Scientists have identified 50
individuals who are able to spot deception with great accuracy after testing
more than 15,000 people. Eyes for Lies is one of the 50 people.
More
Eyes kept score on her blog for 7.5 years and had an accuracy rate of 95%
after identifying truth and deception in
38/40 people
before the truth was known by watching media clips. A record comparable to none.
Eyes for Lies is not psychic.
When Kiesha's parents came out in the media in August of 2010 to report their little girl had vanished, I pointed out that their behavior was off and was not supportive of the story they were giving us. I didn't trust them from day one, and now almost three years later, Kiesha's mom has admitted to killing her daughter.
ALL IDEAS AND CONTENT ON THIS BLOG ARE PROTECTED BY LAW. DO NOT COPY ANYTHING WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. Any violations will be prosecuted to the fullest extent allowable by law.
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero intolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior. Permalink
Having watched several interviews of Elaine and Mark Redwine, and seeing the Dr. Phil show yesterday, there is one person who is inconsistent in the interviews, and its not Mark. It's Elaine Redwine.
Her inconsistencies seriously raise my eyebrows and leave me with wanting to ask her more than a handful of questions.
I do not trust Elaine Redwine. She has made it very clear in her interviews she will talk out of both sides of her mouth and that disturbs me when we are looking for her missing son. She also says things that I cannot reconcile no matter how I slice it, so I'd be interested to get clarification from her.
Many people assume when I don't trust someone that it means I believe they are guilty of a crime. That is an incorrect assumption. A person can be inconsistent and uninvolved, or inconsistent and knowledgeable of more facts than they are letting on, or inconsistent and involved. I am not psychic and do not claim to know what inconsistencies ultimately reveal.
I cannot speculate at why Elaine is acting the way she is, I just know I want more information from her. Why is she inconsistent? It may have everything or nothing to do with Dylan's disappearance. I need more to say.
ALL IDEAS AND CONTENT ON THIS BLOG ARE PROTECTED BY LAW. DO NOT COPY ANYTHING WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. Any violations will be prosecuted to the fullest extent allowable by law.
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero intolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior. Permalink
ALL IDEAS AND CONTENT ON THIS BLOG ARE PROTECTED BY LAW. DO NOT COPY ANYTHING WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. Any violations will be prosecuted to the fullest extent allowable by law.
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero intolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior. Permalink
The police and FBI have been searching for Stacy Peterson in Shorewood, Illiniois, for the past few days hoping to locate her remains. So far, they haven't been successful, but let's hope their luck changes!
ALL IDEAS AND CONTENT ON THIS BLOG ARE PROTECTED BY LAW. DO NOT COPY ANYTHING WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. Any violations will be prosecuted to the fullest extent allowable by law.
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero intolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior. Permalink
Mickey Shunick, 22, a senior at the University of Louisiana at Lafayette, disappeared after spending the evening with a close friend, Brettly Wilson. She left Brettly's house at 1:45 a.m. on her bicycle, and has not been heard from since.
Police have retrieved video footage showing Mickey riding her bike home, and they spotted several vehicles in the area they wanted to question. Apparently, they have questioned all but one vehicle owner. The owner of a Chevy Z-71. You can see the photo of the vehicle here.
When I watch Brettly speak, I see a happy, upbeat person who is easy to get along with. I see young man who is social awkward, and yet liked by people. I see nothing in these videos that stands out to me as inappropriate or questionable. Brettly shows true sadness and concern for his friend.
ALL IDEAS AND CONTENT ON THIS BLOG ARE PROTECTED BY LAW. DO NOT COPY ANYTHING WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. Any violations will be prosecuted to the fullest extent allowable by law.
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero intolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior. Permalink
It's hard to believe that sweet little Kyron Horman is still missing two years after he disappeared from his school. Terri Horman, his step-mom, dropped him off at school, took a photo of him and without a trace, Kyron was never seen again.
I reviewed Terri and Kaine Horman at the time. You can read my thoughts here. Looking back at it now, I can't help but wonder if Terri helped Kaine write what he said that day in the media. I suspect she did and I suspect the odd words I picked up on were from Terri's influence. Who thinks of "memories" so soon after a child is missing? Who thanks people before their child is found? Are these things what Terri suggested Kaine do? I'd love to know...
