Friday, March 31, 2017

Sherri Papini: History of Self Abuse

I have been asked why I don't comment on the Sherri Papini case.  It is obviously one that has caught the public's interest. I have been asked by TV, internet radio, a journalist, and Reddit to discuss the case and have declined all.  

Here is why:

The case has signals of deception, but I do not have statements for analysis.  Those who have come to know me know me through Statement Analysis. They have come to expect 100% accuracy on detecting deception.  

My expertise is limited to analysis of the words.  From the words, I can tell if she is truthful or deceptive, as well as give content analysis (what happened, when it happened, why it happened, and give detail), as well as a psycho-lingusitc profile (the speaker's background, experiences, priority and personality traits). 

Weighing in on opinions may not be best.  Readers/listeners have come to trust my analysis and I would not want to breach that trust with commentary, especially when there is much missing information.   There are others who may be more comfortable, or have expertise in these areas, but mine is limited to the language.  Even Behavioral Analysis, for me, is tied to the statements.  

Should I weigh in on an opinion, it may be interpreted as analysis and it is not.

Should she make a public statement about what happened, I will analyze and it is very likely that we will, finally, learn the truth.  

Below is an article from 

It is a fascinating case for discussion.  


Thirteen years before Sherri Papini told Shasta County detectives she was abducted and tortured for weeks by two female kidnappers, her mother called the same law enforcement agency to ask for help with her daughter.
Papini, her mother alleged, had been harming herself and blaming the injuries on her.
Loretta Graeff's allegations are detailed in a December 2003 Shasta County Sheriff's Office incident report The Sacramento Bee received after filing multiple requests under the California's Public Records Act. The report is only two sentences long. It doesn't say whether the department found evidence that Papini -- then 21 years old -- had in fact harmed herself.
Asked what happened, Shasta County sheriff's Lt. Pat Kropholler said in an email that a deputy spoke with Graeff back in 2003 and gave her advice.
The call by Loretta Graeff was one of several made to law enforcement by members of Papini's family between 2000 and 2003. In 2000, her father, Richard Graeff, alleged his daughter burglarized his residence. Three years later, he alleged she made unauthorized withdrawals from his checking account. In 2000, her sister, Sheila Koester, alleged her back door had been kicked in and she believed Papini was the suspect. The reports provide no details about arrests. Kropholler did not respond to questions about whether Papini had ever been charged with a crime.
<p>Sherri Papini was branded and her hair was cut off to 'wear her down,' Shasta County sheriff says.</p>© Wochit News
These call records are among the few pieces of information the sheriff's department has released to The Bee about Papini, now a 34-year-old mother of two whose November disappearance while jogging near her Redding-area home ignited a media frenzy. Search warrants issued as part of the investigation into her alleged abduction remain sealed.
Investigators provided few details after Papini reappeared near Interstate 5 in Yolo County early Thanksgiving morning. She told investigators she was snatched at gunpoint by two Hispanic women who chopped off her long hair, beat her and seared a brand into her skin before they let her go.
Papini never appeared in public to describe her ordeal. No arrests have been made. No motive for her abduction has been disclosed.
Kropholler declined this week to answer questions surrounding Papini's alleged abduction, other than to say a detective has been assigned to the case full time, and the agency is "in contact with the Papinis on a regular basis."
"The Papini case is still active and the investigation is ongoing," Kropholler wrote in an email response. "I realize there is a lot of interest in Mrs. Papini and the details of her case. However, I am sure you can understand the necessity of maintaining the integrity of the investigation. Please be assured that when it is appropriate to release any further information regarding this case we will do so."
The Graeffs didn't return a voice message. Papini couldn't be reached for comment. Papini's sister, Koester, who has acted as family spokeswoman in the past, asked The Bee for a copy of the the 2003 incident report to verify its authenticity. She didn't reply to interview requests after it and the other reports were emailed to her. In past statements to the press, Papini's husband has insisted her kidnapping was not a hoax.
"All the information that we have right now we have no reason to believe that she is making this up," Shasta County Sheriff Tom Bosenko told The Bee on Nov. 30.
Yet experts on police investigations interviewed by The Bee said that if the allegations her mother made in 2003 are true and Papini had a history of blaming self abuse on others, it recasts her already bizarre kidnapping story with a new shade of doubt.
"It's certainly not proof (of a hoax), but it makes her story even more suspicious," said James Alan Fox, a criminology professor at Northeastern University.
Pierced ears, thin eyebrows
Papini disappeared Nov. 2 in the Shasta County town of Mountain Gate, about two and a half hours north of Sacramento.
Her husband, Keith Papini, said he grew worried after she failed to pick up her children that afternoon from daycare, something her family members say was completely out of character.
Keith Papini used a mobile phone locator app to track down her cell phone. He found it in the grass on the side of a dirt road about a mile from her home, and not far from Interstate 5.
