.

278
00:14:13.279 --> 00:14:16.600
<v Speaker 2>It's disjointed and there's a lot of fragments, and that

279
00:14:16.720 --> 00:14:20.000
<v Speaker 2>shouldn't really be happening if it's coming from memory, and

280
00:14:20.080 --> 00:14:23.600
<v Speaker 2>if it is an incident where somebody lost their life,

281
00:14:23.759 --> 00:14:27.919
<v Speaker 2>and you're saying that you pushed her. Okay, well, if

282
00:14:27.960 --> 00:14:30.679
<v Speaker 2>this resulted in her death, you'd think that he would

283
00:14:30.720 --> 00:14:31.320
<v Speaker 2>remember that.

284
00:14:31.919 --> 00:14:34.320
<v Speaker 1>I think so. Yeah, Like, once you learn the full contact,

285
00:14:34.399 --> 00:14:36.679
<v Speaker 1>you would pretty much realize that this is one of

286
00:14:36.720 --> 00:14:39.360
<v Speaker 1>the most memorable experiences that would have taken place in

287
00:14:39.399 --> 00:14:42.360
<v Speaker 1>this person's life. So you think he would recall details

288
00:14:42.360 --> 00:14:43.279
<v Speaker 1>a lot more vividly.

289
00:14:43.720 --> 00:14:47.720
<v Speaker 2>Exactly. Typically, when you're telling a story, it shouldn't be

290
00:14:47.879 --> 00:14:51.279
<v Speaker 2>something that requires that much effort. You often see that

291
00:14:51.399 --> 00:14:56.039
<v Speaker 2>in deceptive statements. And I mentioned the money earlier. He

292
00:14:56.360 --> 00:14:59.039
<v Speaker 2>doesn't tell us how much money. He doesn't tell us

293
00:14:59.080 --> 00:15:02.120
<v Speaker 2>how she got that much money, and that seems like

294
00:15:02.159 --> 00:15:05.120
<v Speaker 2>a very odd thing to me, especially when he's telling

295
00:15:05.200 --> 00:15:09.080
<v Speaker 2>us that is his primary motivation for this fight. He

296
00:15:09.240 --> 00:15:11.879
<v Speaker 2>jumps into the next part of the story. There isn't

297
00:15:11.960 --> 00:15:14.919
<v Speaker 2>a lead up about why or what led up to

298
00:15:14.960 --> 00:15:17.799
<v Speaker 2>the fight, or he doesn't say something to the effect of,

299
00:15:18.200 --> 00:15:20.840
<v Speaker 2>she took the money, I confronted her, and she punched

300
00:15:20.879 --> 00:15:23.759
<v Speaker 2>me rather out of the blue, she hauled off and

301
00:15:24.000 --> 00:15:28.279
<v Speaker 2>punched me. The language she used here is odd. Did

302
00:15:28.320 --> 00:15:31.919
<v Speaker 2>she out of nowhere punch him as he suggests, or

303
00:15:32.000 --> 00:15:35.960
<v Speaker 2>was she defending herself. There's definitely a withholding of information

304
00:15:36.039 --> 00:15:39.639
<v Speaker 2>here in my opinion. And then he says, I then

305
00:15:39.960 --> 00:15:42.679
<v Speaker 2>dot dot dot, So he's pausing to think about how

306
00:15:42.720 --> 00:15:45.120
<v Speaker 2>he's going to phrase this. If he was recalling it

307
00:15:45.159 --> 00:15:48.279
<v Speaker 2>from memory, there wouldn't be the need to pause incessantly

308
00:15:48.399 --> 00:15:52.279
<v Speaker 2>and rephrase as he does throughout. So this version of

309
00:15:52.279 --> 00:15:55.879
<v Speaker 2>events seems deceptive. With the quote I then dot dot dot,

310
00:15:56.000 --> 00:15:59.720
<v Speaker 2>not thinking dot dot dot pushed her think about recalling

311
00:15:59.720 --> 00:16:01.919
<v Speaker 2>about event such as this. If you were punched in

312
00:16:01.919 --> 00:16:05.399
<v Speaker 2>the face, you may react by pushing back. The pause

313
00:16:05.559 --> 00:16:08.320
<v Speaker 2>in the inclusion of not thinking makes me believe there's

314
00:16:08.360 --> 00:16:12.120
<v Speaker 2>a potential that this isn't in all how the event's transpired,

315
00:16:12.159 --> 00:16:15.480
<v Speaker 2>and that this is deceptive, just like we've seen throughout

316
00:16:15.480 --> 00:16:19.519
<v Speaker 2>the statement. And notice how casual not thinking is and

317
00:16:19.559 --> 00:16:23.120
<v Speaker 2>how devoid of emotion this story is considering the gravity

318
00:16:23.159 --> 00:16:26.200
<v Speaker 2>of it. The tone doesn't match the actions, and that's

319
00:16:26.200 --> 00:16:27.240
<v Speaker 2>something to look out for.

320
00:16:28.240 --> 00:16:30.279
<v Speaker 1>Yes, the whole thing about the twenty dollars bill has

321
00:16:30.320 --> 00:16:32.720
<v Speaker 1>always been a red flag for me because when you

322
00:16:32.960 --> 00:16:35.279
<v Speaker 1>hear the full context of who these people are, it

323
00:16:35.320 --> 00:16:38.080
<v Speaker 1>does seem unlikely that they would have been in possession

324
00:16:38.120 --> 00:16:41.519
<v Speaker 1>of a twenty dollars bill at this particular time, So

325
00:16:41.679 --> 00:16:44.360
<v Speaker 1>it does sound like he's thrown that detail into the story,

326
00:16:44.399 --> 00:16:47.120
<v Speaker 1>possibly to mask what he really did, like the real

327
00:16:47.159 --> 00:16:50.080
<v Speaker 1>truth behind her death. And also when you learn the

328
00:16:50.080 --> 00:16:52.919
<v Speaker 1>full context of when he's making this confession, I mean,

329
00:16:53.000 --> 00:16:56.240
<v Speaker 1>people are going to act differently when they're confessing to

330
00:16:56.279 --> 00:16:58.799
<v Speaker 1>the worst thing they ever did. But I do think

331
00:16:58.799 --> 00:17:01.279
<v Speaker 1>that this is a context where he probably would be

332
00:17:01.320 --> 00:17:04.559
<v Speaker 1>a lot more emotional. But I've seen the actual police

333
00:17:04.559 --> 00:17:07.880
<v Speaker 1>interrogation video where he makes his confession, and he does

334
00:17:07.920 --> 00:17:10.599
<v Speaker 1>do it in a very flat, unemotional tone most of

335
00:17:10.640 --> 00:17:14.039
<v Speaker 1>the time, and you're kind of wondering this was true.

336
00:17:14.079 --> 00:17:16.680
<v Speaker 1>Then I would expect like a lot more emotion from him.

337
00:17:17.000 --> 00:17:21.200
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, the tone is very incongruous with what you would expect.

338
00:17:21.400 --> 00:17:23.519
<v Speaker 2>You would expect there to be a lot of emotion

339
00:17:23.640 --> 00:17:27.440
<v Speaker 2>when you're recalling something like this, but there isn't that.

340
00:17:27.599 --> 00:17:29.720
<v Speaker 2>And he uses a lot of passive language as well,

341
00:17:30.200 --> 00:17:32.440
<v Speaker 2>which is something to look out for, Like you know

342
00:17:32.599 --> 00:17:35.880
<v Speaker 2>she fell, It's like, no, she didn't fall. You pushed her,

343
00:17:36.160 --> 00:17:38.960
<v Speaker 2>and that's why she ended up where she was, if

344
00:17:39.119 --> 00:17:41.839
<v Speaker 2>you were to be believed. So the next time we're

345
00:17:41.880 --> 00:17:44.839
<v Speaker 2>going to analyze, is she fell backwards and her head

346
00:17:45.400 --> 00:17:48.440
<v Speaker 2>dot dot dot. When she fell backwards, her head impaled

347
00:17:48.440 --> 00:17:51.720
<v Speaker 2>on something sharp sticking out of the ground. So like

348
00:17:51.759 --> 00:17:54.119
<v Speaker 2>I just said, she didn't fall backwards. This is passive

349
00:17:54.200 --> 00:17:57.960
<v Speaker 2>language and it's used to minimize. So the subject admits

350
00:17:58.000 --> 00:18:01.200
<v Speaker 2>to pushing her backwards, then he doubles down and takes

351
00:18:01.279 --> 00:18:04.440
<v Speaker 2>himself out of the statement by following it up again

352
00:18:05.319 --> 00:18:09.079
<v Speaker 2>when she fell backwards. This shows a lack of responsibility

353
00:18:09.240 --> 00:18:12.480
<v Speaker 2>and distancing. So rather than being like when I pushed

354
00:18:12.480 --> 00:18:16.119
<v Speaker 2>her backwards and she fell, he's like when she fell backwards,

355
00:18:16.160 --> 00:18:19.359
<v Speaker 2>as if this was something that happened independent of anything

356
00:18:19.400 --> 00:18:22.319
<v Speaker 2>that he did. And so I'm curious what he was

357
00:18:22.359 --> 00:18:26.839
<v Speaker 2>going to say when he said, well, she fell backwards

358
00:18:26.920 --> 00:18:28.839
<v Speaker 2>and her head dot dot dot.

359
00:18:29.920 --> 00:18:32.079
<v Speaker 1>It is true. Like if you see this sense in

360
00:18:32.200 --> 00:18:34.480
<v Speaker 1>just a void, it's making it sound like he's saying

361
00:18:34.480 --> 00:18:37.039
<v Speaker 1>that she fell accidentally, like she tripped, and that he

362
00:18:37.119 --> 00:18:39.400
<v Speaker 1>never touched her. But then you see the full context

363
00:18:39.400 --> 00:18:41.160
<v Speaker 1>and he says we got into a fight and I

364
00:18:41.279 --> 00:18:43.960
<v Speaker 1>pushed her. But at that particular point it does sound

365
00:18:44.160 --> 00:18:47.240
<v Speaker 1>like he's afflecting responsibility, saying that, well, it's not really

366
00:18:47.240 --> 00:18:49.279
<v Speaker 1>my fault. I only gave her a light shove, and

367
00:18:49.319 --> 00:18:52.119
<v Speaker 1>she's the one who fell backwards and caused the fatal

368
00:18:52.160 --> 00:18:54.279
<v Speaker 1>injury to her head. So yeah, it makes you wonder

369
00:18:54.440 --> 00:18:56.799
<v Speaker 1>is he kind of deflecting responsibility from what he did

370
00:18:56.960 --> 00:18:59.119
<v Speaker 1>or is this just not one hundred percent true.

371
00:18:59.319 --> 00:19:02.160
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, he's not saying I am paled her head. That

372
00:19:02.680 --> 00:19:06.319
<v Speaker 2>he's saying she fell backwards, like taking himself out of

373
00:19:06.319 --> 00:19:10.480
<v Speaker 2>that statement completely, and he just doesn't claim responsibility, and

374
00:19:10.519 --> 00:19:12.720
<v Speaker 2>he makes it the fault of the inanimate object, like

375
00:19:12.799 --> 00:19:16.279
<v Speaker 2>that inanimate object impaled her. I didn't you know, Like

376
00:19:16.359 --> 00:19:18.880
<v Speaker 2>he's not like he's saying, you know, it was my fault.

377
00:19:18.920 --> 00:19:22.119
<v Speaker 2>This happened and her head was impaled as a result

378
00:19:22.119 --> 00:19:25.039
<v Speaker 2>of my actions. He's really trying to take himself out

379
00:19:25.119 --> 00:19:28.559
<v Speaker 2>of the statement and make it sound like an accident.

380
00:19:29.559 --> 00:19:32.880
<v Speaker 2>So the next part is he said I then said

381
00:19:33.079 --> 00:19:37.000
<v Speaker 2>are you all right? He doesn't seem panic when recalling,

382
00:19:37.240 --> 00:19:41.279
<v Speaker 2>which should be like a really visceral and emotional situation

383
00:19:41.599 --> 00:19:44.519
<v Speaker 2>where most people would rush to her side right away

384
00:19:44.599 --> 00:19:48.200
<v Speaker 2>before asking are you all right? I think if you

385
00:19:48.279 --> 00:19:50.279
<v Speaker 2>were to tell a story about an event and it

386
00:19:50.319 --> 00:19:53.519
<v Speaker 2>was an accident, would you include something like this I

387
00:19:53.519 --> 00:19:56.279
<v Speaker 2>don't know. It's not a typical flow of events during

388
00:19:56.319 --> 00:19:58.279
<v Speaker 2>a chaotic moment in my opinion.

389
00:19:59.119 --> 00:20:02.039
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, And I always wonder how many of these incidents

390
00:20:02.039 --> 00:20:04.359
<v Speaker 1>actually happen where someone is pushed and then just by

391
00:20:04.440 --> 00:20:06.920
<v Speaker 1>pure luck or bad luck, they wind up getting their

392
00:20:06.960 --> 00:20:09.079
<v Speaker 1>head impaled on something sticking out of the ground. Like

393
00:20:09.119 --> 00:20:11.880
<v Speaker 1>you hear more details about this exact location where this

394
00:20:11.920 --> 00:20:14.759
<v Speaker 1>allegedly took place, and you're thinking of them selves, Man,

395
00:20:14.759 --> 00:20:17.400
<v Speaker 1>the odds of her falling down at this one spot

396
00:20:17.440 --> 00:20:19.799
<v Speaker 1>that had a sharp object sticking out of the ground

397
00:20:20.200 --> 00:20:22.079
<v Speaker 1>just seems very remote. It just seems like one of

398
00:20:22.079 --> 00:20:24.640
<v Speaker 1>those one in a million things that could happen. So

399
00:20:24.880 --> 00:20:28.480
<v Speaker 1>it makes you wonder is he deflecting responsibility and making

400
00:20:28.519 --> 00:20:31.279
<v Speaker 1>this up to kind of rid himself of his own

401
00:20:31.319 --> 00:20:34.400
<v Speaker 1>culpability and what happened And the fact that he's asking

402
00:20:34.480 --> 00:20:37.200
<v Speaker 1>are you all right? Like you said, it just seems

403
00:20:37.200 --> 00:20:39.279
<v Speaker 1>like a weird thing to say if you saw someone

404
00:20:39.400 --> 00:20:42.480
<v Speaker 1>fell and potentially hit their head on something which caused

405
00:20:42.480 --> 00:20:46.200
<v Speaker 1>an injury and killed them instantly, And it's almost like,

406
00:20:46.640 --> 00:20:48.920
<v Speaker 1>if this isn't what actually happened, it's him once again

407
00:20:48.960 --> 00:20:51.920
<v Speaker 1>deflecting responsibility, saying that hey, I didn't mean to kill her.