ALL IDEAS AND CONTENT ON THIS BLOG ARE PROTECTED BY LAW. DO NOT COPY ANYTHING WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. Any violations will be prosecuted to the fullest extent allowable by law.
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero intolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior. Permalink
ALL IDEAS AND CONTENT ON THIS BLOG ARE PROTECTED BY LAW. DO NOT COPY ANYTHING WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. Any violations will be prosecuted to the fullest extent allowable by law.
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero intolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior. Permalink
Sierra Lamar disappeared more than two months ago now in California and has yet to be found, but police have just arrested 21-year-old Antolin Garcia-Torres on suspicion of murder and kidnapping. There is a news conference scheduled for today. You can read more here. I don't doubt the police have the right guy from what I have read.
I found Sierra's mom's behavior very odd when she spoke out about her missing daughter. You can read my original thoughts here. I didn't believe she was being honest with us, though I have said just because someone is not honest it is does not mean they committed murder. I cannot tell anyone with any certainly what a lie is about as I am not psychic, I can just spot them. This situation has caused me stress when writing this blog for a while now. How do I make this clear, and yet still measure my accuracy? Is it even possible to do? I am not sure it is.
I wonder if the days of keeping score on this blog should end because of situations like this. There will be more cases like this.
I set out to prove that you can spot deception with high accuracy from watching people talk, and I think I have accomplished that goal.
What do you think we should do? Did I miss this case? You tell me. I'm happy to mark it wrong if people feel this is the right option. There is no clear cut answer here.
ALL IDEAS AND CONTENT ON THIS BLOG ARE PROTECTED BY LAW. DO NOT COPY ANYTHING WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. Any violations will be prosecuted to the fullest extent allowable by law.
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero intolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior. Permalink
It's been almost eight months after little baby Lisa disappeared. Her parents are back in the news. The last public appearance they made was in February on the Dr. Phil show, and they haven't spoken again until today.
They talk of wanting police to investigate a fraudulent charge on Jeremy's credit card that was made on a UK website one month after baby Lisa disappeared, where they allege someone purchased a service where one could change the name of a baby.
In this interview, what I find is strangely missing is any pleas on their behavior for people to look for their daughter! If they believe she is alive, why aren't they asking people to look for her? Why aren't they identifying her unique features and asking people to keep an eye out for her? Most parents would be begging.
I have always found the parents of baby Lisa's behavior very suspicious from day one. You can read my original thoughts here.
ALL IDEAS AND CONTENT ON THIS BLOG ARE PROTECTED BY LAW. DO NOT COPY ANYTHING WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. Any violations will be prosecuted to the fullest extent allowable by law.
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero intolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior. Permalink
Becky Celis was seen by reporters outside of her home yesterday on Mother's Day without Sergio. It is reported that one parent lost custody of the two remaining Celis boys, and I suspect that parent is Sergio.
What is fascinating about this interview is that we see Becky actually showing true stress in her face for the first time at length when she talks. We see a different Becky compared to when she is with Sergio.
As I mentioned when I did facial profiling last week, Sergio's facial features reveal he has potential anger and control issues. If I were assisting on this case, I absolutely would have investigated this further. And now seeing Becky without Sergio, her demeanor has taken a complete change in direction compared to the other interviews we've seen. While she shows more stress in her forehead, she seems oddly more relaxed.
I have to wonder if Becky is afraid of Sergio now. As the police are honing in, I think Sergio holds the key to this case.
ALL IDEAS AND CONTENT ON THIS BLOG ARE PROTECTED BY LAW. DO NOT COPY ANYTHING WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. Any violations will be prosecuted to the fullest extent allowable by law.
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero intolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior. Permalink
Becky and Sergio gave a third interview to the media at an undisclosed location in the past few days, and this interview, like all of the others, is littered with inconsistencies.
The most notable element of both parents is their lack of urgency to find their daughter. They are as relaxed as a Sunday brunch with friends when I would expect them to be on edge and very stressed considering their daughter has been abducted.