The phone, investigators said, was placed, screen up, with its headphones coiled neatly on top. The only sign of Papini was a few of strands of her blonde hair. There was nothing to suggest a struggle, detectives said.
As is typical in missing persons cases, detectives began questioning those closest to Papini, notably her husband. Keith Papini was cleared as a suspect after he passed a lie-detector test. Investigators said they also looked into her friends and acquaintances, as well as "people Sherri has had past relationships with" in their efforts to find her. They combed her social media profiles, emails, bank accounts and other electronic records looking for clues.
Based on travel receipts obtained by The Bee, two detectives investigating Papini's disappearance traveled to Detroit and its suburbs of New Hudson, Northville, Plymouth and Canton between Nov. 9 and Nov. 11. Detectives have declined to say why they went out of state.
Detectives filed 14 search warrants when she was missing. They filed three more after she was turned up early Thanksgiving morning. The warrants, which would likely include detailed summaries of the investigation, remain under seal in Shasta County Superior Court. No new ones have been filed since 2016.
After his wife was found, Keith Papini told ABC News that she suffered profoundly in captivity. The bridge of her nose had been broken and she weighed only 87 pounds, down from the 100 she normally weighs. He said she was covered in scabs and bruises, had marks from wearing chains and her "signature long blond hair had been chopped off." He said his wife had a brand seared into her skin. Sheriff Bosenko said the brand sent "a message," but he declined to elaborate.
Bosenko said detectives have since urged the family to stop making detailed statements to the press, saying it could compromise the investigation.
Investigators have provided no new information since a Nov. 30 news conference at which Bosenko briefed reporters on the description Papini had provided of her alleged abductors.
One of the women had thin eyebrows and pierced ears, Bosenko said. Her hair was long and curly. The other, who was older, had straight black hair and thick eyebrows. Both spoke in Spanish most of the time, according to Papini's account. They kept their faces covered, and she had no idea where she was held. Bosenko said Papini couldn't describe the suspects' SUV other than that it was dark colored.
Another Vallejo case?
Fox, the criminologist from Northeastern, and other experts on abductions told The Bee Papini's account was odd because women rarely abduct other women. Kidnappers intent on assault or sexual crimes don't usually go out of their way to hide their identities, experts said
The experts also pointed to a couple of high-profile criminal cases over the years that featured people feigning serious bodily and psychological trauma.
The most notable is the case of Tawana Brawley, a 15-year-old African American girl from the New York City area who in 1987 created a media firestorm after she told detectives she was raped by six white men.
When she was found, she had "KKK" written across her chest, a racial slur on her stomach and her hair was smeared with feces. She was so traumatized, according to news reports, that for a time she could answer only yes-or-no questions by blinking her eyes. But a seven-month investigation, involving thousands of pages of testimony, revealed the story was fabricated. A former boyfriend later told reporters Brawley had invented the story to avoid a beating after she ran away from home.
In another case, Darlie Routier told investigators in Texas that on a summer night in 1996 an intruder clad in dark clothing and a baseball cap entered her house, stabbed her two sons to death and slashed her neck and shoulder with a knife. She was convicted after prosecutors proved she killed the boys and inflicted her own injuries.
Papini's husband told ABC News in November he was appalled by the armchair detectives who believed his wife staged a crime.
"I understand people want the story, pictures, proof that this was not some sort of hoax, plan to gain money, or some fabricated race war. I do not see a purpose in addressing each preposterous lie," Keith Papini wrote in the statement.
A racist online post fueled skepticism about the Papini's story.
Internet sleuths dug up a essay posted on a now-defunct website called that was signed by a "Sherri Graeff" -- Papini's maiden name. The writer said that while growing up in Shasta County, she got into two fights with Latinos who targeted her because she was "drug-free, white and proud" of her "blood and heritage."
Bosenko has said it's not clear if Papini wrote the post, but he said the fights the author described weren't noted in sheriff's records. Papini's friends and family have said the post was written by someone else.
Papini also maintained a public Pinterest account that contained a section marked "Cultural Differences" featuring memes expressing concerns about illegal immigrants and Muslims. The section has since been taken down.
Experts familiar with kidnappings caution that just because Papini's case has odd details or has aspects, such as the 2003 incident report, that could be seen as casting doubt on Papini's credibility, it doesn't mean detectives or the public should assume her abduction was staged.
They point to a 2015 kidnapping case in Vallejo in which detectives initially treated a couple's brutal abduction story as if it were they were making it up. The detectives later discovered that their tale was anything but a hoax. The suspect, a Harvard-trained attorney named Matthew Muller, was sentenced in Sacramento federal court this month to 40 years in prison. Vallejo police apologized to the couple, and the pair has since filed lawsuits against the department.
"You always have to allow for the fact that, yes, something that does have many unusual twists and turns actually did occur," said Mary Ellen O'Toole, a former FBI agent who specialized in criminal profiling.
Shasta County Sheriff's Office incident reports related to Sherri Papini