408
00:20:52.039 --> 00:20:54.519
<v Speaker 1>I actually asked her if she was okay, So that

409
00:20:54.640 --> 00:20:57.440
<v Speaker 1>means it was just an accident and this wasn't premeditated

410
00:20:57.559 --> 00:21:00.920
<v Speaker 1>or anything. So it makes you wonder. Yeah, just changing

411
00:21:00.960 --> 00:21:03.599
<v Speaker 1>the details to kind of deflect on what he actually

412
00:21:03.680 --> 00:21:04.119
<v Speaker 1>did do.

413
00:21:05.240 --> 00:21:07.279
<v Speaker 2>So the next line that we're going to analyze is

414
00:21:07.440 --> 00:21:09.920
<v Speaker 2>I run over to her and she just mined a

415
00:21:09.920 --> 00:21:13.880
<v Speaker 2>little bit and there was nothing else. So we've got

416
00:21:13.880 --> 00:21:15.799
<v Speaker 2>a bit of a problem here at the beginning. I

417
00:21:16.000 --> 00:21:20.480
<v Speaker 2>run should be iran, so present tense is often indicative

418
00:21:20.640 --> 00:21:24.480
<v Speaker 2>of deception in a statement. And why would you run

419
00:21:24.519 --> 00:21:26.640
<v Speaker 2>over to her? Like how far away could she be?

420
00:21:27.559 --> 00:21:30.079
<v Speaker 2>The subject isn't a superhero that could like push her

421
00:21:30.240 --> 00:21:34.000
<v Speaker 2>one hundred meters away? He admitted he pushed her, So

422
00:21:34.200 --> 00:21:36.599
<v Speaker 2>it shouldn't require a run. It should be a step

423
00:21:36.640 --> 00:21:37.440
<v Speaker 2>or two, should it not.

424
00:21:38.440 --> 00:21:40.759
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, like if they got into like an altercation where

425
00:21:40.759 --> 00:21:42.839
<v Speaker 1>he shoved her and she fell over, like she's not

426
00:21:42.880 --> 00:21:45.000
<v Speaker 1>gonna fly like one hundred feet away, Like he's not

427
00:21:45.039 --> 00:21:47.039
<v Speaker 1>gonna need to run over. She's going to be very

428
00:21:47.039 --> 00:21:47.680
<v Speaker 1>close to him.

429
00:21:48.559 --> 00:21:51.920
<v Speaker 2>Interesting, he uses the word just a lot. This is

430
00:21:51.960 --> 00:21:53.920
<v Speaker 2>the first time we see it in the statement, But

431
00:21:53.960 --> 00:21:56.680
<v Speaker 2>he uses it quite a bit, and it's what's referred

432
00:21:56.720 --> 00:22:00.480
<v Speaker 2>to as a unique word, and it can often indicate

433
00:22:00.519 --> 00:22:04.240
<v Speaker 2>withholding of information. So when he says she just mined

434
00:22:04.279 --> 00:22:08.119
<v Speaker 2>a little bit, I question if that's indeed accurate. What

435
00:22:08.279 --> 00:22:12.039
<v Speaker 2>does he mean by mind? It's not phrase in the

436
00:22:12.039 --> 00:22:15.480
<v Speaker 2>context of someone lying there and dying. Why would it

437
00:22:15.480 --> 00:22:17.400
<v Speaker 2>not make more sense that she raised her arms and

438
00:22:17.400 --> 00:22:21.759
<v Speaker 2>waved her fingers. There's something soft about mind, and that

439
00:22:21.759 --> 00:22:26.240
<v Speaker 2>can indicate deception in this context. So if she is

440
00:22:26.279 --> 00:22:29.799
<v Speaker 2>indeed dead, which it seems like she potentially is, with

441
00:22:30.160 --> 00:22:36.400
<v Speaker 2>there was nothing else, wouldn't we see more panic, more grief, regret, remorse.

442
00:22:37.359 --> 00:22:41.240
<v Speaker 2>There's a very casual telling of events that potentially ended

443
00:22:41.279 --> 00:22:45.440
<v Speaker 2>someone's life, and that's troubling. There likely was something else,

444
00:22:45.519 --> 00:22:48.000
<v Speaker 2>and he's potentially leaving that out of the statement.

445
00:22:49.599 --> 00:22:51.720
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, getting back to use of the word mind, I

446
00:22:51.759 --> 00:22:53.799
<v Speaker 1>will say that the audio quality on the police and

447
00:22:53.880 --> 00:22:56.480
<v Speaker 1>teror cation video isn't the best. So I had to

448
00:22:56.519 --> 00:22:59.359
<v Speaker 1>watch that part six or seven times while I was

449
00:22:59.440 --> 00:23:02.079
<v Speaker 1>making the train because I had to be absolutely sure

450
00:23:02.519 --> 00:23:04.559
<v Speaker 1>what word he used, because I couldn't figure out what

451
00:23:04.599 --> 00:23:06.440
<v Speaker 1>he was saying at first, and then once I watched it,

452
00:23:06.480 --> 00:23:09.160
<v Speaker 1>a few times it's like, oh, he's saying mind, which

453
00:23:09.200 --> 00:23:11.440
<v Speaker 1>even so is just a very weird phrase to go

454
00:23:11.480 --> 00:23:13.240
<v Speaker 1>in there, just saying that she kind of mined and

455
00:23:13.279 --> 00:23:15.400
<v Speaker 1>looked like she was alive for a little a few

456
00:23:15.440 --> 00:23:18.440
<v Speaker 1>seconds before she died, and that is just a very

457
00:23:18.480 --> 00:23:20.920
<v Speaker 1>odd phrase to use when you're making a confession to

458
00:23:20.960 --> 00:23:24.599
<v Speaker 1>being responsible for someone's death. And yeah, the way he

459
00:23:24.680 --> 00:23:26.960
<v Speaker 1>said like there was nothing else, like, he doesn't even

460
00:23:26.960 --> 00:23:30.039
<v Speaker 1>make it sound like U he panicked a lot that

461
00:23:30.359 --> 00:23:33.200
<v Speaker 1>this person who he caused her death and he didn't

462
00:23:33.200 --> 00:23:35.440
<v Speaker 1>even like get down much and like tried to see

463
00:23:35.519 --> 00:23:37.720
<v Speaker 1>if she was okay or move her body or anything

464
00:23:37.799 --> 00:23:40.440
<v Speaker 1>like that. He just says she moved her head and uh,

465
00:23:40.599 --> 00:23:43.039
<v Speaker 1>then she stopped. And I took that immediately as an

466
00:23:43.079 --> 00:23:46.400
<v Speaker 1>indication that she was dead. And of course I could

467
00:23:46.440 --> 00:23:49.039
<v Speaker 1>be a sign that he's totally fabricating this story and

468
00:23:49.079 --> 00:23:50.039
<v Speaker 1>this isn't what happened.

469
00:23:50.680 --> 00:23:53.759
<v Speaker 2>I would think if it was unintentional and this was

470
00:23:53.839 --> 00:23:56.559
<v Speaker 2>a complete accident, like you pushed her and her head

471
00:23:56.559 --> 00:23:59.240
<v Speaker 2>impaled on something sharp, which I don't believe him at all,

472
00:23:59.759 --> 00:24:02.640
<v Speaker 2>But if that was indeed the case, you would see

473
00:24:02.640 --> 00:24:07.039
<v Speaker 2>some shock because that is a very normal response when

474
00:24:07.200 --> 00:24:09.640
<v Speaker 2>something like that happens, that it's an accident and you

475
00:24:09.759 --> 00:24:14.559
<v Speaker 2>realize that you unintentionally ended somebody's life by your actions.

476
00:24:15.079 --> 00:24:18.799
<v Speaker 2>But he's not shocked. We're not seeing any emotional reaction,

477
00:24:19.440 --> 00:24:21.480
<v Speaker 2>and that leads me to believe that, like pretty much,

478
00:24:21.480 --> 00:24:25.200
<v Speaker 2>everything he's saying so far is deceptive. Okay, so the

479
00:24:25.240 --> 00:24:28.200
<v Speaker 2>next line we're gonna analyze is I hollered out for

480
00:24:28.279 --> 00:24:32.319
<v Speaker 2>help too? Because Holmes Boulevard is right there. Nobody came,

481
00:24:32.680 --> 00:24:36.839
<v Speaker 2>nobody yelled back or anything. So I question what year

482
00:24:36.920 --> 00:24:41.079
<v Speaker 2>is this? Did they have cell phones landlines? Because I

483
00:24:41.160 --> 00:24:44.319
<v Speaker 2>hollered out for help too, So the inclusion of two

484
00:24:44.559 --> 00:24:49.680
<v Speaker 2>is interesting, as if he hollered in addition to something else. Also,

485
00:24:50.119 --> 00:24:52.559
<v Speaker 2>why is he hollering for help on the street? I

486
00:24:52.559 --> 00:24:55.240
<v Speaker 2>don't know, Like where this college is located. Is it rural?

487
00:24:55.640 --> 00:24:58.839
<v Speaker 2>Did he not have access to a neighbor's home a phone?

488
00:24:59.440 --> 00:25:01.599
<v Speaker 2>I don't know this This is incredibly suspect. And if

489
00:25:01.640 --> 00:25:04.519
<v Speaker 2>someone heard his cries, wouldn't they approach him in a

490
00:25:04.559 --> 00:25:08.279
<v Speaker 2>vehicle or on foot? Why would they holler back? So

491
00:25:08.400 --> 00:25:10.839
<v Speaker 2>I question if he did indeed holler as he claims

492
00:25:10.880 --> 00:25:14.519
<v Speaker 2>Like here, this appears deceptive and end quote. Nobody came,

493
00:25:14.640 --> 00:25:18.480
<v Speaker 2>nobody yelled back or anything like I just said, why

494
00:25:18.480 --> 00:25:21.200
<v Speaker 2>would somebody yell back? Wouldn't they see you and come

495
00:25:21.240 --> 00:25:21.480
<v Speaker 2>to you?

496
00:25:22.319 --> 00:25:22.400
<v Speaker 1>Like?

497
00:25:22.480 --> 00:25:25.640
<v Speaker 2>What were you hoping to achieve just by randomly hollering?

498
00:25:26.480 --> 00:25:28.519
<v Speaker 2>Notice that he doesn't say he waved his hands and

499
00:25:28.599 --> 00:25:30.599
<v Speaker 2>jumped up and down and ran in front of an

500
00:25:30.599 --> 00:25:33.680
<v Speaker 2>approaching car. So we're to believe that he just wandered

501
00:25:33.720 --> 00:25:37.319
<v Speaker 2>onto the street and started hollering. In my opinion, this

502
00:25:37.359 --> 00:25:39.359
<v Speaker 2>is deceptive and it never transpired.

503
00:25:40.079 --> 00:25:42.640
<v Speaker 1>Well, without giving away the exact year just yet, I

504
00:25:42.680 --> 00:25:44.839
<v Speaker 1>will say that this was the pre cell phone era,

505
00:25:45.000 --> 00:25:47.000
<v Speaker 1>so he wouldn't have had one. Uh, there would have

506
00:25:47.000 --> 00:25:49.559
<v Speaker 1>been payphones around, but I don't have any information about

507
00:25:49.599 --> 00:25:52.119
<v Speaker 1>where the nearest payphone would have been to this location.

508
00:25:52.839 --> 00:25:56.240
<v Speaker 1>And I'll just say that this incident supposed this supposedly

509
00:25:56.240 --> 00:25:58.920
<v Speaker 1>took place at night, and it was in an outdoor area,

510
00:25:59.400 --> 00:26:00.960
<v Speaker 1>but I don't I don't think it was all that

511
00:26:01.240 --> 00:26:04.759
<v Speaker 1>far from many other houses or in many other places

512
00:26:04.759 --> 00:26:06.400
<v Speaker 1>to get help. It wasn't like it was in a

513
00:26:06.480 --> 00:26:08.880
<v Speaker 1>rural area or anything. So if he really wanted to

514
00:26:08.880 --> 00:26:10.839
<v Speaker 1>get help, I don't think he would have had to

515
00:26:10.920 --> 00:26:13.400
<v Speaker 1>have run far to the nearest house in order to

516
00:26:13.440 --> 00:26:16.680
<v Speaker 1>call for emergency or medical assistance, or call to the

517
00:26:16.720 --> 00:26:19.519
<v Speaker 1>nearest pay phone. So, yeah, that does strike me as odd.

518
00:26:19.559 --> 00:26:22.759
<v Speaker 1>That's he hollers out for help and no one comes,

519
00:26:23.039 --> 00:26:25.039
<v Speaker 1>and then after that he doesn't do anything else. He

520
00:26:25.119 --> 00:26:27.519
<v Speaker 1>makes no attempt to find help for this person that

521
00:26:27.559 --> 00:26:28.720
<v Speaker 1>he supposedly killed.