Furthermore, they are emotionally as flat as ice cubes when it comes to expressing fear, sadness and concern, yet they tell us their heart is breaking. If their heart is breaking, they would be giving us indicators (oblique eyebrows, frowns, tears, etc), but we see absolutely nothing. It's hard to ignore. Faces do not lie.
Becky says without any emotions whatsoever, "...we break down every night. Sorry that we are not breaking down in front
of you guys every five seconds. I am very private. I am not one to
show my feelings in front of people. You can ask anybody. I need my
friends and family. I am very closed person. And I cry by myself. I
break down by myself. I don't even break down in front of my kids and
my husband. That is my thing, my private -- I'm sorry, that is just the
way I am."
Yet when she says this, I see a glimmer of positive emotions as shown below. How can she feel positive emotions in a time like this?
Becky and Sergio were asked if they had any suspects in their minds and listen to Becky's answer: "From the get-go, we...I don't think we ever...eh....I mean, its all been so...(shoulder shrug)...we just don't understand. We don't understand who would take her. There is no reason to take her."
Becky shows what are called false starts. She starts a sentence in one direction and then change directions multiple times. This means that Becky is thinking on her feet as she talks and changes her thoughts constantly. Becky and Sergio both do this repeatedly through this interview. Then Becky finally says, "There is no reason to take her."
I find Becky's answer odd. There is no reason to take her? Of course there isn't, but it doesn't take long for any adult to figure out why a child could be abducted and none of them are positive, yet they don't seem to even consider this, which is highly abnormal.
Sergio talks further about who could have taken Isa. He says, "We literally wanted anyone whose been in our home to go through all the questioning, because yes, how are we going to trust anyone whose been in our home because we really don't know."
Its interesting that Sergio is saying they suspect everyone, yet if someone took their daughter out her window, wouldn't that support a stranger abduction? Which one do they believe it is? They don't ever seem to clarify this.
Becky continues that they want everybody... anyone who has been in their house to be held under the same scrutiny as they were. When Becky says this, she shows disgust. Why is Becky disgusted? Sergio continues, "To be held under the same scrutiny as us."
If you notice, they don't want people questioned to get to the truth. Instead, they make it clear they want people scrutinized just like they were. That seems to be most important to them. It's very odd.
Parents of abducted children could careless about being scrutinized about the missing child so long as police hone into the right direction, and Sergio acts like its no big deal to them, yet Becky shows clear disgust when talking about this.
What these two say versus what they express emotionally are two different animals!
Sergio goes on to says, "And now its giving thanks to the community". Giving thanks? This really flags me. No one has found Isa!!! How can you thank people before you get results? Most parents of missing children don't think about thanking anyone until they find evidence and get an outcome. It's the furthest thing on their mind until they get answers! They continue to beg for help and they don't want people to think they're done and finished with a thank you!
It's like these two don't seem to need answers, do they?
Becky is asked and talks about the funding that is being raised for Isabel. She says, "We've asked that it goes straight to them, to find Isabel. I mean we're okay, financially, we will make it. We've made it through worse, and uh, financially, and uh, there's no...we'll make this though. What we want is all the effort towards Isabel, finding Isabel" and this point she shakes her head no, and gives a blended contempt disgust expression!!!
I was blown away!!! See a screen capture below.
Furthermore, if you notice Becky says they've been through worse? REALLY? Then she corrects herself by saying financially. Becky is self-censoring herself. Why does she feel the need to do this?
Why does Becky have such contempt and disgust about money being used to find Isa? This disturbs me. Its like she doesn't want people searching and looking for Isa nor for the money to be spent, or she is disgusted and contemptuous at the reporter, but why?
Sergio then talks about the ransom and gives us many false starts when he says, "I wanted to be clear that nothing had been mentioned...there was no, you know.......I wanted....if there were demands, please let us know something...let us know something. Why is this happening? What is the reason behind it? And the fact that nothing has been mentioned about that--that's why we're even reaching for that. It's like they're not even mentioning anything....as far as a reward, or anything like that. And even the reward money when we were first saw it and 88 crime put up their reward, and to this day everything as far as we know is an anonymous donation."