Thursday, March 30, 2017

Child Molestation Analysis and Polygraph

Analysis of words is not reality; it is the subject's verbalized perception of reality.  

Every polygraph examiner should be formally trained in Statement Analysis. 

Only twice in my career did my analysis oppose the results of a polygraph.  It is, professionally, a very uncomfortable position to be in, as I have great confidence in the polygraph when the subject's own words are used. 

Each subject has a personal subjective dictionary.  The most common example is:

"I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky."  

President Clinton would have passed a polygraph if he had been asked this very question.  Had he been asked, "Did you have sexual contact with Ms. Lewinsky?" and denied such, he would have failed. 

Sexual activity is a specific topic in with the investigator/analyst should never assume or interpret.  The wide variance in personal subjective dictionaries is highlighted most in this topic.  

In statemnet analysis , we have perspectives that often sound unusual to the untrained, but make sense to the trained.  We say, for example, "a man cannot molest his own daughter", while knowing that men do molest their own daughters.  This perspective is in the language.  We find that molesters will "change" their victims from "my daughter" to something else, including "the girl" or "she" during the time (in the statement) where the molestation took place. 

Child molesters routinely minimize.  They did not "hurt" nor "harm" the child (see Michael Jackson's language).  When they did not physically inflict injury in some cases they will make this claim.  They routinely shift the blame to the child, and in some cases, to the mother for "allowing" them to act upon this immoral and acutely damaging instinct.  

Of the two cases in which I opposed the passed polygraph, one was the analysis of a 911 call which, after 2 years, ended with a conviction of double murder.  This meant that a short, 3 minute 911 call was weighed against decades of homicide experience, and the entire case file; interviews, forensics, analysis, and so on.  

The words that the one who passed his polygraph revealed: 

that he did it;
his disposition towards the victims (including a child)
His motive:  
why he did it and 
His background:
what his background investigation would reveal.  

The 3 minute call to 911 gave us his guilt, his motive and verifiable aspects of his history of both violence and greed.  When the hosting police captain asked me, in front of the class, how certain I was, I said, "I stake my career on it."


Because his words talked me into it.  

I began the analysis, live before experienced detectives, with the presupposition that the caller:

did not do it, and was calling to help police learn the truth.  

He talked me out of it, line by line, and word by word, and he left me with no choice.  

The other case where my analysis opposed the passed polygraph  was a child molestation case. 

I had both the perpetrator's and the victim's written statement, as well as audio interviews of both. 

The analysis matched.  The written statement of the perp showed, for example, the skipping over of a specific period of time.  The child (10) wrote that he had 'tickled' her at the very time period in which the perp skipped over.  This was just one of many indicators within the statements.  

I sent the statement (redacted) out, as is routine, for a second opinion, from a professional instructor. 

He wrote back that the child, for example, was telling the truth as to when and where the molestation took place, and that the perpetrator was deceptive. 

Yet, the perpetrator (child's mother's boyfriend) passed his polygraph and was allowed to return to the home. He boldly stated, "I did not molest her!" 

Months later, I learned he had reoffended. 

In his language, he did not "molest" the child.  He was "tickling" and was "affectionate" (his language). 

How did the failure to properly use his own wording in the polygraph impact this victim?

The perp was obviously empowered.  Whenever justice is perverted, denied, or lost, criminal behavior increases. This is human nature.  

I don't know what became of the young victim, but I can imagine that not only was she re-victimized by the sexual abuse, but what of her family's viewpoint that she was lying?  Victims of childhood sexual abuse show an acute need to be heard.  It echoes throughout their language.  

How might this impact not only her relationship with her mother, but later, with her own children?  

"Out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks" is  truth.  

The "heart", that is, the seat of the intellect and emotions, is a source of "abundance." It is deeply filled with tens of thousands of words, and myriad emotional connection to words and experiences.  