522
00:26:29.079 --> 00:26:31.519
<v Speaker 2>And do you notice what's missing throughout you, Like, while

523
00:26:31.559 --> 00:26:35.960
<v Speaker 2>he tells his story, he's talking about what happened. There's

524
00:26:36.079 --> 00:26:39.559
<v Speaker 2>nothing else you know she was dead and how he's panicking,

525
00:26:39.920 --> 00:26:42.680
<v Speaker 2>And he doesn't say, so, I got up, I ran

526
00:26:42.759 --> 00:26:45.559
<v Speaker 2>out of the college, I ran onto the road. I

527
00:26:45.640 --> 00:26:48.000
<v Speaker 2>was jumping up and down and waving my hands. He

528
00:26:48.039 --> 00:26:51.759
<v Speaker 2>doesn't tell you what he's physically doing. He just says

529
00:26:51.839 --> 00:26:55.000
<v Speaker 2>I was there and I was hollering. It just seems

530
00:26:55.000 --> 00:26:56.920
<v Speaker 2>like if you were going to fabricate a story, that

531
00:26:57.039 --> 00:26:58.759
<v Speaker 2>is how you would fabricate it, because if you were

532
00:26:58.799 --> 00:27:01.599
<v Speaker 2>going to be recalling some thing from memory, you would

533
00:27:01.599 --> 00:27:04.519
<v Speaker 2>be saying which you physically did. It would be imprinted

534
00:27:04.559 --> 00:27:07.279
<v Speaker 2>in your memory because there would be so much emotion

535
00:27:07.559 --> 00:27:10.720
<v Speaker 2>tied to the fact that this individual lost their life,

536
00:27:10.759 --> 00:27:13.480
<v Speaker 2>Like he's playing it off as an accident, but no

537
00:27:13.599 --> 00:27:18.200
<v Speaker 2>matter what the motivation he had, or if indeed this

538
00:27:18.319 --> 00:27:21.319
<v Speaker 2>was premeditated murder or if it was an accident, or

539
00:27:21.359 --> 00:27:25.119
<v Speaker 2>if he's even responsible, I would think that there would

540
00:27:25.160 --> 00:27:30.079
<v Speaker 2>be like just an urgency and heightened emotional state shock.

541
00:27:30.759 --> 00:27:33.839
<v Speaker 2>The recall wouldn't be so casual, don't you think.

542
00:27:34.759 --> 00:27:37.119
<v Speaker 1>I think so, yeah, that even if he was fabricating

543
00:27:37.119 --> 00:27:40.119
<v Speaker 1>the story to cover up his own complicity, that he

544
00:27:40.119 --> 00:27:42.759
<v Speaker 1>would at least throw in some details of just saying

545
00:27:42.799 --> 00:27:44.720
<v Speaker 1>that I ran, I looked for cars, but there was

546
00:27:44.759 --> 00:27:47.039
<v Speaker 1>no one around. I went to a neighbor's house and

547
00:27:47.079 --> 00:27:48.720
<v Speaker 1>knocked on the door, but there was no one home,

548
00:27:48.799 --> 00:27:50.559
<v Speaker 1>like make it look like he tried to do more

549
00:27:50.839 --> 00:27:52.960
<v Speaker 1>to try to save this person's life, but instead he

550
00:27:53.000 --> 00:27:56.279
<v Speaker 1>just casually says I yelled, I hollered, but no one came.

551
00:27:56.519 --> 00:27:58.880
<v Speaker 1>So that just really sounds like he had to come

552
00:27:58.960 --> 00:28:01.240
<v Speaker 1>up with this story on the fly or something like that,

553
00:28:01.599 --> 00:28:04.000
<v Speaker 1>and just because it wasn't actually the truth, it doesn't

554
00:28:04.039 --> 00:28:06.519
<v Speaker 1>have any details to add to the believability of it.

555
00:28:07.079 --> 00:28:09.200
<v Speaker 2>So the next line that we're going to analyze is

556
00:28:09.240 --> 00:28:11.519
<v Speaker 2>I didn't want to leave her dot dot dot, I

557
00:28:11.599 --> 00:28:15.400
<v Speaker 2>freaked out, dot dot dot, I didn't dot dot dot

558
00:28:16.079 --> 00:28:17.960
<v Speaker 2>I said I don't know what to tell you. All.

559
00:28:18.559 --> 00:28:20.720
<v Speaker 2>It's possible that he didn't know what to do and

560
00:28:20.759 --> 00:28:25.079
<v Speaker 2>he did freak out, but he says, quote I didn't

561
00:28:25.440 --> 00:28:28.240
<v Speaker 2>and trails off. I'm really curious what he was going

562
00:28:28.319 --> 00:28:31.720
<v Speaker 2>to say there There is an I didn't and he

563
00:28:31.759 --> 00:28:36.160
<v Speaker 2>trails off with what didn't he do? This is a

564
00:28:36.240 --> 00:28:39.000
<v Speaker 2>pattern where he starts a sentence and then it goes

565
00:28:39.039 --> 00:28:42.359
<v Speaker 2>against what I would assume is his better judgment to continue,

566
00:28:42.519 --> 00:28:46.759
<v Speaker 2>and he rephrases, so this can definitely be indicative of deception.

567
00:28:47.599 --> 00:28:50.880
<v Speaker 2>So it's interesting that he says, quote, I said I

568
00:28:50.920 --> 00:28:54.799
<v Speaker 2>don't know what to tell you. He's not saying he's

569
00:28:54.799 --> 00:28:57.480
<v Speaker 2>not saying I don't know what to tell you, but

570
00:28:57.599 --> 00:29:00.359
<v Speaker 2>that he said that I said I I don't know

571
00:29:00.359 --> 00:29:02.440
<v Speaker 2>what to tell you. He's not saying I don't know

572
00:29:02.480 --> 00:29:05.680
<v Speaker 2>what to tell you, but that he'd already said that,

573
00:29:06.079 --> 00:29:09.400
<v Speaker 2>And it's not an equal statement. They're two very different things.

574
00:29:10.039 --> 00:29:12.640
<v Speaker 2>It's also an odd statement since they're asking for his

575
00:29:12.920 --> 00:29:17.000
<v Speaker 2>version of events and that should come from memory. So

576
00:29:17.160 --> 00:29:20.960
<v Speaker 2>the fact that he doesn't know what to say is interesting. Also,

577
00:29:21.119 --> 00:29:23.799
<v Speaker 2>he's using past tense, as if he said this to

578
00:29:23.839 --> 00:29:26.160
<v Speaker 2>them before. But since I only have a piece of

579
00:29:26.160 --> 00:29:29.200
<v Speaker 2>the interview, it is possible that they had discussed this.

580
00:29:29.920 --> 00:29:31.640
<v Speaker 1>Yes, I'm going to talk more about this when we

581
00:29:31.839 --> 00:29:34.119
<v Speaker 1>share the details of the case. But there were prior

582
00:29:34.240 --> 00:29:38.519
<v Speaker 1>conversations between the person making this statement and the police,

583
00:29:38.960 --> 00:29:41.720
<v Speaker 1>and there is an additional person in the interrogation room

584
00:29:41.759 --> 00:29:44.039
<v Speaker 1>at this point that he's telling to the first time.

585
00:29:44.160 --> 00:29:46.960
<v Speaker 1>So that kind of is how this statement comes in here.

586
00:29:47.400 --> 00:29:50.279
<v Speaker 1>But once you learn the full details about why he's

587
00:29:50.319 --> 00:29:52.519
<v Speaker 1>making this statement, you're going to think that, Wow, he

588
00:29:52.559 --> 00:29:55.400
<v Speaker 1>should really be more emotional or have better recall or

589
00:29:55.400 --> 00:29:58.720
<v Speaker 1>more details. But just the way that he's just casually

590
00:29:58.759 --> 00:30:00.880
<v Speaker 1>saying I didn't know what to do. I freaked out.

591
00:30:00.960 --> 00:30:04.200
<v Speaker 1>But uh he isn't giving like more urgency. He's making

592
00:30:04.200 --> 00:30:06.400
<v Speaker 1>it sound like even though this was an accident, he

593
00:30:06.480 --> 00:30:10.680
<v Speaker 1>wasn't responsible. He just like kind of had this attitude that, well,

594
00:30:10.880 --> 00:30:12.519
<v Speaker 1>she's dead, nothing I can do about it.

595
00:30:14.559 --> 00:30:16.920
<v Speaker 2>All right, So the next line that we're going to

596
00:30:16.960 --> 00:30:20.599
<v Speaker 2>analyze is I couldn't tell you all. I just freaked out.

597
00:30:21.240 --> 00:30:25.119
<v Speaker 2>Uh so I dot dot dot not thinking dot dot dot,

598
00:30:25.319 --> 00:30:28.920
<v Speaker 2>I freak dot dot dot, I trip dot dot dot,

599
00:30:29.640 --> 00:30:32.400
<v Speaker 2>I just don't know what to do dot dot dot,

600
00:30:32.759 --> 00:30:37.000
<v Speaker 2>I buried her. So when he says I couldn't tell

601
00:30:37.039 --> 00:30:40.599
<v Speaker 2>you all, I believe him. I personally believe that the

602
00:30:40.640 --> 00:30:44.559
<v Speaker 2>truth is leaking out here. He can't tell the investigators everything,

603
00:30:44.680 --> 00:30:48.559
<v Speaker 2>and that's why we're seeing so much withholding. Either he

604
00:30:48.599 --> 00:30:51.319
<v Speaker 2>isn't responsible at all and he doesn't have the details

605
00:30:51.400 --> 00:30:55.720
<v Speaker 2>and that's why he's withholding, or he's fabricating and perhaps

606
00:30:55.759 --> 00:30:58.279
<v Speaker 2>the truth of the events are far worse, and he

607
00:30:58.400 --> 00:31:01.880
<v Speaker 2>fears that the truth could impact many things, from the

608
00:31:01.880 --> 00:31:04.960
<v Speaker 2>way that investigators view him to the type of sentence

609
00:31:05.000 --> 00:31:08.440
<v Speaker 2>that he may receive if, say, for example, sexual assault

610
00:31:08.519 --> 00:31:11.839
<v Speaker 2>was included in the crime, or like I said, he

611
00:31:11.920 --> 00:31:15.359
<v Speaker 2>can't tell them because he simply doesn't know. He again

612
00:31:15.480 --> 00:31:20.039
<v Speaker 2>uses the word just with I freaked out, indicating that

613
00:31:20.119 --> 00:31:23.720
<v Speaker 2>he is potentially withholding on his actions surrounding her death

614
00:31:23.799 --> 00:31:27.960
<v Speaker 2>and that he did more than quote freak out. He

615
00:31:28.000 --> 00:31:31.680
<v Speaker 2>again says that he wasn't thinking, and another use of

616
00:31:31.960 --> 00:31:35.319
<v Speaker 2>just with I just don't know what to do. He's

617
00:31:35.359 --> 00:31:40.759
<v Speaker 2>again withholding. Also ask yourself if the end result is

618
00:31:40.799 --> 00:31:45.559
<v Speaker 2>you bury someone, This seems very calculated and well thought out.

619
00:31:46.200 --> 00:31:48.720
<v Speaker 2>One has to move the body, get it to a vehicle,

620
00:31:48.839 --> 00:31:51.759
<v Speaker 2>find a shovel, transport the body, and then dig a

621
00:31:51.799 --> 00:31:55.119
<v Speaker 2>hole and bury the individual. The way that he tells

622
00:31:55.160 --> 00:31:58.680
<v Speaker 2>the story, he just skips over all those details. And

623
00:31:58.839 --> 00:32:00.680
<v Speaker 2>don't you find that a little bit perplexing?

624
00:32:01.920 --> 00:32:04.880
<v Speaker 1>I do. And I'm not giving anything away because in

625
00:32:04.920 --> 00:32:07.920
<v Speaker 1>a couple moments we're going to analyze this statement. But

626
00:32:08.400 --> 00:32:11.400
<v Speaker 1>the person did say his age out loud when he

627
00:32:11.480 --> 00:32:13.680
<v Speaker 1>said this incident took place, And when you hear this

628
00:32:13.759 --> 00:32:16.440
<v Speaker 1>person's age, you're thinking, this is not someone who just

629
00:32:16.480 --> 00:32:19.519
<v Speaker 1>casually decides to bury a body, and if they did,

630
00:32:19.920 --> 00:32:22.079
<v Speaker 1>they would not be so careful about it and so

631
00:32:22.400 --> 00:32:26.839
<v Speaker 1>like cautious that the victim's remains would not be found

632
00:32:26.920 --> 00:32:29.559
<v Speaker 1>for many, many years. And it is kind of weird

633
00:32:29.640 --> 00:32:33.200
<v Speaker 1>that he just says I picked up like, oh yeah,

634
00:32:33.240 --> 00:32:35.640
<v Speaker 1>he does. Later on he gives like a more detailed

635
00:32:35.720 --> 00:32:37.880
<v Speaker 1>version about how he buried. But the fact that he's

636
00:32:37.920 --> 00:32:41.680
<v Speaker 1>not providing specific details in this particular statement is a

637
00:32:41.680 --> 00:32:45.240
<v Speaker 1>bit telling, because you know, most people, once like they

638
00:32:45.319 --> 00:32:47.119
<v Speaker 1>are there in a situation like this, are just not

639
00:32:47.200 --> 00:32:50.359
<v Speaker 1>going to casually say within seconds or minutes, oh okay,

640
00:32:50.480 --> 00:32:52.039
<v Speaker 1>I did this bad thing. I'm going to have to

641
00:32:52.119 --> 00:32:55.319
<v Speaker 1>bury someone and just have the wherewithal to do it successfully.

642
00:32:55.440 --> 00:32:57.920
<v Speaker 1>So I've always felt that this is the most troubling

643
00:32:57.960 --> 00:33:00.279
<v Speaker 1>part of the confession, which doesn't hold water to me.

