The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Welcome to 'The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann' forum 🌹

Please log in, or register to view all the forums as some of them are 'members only', then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann.

When you register please do NOT use your email address for a username because everyone will be able to see it!

Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time  - Page 2 Mm11

Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time  - Page 2 Regist10

Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time

Page 2 of 6 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time  - Page 2 Empty Re: Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time

Post by Hobs on 03.12.16 19:56

Hi verdi, Statement Analysis is a recognized science in the field of policing.
it allows for the interviewer to learn the truth and obtain confessions or an admission using only the subjects own words against them.
If it were not why then do police forces all over the country and even the word sign up to have their officers trained in it. Why does the F.B.I. use it and have their officers trained in it?
What about all the social services let alone business and HR use it?

Although the science like polygraphs is not admissible i8n court, the analyst is classed as an expert and is then able to testify and be questioned as to how they  came to their conclusions.

In the case of the mccanns interview, Peter, and previously the other trained professionals such as detectives, physchologists, social workers and the like all went over the interview with one aim, to see if there was evidence of sexual abuse or not revealed in the interview where they spoke freely using their own personal internal dictionary.

The conclusion was there there was evidence of sexual abuse.
There was also possibilityty that the parents themselves had been a victim of abuse- at least what was learned in the lecture i was at.
There would have been a more in depth  investigation and as a result conclusion at the 'professionals' meeting which was 6 hours long.

We learned that Maddie died in the apartment as a result of sedation.
Maddie was not alive when she spoke about Maddie beiung cuddled or when gerry had his loving father moment.
Kate does know where Maddie is currently.
The mccanns at no point showed any concern regarding Maddie.
There was no concern about what she have been going through, any pain.
Dead people have no more pain or feelings.
Their concern was solely about how they were feeling, their reputations.

The introduction of doors, windows, water, hygiene all indicated for sex.
This is something learned from decades of interviews with survivors of sexual abuse, that they remember the door opening/closing, lights going on /of, water and hygiene.

That someone mentions brushing their teeth or bathing  makes it sensitive to them that they needed to introduce it to the statement.
If you had to give a detailed account of what you did in one day, you wouldn't need to describe the minutia, you would only include that which was important to you.
You wouldn't need to tell us you brushed your teeth, it would be a given that you would do so first thing and last thing when doing your ablutions.
You wouldn't tell us every time you used the bathroom or washed your hands, or cleaned your teeth after eating, that you dried yourself with a towel after a bath or shower.
We all know you dry off after a bath or shower rather than run around naked  trying to get dry.
This is why when it is introduced, the interviewer wants to know why it was important enough  for the subject to tell us what they did.

Peter  gave examples of when doors/windows/water and hygiene were introduced in an interview and what was learned when the subject was further questioned on those sensitive areas.

WE learned that kate gave the children treats, crisps and biscuits.
The crisps and biscuits were separate from the treats which lead to the idea that the treats were the sedatives.

The mccanns told us what they did, when and why.
We have to believe them.

I learned a lot in this lecture, some i already knew or suspected, some i learned the when, the how.

The mccanns indicate for deception in their claims that Maddie is alive and findable.
The mccanns indicate for sexual abuse.

HiDeHO recorded it and i think also got the text and she will be posting it shortly.

____________________
The little unremembered acts of kindness and love are the best parts of a person's life.
Hobs
Hobs
Researcher/Analyst

Posts : 1009
Join date : 2012-10-20
Age : 55
Location : uk

http://tania-cadogan.blogspot.co.uk/

Back to top Go down

Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time  - Page 2 Empty Re: Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time

Post by worriedmum on 03.12.16 20:13

Thank you for that. Hobs, and thank you too for all your own contributions in the past.  Do you know when Peter's report will be available online please?
worriedmum
worriedmum

Posts : 1988
Join date : 2012-01-17

Back to top Go down

Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time  - Page 2 Empty Re: Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time

Post by Verdi on 03.12.16 20:34

@Tony Bennett wrote:
@Verdi wrote:...I think it unwise to overrate the usefulness of statement analysis and the function of the analyst...it's important not to get too carried away by its revelations - it won't solve the case, nor even assist with any live investigation. 
Wise words @ Verdi as we always seem to get from you.

Nevertheless, Richard's 'Embedded Confessions' is making waves even beyond his usual reach. One of the internet media that has picked up his latest Madeleine film is The Daily Sheeple:

http://www.thedailysheeple.com/madeleine-mccann-parents-embedded-confessions-of-complicity-in-her-disappearance_112016

Unfortunately they seem to have missed the point, though.

At the end of their article they suggest that although Madeleine was definitely abducted, her parents seem - from Hyatt's expertise - to somehow be involved in the abduction or 'know more about it'. 

Plus they think that the Podesta brothers might be 'Smithman'.

Oh well, never mind
howdy That's the beauty of Richard D. Hall's works in my opinion, aside from the indisputable value of information, he doesn't try to indoctrinate, rather, he puts the detail out there for people to make up their own minds.  The man is a true asset.  If only people would accept that simple fact when looking for reason to damn his very existence - an attitude childlike in the extreme.

As I said, if nothing else - whether one is engrossed by the fascinating subject of statement analysis or not - at least Richard D. Hall's video interview with Peter Hyatt has rekindled interest in the case of Madeleine McCann's disappearance - albeit in some cases deluded.