When one speaks, we may know the truth, even when the subject intends to deceive.  

Truth is not impacted by time nor culture nor external influences.  

Analysis of the words gets to the truth and trained analysts run regularly at or near 100% accuracy.  When a polygraph examiner is trained in Statement Analysis, it is to combine great skills and science together.  

Child molesters 

hat tip: John 

POLK COUNTY, Fla. -- A Polk County man is facing dozens of lewd molestation charges after deputies say he repeatedly molested three young girls, according to the Polk County Sheriff's Office.
Ezra Raulerson, 65, was arrested Tuesday. A woman came forward earlier this month and tipped off deputies to the abuse, according to a news release.
All three victims said Raulerson asked to give them a "tummy rub" and then molested them, deputies said.
One victim was molested 30 times when she was 10 and 11 years old, the second victim was molested 15 times when she was 10 years old and the third girl was molested 20 times when she was 9 years old, according to the news release.
Deputies said the abuse continued until about three weeks ago.
"Ezra Raulerson's conduct is the worst of the worst -- he violated innocent children who depend on adults for their safe care. It sickens us to know that three innocent and precious children were taken advantage of by someone they trusted. He belongs behind bars for the rest of his life," Polk County Sheriff Grady Judd said.

Statement Analysis: Jeurys Familia, Domestic Violence

Even with prepared statements, we can glean truth. 

In Domestic Violence we want to learn if the subject will take ownership, or personal responsibility  which is helpful in predicting future violence. 

For athletes, domestic violence is the continuation of acute competition that is not "shut off" but continues in the home.  The use of strong masculine presence, for example, may cause the children to behave better.  When the father turns to the mother and says, "why can't you control them like I do?", he is showing the competitive streak within in. 

Masculinity is described as "the sacrifice of strength for right purposes."  The above description is not "masculinity" according to this old school definition.  It is exploitation, instead.  

1.  Personal Responsibility 
2.  Empathy for the Victim 

In a statement of a penitent offender, we listen carefully to his words to learn:

a.  does he take responsibility for his own actions?
b.  does he understand masculinity sacrifices, rather than exploits?
c.  can he turn off competition appropriately?
d.  does he show human empathy for the victim?

We note any minimization or shifting of blame. Athletes compete and they must "turn off" the competition via self control.
This is why sportsmanship is vital.
Those who taunt or humiliate the already vanquished foe pose a risk of domestic violence.  

When a young boy is taught to compete in sports, which is natural masculine preparation for life (provision and protection), it is essential that with his increased testosterone, he is taught self control.  

Old school taught respectful behavior in both defeat and in victory, and where one has already "defeated" his sports enemy, the expectation was magnanimity.  Anything less was penalized by the referee or umpire and often sanctioned by society, via crowd reaction and negative press.  

Therefore, after scoring "the"  goal, the player's jubilance needed to be contained and specifically not directed towards, not intended to further humiliate,  the already defeated sports enemy. 

At the moment where his hormonal and emotional response is at its zenith, having overcome a deep struggle and battle on to victory, he was expected to control himself and be gracious towards the defeated. 

This is human empathy once prized as distinctly masculine.  This is where the strong protect the weak, stand up to bullies, and show respectful dignity towards the subordinated was a sign of a man's character.  Something as simple as shaking hands after a fight showed respect.  

In the early 1960's, demographic and social change took place in the United States where, in some cities, boys raised without fathers went from 30% to more than 70% today.  These young boys with their increasing testosterone during critically impressionable years, did not have fathers to teach them the definition of masculinity.  

Hence, not only the increase of violence, and violent crime, but the acceptance of behavior once distinctly penalized (socially and formally) as "unsportsmanlike behavior."

In hiring police officers, this is critical in finding those with both courage and self control.  

Those who, for example, enjoy the suffering of another, pose a high risk for fulfilling their personal "enjoyment."  We use statement analysis to reveal this weakness and exclude one from carrying a firearm while possessing authority over others.  The end result is the brave officer, who de-escalates well, of whom communities and fellow officers trust. Yet, if called upon, he will use force to protect life and property.  

It is, therefore, no surprise when you see a player known for his on field narcissistic celebrations that his lack of self control eventually finds its way into the home, and into the news papers when he is arrested for assaulting his wife, mother, or daughter. 