644
00:33:01.000 --> 00:33:05.079
<v Speaker 2>It absolutely doesn't hold water. I just think I think

645
00:33:05.160 --> 00:33:09.000
<v Speaker 2>if you were going to dispose of a body like

646
00:33:09.039 --> 00:33:12.440
<v Speaker 2>you said, at the age of the potential perpetrator here,

647
00:33:13.119 --> 00:33:16.559
<v Speaker 2>it would be very very difficult for them to be

648
00:33:16.680 --> 00:33:21.240
<v Speaker 2>able to get the implements and just to be able

649
00:33:21.279 --> 00:33:25.359
<v Speaker 2>to execute burying a body and to know what to do.

650
00:33:25.400 --> 00:33:27.960
<v Speaker 2>This is pre Internet age. They're not googling how to

651
00:33:28.000 --> 00:33:30.160
<v Speaker 2>dispose of a body or like where to do it,

652
00:33:30.759 --> 00:33:36.599
<v Speaker 2>So it's very very strange. And again, if you're deciding

653
00:33:36.640 --> 00:33:40.359
<v Speaker 2>to bury the body of somebody that you're saying that

654
00:33:40.480 --> 00:33:43.759
<v Speaker 2>like they fell backwards and impaled their head, and that

655
00:33:44.119 --> 00:33:46.599
<v Speaker 2>you're leading us to believe that this was an accident,

656
00:33:47.359 --> 00:33:49.839
<v Speaker 2>then there should be more emotion attached to this, not

657
00:33:49.960 --> 00:33:54.920
<v Speaker 2>just I buried her. There's nothing there. It's devoid of

658
00:33:55.240 --> 00:34:01.200
<v Speaker 2>any shock, any grief, any remorse, there's no regret. There's

659
00:34:01.319 --> 00:34:03.359
<v Speaker 2>just nothing. It's flat.

660
00:34:04.279 --> 00:34:06.920
<v Speaker 1>Exactly when you hear the full context about what the

661
00:34:06.960 --> 00:34:10.519
<v Speaker 1>relationship was between this person making the statement and the

662
00:34:10.519 --> 00:34:13.960
<v Speaker 1>person who died, this just seems more unbelievable. And I'll

663
00:34:13.960 --> 00:34:15.960
<v Speaker 1>just say that if I was the age of the

664
00:34:16.400 --> 00:34:19.719
<v Speaker 1>person who's making this statement, and I had accidentally killed someone,

665
00:34:20.079 --> 00:34:21.719
<v Speaker 1>I can tell you that my brain at that time

666
00:34:21.760 --> 00:34:24.360
<v Speaker 1>would not have instantly gone to bury the body and

667
00:34:24.400 --> 00:34:27.400
<v Speaker 1>cover it up within seconds or minutes after it happened.

668
00:34:27.639 --> 00:34:29.320
<v Speaker 1>And I'm sure you'd probably say the same thing.

669
00:34:29.599 --> 00:34:32.159
<v Speaker 2>No, I mean, my brain wouldn't have gone there either.

670
00:34:32.320 --> 00:34:36.159
<v Speaker 2>But I suppose there are those individuals. If you're you know,

671
00:34:36.599 --> 00:34:39.480
<v Speaker 2>there's the birthing of a serial killer or something like that,

672
00:34:39.599 --> 00:34:43.119
<v Speaker 2>then perhaps they'd fantasize about a scenario such as that,

673
00:34:43.679 --> 00:34:49.440
<v Speaker 2>and in fantasizing about those scenarios, they'd considered body disposal.

674
00:34:49.840 --> 00:34:53.079
<v Speaker 2>I have no idea, but I assume we can't apply

675
00:34:53.239 --> 00:34:56.119
<v Speaker 2>our thought process to the way that somebody who could

676
00:34:56.159 --> 00:35:00.599
<v Speaker 2>be a killer, and especially if they're a objective was

677
00:35:00.639 --> 00:35:03.599
<v Speaker 2>to murder. Then we're not going to be thinking in

678
00:35:03.639 --> 00:35:06.280
<v Speaker 2>the same way that somebody whose thought process is like

679
00:35:06.320 --> 00:35:07.119
<v Speaker 2>that would.

680
00:35:08.079 --> 00:35:10.039
<v Speaker 1>Well, when you learn more about this person's background, I

681
00:35:10.039 --> 00:35:12.000
<v Speaker 1>can say he does not seem like a young dexter

682
00:35:12.079 --> 00:35:14.159
<v Speaker 1>morgan in trading. He doesn't seem like the type of

683
00:35:14.199 --> 00:35:17.079
<v Speaker 1>person who would kill someone just for the thrill of

684
00:35:17.119 --> 00:35:18.760
<v Speaker 1>doing it, just to see if he can get away

685
00:35:18.800 --> 00:35:20.840
<v Speaker 1>with it. So I'm thinking that if he was guilty,

686
00:35:20.880 --> 00:35:24.000
<v Speaker 1>he had an entirely different motive, rather than just because

687
00:35:24.000 --> 00:35:25.519
<v Speaker 1>he was a budding serial killer.

688
00:35:25.960 --> 00:35:28.039
<v Speaker 2>Dexter was who I thought of. Have you started watching

689
00:35:28.119 --> 00:35:28.760
<v Speaker 2>the new Dexter.

690
00:35:29.519 --> 00:35:31.800
<v Speaker 1>I know I haven't, but I remember the original series

691
00:35:31.800 --> 00:35:34.079
<v Speaker 1>when they did flashbacks to him as a kid and

692
00:35:34.199 --> 00:35:36.280
<v Speaker 1>his father trying to groom him to like, well, if

693
00:35:36.280 --> 00:35:37.920
<v Speaker 1>you're going to be a serial killer, at least kill

694
00:35:37.960 --> 00:35:40.400
<v Speaker 1>other serial killers so you can get that rage out

695
00:35:40.480 --> 00:35:41.679
<v Speaker 1>in positive ways.

696
00:35:42.360 --> 00:35:44.960
<v Speaker 2>Dexter Original Sin is so good. You should watch it.

697
00:35:44.960 --> 00:35:47.360
<v Speaker 2>It like sticks so close to the source material, uses

698
00:35:47.400 --> 00:35:50.760
<v Speaker 2>the same type of musical score, and Michael C. Hall

699
00:35:50.840 --> 00:35:53.920
<v Speaker 2>does a narration, and every character on there has the

700
00:35:54.400 --> 00:35:59.079
<v Speaker 2>like exact same looks or vibes as their inspiration from

701
00:35:59.119 --> 00:36:00.920
<v Speaker 2>the original Dexter. It's really good.

702
00:36:01.320 --> 00:36:03.920
<v Speaker 1>Okay, I'll have to check it out, all right.

703
00:36:03.960 --> 00:36:05.679
<v Speaker 2>So the next line that we're going to do is

704
00:36:05.880 --> 00:36:08.159
<v Speaker 2>I didn't know what to do. It was the wrong

705
00:36:08.199 --> 00:36:12.199
<v Speaker 2>thing to do. I agree again, he says I didn't

706
00:36:12.199 --> 00:36:14.599
<v Speaker 2>know what to do. For someone who didn't know what

707
00:36:14.679 --> 00:36:17.679
<v Speaker 2>to do doesn't baring someone seem like a well thought

708
00:36:17.719 --> 00:36:20.480
<v Speaker 2>out endgame after a murder, so it doesn't seem like

709
00:36:20.519 --> 00:36:23.280
<v Speaker 2>one would casually stumble into it. Like we mentioned, his

710
00:36:23.360 --> 00:36:26.960
<v Speaker 2>statements are incongruous to the actions that he took. So

711
00:36:27.360 --> 00:36:30.280
<v Speaker 2>what is the it in it was the wrong thing

712
00:36:30.360 --> 00:36:34.440
<v Speaker 2>to do? Is he referencing a murder, a rape, an accident?

713
00:36:34.719 --> 00:36:37.480
<v Speaker 2>He doesn't say, he just agrees that it was wrong.

714
00:36:38.280 --> 00:36:40.360
<v Speaker 1>Yes, I think that when you look at this person's

715
00:36:40.360 --> 00:36:43.079
<v Speaker 1>age when this incident allegedly happened, you're gonna think that

716
00:36:43.480 --> 00:36:46.159
<v Speaker 1>a normal person, if they accidentally killed someone, if they're

717
00:36:46.199 --> 00:36:48.400
<v Speaker 1>going to panic and freak out, they're probably going to

718
00:36:48.480 --> 00:36:51.280
<v Speaker 1>do something like run away and leave the body behind

719
00:36:51.320 --> 00:36:53.480
<v Speaker 1>and just pray that no one finds the body, or

720
00:36:53.639 --> 00:36:55.599
<v Speaker 1>just think well, if they find the body, I'll just

721
00:36:55.599 --> 00:36:57.599
<v Speaker 1>say that I didn't do it. They're not going to

722
00:36:57.639 --> 00:36:59.760
<v Speaker 1>instantly go to like, I'm going to cover this up

723
00:36:59.800 --> 00:37:02.719
<v Speaker 1>by burying her because this is an arrow when they

724
00:37:02.719 --> 00:37:05.800
<v Speaker 1>did not know about DNA yet, So no one at

725
00:37:05.800 --> 00:37:07.719
<v Speaker 1>that age at that time is going to be thinking, well,

726
00:37:07.719 --> 00:37:09.440
<v Speaker 1>if they find the body, they're going to find my

727
00:37:09.559 --> 00:37:12.599
<v Speaker 1>DNA on them, so I better bury her. That doesn't

728
00:37:12.639 --> 00:37:15.079
<v Speaker 1>really fit the scenario at all, So I do agree

729
00:37:15.079 --> 00:37:16.880
<v Speaker 1>that it contradicts where he says I didn't know what

730
00:37:16.920 --> 00:37:19.360
<v Speaker 1>to do, yet he knows to bury the body.

731
00:37:20.440 --> 00:37:22.679
<v Speaker 2>Okay, So the next line that we're going to do is,

732
00:37:23.360 --> 00:37:26.440
<v Speaker 2>but I was fourteen years old. I wasn't thinking. I

733
00:37:26.559 --> 00:37:29.679
<v Speaker 2>then dot dot dot. I came home after that, but

734
00:37:29.760 --> 00:37:33.360
<v Speaker 2>she was dead. He says over and over how he

735
00:37:33.440 --> 00:37:37.280
<v Speaker 2>wasn't thinking, but his actions appear to be calculated. I then,

736
00:37:38.079 --> 00:37:41.280
<v Speaker 2>what she says is often indicative of withholding of information.

737
00:37:42.000 --> 00:37:45.119
<v Speaker 2>Then is skipping over what preceded it and the dot

738
00:37:45.159 --> 00:37:48.840
<v Speaker 2>dot dot or paused where he rephrases it's likely a

739
00:37:48.920 --> 00:37:52.079
<v Speaker 2>spot where something happened that he's excluding from the statement.

740
00:37:53.159 --> 00:37:55.840
<v Speaker 2>And this again seems out of order. I came home

741
00:37:55.880 --> 00:37:59.800
<v Speaker 2>after that, but she was dead. Firstly, what is the

742
00:37:59.840 --> 00:38:03.039
<v Speaker 2>that he's referring to? And secondly, didn't he say he

743
00:38:03.119 --> 00:38:06.079
<v Speaker 2>buried her already? So stating that she was dead seems

744
00:38:06.199 --> 00:38:10.079
<v Speaker 2>redundant since it's out of order, and one often sees

745
00:38:10.119 --> 00:38:11.440
<v Speaker 2>this in deceptive statements.

746
00:38:12.559 --> 00:38:14.719
<v Speaker 1>Well, now we're at the point when he reveals his

747
00:38:14.840 --> 00:38:17.360
<v Speaker 1>exact age at the time this incident took place, which

748
00:38:17.400 --> 00:38:19.400
<v Speaker 1>is fourteen years old, and I'm sure you're all thinking

749
00:38:19.440 --> 00:38:21.519
<v Speaker 1>to yourself, it seems very at a character for a

750
00:38:21.559 --> 00:38:24.559
<v Speaker 1>fourteen year old to just have the wherewithal to bury

751
00:38:24.599 --> 00:38:28.599
<v Speaker 1>a victim only minutes after they allegedly killed them. And

752
00:38:28.920 --> 00:38:31.320
<v Speaker 1>like he said, it contradicts where he keeps saying I

753
00:38:31.440 --> 00:38:33.800
<v Speaker 1>wasn't thinking, but he was thinking enough that he was

754
00:38:33.840 --> 00:38:35.920
<v Speaker 1>going to bury the victim in order to cover up

755
00:38:35.960 --> 00:38:40.000
<v Speaker 1>his crime. So it's a very crazy contradiction. And he says,

756
00:38:40.039 --> 00:38:42.800
<v Speaker 1>I came home after that, and like, I'm wondering, what

757
00:38:42.960 --> 00:38:44.920
<v Speaker 1>is the that he's referring to, because if it was

758
00:38:45.000 --> 00:38:48.239
<v Speaker 1>just like an accident in a burial, it just seems

759
00:38:48.239 --> 00:38:49.840
<v Speaker 1>that weird that he would throw it in there. Like

760
00:38:49.880 --> 00:38:52.880
<v Speaker 1>that makes you wonder did something else actually happened? And

761
00:38:52.920 --> 00:38:56.119
<v Speaker 1>he did go home after it took place, But it

762
00:38:56.159 --> 00:38:59.320
<v Speaker 1>isn't the incident as he outlined it here in his confession.

