This came on an appearance on British TV shortly after the attack. The host said that it would be good for Naomi Omi to get in touch with Katie Piper.
Prior to the acid thrown in her face, Naomi Omi had, according to police, already researched Katie Piper online from her personal computer.
Statement Analysis has shown that Naomi Omi's words reveal an attempt to conceal the identity of the attacker. This, along with her computer searches, led police to question whether she did this to herself. A few weeks later, two people were arrested in the attack, and we learned that the two arrested are friends of Ms. Omi's.
In Statement Analysis, we take note of where emotions appear in a statement. In truthful accounts, most times the emotions will be in the "after" section of the account. This is because it takes time for us to process our emotions. A truthful statement will often be in three sections:
I. Introduction
This is a short portion, often only 25% of the account, in which the subject tells us what happened just before the main event.
II. The Main Event
This is the largest portion of the statement, often 50% of the entire statement being dedicated to telling what it is that happened to the subject.
III. Post Event
This is a short portion, after the main event, in which the subject uses only about 25% of the entire statement to tell us what happened afterwards, such as calling 911, or going to the hospital. It is here, that in most truthful accounts that we find emotions.
In story telling, we often find emotions in the Main Event (II) because it makes for good story telling. "I was walking in the dark and felt a tingling of fear when suddenly..."
In truthful accounts, the subject will often simply report what happened, but afterwards, describe what he felt. When we encounter emotions in the Main Event (II) we must ask if the emotion has been placed there artificially by the subject, in order to persuade. We do not conclude deception on any one single indicator, but we do take this into consideration.
We also recognize in Statement Analysis that a person who is truthful can only tell us what it is they remember. A person should tell us, in an open statement (instead of a response to a direct question) what happened, what was said, what was thought, etc, and not what did not happen.
Note that in this statement on television, Naomi Omi was asked what happened. We listen carefully to where a subject begins her account, and note where the emotions are placed as well as her description of the "Muslim woman" who did this to her:
"After getting off the bus I had a funny feeling... I looked behind me and I saw a person and felt shocked because I don't remember hearing footsteps or getting off the bus after me.
"I remember the person just staring at me - a cold stare. I don't remember anyone else around... as I turned my head, I just felt a splash and that's when, someone is out to kill me so I thought to myself that this person is not going to take my life. I didn't bother to look back, I just started running. I knew it was acid. It felt like something eating away at your skin..."
Here we look at it again, with emphasis added. Statement Analysis is in bold type.
"After getting off the bus I had a funny feeling... I looked behind me and I saw a person and felt shocked because I don't remember hearing footsteps or getting off the bus after me.
"I remember the person just staring at me - a cold stare. I don't remember anyone else around... as I turned my head, I just felt a splash and that's when, someone is out to kill me so I thought to myself that this person is not going to take my life. I didn't bother to look back, I just started running. I knew it was acid. It felt like something eating away at your skin..."
1. Note the inclusion of emotion ("funny feeling" and "shock") in the main part of the story.
2. Note that she reported that she saw "a person" which is gender neutral. Since she reported to police that the attacker was a "Muslim woman", we wonder why she now uses the gender neutral, "person" in her statement.
3. "I don't remember" in an open statement is something that we flag for possible deception because a truthful person can only report what it is that they do remember. If someone is asked, "do you remember?", the answer in the negative is not considered sensitive, since it is a response. But in an open statement, one should only tell us what they do remember.
4. "this person" again uses the gender neutral "person", but adds the word "this", which indicates closeness. (The word "that" shows distance). Since closeness is used, we do not expect to see the word "person" again, but "woman" or even "attacker"
5. "I didn't bother to look back" reports what the subject did not do, which is also unexpected.
6. "Your skin" is also unexpected distancing language ("your" is the 2nd person). A physical attack is very personal and the expected is "my skin" since this is not a common event to others. It is, however, a common event to the subject and Katie Piper, the victim she had previously searched on her computer. Katie Piper has her own foundation which helps other burn victims and makes frequent media appearances.
There are enough indicators in this short statement, alone, to know that something is amiss in this case and the subject is deceptive.
The subject here, and in other statements, deliberately conceals the identity of the attacker, and as we now know, knew her as a friend. She not only had researched Katie Piper on her computer, but released to the media photos of herself in order to "help find" the 'unknown' assailant Muslim woman.
There is more to this story.
.jpg)
0 comments:
Post a Comment