Jeurys Familia pitches for the New York Mets.  As a long term fan, one may note the behavior of his teammate, Jose Reyes when he does something positive on the field.  He has no self restraint to "show up" his opponent in his antics.  He waits for the camera to focus upon him, and begins his dance.  Just prior to first leaving the Mets, he robbed families who paid a great deal of money to see his talent on the field, on the last game of the season.  He had been leading the league in batting average, got a hit, and took himself out of the game lest he spoil his top average by not getting a hit.  Unacceptable a generation ago, this self - first attitude was praised by young fans, as they knew this single statistic would translate into dollars.  Those of us who watched him on the field and observed his behavior, were not surprised to see him arrested for assaulting his wife.  
The trait of self restraint,  not learned in early childhood, does not bode well later in life.  

For many, success dismisses the most egregious crimes.  A soccer player spends a few years in prison for having his wife murdered and eaten by dogs but is cheered on the field.  A pedophile is celebrated because of his music or acting talents.  The shift is cultural and it is profound.  

In spite of productivity, sports management frequently frets about how such behavior can set a poor example for younger players.  This includes other forms of narcissistic like behavior, including athletes who should be concentrating on their craft, rather than night life exploits, with managers ruing the day they allowed a drug dealer, for example, into he clubhouse.  
Mets pitcher Jeurys Familia was suspended Wednesday for the first 15 games of the 2017 season.

The reigning MLB saves leader will be eligible to return to the team on April 20, barring any postponed games on the Mets schedule. He forfeits 18 days of pay, worth more than $700,000.

Familia met with Commissioner Rob Manfred on Monday in New York to discuss the closer’s domestic violence incident, which was dismissed in court.

Familia was arrested Oct. 31 at his New Jersey home after his wife, Bianca, called 911 to report an altercation. The police report indicated Familia’s wife had a bruised cheek and scratches to her neck.

Consider the situation she was in, and the known cost of calling 911 for armed intervention for the sake of safety from her husband.  

Familia has accepted the suspension without protest. Compared to other suspensions, this is very short.  

Here is his statement.  

We look for two key elements:

1.  Personal Responsibility 
2.  Empathy for the victim 

“It is important that it be known that I never physically touched, harmed or threatened my wife that evening. I did, however, act in an unacceptable manner and am terribly disappointed in myself. I am alone to blame for the problems of that evening.
My wife and I cooperated fully with Major League Baseball’s investigation, and I’ve taken meaningful steps to assure that nothing like this will ever happen again. I have learned from this experience, and have grown as a husband, a father, and a man.
I apologize to the Mets’ organization, my teammates, and all my fans. I look forward to rejoining the Mets and being part of another World Series run. Out of respect for my teammates and my family, I will have no further comment."

Where one begins a statement is very important.  

"It is important that it be known that I never physically touched, harmed, or threatened my wife that evening." 

The statement analysis principle of priority is emphasized by the wording of the statement.  Here, the priority is that the public know he did not "physically" touch, harm or threaten his wife. 

Why, then, did she call 911 knowing the cost of such a call?

How did she receive her injuries?

The priority of the statement is to let us know what he did not do.  

The word "never" is unreliable in particular because this happened on a specific night that he, himself, identifies as "that evening."

We note also that not only is a priority for him but he must qualify what he did do:

"physically" touch.  

He did not "physically" touch her.  This is the type of technical language used often by attorneys to deceive. 

*Did an object "physically" touch her?

That his priority is to protect the image (in the negative), we must consider recidivism.  

Next, what does he call the mysterious action?

"unacceptable manner."  

"the problems" 

"this experience

This is minimization. 

To "confess" is to, in Greek, "say the same" or "agree" (homo-logeo), that is, to be truthful or agree with the facts.  

If he did not physically touch, harm or threaten, why is he even suspended?

The answer is within the statement, whether prepared for him, with him or by him:
My wife and I cooperated fully with Major League Baseball’s investigation, 

This is an unnecessary statement, but it does show something by what is missing:  he does not say that they cooperated with police. 

In fact, his wife has refused to disclose what happened and as such (victims often do), Major League baseball was left without the ability to prove how she suffered her injuries and why she called police. 

The cooperation is unnecessary, but it is made sensitive, further, by the word "fully."

Would we expect "My wife and I cooperated 70% with MLB"?  

When we see, in many statements, that one "fully" cooperated, we have found that the subject has a reason to qualify cooperation with "fully."  

Analysis Conclusion:  

The statement seeks to protect the subject's reputation while minimizing his behavior. 

As we look for the element of human empathy for the victim, we learn that it is absent

These are the two key elements we seek.  They are not in the statement.  

Victims of domestic violence will likely recognize the missing elements in the statement.  