763
00:39:00.679 --> 00:39:02.719
<v Speaker 2>So the next line that we're going to do is

764
00:39:03.320 --> 00:39:06.880
<v Speaker 2>definitely dead before I buried her. That I know because

765
00:39:06.920 --> 00:39:10.239
<v Speaker 2>I checked her stomach and all that. So notice how

766
00:39:10.280 --> 00:39:12.719
<v Speaker 2>there was no she was So when he takes her

767
00:39:12.760 --> 00:39:15.400
<v Speaker 2>out of the statement, this is sensitive, so pay attention.

768
00:39:16.039 --> 00:39:19.440
<v Speaker 2>So if he did indeed bury her, I would wonder

769
00:39:19.559 --> 00:39:24.280
<v Speaker 2>if she was dead, because the fact that she's taken

770
00:39:24.360 --> 00:39:27.480
<v Speaker 2>out of there and he uses the fragment definitely dead

771
00:39:27.559 --> 00:39:31.760
<v Speaker 2>before I buried her is really bizarre. So what does

772
00:39:31.800 --> 00:39:35.320
<v Speaker 2>he mean by quote that I know because I checked

773
00:39:35.320 --> 00:39:39.320
<v Speaker 2>her stomach and all that. Firstly, one typically checks a pulse.

774
00:39:40.400 --> 00:39:42.800
<v Speaker 2>Does he mean that he watched her chest to see

775
00:39:42.840 --> 00:39:46.320
<v Speaker 2>if it went up and down? But we cannot extrapolate.

776
00:39:46.360 --> 00:39:49.159
<v Speaker 2>We can only go off what people say. So I'm

777
00:39:49.239 --> 00:39:52.719
<v Speaker 2>curious if there's any injuries to the stomach or why

778
00:39:52.800 --> 00:39:55.079
<v Speaker 2>is he focusing on that rather than the pulse or

779
00:39:55.079 --> 00:39:58.920
<v Speaker 2>her breathing or lack thereof. And the quote all that

780
00:39:59.760 --> 00:40:01.639
<v Speaker 2>is he implying that he did other things that are

781
00:40:01.679 --> 00:40:04.199
<v Speaker 2>lower on her body than her mouth or her chest,

782
00:40:04.280 --> 00:40:07.360
<v Speaker 2>since he references the stomach, but he's not telling us

783
00:40:07.360 --> 00:40:10.000
<v Speaker 2>what they are, so we can't be sure that he

784
00:40:10.039 --> 00:40:12.119
<v Speaker 2>did anything at all to check to see if she

785
00:40:12.239 --> 00:40:15.559
<v Speaker 2>was alive. So the use of the word that is

786
00:40:15.599 --> 00:40:19.760
<v Speaker 2>interesting is distancing language. Rather than this, he says that

787
00:40:21.039 --> 00:40:23.719
<v Speaker 2>this whole portion of the statement, in my opinion, seems

788
00:40:23.719 --> 00:40:27.800
<v Speaker 2>potentially fabricated. This whole statement seems fabricated thus far.

789
00:40:28.920 --> 00:40:31.320
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I've always found that detail weird that the only

790
00:40:31.400 --> 00:40:33.760
<v Speaker 1>thing he says is I checked her stomach, Like nothing

791
00:40:33.800 --> 00:40:36.039
<v Speaker 1>about checking your pulse, And I guess he's trying to

792
00:40:36.079 --> 00:40:38.599
<v Speaker 1>imply that he wanted to see if she was still breathing,

793
00:40:38.719 --> 00:40:41.079
<v Speaker 1>if her stomach was moving. But you notice that the

794
00:40:41.079 --> 00:40:43.559
<v Speaker 1>one thing he never mentions in the confession is checking

795
00:40:43.639 --> 00:40:47.119
<v Speaker 1>your actual head, Because if someone fell down and hit

796
00:40:47.159 --> 00:40:49.639
<v Speaker 1>their head out of a sharp object sticking out of

797
00:40:49.679 --> 00:40:52.280
<v Speaker 1>the ground, I mean, I'm assuming if it happened so

798
00:40:52.400 --> 00:40:55.360
<v Speaker 1>fast that you may not even notice that sharp object,

799
00:40:55.360 --> 00:40:57.360
<v Speaker 1>You're just gonna see your landing her head and then

800
00:40:57.400 --> 00:41:00.679
<v Speaker 1>wonder why she's not getting up. Yet he never anything

801
00:41:00.719 --> 00:41:02.719
<v Speaker 1>about pulling her head up just to double check if

802
00:41:02.760 --> 00:41:04.960
<v Speaker 1>there was any sort of injury here. It's like he

803
00:41:05.000 --> 00:41:07.800
<v Speaker 1>has such great vision that at night he was able

804
00:41:07.840 --> 00:41:10.440
<v Speaker 1>to tell that her head hit a sharp object sticking

805
00:41:10.440 --> 00:41:12.639
<v Speaker 1>out of the ground, and that it was so deadly

806
00:41:12.719 --> 00:41:14.960
<v Speaker 1>that it killed her instantly, so he didn't have to

807
00:41:15.079 --> 00:41:18.159
<v Speaker 1>attempt any medical attention or go for help, just to

808
00:41:18.159 --> 00:41:20.559
<v Speaker 1>get a professional to check if she was still alive.

809
00:41:21.159 --> 00:41:23.239
<v Speaker 2>Oh, but he asked her if she was okay, and

810
00:41:23.239 --> 00:41:25.760
<v Speaker 2>then he ran over to her, and it's like, sir,

811
00:41:26.400 --> 00:41:28.599
<v Speaker 2>if this is indeed what happened. You would think you're

812
00:41:28.599 --> 00:41:31.280
<v Speaker 2>telling a story like that somebody fell after you push

813
00:41:31.360 --> 00:41:33.760
<v Speaker 2>them and they impaled their head. You'd think I ran

814
00:41:33.840 --> 00:41:37.079
<v Speaker 2>over to them and I grabbed her. I grabbed her

815
00:41:37.079 --> 00:41:39.199
<v Speaker 2>head to check and see if she was okay, or

816
00:41:39.239 --> 00:41:42.559
<v Speaker 2>her neck, to see if she was breathing, she was bleeding.

817
00:41:42.920 --> 00:41:45.480
<v Speaker 2>There was no details like that. How did you know

818
00:41:45.599 --> 00:41:49.000
<v Speaker 2>that her head was impaled? And he doesn't give like

819
00:41:49.039 --> 00:41:52.599
<v Speaker 2>we said before with the running, the part about hollering

820
00:41:52.639 --> 00:41:54.599
<v Speaker 2>on the street. He doesn't say like I got up

821
00:41:54.639 --> 00:41:56.639
<v Speaker 2>and I ran out of the college and I ran

822
00:41:56.719 --> 00:41:59.280
<v Speaker 2>to the street. He doesn't say like I went over

823
00:41:59.360 --> 00:42:02.119
<v Speaker 2>and I touched her. And he's lacking any sort of

824
00:42:02.760 --> 00:42:06.519
<v Speaker 2>statements on like what physical actions he took. It's just

825
00:42:06.719 --> 00:42:10.719
<v Speaker 2>so vague, just saying I checked her stomach. Who checks

826
00:42:10.719 --> 00:42:11.280
<v Speaker 2>the stomach?

827
00:42:12.559 --> 00:42:14.519
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, this really doesn't sound like the actions of a

828
00:42:14.559 --> 00:42:17.840
<v Speaker 1>fourteen year old who is genuinely panicked that they killed someone.

829
00:42:18.000 --> 00:42:20.719
<v Speaker 1>I mean, I can't say I've never been in that situation,

830
00:42:20.800 --> 00:42:23.159
<v Speaker 1>so I can't say what I would do. But I

831
00:42:23.239 --> 00:42:25.320
<v Speaker 1>don't think I would just like say, oh, i'm your

832
00:42:25.440 --> 00:42:27.760
<v Speaker 1>check her stomach. Oh she's not breathing. She must be

833
00:42:27.800 --> 00:42:29.480
<v Speaker 1>dead and then just leave it at that and then

834
00:42:29.559 --> 00:42:30.559
<v Speaker 1>decide to bury her.

835
00:42:31.039 --> 00:42:34.320
<v Speaker 2>I'm going to say that you wouldn't do this, and emotionally,

836
00:42:34.639 --> 00:42:38.159
<v Speaker 2>you would have a reaction if somebody accidentally fell backwards,

837
00:42:38.199 --> 00:42:41.599
<v Speaker 2>because you have the normal range of human emotions and

838
00:42:41.679 --> 00:42:45.159
<v Speaker 2>we're just not seeing that here. Everything that we're reading

839
00:42:45.239 --> 00:42:49.360
<v Speaker 2>so far has there's no panic, there's no emotion. It's

840
00:42:49.519 --> 00:42:52.679
<v Speaker 2>just like he's describing like what he ate for lunch,

841
00:42:52.880 --> 00:42:53.559
<v Speaker 2>you know what I mean?

842
00:42:54.480 --> 00:42:56.639
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, exactly. Just seems very casual.

843
00:42:58.079 --> 00:43:00.280
<v Speaker 2>So the next line we're going to analyze is then

844
00:43:00.360 --> 00:43:03.440
<v Speaker 2>after that, I sit there for about thirty minutes, thirty

845
00:43:03.480 --> 00:43:05.800
<v Speaker 2>to forty five minutes, just didn't know what to do.

846
00:43:07.039 --> 00:43:10.960
<v Speaker 2>So the whole statement then after that is very interesting.

847
00:43:11.440 --> 00:43:15.360
<v Speaker 2>Each individual word shows missing time, and withholding there's a

848
00:43:15.400 --> 00:43:18.639
<v Speaker 2>significant event or events that he's skipping over here, so

849
00:43:19.079 --> 00:43:23.400
<v Speaker 2>then shows missing time. After also shows missing time, indicating

850
00:43:23.440 --> 00:43:25.920
<v Speaker 2>there was an event preceding it. So we're looking at

851
00:43:25.960 --> 00:43:30.000
<v Speaker 2>something that is just incredibly vague. So he's using distancing

852
00:43:30.079 --> 00:43:34.360
<v Speaker 2>language with that, rather than saying exactly what happened, He's

853
00:43:34.480 --> 00:43:38.039
<v Speaker 2>using present tense language with sit there and not sat there.

854
00:43:38.480 --> 00:43:41.119
<v Speaker 2>He's recalling a past event, so he should be using

855
00:43:41.159 --> 00:43:45.519
<v Speaker 2>past tense language. Present tense language is often in a

856
00:43:45.519 --> 00:43:49.239
<v Speaker 2>deceptive statement, so we see the order of the story here.

857
00:43:49.239 --> 00:43:52.599
<v Speaker 2>It's out of sain which we often see time references

858
00:43:52.679 --> 00:43:56.760
<v Speaker 2>jumbled up in deceptive statements. He said that he's buried her,

859
00:43:56.880 --> 00:44:00.000
<v Speaker 2>and now he's talking about the aftermath of her murder

860
00:44:00.440 --> 00:44:03.960
<v Speaker 2>or this accidental death. I guess saying that he was

861
00:44:03.960 --> 00:44:07.320
<v Speaker 2>sitting there for about thirty minutes, which is an interesting

862
00:44:07.440 --> 00:44:11.199
<v Speaker 2>choice since statistically liars often picked the number three, so

863
00:44:11.239 --> 00:44:15.599
<v Speaker 2>this would include thirty minutes, and quote about makes it

864
00:44:15.679 --> 00:44:20.639
<v Speaker 2>even less precise. So quote just didn't know what to do.

865
00:44:21.800 --> 00:44:24.599
<v Speaker 2>We see the inclusion of the unique word just, and

866
00:44:24.639 --> 00:44:26.920
<v Speaker 2>we also see the fact that he took the eye

867
00:44:27.000 --> 00:44:30.599
<v Speaker 2>out of the statement, so he's distancing himself from responsibility.

868
00:44:31.800 --> 00:44:33.719
<v Speaker 1>Yeah. I always found that weird that he just said

869
00:44:33.760 --> 00:44:36.320
<v Speaker 1>I sit there rather than sat there, even though he's

870
00:44:36.360 --> 00:44:39.559
<v Speaker 1>describing an event that took place in the past, and

871
00:44:39.840 --> 00:44:42.599
<v Speaker 1>when you just see the full context, it's like so

872
00:44:42.719 --> 00:44:46.199
<v Speaker 1>weird that he can be calculated enough to bury this

873
00:44:46.239 --> 00:44:49.360
<v Speaker 1>person's body and then run away, yet then'd be shell

874
00:44:49.360 --> 00:44:52.039
<v Speaker 1>shocked enough afterwards to just sit there between thirty to

875
00:44:52.039 --> 00:44:55.400
<v Speaker 1>forty five minutes. That's interesting. I didn't know that. Statistically,

876
00:44:55.440 --> 00:44:58.719
<v Speaker 1>liars often picked the number three. So I'm guessing this

877
00:44:58.840 --> 00:45:00.760
<v Speaker 1>is a common thing where if have to make up

878
00:45:00.760 --> 00:45:03.000
<v Speaker 1>a story and come up with a timeframe, they'll usually

879
00:45:03.000 --> 00:45:05.800
<v Speaker 1>say like thirty minutes or so, just they're just attracted

880
00:45:05.840 --> 00:45:07.559
<v Speaker 1>to that word, that number for some reason.

881
00:45:07.880 --> 00:45:11.199
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, thirty minutes, three o'clock. Yeah, it's just it's a

882
00:45:11.239 --> 00:45:13.800
<v Speaker 2>typical number that liars will pick. I don't know why.

883
00:45:15.400 --> 00:45:18.360
<v Speaker 2>So the next line that we're going to analyze is

884
00:45:18.880 --> 00:45:22.199
<v Speaker 2>I went home, I got cleaned up. I regret it.