Does that even make sense to anyone? Sergio is talking nonsense in all directions, isn't he? What's up with these two? Ransom and reward money are two different things!!! And he suggests he is reaching for a ransom. What?
I can't believe they laughed at what ransom money they would have when asked. "I guess we could get rid of our cars and our house," says Sergio. He guesses? Would you ever say that? Most parents would say if this comes down to a ransom, we will come up with whatever money is necessary! Or they wouldn't even entertain this concept, but these two make you feel like they wouldn't give up a dime for ransom, don't they?
It seems they want a ransom, but none has been mentioned. Why would they even entertain this? It seems absurd to me.
I do not believe Becky or Sergio at all. I think they feel very differently than they are telling us.
ALL IDEAS AND CONTENT ON THIS BLOG ARE PROTECTED BY LAW. DO NOT COPY ANYTHING WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. Any violations will be prosecuted to the fullest extent allowable by law.
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero intolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior. Permalink
When I first look at Becky and Sergio, I immediately notice their demeanor. It stands out to me. They are both extremely somber and hopeless looking. There is no urgency in them whatsoever to find their daughter. Why? Why have they given up? It seems they have been this way from day one. How do you give up if you believe your daughter is abducted and could still be out there?
When Becky first talks, I feel like she is making a conscious effort to
talk about her daughter in present tense, and as soon as Sergio slips and uses
past tense, he corrects himself. It’s notable. The last time Becky talked about her daughter, she used past tense, and while that can be a clue to deception, it isn't always, but the change in her behavior now is what stands out. You can just feel her thinking as she speaks.
Sergio doesn’t seem to have a solid last memory of his last
time with Isa.He doesn't talk about tucking her into bed, hugging her good night, getting her ready for bed. I don't hear him have recollection memories like "I didn't tuck her in to bed that night and I so regret it." Instead his memory is one of her walking past him not wanting to eat. He says, "I was asking her..." instead of "I asked her...". He doesn't talk in terms of what he remembers. His memories are... "She just was ...she was...she is..."
Becky does a lot of shoulder shrugging as she is talking, which is showing a
lack of confidence in what she is saying. Why doesn't the woman have confidence in what she should know to be true? That they are innocent, that someone took their daughter, that she is out there and can be found, if people work together and no one gives up!?
For Sergio to say that Isabel doesn’t deserve this is
odd.“Deserve” is a weird word for a
child that he believes was abducted. I don't think any parent would think in these terms if their child was a victim of a crime. However, if something happened to Isa under their watch which caused her harm, they might use these terms.
Sergio is asked if he believes his daughter is being held somewhere by the Today Show. If you notice, Sergio doesn't answer the question, but he does say they have a reward ready.Are you kidding me? There there has been nothing said about a
ransom!Where does this come from? Most parents don't automatically think of a ransom when a child is abducted. This is very strange!!
Sergio says when talking about being looked at in this case, "We do feel sometimes that they're wasting time with us
even though we know we have to be under, you know, scrutiny, absolutely,
understandable: but my goodness, she's still out there."
When he says this, he actually
breaks out into a smile.How could he
ever find that funny?Most people would
be upset if the police were wrongly looking at them.They also wouldn't feel that "sometimes" they are wasting time. They would feel like every time they look at the them, they are wasting time.
Clearly, their answers are not consistent with what they want us to believe.
I also find it odd that Becky only wants “prayers” to bring her
daughter home instead of volunteers to search, people to look for their daughter
at gas stations, supermarkets, convenience stories. Most moms would say anyone
who you think looks like Isa, please call police. No lead is unimportant, but
no she just wants prayers. That is stressed way more than their desire for people to search. Very strange.
Becky specifically says she wants prayers to “bring her…to help us bring her home.”You almost feel they are asking for prayers
for someone to find their little girl’s body, to help them get her home without
implicating them so this whole ordeal can be over with.
I have no doubt the parents know a different story than what they are telling us about Isa right now. Very sad.
ALL IDEAS AND CONTENT ON THIS BLOG ARE PROTECTED BY LAW. DO NOT COPY ANYTHING WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. Any violations will be prosecuted to the fullest extent allowable by law.