For training in deception detection, visit 

Monday, March 27, 2017

Father of Car Shooting Statements

Police in Ohio are hunting for up to three suspects after a driver who was allegedly speeding down a residential street was fatally shot for striking a 4-year-old boy.
Police said Jamie Urton, 44, was killed after he got out of his vehicle to check on the injured child and an argument erupted between him and onlookers Friday.
There was some type of confrontation that took place after the accident,” Cincinnati Police Department Lt. Steve Saunders told The Post. “I don’t know exactly what ensued, but as a result of that confrontation, there was gunfire that occurred and the victim was struck several times and was killed.”
No suspects had been identified as of Monday, Saunders said.
The boy’s father, Jamal Killings said that his son was released from the hospital with bleeding in his brain on Saturday — one day after the violence on Kenton Street, where police said the boy was hit by a car after crossing into the road.
We do not have a quote here but his son was released from the hospital with bleeding on the brain?
Killings, who was busy checking on his son’s condition, said he wasn’t aware that someone had targeted the man behind the wheel who struck him.
My job as a father was to get my son face first off the concrete and take him to see medical attention, and that’s what I did,” Killings told the station.
The car had been speeding at about 45 miles per hour just prior to the crash, he said.
“I initially stopped the car, you know, a lot of kids play on that street — that’s residential, 15-25. I initially stopped him. He slowed down a bit and then he kind of like swerved around me, hitting my other son. My son wasn’t hit in the middle of the street. He was hit on the curb.”
Killings apologized to Urton’s relatives, saying he didn’t agree with the apparent vigilante street justice.
“I apologize for your loss,” Killings said. “I don’t condone violence. I don’t teach my kids violence. That should never have happened … an unfortunate situation, unfortunate event, but I hope we can all learn from this.”
He does not teach his kids violence.  He repeats "violence" and calls the murder an "unfortunate situation" and an "unfortunate event."  This is minimizing language.  
Killings said the boy must be monitored closely for the next six weeks and could require surgery due to his injuries.
Witnesses told police that three people were involved in the shooting, WCPO reported.
“I pulled right into it,” witness George Gaines said of the crime scene. “He was parked in the middle of the street.
Gaines said he saw Urton slumped over into the car’s passenger seat as police responded to the shooting.
“The police pulled out from every place,” he said. “It was crazy.”
A passenger in Urton’s car was also injured by the suspects, but was not shot.  Police said it’s unclear whether the victims were dragged from the car or were attacked after they exited the vehicle.
Did the father's actions lead to this shooting?
We will likely learn more about this from the survivor.  
The race of the victim is not mentioned.  

Supremacist Ideology and Crime

The mother of the London Islamic killer said this:

"I wish to make it absolutely clear, so there can be no doubt, I do not condone his actions nor support the beliefs he held that led to him committing this atrocity."

It is a very sensitive defensive and weak statement. 

Yet, we must consider it by asking questions:

 Is it because she feels the weight of accusation due to her belief system?

Is she a non Muslim fearful of being politically incorrect?

Is she afraid of backlash from ISIS supporters?

Is it because she is deceptively using political correctness in public?

It is a very weak statement.  

The distancing language begins with her "wish."  We must also note that she does not say what he did was "wrong" in any form.  

She does not "condone" but she also does not "condemn."  
She does not say she is "sorry" for what her son did.  

Is she deceptively using tacquia?

Or, might there something else in play here?

If she is sensitive because of Islam, we should not discount the possibility that she fears violent repercussion if she condemns the jihadist action her son took. She, herself, could face the wrath of her local mosque.  

            Muslims are often the first victims of Islam.  

If she is not a Muslim, she could fear offending others.  

Why the need to "not condone" rather than "condemn"?

When Islam turns violent, Muslims who are not jihadists choose self preservation, no different than Germans who had to "join the Nazi party" just to hold a job, at first, and later to save their own lives.  


Bob had Thanksgiving dinner with his wife's extended family.  His brother-in-law insulted Bob's favorite football team, the New England Patriots with a Tom Brady joke.  Most everyone at the table roared with laughter.  

Bob did not find it funny. 

With plenty of wine in him, Bob slammed his fist on the table, cursed his brother-in-law, and stormed away from the table, knocking over some of the wine glasses and plates. 

The pleasant family dinner came to a screeching uncomfortable halt.  

In our culture, we believe that Bob lost his temper and is, therefore, in a weakened position where he should apologize for his inability to restrain himself. 

**************************************************** Any supremacist ideology, by its own nature, must survive on demonization of another.  This is the same with moral narcissism:  'my moral view is so high that you're failure to agree with it is a failure to acknowledge me; my very existence. 