885
00:45:22.559 --> 00:45:27.239
<v Speaker 2>I'm sorry it did happen. I regret pushing her. So

886
00:45:27.519 --> 00:45:30.119
<v Speaker 2>he already said that he went home more out of

887
00:45:30.199 --> 00:45:33.719
<v Speaker 2>order statements and time references that are off, So he

888
00:45:33.760 --> 00:45:37.000
<v Speaker 2>skips over what he did after sitting there. He says

889
00:45:37.079 --> 00:45:40.599
<v Speaker 2>he buried her, But we're getting no information on how

890
00:45:40.760 --> 00:45:44.480
<v Speaker 2>or when that transpired. If this is true, he likely

891
00:45:44.480 --> 00:45:47.840
<v Speaker 2>did go home and get cleaned up, but he's definitely

892
00:45:47.880 --> 00:45:51.599
<v Speaker 2>withholding a great deal of information on what preceded that exactly.

893
00:45:52.159 --> 00:45:55.400
<v Speaker 2>And although this sounds really strange, to stay with me.

894
00:45:56.000 --> 00:45:59.679
<v Speaker 2>So the use of the phrase cleaned up could indicate

895
00:45:59.679 --> 00:46:05.519
<v Speaker 2>sexual activity so washing, bathing, brushing teeth, These personal cleaning

896
00:46:05.599 --> 00:46:09.679
<v Speaker 2>rituals can be indicative of sexual abuse or activity. So

897
00:46:09.800 --> 00:46:13.800
<v Speaker 2>I question here if he is indeed responsible, that the

898
00:46:13.840 --> 00:46:17.400
<v Speaker 2>potential motive could be that of rape and not related

899
00:46:17.400 --> 00:46:20.880
<v Speaker 2>to the money at all. So quote I regret it.

900
00:46:21.239 --> 00:46:25.239
<v Speaker 2>My question if he does, he's taking what he regrets

901
00:46:25.320 --> 00:46:27.960
<v Speaker 2>out of the statement. So how much could he truly

902
00:46:28.000 --> 00:46:30.679
<v Speaker 2>be feeling remorse if he can't say exactly what he

903
00:46:30.719 --> 00:46:34.039
<v Speaker 2>did that he regrets. Does he regret cleaning up? That's

904
00:46:34.039 --> 00:46:37.079
<v Speaker 2>what the sentence structure would have you believe, But clearly

905
00:46:37.119 --> 00:46:40.119
<v Speaker 2>he means the death of the victim, but he's not

906
00:46:40.159 --> 00:46:43.599
<v Speaker 2>saying that, so I can't be sure. And he doesn't

907
00:46:43.639 --> 00:46:45.400
<v Speaker 2>say that it was an accident. He just leaves it

908
00:46:45.440 --> 00:46:49.199
<v Speaker 2>out entirely. He uses really strange language here, and he

909
00:46:49.280 --> 00:46:52.559
<v Speaker 2>doesn't say I'm sorry it happened. He uses present tense

910
00:46:52.639 --> 00:46:56.400
<v Speaker 2>I'm sorry it did happen, which isn't the same thing.

911
00:46:56.719 --> 00:46:59.599
<v Speaker 2>Is he apologizing for what he did or is he

912
00:46:59.599 --> 00:47:03.719
<v Speaker 2>apologizing to investigators who may be giving him disapproving glances

913
00:47:04.159 --> 00:47:08.119
<v Speaker 2>and affirming that it did indeed happen. He's lacked a motion,

914
00:47:08.480 --> 00:47:11.079
<v Speaker 2>like we said, through this entire statement, and the way

915
00:47:11.079 --> 00:47:15.199
<v Speaker 2>that he chooses to express remorse is suspect. Many killers

916
00:47:15.239 --> 00:47:19.079
<v Speaker 2>express remorse, but people who make false confessions would have

917
00:47:19.119 --> 00:47:21.960
<v Speaker 2>no reason to be remorseful, aside from wasting time of

918
00:47:22.079 --> 00:47:25.559
<v Speaker 2>investigators or getting the families hopes up. He says that

919
00:47:25.599 --> 00:47:28.400
<v Speaker 2>he regrets pushing her, but he doesn't mention that he

920
00:47:28.440 --> 00:47:31.239
<v Speaker 2>regrets anything else, not the fight, not the fact that

921
00:47:31.280 --> 00:47:33.920
<v Speaker 2>she died, that he chose to bury her and cover

922
00:47:33.960 --> 00:47:36.840
<v Speaker 2>it up, simply that he pushed her. We can only

923
00:47:36.880 --> 00:47:39.480
<v Speaker 2>believe he regrets what he tells us that he regrets.

924
00:47:40.679 --> 00:47:43.039
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, the whole statement about him getting cleaned up. When

925
00:47:43.119 --> 00:47:45.199
<v Speaker 1>you learn the full context of this case, you're going

926
00:47:45.280 --> 00:47:47.920
<v Speaker 1>to wonder, like, is this part even true. I mean,

927
00:47:48.000 --> 00:47:50.920
<v Speaker 1>it is possible that there was sexual abuse here that

928
00:47:50.960 --> 00:47:52.880
<v Speaker 1>he's not talking about, and that's why he felt the

929
00:47:52.920 --> 00:47:55.440
<v Speaker 1>need to clean himself up. Yet at the same time,

930
00:47:55.559 --> 00:47:59.199
<v Speaker 1>if he actually buried someone, then obviously he would be

931
00:47:59.199 --> 00:48:02.000
<v Speaker 1>pretty dirty and require a lot of cleaning. And when

932
00:48:02.039 --> 00:48:04.960
<v Speaker 1>you see the circumstances of how he was living at

933
00:48:04.960 --> 00:48:07.000
<v Speaker 1>the time, you would think that someone would have noticed

934
00:48:07.000 --> 00:48:09.119
<v Speaker 1>something that if he had gotten if he had accidentally

935
00:48:09.199 --> 00:48:11.719
<v Speaker 1>killed someone and buried their body. There would be a

936
00:48:11.719 --> 00:48:13.519
<v Speaker 1>lot more warning signs with them, like he would be

937
00:48:13.559 --> 00:48:15.840
<v Speaker 1>covered in dirt, he would be sweaty. And I haven't

938
00:48:15.880 --> 00:48:19.159
<v Speaker 1>heard anything to indicate that someone saw him on that

939
00:48:19.280 --> 00:48:22.000
<v Speaker 1>fashion on that particular night, which makes me wonder if

940
00:48:22.039 --> 00:48:25.000
<v Speaker 1>this entire part of the story is completely fabricated. And

941
00:48:25.039 --> 00:48:28.559
<v Speaker 1>it's interesting how he always uses the word her throughout

942
00:48:28.639 --> 00:48:31.639
<v Speaker 1>this when describing the victim, like I regret pushing her.

943
00:48:31.920 --> 00:48:33.840
<v Speaker 1>But you'll notice that there was only one moment in

944
00:48:33.880 --> 00:48:35.880
<v Speaker 1>the entire statement where I had to bleep out the

945
00:48:35.960 --> 00:48:39.360
<v Speaker 1>victim's name, And it's kind of a detached thing where

946
00:48:39.559 --> 00:48:42.760
<v Speaker 1>he only uses the victim's name once during the entire statement.

947
00:48:43.119 --> 00:48:45.679
<v Speaker 1>And when you hear that, you're like, yeah, that's kind

948
00:48:45.679 --> 00:48:48.679
<v Speaker 1>of surprising when you learn the relationship between them. So

949
00:48:48.719 --> 00:48:52.000
<v Speaker 1>it's kind of like he's deliberately not using the person's

950
00:48:52.039 --> 00:48:53.840
<v Speaker 1>name to distance himself from what he did.

951
00:48:54.719 --> 00:48:58.440
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, that can definitely be indicative of distancing. But if

952
00:48:58.840 --> 00:49:02.840
<v Speaker 2>the perpetrator used her name in the beginning, like I remember,

953
00:49:02.920 --> 00:49:05.800
<v Speaker 2>I thought this too. I was doing the Scott Peterson

954
00:49:06.199 --> 00:49:09.679
<v Speaker 2>interview with investigators and just for practice, and I sent

955
00:49:09.719 --> 00:49:12.840
<v Speaker 2>it to Mark and I was noting every single time

956
00:49:12.880 --> 00:49:17.079
<v Speaker 2>that he said her rather than like my wife or Lacey.

957
00:49:17.760 --> 00:49:21.360
<v Speaker 2>And I had the exact same thought that you did,

958
00:49:21.440 --> 00:49:23.440
<v Speaker 2>because I thought, like, if you're continuing to say her

959
00:49:23.639 --> 00:49:26.599
<v Speaker 2>rather than saying her name. But he said, if her

960
00:49:26.679 --> 00:49:31.440
<v Speaker 2>name was used initially, then you can say her. But

961
00:49:31.679 --> 00:49:34.840
<v Speaker 2>I still do think that if you're going to go

962
00:49:34.960 --> 00:49:37.679
<v Speaker 2>a whole statement and you're only going to use that

963
00:49:37.719 --> 00:49:41.000
<v Speaker 2>person's name once, if that person meant something to you

964
00:49:41.119 --> 00:49:45.639
<v Speaker 2>and you're indicating that there was a relationship, and earlier

965
00:49:45.639 --> 00:49:48.119
<v Speaker 2>on in the analysis, I said that we would indicate

966
00:49:48.119 --> 00:49:50.440
<v Speaker 2>a partnership, and I thought that these two were known

967
00:49:50.480 --> 00:49:52.119
<v Speaker 2>to each other. This wasn't just like a victim of

968
00:49:52.320 --> 00:49:56.599
<v Speaker 2>opportunity or a chance encounter. Then you would think that

969
00:49:57.159 --> 00:50:00.840
<v Speaker 2>somebody who would be remorseful, especially if they respond, would

970
00:50:00.880 --> 00:50:04.000
<v Speaker 2>be using that person's name. It just it doesn't feel

971
00:50:04.079 --> 00:50:05.480
<v Speaker 2>emotionally appropriate.

972
00:50:06.119 --> 00:50:08.639
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, yeah, especially when you learn the full context about

973
00:50:08.639 --> 00:50:09.360
<v Speaker 1>why he's saying this.

974
00:50:10.840 --> 00:50:12.840
<v Speaker 2>So the next line is I wish I could go

975
00:50:12.920 --> 00:50:15.480
<v Speaker 2>back in time and not have done that. I wish

976
00:50:15.519 --> 00:50:18.360
<v Speaker 2>I could turn time. If I could turn time back,

977
00:50:18.480 --> 00:50:21.760
<v Speaker 2>I wouldn't just you know, I wish I could go

978
00:50:21.800 --> 00:50:24.519
<v Speaker 2>back in time and not have done that. Again, what

979
00:50:24.679 --> 00:50:28.039
<v Speaker 2>is that There's a great deal of information that he's withholding,

980
00:50:28.159 --> 00:50:30.639
<v Speaker 2>So I think there's a potential that that could refer

981
00:50:30.719 --> 00:50:34.360
<v Speaker 2>to rape or murder and not just an accident. He

982
00:50:34.360 --> 00:50:37.000
<v Speaker 2>doesn't say accident, and we can only go off what

983
00:50:37.079 --> 00:50:41.119
<v Speaker 2>the subject says, So based on his words, this is

984
00:50:41.320 --> 00:50:44.880
<v Speaker 2>likely no accident. He doesn't say her name or express

985
00:50:44.920 --> 00:50:48.199
<v Speaker 2>regret over her being dead. Notice, it's all about him.

986
00:50:48.920 --> 00:50:50.760
<v Speaker 2>If I could go back in time, I would just

987
00:50:51.199 --> 00:50:51.880
<v Speaker 2>dot dot dot.

988
00:50:51.920 --> 00:50:52.159
<v Speaker 3>You know.

989
00:50:53.039 --> 00:50:56.679
<v Speaker 2>Again, he uses the word just he's withholding information, and

990
00:50:56.760 --> 00:51:01.000
<v Speaker 2>you know he's assuming. The interviewer notes. By using this language,

991
00:51:01.000 --> 00:51:04.000
<v Speaker 2>she's distancing himself from the act and the potential motivation.

992
00:51:05.119 --> 00:51:08.440
<v Speaker 2>He doesn't anywhere say that this was a terrible accident,

993
00:51:08.519 --> 00:51:11.320
<v Speaker 2>as I just mentioned, So we have to ask ourselves

994
00:51:11.400 --> 00:51:14.119
<v Speaker 2>if there is a possibility that he intended to end

995
00:51:14.119 --> 00:51:18.320
<v Speaker 2>her life. He's purposefully vague and in my opinion, trying

996
00:51:18.320 --> 00:51:20.320
<v Speaker 2>to cover up what really happened and what was his

997
00:51:20.440 --> 00:51:23.840
<v Speaker 2>true motivation if he was indeed in fault.

998
00:51:24.639 --> 00:51:26.719
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, it's kind of weird the phrasing. I wish I

999
00:51:26.719 --> 00:51:29.039
<v Speaker 1>could have gone back in time and not have done that.

1000
00:51:29.239 --> 00:51:32.079
<v Speaker 1>And I'm thinking if this was legitimately an accident, that

1001
00:51:32.159 --> 00:51:34.639
<v Speaker 1>he would say more details that he would say, if

1002
00:51:34.679 --> 00:51:36.320
<v Speaker 1>I could do it over again, I would have been

1003
00:51:36.360 --> 00:51:38.800
<v Speaker 1>certain that she was dead, like I would have gone

1004
00:51:38.880 --> 00:51:41.039
<v Speaker 1>for help, and maybe if I had acted quicker, I

1005
00:51:41.079 --> 00:51:44.760
<v Speaker 1>could have saved her life. But it's like you're saying

1006
00:51:44.800 --> 00:51:46.400
<v Speaker 1>that all I wish I had not done that. That

1007
00:51:46.440 --> 00:51:49.400
<v Speaker 1>does kind of indicate that maybe he's did something else

1008
00:51:49.719 --> 00:51:51.400
<v Speaker 1>but just doesn't want to say it, and then he

1009
00:51:51.440 --> 00:51:54.360
<v Speaker 1>has great regrets about having done it. But it's just

1010
00:51:54.360 --> 00:51:56.840
<v Speaker 1>a weird phrase to use. If you are genuinely like

1011
00:51:56.920 --> 00:51:59.000
<v Speaker 1>not a fault, then it was genuinely an accident.