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero intolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior. Permalink
Sierra Lamar went missing on March 16, 2012, from her home in California. She was not seen by any of her friends or on the school bus that morning, but her cell phone was found along the road the following day. Sierra's mom, Marlene, has been in the media talking about her daughter's disappearance, and her emotions and demeanor clearly stand out as inconsistent.
If you watch her in this interview above, she wants us to believe she is sad and worried, but she shows no clear scientific evidence that she is really feeling this way.
I do not believe Sierra's mom is feeling like she wants us to feel. It's a notable red flag.
In the interview below with Nancy Grace, Marlene confuses facts and gets very defensive with Nancy Grace when talking about her boyfriend and if he was home the morning Sierra disappeared. Then she cuts the interview off with a ridiculous line that she had other things she had to do. It's absolute rubbish!
If finding Sierra was Marlene's number one priority, she would have stayed on the phone with Nancy Grace, but she didn't. It seems her number one priority was taking the questions off of her boyfriend!! She wanted everyone to believe he was cleared, but as Nancy Grace finds out after Marlene is off the line from the sheriff that no one is cleared.
Why is Marlene so defensive about her boyfriend? I sure would like to see him speak. If anyone finds a video of him, please let me know.
I also listened to Marlene recall the last morning she saw her daughter, she couldn't give us any details of their last encounter. Instead, she recalls the night before. This is another red flag.
She also is what I would call emotionally turbulent in some interviews. That's another red flag.
Do I trust Marlene? I do not. I believe she knows more than she is telling us.
ALL IDEAS AND CONTENT ON THIS BLOG ARE PROTECTED BY LAW. DO NOT COPY ANYTHING WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. Any violations will be prosecuted to the fullest extent allowable by law.
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero intolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior. Permalink
Tanya Perdomo's husband, Jerry, went missing while on a trip to supposedly help a friend in Maine move, says his wife. When Tanya talks about where her husband went and what he went to do--she strangely doesn't know. I'm not buying it. She is withholding information, if you want my opinion.
She is very evasive and emotionally flat.
Tanya is very uncomfortable and seems to be thinking as she speaks.
She also isn't showing stress or concern or worry about her husband, which I find odd in this interview.
I question if she and her husband were into illegal activities--hence why she is vague and doesn't want to talk about things. You wouldn't go to a press conference and say my husband was doing something illegal, blah, blah, blah. You'd be vague and evasive, just as she is.
Fact checking for this post, I just saw that police have arrested a suspect for Jerry's murder, though no body has been found. Police believe drugs were involved and that Jerry has been killed. Read more here:
I suspect that Tanya knew what Jerry was up to and where he was going. She may not have known he had an affair and may not have wanted many details, but she knew the purpose of his trip, if you ask me.
ALL IDEAS AND CONTENT ON THIS BLOG ARE PROTECTED BY LAW. DO NOT COPY ANYTHING WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. Any violations will be prosecuted to the fullest extent allowable by law.
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero intolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior. Permalink
Many of you have requested that I review this video and share my thoughts. Unfortunately, I have not been able to follow this case. From what I understand to date, Ayla went missing from her father's home on December 17, 2011 when he was at home with two other adults in the house.
Ayla apparently suffered a broken arm prior to her disappearance, and DiPietro told Ayla's mother a different story than he is now telling police about how she broke her arm. And the last development is that police have found blood in DiPeitro's basement believed to be that of Ayla.
When I watch DiPietro in this interview, I see very little emotion on his face, though I do see flickers of anger and frustration, and indicators of stress.
What strikes me most in this interview is how DiPietro talks about how the night Ayla was supposedly abducted from the house. He says, "It was (shoulder shrug) just a normal night...there was nothing...I just put her to bed and...just...just a normal night."
Why doesn't DiPietro have any details in his memory? He doesn't give us anything at all, which is notable to me. Why isn't he reliving the last night he had with his daughter? It begs the question was he even watching her that night? He also isn't showing stress and urgency in his plea for his daughter. He is completely calm, which I find notable.
He licks his lips, which is an indicator of stress and/or nerves.