In analyzing and interviewing supremacists, there are two basic categories:

1.  The Supremacist 
2.  The Supremacist Convert 

First, consider supremacist ideology separate from individuals.  A good example is National Socialism. 

If you read first person historical accounts of World War II, you will find intimate details that you may be read through the lens of whatever statement analysis training you've had.  Specifically with Nazi Germany:

There were many Germans who resisted the ideology of National Socialism. 
There were many Germans who joined the Nationalist Socialist party early on because they believed in its basic principles including socialism, where the government is responsible for the "social security" of citizens, who later resisted the party's evil, while being members. 
There were many German Nazis who were coerced into National Socialism's crimes.
There were many Germans who feared resigning from the party.  

There were "good" and moral Nazis.  

This is why in criminal analysis we deal with ideology; not with individuals personal experiences and feelings.  We then note the ideology's impact in general. 

If you argue National Socialism is either "good" or it is "bad" by presenting persons, you will fail to see the ideology and fail to respond to it. For each "bad" person you present, someone else will find a "good" person. This is the illogical haze of emotionalism. 

 It will come down to your emotion and personal experience.  You met a "good" Nazi, so Nazism is not evil.  This says more about you, who has elevated your emotion and personal experience above truth.  This is an example  moral narcissism:  how I feel about something is superior to the truth.  

It is popular today and it is leads to illogic, supremacist ideology, and it leads to anger, rage, tyranny, shout downs,  and eventually, violence.  

Principle is built on a general, not upon exceptions. 

Supremacy ideology always leads to violence.  It begins with the demonization of the others.  

The Nazi Party blamed Jews for the Treaty of Versailles and this became not only epidemic, but it became cultural, in just two decades of time because it targeted all aspects of society, including children.  They grew up believing that they were superior.  

Because life is unequal, no matter what belief we may hold, supremacist ideology must demonize and this eventually led to violence.  

I.  The Supremacist 

The Supremacist has a culture of supremacy.  National Socialism taught that Jewish blood was different than German blood, microscopes and science be damned.  The Jews were railed against privately, and then publicly, and then with the complicit press, which lead to protests. 

With emotion enflamed, eventually small skirmishes broke out.  As anger grew, violence grew where Jews were eventually considered less human.  (This is the same argument that was used by slave holders and today by abortionists).  

Islam is a criminal supremacist ideology, whether or not individual Muslims believe or adhere to this.  Inherent in its teaching is violent coercion.  It specifically teaches violent conquest and does so not only by declaring its own supremacy (the death penalty is ascribed to anyone criticizing Islam, which is why it has been immune to reformation), but by demonizing others, beginning with Jews.  This is where you read about Jews being "descendants from pigs" and other insults.  What Canada calls "Islamophobia", Islam calls the Sharia blasphemy laws; calling for death for anyone who criticizes Islam.  

What the political elite call "Radical Islam", is actually "Islam."  What the political elite call "Moderate Muslims" (Muslims who do not want violence), Islam calls "apostates" and assigns to them, as well, the death penalty.  

A jihadist is a "devout" or "obedient" follower of Islam.  In nations that have fallen to this ideology, cultural Muslims (including atheists) were the first targeted.  

Islam spreads by coercion:

First, Islam is demanded to be followed.  This is the "submission" that one must give and then "peace" is settled.  

For Jews and Christians who refuse to submit, the "peace" permitted is Dhimmitude:  that is, the specific "tax" (jizrah) to be paid to Muslims to be allowed to live.  Not only must they pay the tax but they must verbally acknowledge their inferiority to the satisfaction of the Islamist. 

The women are to wear coverings so as not to be sexually molested.  Those who refuse to wear the covering are fair game for rape.  In Sweden, even with government statistics taken into account, Sweden's native women are raped in the highest percentage in the western world.  By refusing to "cover" (hijab, etc) and importing Islam by the hundreds of thousands, the political elite are endangering women who refuse to submit to Islam's demand.  They are paying a terrible cost. 

Dhimmitude is a form of slavery and it is to bow before Islam in varying degrees. 

When young men pay $10,000 to a smuggler, and walk into Sweden, and are immediately welcomed with money their hands have not earned, including free housing, medical care, internet access and so on, it affirms what they have been taught since childhood. 

The Islamic Supremacist raised in the Islamic culture has also experienced acute desensitization to violence against women.  

The impact upon children of even viewing violence against their own mothers is still bewildering in studies and its impact upon society is seismic.  