1012
00:52:00.199 --> 00:52:02.400
<v Speaker 2>The next line is it was all over money dot

1013
00:52:02.440 --> 00:52:04.559
<v Speaker 2>dot dot. And you know what money will do to

1014
00:52:04.639 --> 00:52:07.000
<v Speaker 2>you when you're a kid. I don't know dot dot

1015
00:52:07.000 --> 00:52:10.119
<v Speaker 2>dot you were a kid, dot dot dot. You had

1016
00:52:10.159 --> 00:52:13.159
<v Speaker 2>a certain amount of money dot dot dot. The money

1017
00:52:13.199 --> 00:52:16.559
<v Speaker 2>was valuable to you. Then you know, so the it

1018
00:52:16.840 --> 00:52:19.360
<v Speaker 2>he doesn't say what it is, was it the fight,

1019
00:52:20.159 --> 00:52:23.440
<v Speaker 2>was it pushing her? He doesn't say what money does

1020
00:52:23.480 --> 00:52:26.480
<v Speaker 2>to him. He pushes it onto the detective trying to

1021
00:52:26.519 --> 00:52:29.480
<v Speaker 2>relate with the statement, and you know what money will

1022
00:52:29.519 --> 00:52:31.280
<v Speaker 2>do to you when you're a kid, I don't know.

1023
00:52:31.360 --> 00:52:33.679
<v Speaker 2>Dot dot dot you were a kid, dot dot dot

1024
00:52:33.760 --> 00:52:35.800
<v Speaker 2>you had a certain amount of money, the money was

1025
00:52:35.920 --> 00:52:39.239
<v Speaker 2>valuable to you, then, you know, So why are you

1026
00:52:39.280 --> 00:52:42.960
<v Speaker 2>referencing childhood and money? This seems like a need to

1027
00:52:43.039 --> 00:52:47.360
<v Speaker 2>distract from what could be a real motivation or what

1028
00:52:47.480 --> 00:52:50.000
<v Speaker 2>were the real actions that he took. He doesn't say

1029
00:52:50.000 --> 00:52:52.719
<v Speaker 2>the amount of money that she had in possession. He's

1030
00:52:52.800 --> 00:52:56.360
<v Speaker 2>so nonspecific with the change from twenty dollars. So the

1031
00:52:56.400 --> 00:52:59.400
<v Speaker 2>subject takes himself out of the statement, distancing himself and

1032
00:52:59.480 --> 00:53:03.079
<v Speaker 2>further brings the detective in. So he's meandering and loses

1033
00:53:03.119 --> 00:53:07.400
<v Speaker 2>the plot here. He was fourteen, not seven, So the

1034
00:53:07.480 --> 00:53:10.280
<v Speaker 2>reference to him as a kid, is that appropriate or

1035
00:53:10.320 --> 00:53:13.079
<v Speaker 2>do you think that that's to minimize.

1036
00:53:13.360 --> 00:53:15.599
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, because that's this whole story, is that they got

1037
00:53:15.639 --> 00:53:18.639
<v Speaker 1>into a fight over money and that he pushed her

1038
00:53:18.719 --> 00:53:21.079
<v Speaker 1>accidentally and that's how she wound up dead. So he's

1039
00:53:21.079 --> 00:53:24.039
<v Speaker 1>pretty much saying that's the entire motivation, and he's trying

1040
00:53:24.039 --> 00:53:25.800
<v Speaker 1>to make it sound like, oh, if you're a kid

1041
00:53:25.920 --> 00:53:28.519
<v Speaker 1>or if you're a teenager, that a fight over money

1042
00:53:28.559 --> 00:53:31.079
<v Speaker 1>can escalate a lot worse than if you're an adult,

1043
00:53:31.119 --> 00:53:33.960
<v Speaker 1>and that's why they got into a physical altercation, which

1044
00:53:34.440 --> 00:53:37.960
<v Speaker 1>is kind odd that she's just trying to justify it, saying, well,

1045
00:53:38.000 --> 00:53:40.280
<v Speaker 1>you know what it's like if someone doesn't steals money

1046
00:53:40.280 --> 00:53:42.079
<v Speaker 1>from you or doesn't give you the correct money, you

1047
00:53:42.079 --> 00:53:44.480
<v Speaker 1>can drive you wild. And I'm thinking, really, is a

1048
00:53:44.519 --> 00:53:46.559
<v Speaker 1>fourteen year old going to act this way over a

1049
00:53:46.679 --> 00:53:49.159
<v Speaker 1>twenty dollars? And one thing he doesn't mention in the

1050
00:53:49.199 --> 00:53:51.760
<v Speaker 1>statement you'll notice is that he doesn't say what happened

1051
00:53:51.800 --> 00:53:54.119
<v Speaker 1>to the actual money, because he says that she didn't

1052
00:53:54.119 --> 00:53:56.360
<v Speaker 1>give him back the correct change from the twenty dollars,

1053
00:53:56.760 --> 00:53:59.320
<v Speaker 1>but he doesn't mention anything about checking her pockets or

1054
00:53:59.320 --> 00:54:02.480
<v Speaker 1>anything to collect the money. Even though this was supposedly

1055
00:54:02.519 --> 00:54:03.880
<v Speaker 1>the motivation for her death.

1056
00:54:05.519 --> 00:54:07.440
<v Speaker 2>I would go so far as to say that it wasn't.

1057
00:54:07.559 --> 00:54:12.199
<v Speaker 2>And then he's lying because it's completely nonspecific. Just all

1058
00:54:12.239 --> 00:54:15.639
<v Speaker 2>the details here nonspecific. He just feels like he's trying

1059
00:54:15.639 --> 00:54:18.119
<v Speaker 2>to distract when he's bringing the detective into it, Like,

1060
00:54:18.119 --> 00:54:19.960
<v Speaker 2>how does he know that money was valuable to the

1061
00:54:19.960 --> 00:54:22.960
<v Speaker 2>detective when he was a kid. He won't take responsibility

1062
00:54:23.000 --> 00:54:25.400
<v Speaker 2>by saying when I was a kid, money was valuable

1063
00:54:25.400 --> 00:54:28.880
<v Speaker 2>to me. He's distancing himself from what he's saying was

1064
00:54:28.920 --> 00:54:31.559
<v Speaker 2>his primary motivation, which I think is really odd.

1065
00:54:32.119 --> 00:54:33.960
<v Speaker 1>Well, I'll just say that once you learn the full

1066
00:54:34.000 --> 00:54:37.280
<v Speaker 1>context of how this statement is taking place, this statement

1067
00:54:37.280 --> 00:54:39.639
<v Speaker 1>about the money does make a bit more sense when

1068
00:54:39.639 --> 00:54:42.159
<v Speaker 1>you realize that it's not just a detective, that there's

1069
00:54:42.480 --> 00:54:44.639
<v Speaker 1>someone else in the room who is hearing this story.

1070
00:54:44.679 --> 00:54:47.079
<v Speaker 1>So I think that's why he's just talking about how

1071
00:54:47.199 --> 00:54:49.280
<v Speaker 1>you know that money was valuable to me back then.

1072
00:54:50.159 --> 00:54:52.440
<v Speaker 2>That might be the context that I'm missing, because it's

1073
00:54:52.519 --> 00:54:54.840
<v Speaker 2>just like, why are you meandering on about how you

1074
00:54:54.880 --> 00:54:56.719
<v Speaker 2>had a certain amount of money when you were a kid?

1075
00:54:56.760 --> 00:54:58.320
<v Speaker 2>To the detective, it's like, why don't you just say

1076
00:54:58.320 --> 00:54:59.719
<v Speaker 2>I had a certain amount of money when I was

1077
00:54:59.719 --> 00:55:02.199
<v Speaker 2>a kid, and that money was very valuable to me,

1078
00:55:02.679 --> 00:55:06.039
<v Speaker 2>and so I felt the under threat when she took

1079
00:55:06.079 --> 00:55:08.559
<v Speaker 2>this money or whatever. But he doesn't give any details

1080
00:55:08.639 --> 00:55:12.119
<v Speaker 2>like that. It just feels like an utter fabrication. So

1081
00:55:12.239 --> 00:55:14.440
<v Speaker 2>the next line is, but that's the way it was

1082
00:55:14.480 --> 00:55:18.039
<v Speaker 2>when I was a kid. The subject finally references himself

1083
00:55:18.079 --> 00:55:20.639
<v Speaker 2>as a kid, but again doesn't say money was important

1084
00:55:20.679 --> 00:55:23.119
<v Speaker 2>to me as a kid. He keeps it vague with

1085
00:55:23.840 --> 00:55:25.719
<v Speaker 2>but that's the way it was with me when I

1086
00:55:25.800 --> 00:55:27.679
<v Speaker 2>was a kid. Is fourteen a kid?

1087
00:55:28.119 --> 00:55:28.480
<v Speaker 1>I don't know.

1088
00:55:28.519 --> 00:55:30.480
<v Speaker 2>I think it's more of a teenager, but I guess

1089
00:55:30.519 --> 00:55:33.199
<v Speaker 2>it depends on the age the subject is when looking back.

1090
00:55:34.199 --> 00:55:36.079
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, yeah, as we're going to talk about this is

1091
00:55:36.320 --> 00:55:39.920
<v Speaker 1>years down the line, so obviously the person saying this

1092
00:55:40.079 --> 00:55:42.079
<v Speaker 1>is no longer a kid. They are now grown adult,

1093
00:55:42.159 --> 00:55:44.400
<v Speaker 1>So that's probably why they were referring themselves to a

1094
00:55:44.480 --> 00:55:47.239
<v Speaker 1>kid at age fourteen, even though that would technically make

1095
00:55:47.239 --> 00:55:49.480
<v Speaker 1>them a teenager. And of course at that point they

1096
00:55:49.480 --> 00:55:51.119
<v Speaker 1>are old enough to know right from wrong.

1097
00:55:52.079 --> 00:55:54.239
<v Speaker 2>So I'm not sure if this next one is like

1098
00:55:54.280 --> 00:55:57.760
<v Speaker 2>a grammatical error or if this is I'm going to

1099
00:55:57.840 --> 00:56:00.440
<v Speaker 2>think that it's not, but I'll read the line every

1100
00:56:00.519 --> 00:56:03.519
<v Speaker 2>dime I got I depend on because most stuff like

1101
00:56:03.559 --> 00:56:06.920
<v Speaker 2>that I had to work for, so I depend on

1102
00:56:07.320 --> 00:56:10.239
<v Speaker 2>is present tense, So I don't know if he's referring

1103
00:56:10.280 --> 00:56:12.800
<v Speaker 2>to the past or the present, like right now, money

1104
00:56:12.880 --> 00:56:15.719
<v Speaker 2>is really important, like every dime I have, Like rather

1105
00:56:15.760 --> 00:56:18.760
<v Speaker 2>than saying every dime I have I depend on, he

1106
00:56:18.800 --> 00:56:21.480
<v Speaker 2>said I got or does he mean every dime I got?

1107
00:56:21.639 --> 00:56:23.880
<v Speaker 2>Past tense at that time, and then he's saying I

1108
00:56:23.960 --> 00:56:27.880
<v Speaker 2>depend on, I'm thinking that it's the misuse of present

1109
00:56:28.000 --> 00:56:32.360
<v Speaker 2>tens rather than him speaking about present tents. What do

1110
00:56:32.400 --> 00:56:32.760
<v Speaker 2>you think?

1111
00:56:33.320 --> 00:56:35.400
<v Speaker 1>That's what I'm thinking as well, because he is staying

1112
00:56:35.440 --> 00:56:38.440
<v Speaker 1>this statement years after the alleged incident took place, and

1113
00:56:38.519 --> 00:56:40.840
<v Speaker 1>I don't think he would say I depended on every

1114
00:56:40.920 --> 00:56:43.599
<v Speaker 1>dime I got way back when I was fourteen years old.

1115
00:56:43.920 --> 00:56:46.039
<v Speaker 1>So he's trying to say that, like any free thing

1116
00:56:46.079 --> 00:56:48.519
<v Speaker 1>I have right now, I had to work for. So

1117
00:56:48.679 --> 00:56:51.079
<v Speaker 1>but he's still trying to use it as a justification

1118
00:56:51.159 --> 00:56:53.199
<v Speaker 1>for his motivation, saying, you know how hard it is

1119
00:56:53.239 --> 00:56:55.440
<v Speaker 1>for me to earn money, so you can understand why

1120
00:56:55.480 --> 00:56:58.320
<v Speaker 1>I would have lost my temper and accidentally killed someone

1121
00:56:58.360 --> 00:57:00.280
<v Speaker 1>over money back when I was fourteen years old.

1122
00:57:01.159 --> 00:57:03.679
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, And he goes on by saying, because most stuff

1123
00:57:03.719 --> 00:57:06.760
<v Speaker 2>like that I had to work for. Most stuff like

1124
00:57:06.800 --> 00:57:08.440
<v Speaker 2>that you had to work for. Like what are we

1125
00:57:08.559 --> 00:57:11.760
<v Speaker 2>referring to here, Like we're knowing, Okay, So he's saying

1126
00:57:11.800 --> 00:57:15.000
<v Speaker 2>most stuff like that. Is he referring to money, is

1127
00:57:15.039 --> 00:57:18.760
<v Speaker 2>he referring to relations with women? He doesn't specify what

1128
00:57:19.000 --> 00:57:20.400
<v Speaker 2>most stuff like that is.