It's interesting how DiPietro self-censors himself when he says, "I can tell you what I'm not...I can tell you I love my daughter. I would never do anything to harm my daughter..." It was like he was going on direction with his sentence, and then he changed directions. Why did he have a need to self-sensor himself? I was expecting him to say, I can tell you what I'm not...I'm not a killer...but he stops just short. Was that what he was going to say? You have to wonder, and why couldn't he say that, if he is innocent?
Another time, DiPietro also says, "It feels like a helpless situation at some points, but..." If he truly believes his daughter was abducted, why does he feel helpless? Why isn't he organizing searches, banging on doors and looking for himself. Has DiPietro being doing searches?
While things aren't looking positive for DiPietro, I need to see more before I can draw any conclusions. He is clearly on my radar and I think he needs to be looked at further, without question.
ALL IDEAS AND CONTENT ON THIS BLOG ARE PROTECTED BY LAW. DO NOT COPY ANYTHING WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. Any violations will be prosecuted to the fullest extent allowable by law.
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero intolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior. Permalink
When I watch Gary Giordano speak, I have to say I am left with a lot of answers that aren't logical or that make sense.
Gary wants us to believe he went with her girlfriend to Aruba and when she supposedly went missing at sea; oh well, he went to catch his regularly scheduled flight. Nothing odd about that. Yeah, right. It doesn't take Eyes for Lies to see that.
Furthermore, Gary wants us to believe he drove across the island to a beautiful beach, Baby Beach, yet he goes snorkeling farther down off a jagged, rocky shore. "Baby Beach" got its name because the shores are perfect for children and families. It was an ideal place to go snorkel. Click on the link above and see how beautiful Baby Beach is, and then look (on Dateline) where he claimed he swam. No one would chose to swim off the rocks where he claims. I suspect it is unlikely they went in the water here, or if they did, it was with sinister intent.
When Gary says he never heard there were a lot of accounts that they were drinking heavily, he says, "I know there were videos of us at the RumRunner, okay, we didn't order drinks, we didn't drink heavily, she was walking, I was walking--we were a sober couple."
Gary is saying that because they didn't order drinks, and they were upright, they were sober? Does that convince you? Also, his story about juice (as seen on Dateline)... I'm not buying it. Either he had an alcoholic drink, or that drink was more sinister. He is hiding something here, too.
Gary goes on to say that people are saying he took Robyn to a remote location. To that he responds, "We were 100 yards from a scuba diving store with tanks in the back...we were in view of other people at Baby beach."
Yet later in the video, he says about that same scuba shop, "There is nobody there. There is
not one person in the parking lot. Those are storm doors [in the video]....The scuba
diving shop is closed. There isn't a single car in the parking lot. So I
am screaming in the air?"
Oops. Gary is talking out of both sides of his mouth, isn't he? He seems to change the story whenever it suits him...honest people don't do this. Clearly, Baby Beach was remote that day.
When Gary is asked what he said to the airline clerk about Robyn, his flight companion, he denies he said that Robyn is taking another flight, but he doesn't remember what he said. That's a red flag. He says, "I didn't want to get into a long conversation about what is going on." He knows exactly what he said, but he doesn't want to admit to it, if you ask me. I trust the airline clerk. Considering the airport was shutting down, I'm sure she remembers him trying to catch a last minute flight minus his companion.
Gary couldn't be more removed from Robyn if he tried.
It's interesting when Gary recollects what the lead detective telling him that he is being arrested for the murder of Robyn Gardner, we don't see any response from Giordano like, "Did they find her? Is she gone?" He has no emotional response or memory that you would expect. Most people would not forget that moment if they are innocent -- being told you are being arrested for murder. You would immediately wonder if they found her --specifically if you didn't do it!!
Gary also says he swam with his shoes on. Give me a break!
When Gary talks about the flight insurance he got, he tells us he had to cover Robyn. He says he didn't have any other options. Yet strangely, while he makes the same claims to Dateline on Friday night, when Josh Mankiewicz says, "Couldn't you have taken out insurance on yourself without taking out insurance on Robyn Gardner, Gary responds while grinning, "I'm sure I could have done 15 different things."
Gary tells us he took out insurance for his boys, so why didn't he make them the beneficiaries on Robyn's policy? This is another inconsistency.