Islamic culture in the workplace

I interviewed Islamic women who immigrated from Somalia and eventually took work ("liberal Muslims") in nursing homes.  There, no higher educational standards were needed and some companies hired almost exclusively Somali women to take care of elderly New Englanders who were incapable of taking care of themselves. 

Repeatedly, they struck elderly men and women, particularly, in the face. 

There was nothing I could do to talk them out of this norm. 

First, they had no fear of prosecution. (This is one of three elements in Employment Analysis that helps companies hire the best and brightest of their pool, as well as the most low risk for theft and fraudulent claims.) 

They long had learned that they would not face prosecution lest the prosecutor be called "racist", "Islamophobic" and face hostile and violent threats.  This would be accompanied by the complicit support of local media.  

Next, it was I who did not "understand" the "kuffar" element within these nursing homes.  The elderly were "unclean" and "should have been cared for by their families."  If the victim was a Jew, there was no dialog.   

These women had been raised since childhood in violence.  They were then targeted with violence by their husbands who beat them in obedience to the Koran. 

They did not grasp our society's shock over such treatment of the elderly.  

They felt no need to stay with their initial unreliable denials, which increased the risk to the elderly.  "Tacquia", that is, the Islamic lie (to protect Muslims, or to propagate Islam) was something they all abandoned early in the interview process.  

The Supremacist is dangerous.  He or she believes in an ideology that states that they are superior to others, and they migrate to cultures that confirm this belief.  

                                          What About Bob?

Bob had Thanksgiving dinner where his brother-in-law made a Tom Brady joke, enjoyed by the crowd, except for Bob.   

 Bob blew.   

In our culture, we believe that Bob should apologize for his behavior. 

In Islamic culture, Bob is the powerful respected one and the brother-in-law who did not stand up and fight Bob, is the weaker one, to be despised. 

Now consider the "sinful" Muslim male who has adopted the Western culture of "weakness", ostracized by his own insulated community.  

He drinks, smokes and eats ham sandwiches and listens to western music and dates a western woman. 

How can he be "redeemed"?

This is why imans say one thing to the media, while stocking cache of weapons in the mosque, targeting young males, particularly with mental health issues, for "redemption" of Islam.  

When the Orlando Islamist was insulted by being called "towel head", the analyst concluded, from his own projective western value, that "sticks and stones may break our bones, but names will never hurt us."  He wrote that the Orlando Islamic terrorist did not pose a risk of violence but was a victim of "Islamophobia."  

The analyst did not consider how he was in need of Islamic "redemption" due to his "disobedience" to Islam by embracing western culture.  

II.  The Supremacist Convert 

The Supremacist Convert is distinctly different than the Supremacist who was raised in the culture.  He is still dangerous, but in a different way and for different reasons. 

He is, in a sense, a Supremacist "wanna be" who, dangerously, has something to prove. 


In a murder case, John Doe became Mohammad Doe in prison, which is the perfect storm for violence. 

By listening to prison imans, the violent criminal is told:

*You are superior to others.  (combine this with both his violent history and testosterone). 

*You are here because of the fraud committed against you.  

*The violence you feel is holy and approved in religion by "god" (allah) but it must be properly used.  

*You may rape "infidel" women under certain conditions.  Women hold a "one-half value" of the man when she is Islamic.  Infidel women do not even reach this percentage.  

*Pray five times a day 

*Wage Jihad.  

If you die as a martyr, you will be raping virgins in the afterlife.  

Here, he was not raised to be considered supreme to others and his violent and criminal history shows a constant 

White Supremacy is a very tiny portion of the population.  It is only significant to main stream media. 

Yet, even in small number, the danger is in the "need to prove" one's own superiority can assist in removing the common cultural restraints against violence, posing an increased risk.  

This supremacist wanna be can be interviewed from this specific standpoint.  Whether it is a new prison convert, or any other type of supremacist, there is a ready-made excuse for:

criminal behavior

Failure to succeed in life

by the ideology. 

Islamic nations do not report criminal statistics. Wherever Islamic nations have had western influence, they have made some progress, but the supremacist ideology leads to violence even when the nation is finally 100% Islam.  

This is because of life's inequalities inherent in creation.  

One person is born with more intellect than another.  Socialism says to take away what the smarter has gained by coercion (theft) and give it to the lesser. 

When this is combined with religion or religious like zealousness (including National Socialism, extreme leftist, pseudo science, elevation of emotion, etc), the violence is hastened. 

In criminal interviewing, the better the understanding of the ideological impact upon the subject's own culture, the better the strategy, and even the more pointed the tactics within the interview. 

For training in detecting deception, visit