1129
00:57:21.199 --> 00:57:23.880
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, it's kind of weird to me because we really

1130
00:57:23.920 --> 00:57:27.440
<v Speaker 1>don't know how true this story is and I don't

1131
00:57:27.440 --> 00:57:30.039
<v Speaker 1>know if he's trying to say that, like talk about

1132
00:57:30.079 --> 00:57:32.800
<v Speaker 1>even how emotional connections had to work for because I

1133
00:57:32.880 --> 00:57:34.920
<v Speaker 1>we're going to find out this person that he supposedly

1134
00:57:35.039 --> 00:57:38.039
<v Speaker 1>killed was someone who had a very strong connection to him,

1135
00:57:38.360 --> 00:57:41.079
<v Speaker 1>and maybe he's thinking about how it was very difficult

1136
00:57:41.079 --> 00:57:43.840
<v Speaker 1>for me to develop strong relationships with other people. That

1137
00:57:44.000 --> 00:57:46.280
<v Speaker 1>was something I had to work for. So it could

1138
00:57:46.320 --> 00:57:48.920
<v Speaker 1>be like a distancing himself again where he's saying that

1139
00:57:48.960 --> 00:57:51.880
<v Speaker 1>there's no way I would commit premeditated murder because this

1140
00:57:51.920 --> 00:57:54.199
<v Speaker 1>person was someone who was close to me.

1141
00:57:55.280 --> 00:57:59.199
<v Speaker 2>All right, So I'm going to give my conclusion here.

1142
00:58:00.039 --> 00:58:02.199
<v Speaker 2>I think the vast majority of the statement, as we've

1143
00:58:02.239 --> 00:58:06.000
<v Speaker 2>mentioned throughout, is fabricated. The time references are all off

1144
00:58:06.280 --> 00:58:09.480
<v Speaker 2>and the events are jumbled. There's missing time all over

1145
00:58:09.519 --> 00:58:12.199
<v Speaker 2>the place as well. The subject takes himself out of

1146
00:58:12.199 --> 00:58:16.039
<v Speaker 2>the statement. He uses passive language, the story lacks emotion,

1147
00:58:16.960 --> 00:58:19.599
<v Speaker 2>the tone is inappropriate, and it seems like he's trying

1148
00:58:19.639 --> 00:58:23.119
<v Speaker 2>to cloak what could be his real motivation, which if

1149
00:58:23.199 --> 00:58:26.559
<v Speaker 2>he isn'tdeed responsible. Based on these statements, I think could

1150
00:58:26.639 --> 00:58:30.360
<v Speaker 2>potentially be sexual in nature, but they're definitely not related

1151
00:58:30.400 --> 00:58:33.320
<v Speaker 2>to the money that he brings up throughout the entire statement.

1152
00:58:33.880 --> 00:58:36.360
<v Speaker 2>But given the context of the entire statement, it is

1153
00:58:36.639 --> 00:58:39.719
<v Speaker 2>entirely possible that it could be a balse confession and

1154
00:58:39.760 --> 00:58:42.960
<v Speaker 2>there are underlying motives or fantasies that drove the subject

1155
00:58:43.039 --> 00:58:45.800
<v Speaker 2>to confess. There's plenty of use of unique words such

1156
00:58:45.800 --> 00:58:47.760
<v Speaker 2>as just, and the fact that he doesn't say this

1157
00:58:47.880 --> 00:58:50.559
<v Speaker 2>was an accident at any point, and he doesn't give

1158
00:58:50.599 --> 00:58:53.960
<v Speaker 2>clear details. The whole account is vague. He skates over

1159
00:58:54.000 --> 00:58:57.360
<v Speaker 2>the part about burying her, and he gives no details

1160
00:58:57.400 --> 00:59:00.199
<v Speaker 2>on what should be a very memorable action. Taken this

1161
00:59:00.239 --> 00:59:02.880
<v Speaker 2>feels like an important part of the story, as is

1162
00:59:02.920 --> 00:59:06.719
<v Speaker 2>the part where she was impaled and by what, And

1163
00:59:06.800 --> 00:59:10.159
<v Speaker 2>like Robin said, he doesn't check her head. He offers

1164
00:59:10.199 --> 00:59:13.280
<v Speaker 2>no further clues. None of this feels like it's coming

1165
00:59:13.280 --> 00:59:16.119
<v Speaker 2>from memory. Basically, all of the events in here, in

1166
00:59:16.119 --> 00:59:19.719
<v Speaker 2>my opinions, seemed fabricated. And there's two possibilities here in

1167
00:59:19.760 --> 00:59:22.920
<v Speaker 2>my very non expert opinion, let's keep this in mind.

1168
00:59:23.519 --> 00:59:26.159
<v Speaker 2>Number one, this is a false confession by someone who

1169
00:59:26.199 --> 00:59:31.079
<v Speaker 2>came forward with very few details and no real knowledge

1170
00:59:31.119 --> 00:59:34.519
<v Speaker 2>of the crime, but they're somehow tied to her because

1171
00:59:34.559 --> 00:59:37.960
<v Speaker 2>like I said earlier, the use of us indicates a partnership,

1172
00:59:38.079 --> 00:59:40.519
<v Speaker 2>and I felt as though this is somebody who had

1173
00:59:40.639 --> 00:59:43.760
<v Speaker 2>known her in her life. Number Two, this is a

1174
00:59:43.800 --> 00:59:47.639
<v Speaker 2>suspect to confess, but with a completely inaccurate retelling of

1175
00:59:47.679 --> 00:59:50.440
<v Speaker 2>events in question, reframing them to put himself in a

1176
00:59:50.480 --> 00:59:53.760
<v Speaker 2>less culpable position. And I go back and forth on these.

1177
00:59:53.800 --> 00:59:55.280
<v Speaker 2>I'm not even going to say which one that I

1178
00:59:55.360 --> 00:59:58.280
<v Speaker 2>feel like is more likely, because I think that both

1179
00:59:58.960 --> 01:00:02.360
<v Speaker 2>options are equally plausible, and I think I'll have an

1180
01:00:02.360 --> 01:00:05.280
<v Speaker 2>opinion once you tell me the details of the case.

1181
01:00:06.159 --> 01:00:08.159
<v Speaker 2>But the one thing that I can settle on is

1182
01:00:08.239 --> 01:00:12.719
<v Speaker 2>this statement is fabricated. It is almost entirely deceptive.

1183
01:00:13.320 --> 01:00:15.639
<v Speaker 1>Yeah. Well, before we recorded this, you sent me like

1184
01:00:15.679 --> 01:00:17.960
<v Speaker 1>a draft of your statement analysis and you just wanted

1185
01:00:18.000 --> 01:00:19.880
<v Speaker 1>to ask me if I was on the right track,

1186
01:00:20.280 --> 01:00:22.880
<v Speaker 1>and I said that you were, because when I covered

1187
01:00:22.880 --> 01:00:24.880
<v Speaker 1>this case, when the trail went cold four years ago,

1188
01:00:24.920 --> 01:00:28.039
<v Speaker 1>I pretty much had these same feelings where I wasn't

1189
01:00:28.079 --> 01:00:30.559
<v Speaker 1>one hundred percent certain about whether the person making this

1190
01:00:30.599 --> 01:00:33.679
<v Speaker 1>statement was guilty. But either way, I do not believe

1191
01:00:33.719 --> 01:00:36.599
<v Speaker 1>that this is an accurate account of what actually happened,

1192
01:00:36.920 --> 01:00:39.119
<v Speaker 1>and that if the person who said it was guilty,

1193
01:00:39.280 --> 01:00:42.880
<v Speaker 1>then the victim's death took place in an entirely different fashion,

1194
01:00:43.199 --> 01:00:44.960
<v Speaker 1>and that he was not telling the full truth.

1195
01:00:45.639 --> 01:00:48.079
<v Speaker 2>If Mark was looking over this statement, you guys would

1196
01:00:48.119 --> 01:00:50.480
<v Speaker 2>get a way better result where he would tell you

1197
01:00:50.480 --> 01:00:53.239
<v Speaker 2>probably exactly whether or not this person did it or

1198
01:00:53.280 --> 01:00:57.760
<v Speaker 2>not he was lying this entire statement. And I'm really

1199
01:00:57.760 --> 01:00:59.519
<v Speaker 2>interested to hear the details the case.

1200
01:01:00.440 --> 01:01:02.199
<v Speaker 1>So now this would be a good time to end

1201
01:01:02.199 --> 01:01:05.519
<v Speaker 1>part one and part two. I will finally reveal which

1202
01:01:05.599 --> 01:01:08.239
<v Speaker 1>case it is to Jewels and give her the full details,

1203
01:01:08.280 --> 01:01:10.440
<v Speaker 1>and we can go back over this statement analysis and

1204
01:01:10.480 --> 01:01:13.239
<v Speaker 1>see if she's changed her mind or she still thinks

1205
01:01:13.239 --> 01:01:16.079
<v Speaker 1>she was dead on on what she believed about the statement.

1206
01:01:16.239 --> 01:01:18.679
<v Speaker 1>So join us for part two of our series about

1207
01:01:18.760 --> 01:01:20.119
<v Speaker 1>Jewels statement analysis.

1208
01:01:21.519 --> 01:01:23.039
<v Speaker 2>Robin, do you want to tell us a little bit

1209
01:01:23.039 --> 01:01:24.519
<v Speaker 2>about the Trail Went Cold Patreon?

1210
01:01:25.239 --> 01:01:27.599
<v Speaker 1>Yes, the Trail Cold Patreon has been around for three

1211
01:01:27.679 --> 01:01:31.440
<v Speaker 1>years now, and we offer these standard bonus features like

1212
01:01:31.519 --> 01:01:34.880
<v Speaker 1>early ad free episodes, and I also send out stickers

1213
01:01:34.920 --> 01:01:37.760
<v Speaker 1>and sign thank you cards to anyone who signs up

1214
01:01:37.800 --> 01:01:40.400
<v Speaker 1>with us on Patreon if you join our five dollars

1215
01:01:40.400 --> 01:01:44.480
<v Speaker 1>tier Tier two. We also offer monthly bonus episodes in

1216
01:01:44.519 --> 01:01:47.679
<v Speaker 1>which I talk about cases which are not featured on

1217
01:01:47.719 --> 01:01:50.519
<v Speaker 1>The Trail Went Cold's original feed, so they're exclusive to

1218
01:01:50.559 --> 01:01:53.639
<v Speaker 1>Patreon and if you join our highest tier, Tier three,

1219
01:01:53.760 --> 01:01:56.480
<v Speaker 1>the ten dollar Tier. One of the features we offer

1220
01:01:56.719 --> 01:02:01.159
<v Speaker 1>is a audio commentary track over classic episode of Unsolved Mysteries,

1221
01:02:01.400 --> 01:02:04.400
<v Speaker 1>where you can download an audio file and then boot

1222
01:02:04.440 --> 01:02:07.679
<v Speaker 1>up the original Unsolved Mysteries episode on Amazon Prime or

1223
01:02:07.679 --> 01:02:11.079
<v Speaker 1>YouTube and play it with my audio commentary playing in

1224
01:02:11.119 --> 01:02:14.239
<v Speaker 1>the background, where I just provide trivia and factoids about

1225
01:02:14.239 --> 01:02:17.679
<v Speaker 1>the cases featured in this episode. And incidentally, the very

1226
01:02:17.719 --> 01:02:20.559
<v Speaker 1>first episode that I did a commentary track over was

1227
01:02:20.599 --> 01:02:23.360
<v Speaker 1>the episode featuring this case. So if you want to

1228
01:02:23.400 --> 01:02:26.119
<v Speaker 1>download a commentary track in which I make more smart

1229
01:02:26.119 --> 01:02:29.159
<v Speaker 1>ass remarks about Jewel Kaylor, then be sure to join

1230
01:02:29.239 --> 01:02:29.960
<v Speaker 1>Tier three.

1231
01:02:30.159 --> 01:02:31.639
<v Speaker 3>So I want to let you know a little bit

1232
01:02:31.679 --> 01:02:34.639
<v Speaker 3>about the Jeweles and Nashty Patreons. So there's early ad

1233
01:02:34.679 --> 01:02:37.559
<v Speaker 3>free episodes of the Path Went Chili. We've got our

1234
01:02:37.599 --> 01:02:40.400
<v Speaker 3>Path Went Chili mini's, which are always over an hour,

1235
01:02:40.519 --> 01:02:42.639
<v Speaker 3>so they're not very many, but they're just too short

1236
01:02:42.679 --> 01:02:45.679
<v Speaker 3>to turn into a series, and we're really enjoying doing those,

1237
01:02:45.760 --> 01:02:47.920
<v Speaker 3>so we hope you'll check out those patreons.

1238
01:02:47.920 --> 01:02:49.440
<v Speaker 2>We'll link them in the show notes.

1239
01:02:49.920 --> 01:02:51.840
<v Speaker 1>So I want to thank you all for listening and

1240
01:02:51.960 --> 01:02:54.320
<v Speaker 1>any chance you have to share us on social media

1241
01:02:54.360 --> 01:02:56.679
<v Speaker 1>with a friend or d rate and review is greatly

1242
01:02:56.719 --> 01:02:58.880
<v Speaker 1>appreciate it. You can email us at the path Went

1243
01:02:59.000 --> 01:03:01.960
<v Speaker 1>Chili at Gmail dott. You can reach us on Twitter

1244
01:03:02.039 --> 01:03:04.760
<v Speaker 1>at the Pathwin. So until next time, be sure to

1245
01:03:04.800 --> 01:03:07.960
<v Speaker 1>bundle up because cold trails and chili pass call for

1246
01:03:08.039 --> 01:03:08.679
<v Speaker 1>warm clothing.

1247
01:03:08.880 --> 01:03:12.039
<v Speaker 2>Music by Paul Rich from the podcast Cold Callers Comedy