I am troubled by Gary's word choice when he talks about the insurance money, "When I give a thought about that, it's dirty."
Dirty? Really? If I am totally innocent and my girlfriend died at sea, would I think insurance money is dirty???? I might not want to collect on it because it emotionally kills me realizing my girlfriend died, but I would never think to call it dirty. Is it "dirty" to Gary because of what he knows happened?
ALL IDEAS AND CONTENT ON THIS BLOG ARE PROTECTED BY LAW. DO NOT COPY ANYTHING WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. Any violations will be prosecuted to the fullest extent allowable by law.
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero intolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior. Permalink
Amber Kirwan went out with her friends in Novia Scotia to a pool hall and was last seen in the early morning hours on Sunday. She parted from her friends saying she was going to a convenient store where her boyfriend was going to pick her up.
Amber's boyfriend, Mason Campbell, said when he arrived at the convenience store, Amber was no where to be seen. You can watch him talk in this video.
Mason says, "The second I got there, and she wasn't, it was completely out of character right there and then."
So, I wonder, did he start searching for her? Did he call her friends and family?
I have to say its odd that Mason talks about his "common relationship" with Amber. He says, "She gets upset if there is something else I have to do..." and focuses on the negative of their relationship right away when she is missing. Most people when a loved one disappears grasp on fondly to the specialness of their relationship. Why isn't Mason?
Did he say to Amber when she called that he had something else he had to do that night, and she got upset? Did they have a fight? Did he show up way late or not at all? I can't help but wonder...
Mason continues, "I should have been there. I should have waited longer around there. I should have tried harder to skim up and down that road."
I have to say this baffles me. Why does he say he should have been there? I thought he was there. Or is he talking about the pool hall--that he should have been there instead of the convenient store? He also says he should have waited longer. Yet in the interview above, Mason tells us he knew it was flat out of character for Amber not to be there. If he didn't start calling around and raising alarms that night, that would be a huge red flag for me. Did he go looking for her that night or not?
Mason says, "I wasn't preparing myself for a situation like this, you know?"
This is a definite red flag. Who prepares for a situation like this? No one can prepare for something like this...but if something happens, such as a fight and things go wrong -- one might say this.
Mason isn't making a lot of sense at this point.
He then speculates about what happened to her. Speculation is quite unusual, too, but his speculations are not out of reason. They are just odd.
I see some strange behavior which flag me and one solid red flag, but these are not enough for me to reach any conclusions at this point. I am curious to see more.
If anyone sees other interviews, please let me know.
ALL IDEAS AND CONTENT ON THIS BLOG ARE PROTECTED BY LAW. DO NOT COPY ANYTHING WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. Any violations will be prosecuted to the fullest extent allowable by law.
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero intolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior. Permalink
Back in April, Kenia Monge disappeared after a night out at a local Denver club. The last man to see Kenia alive spoke out to the news media claiming he was a suspect, though police did not confirm he was. That man was Travis Forbes, and the behavior of Travis in that interview told me all I needed to know. Things did not look good for Kenia.
Sadly, today, Travis Forbes led police to a body along an interstate in Colorado some 40 miles from where Kenia was last seen. The District Attorney has confirmed that they believe the body is Kenia though testing is need to make it official.
Body language and human behavior are big indicators to deception if one is trained and knows what to look for. Travis is a great example of how this is true. I have over 30 real life examples of this on my blog.
To read my original thoughts on Travis back in April, click here.
ALL IDEAS AND CONTENT ON THIS BLOG ARE PROTECTED BY LAW. DO NOT COPY ANYTHING WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. Any violations will be prosecuted to the fullest extent allowable by law.
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero intolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior. Permalink
Many people when children do bad things want to blame the parents for the problem saying the apple doesn't fall too far from the cart. In some instances this is true and in others it is not. In this case, however, it is absolutely true. We can see where Josh Powell gets his absurd ways, without question.
The fact that Josh's dad, Steve Powell, is controlling Susan Powell's diaries from when she was a little girl and plans to post them to prove his theories is outrageous, and the fact he is accusing her of running away with another man when the last known person to see her was his son, is sickening.
I do not believe Steve for an instant that Susan Powell was in any way promiscuous. Nor do I believe she ran away. There was a wet spot in the Powell's living room and Josh dang well knows what happened, if you ask my opinion. Steve doesn't want to talk about that, does he?
I find it interesting how Steve talks for his son and says, "we". Why isn't Josh speaking for himself? Why does his dad feel the need to talk for his son??
This man, in my opinion, is as twisted as his son, sadly.
You can read my opinions of Josh Powell when he first spoke out here.
ALL IDEAS AND CONTENT ON THIS BLOG ARE PROTECTED BY LAW. DO NOT COPY ANYTHING WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. Any violations will be prosecuted to the fullest extent allowable by law.
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero intolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior. Permalink
Tiffany Hartley defies all that we know about emotional understanding as she recalls painful, scary and stressful events the day she saw her husband get killed, yet she is eerily missing any emotional recall.
When people are truly sad, we know they produce oblique eyebrows. In simple terms, it means your eyebrows knit together into an "A" shape above your nose. In fear, our eyes widen and our mouth pulls back. Even months and years after a tragedy, most people will show flickers of true and genuine emotional recall when talking about an emotional experience.
Yet when we look at Tiffany, she is eerily missing genuine indicators of sadness and she doesn't express any fear. Tiffany has not displayed them when talking about her husband since his death (in the interviews I have seen). It's a notable red flag. Tiffany shows very few true indicators that she was shocked, stressed, saddened or afraid by what happened. When we watch her family members, however, the indicators are overly abundant, as we would expect.
People could argue in defense of Tiffany that she is emotionally in shock, but shocked people do not talk so freely about the horrifying details of the event like Tiffany does, because shock means they cannot accept what happened. Clearly Tiffany can talk about everything, including the bullet hole to her husband's head that she found, up close and personally.
When people feel genuine emotions, science has identified that we all react the same. We all use the same muscles and those muscles often cannot be voluntarily contracted for most people. Even more interesting is that when we fake emotions, we don't realize we are giving away tell-tale signs that we aren't really feeling what we say we are feeling.
This is a fascinating interview because Tiffany is a classic example of this. She can recall seeing her husband being shot and killed, and she even recalls having a gun pointed at her and her life threatened, but she has no emotional reaction. No sadness, no fear, no stress, no anger...nothing. Biologically, it doesn't make sense unless Tiffany feels something she isn't telling us.
TIFFANY'S SLIP OF THE TONGUE
Furthermore, in this interview, Tiffany Hartley self-censors herself and what she says is fascinating. It's a subconscious slip, a leak, if you ask me. She says, "I think it just hasn't hit me. It just seems like how on earth......did we d-- this happen? It just doesn't seem real. It seems like it hasn't connected...in my brain."
Did it not appear that she censored herself from saying, "How on earth did we dothis?"
Do this? What did Tiffany and David do? Did they pull something off? Why would she be leaking this?
I personally (in my own opinion) do not believe Tiffany Hartley has told us the truth about what she knows happened that day. I have said that from day one and I still will say that I have yet to see one interview with Tiffany that isn't littered with hotspot after hotspot after hotspot.
ALL IDEAS AND CONTENT ON THIS BLOG ARE PROTECTED BY LAW. DO NOT COPY ANYTHING WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. Any violations will be prosecuted to the fullest extent allowable by law.
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero intolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior. Permalink
Disclaimer:
All data and information provided on this site is for
informational purposes only. Eyes for Lies Blog makes no representations as to
accuracy, completeness, currentness, suitability, or validity of any information
on this site & will not be liable for any errors, omissions, or delays in
this information or any losses, injuries, or damages arising from its
display or use. This is a blog and expresses opinions of the author. Just
because Eyes for Lies does not believe someone does not mean they are (a)
lying, or (b) a liar. All information is provided on an as-is basis. Eyes for Lies does not take
any responsibility for comments published by its readers. Readers publish comments at their own risk.
By reading this blog, you agree to the terms expressed
in this link.
Copyright
Notice 2004-2013
The content of this blog cannot in any way be reproduced, replicated, copied,
duplicated or performed in any manner without express written permission from
Eyes for Lies. You don't want to get caught in a lie, do you? Ask first.