____________________
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx

https://thecompletemysteryofmadeleinemccann.blogspot.com/
Verdi
Verdi
Moderator/Researcher

Posts : 13709
Join date : 2015-02-02

Back to top Go down

Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time  - Page 2 Empty Re: Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time

Post by Verdi on 03.12.16 20:40

@Tony Bennett wrote:
Plus they think that the Podesta brothers might be 'Smithman'.
What both of them or a merger of one superimposed over the other?  Personally, I think the one some people think looks like Gerry McCann, might be Tannerman - or crecheman - or eggman - or batman - or superman sarcastic .

____________________
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx

https://thecompletemysteryofmadeleinemccann.blogspot.com/
Verdi
Verdi
Moderator/Researcher

Posts : 13709
Join date : 2015-02-02

Back to top Go down

Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time  - Page 2 Empty Re: Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time

Post by Verdi on 03.12.16 20:47

@Hobs - I remain sceptical about the true value of a statement analyst, although I appreciate your reason for defending the skill and thank you for taking the trouble to respond in such detail.

I look forward to HiDeHo's transcription - never know it might have some effect on my so far inflexible opinion.

____________________
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx

https://thecompletemysteryofmadeleinemccann.blogspot.com/
Verdi
Verdi
Moderator/Researcher

Posts : 13709
Join date : 2015-02-02

Back to top Go down

Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time  - Page 2 Empty Re: Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time

Post by Richard IV on 03.12.16 22:03

Can anyone remember the name of that woman from Southampton University who did a programme about lying and said the McCanns were definitely innocent ?

I`ve googled all sorts of combinations of words and can`t find it.

Anyway my point is - she ought to get together with Peter Hyatt
Richard IV
Richard IV

Posts : 552
Join date : 2015-03-06

Back to top Go down

Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time  - Page 2 Empty Re: Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time

Post by aquila on 03.12.16 22:14

@Richard IV wrote:Can anyone remember the name of that woman from Southampton University who did a programme about lying and said the McCanns were definitely innocent ?

I`ve googled all sorts of combinations of words and can`t find it.

Anyway my point is - she ought to get together with Peter Hyatt
Dr. Sharon Leal.
aquila
aquila

Posts : 9424
Join date : 2011-09-03

Back to top Go down

Back to top Go down

Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time  - Page 2 Empty Re: Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time

Post by Verdi on 03.12.16 23:14

'Eyes for Lies' still sure the McCanns are innocent


Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time  - Page 2 Empty by Tony Bennett on 08.10.11 18:51

'Eyes for Lies' is a blog run by an American lady, a psychologist or analyst of some kind, who proclaims that she is an 'expert in deception'. She even runs training courses in how to spot lies.

She has posted many useful articles analysing those who have lied in public and one of her most penetrating observations IMO was on a TV interview given by Robert Murat days after he famously won his £600 grand in the High Court of Justice in early 2008. We've quoted from it extensively in one of our articles about Robert Murat.

As the result of a recent TV items about the McCanns on Australian TV, she made this pronouncement yesterday:

]http://blog.eyesforlies.com/2011/10/mccanns-speak-out-in-australia.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+EyesForLies+%28Eyes+for+Lies+Blog%29

QUOTE

I continue to support the McCanns are innocent and uninvolved in the disappearance of their daughter.

To read my thoughts on this case, click on the labels below and scroll down to read the posts in reverse chronological order.


UNQUOTE


Labels: [url=http://blog.eyesforlies.com/search/label/Gerry McCann]Gerry McCann[/url], [url=http://blog.eyesforlies.com/search/label/Kate McCann]Kate McCann[/url], [url=http://blog.eyesforlies.com/search/label/Madeleine McCann]Madeleine McCann[/url], [url=http://blog.eyesforlies.com/search/label/missing pesron]missing pesron[/url], [url=http://blog.eyesforlies.com/search/label/Robert Murat]Robert Murat[/url]


++++++++++++++++

23 days after Madeleine was reported missing, 'Eyes for Lies' made this observation:

Saturday, May 26, 2007


Madeleine McCann's Parents
by Eyes at 11:23 AM


QUOTE

A reader made the following request:

"you [sic] may have heard of a case of a missing child from the UK called madeleine McCann [sic] the parents of this child have not come under suspicion for her dissappearence [sic] from the authority but many many members of the public are perplexed by their actions and statements.

here [sic] is the link to the only formal interview they have given since may 3rd when their child dissappeared [sic] i thought it may intrest [sic] you and i would love to hear your views"

Sky News Video Link


I think the McCanns are perplexing people right now because of their lack of emotions outwardly expressed in this video. I also believe many people are judging the McCanns on their poor judgment call to leave three children unattended, alone in a holiday apartment. Both of these together, perhaps, are generating suspicion.

I believe the McCanns made an awful mistake in leaving their three children unattended, even if they were sleeping, and the McCanns checked on the children every 30 minutes. But they did it. They didn't think through the ramifications of their actions. I think all parents have made poor judgment calls to varying degrees over their life as parents, it's just that few parents get stuck with such devastating results.

For the McCanns to live with a mistake of this proportion is monumental and life changing - if they accept the fact that Maddie may never come home again. It's devastating, but why aren't they acting devastated?

For some, this may raise a red flag. For me, it does not.

What if the McCanns haven't accepted the outcome that Madeleine will not come home? What if they are choosing instead to live in the belief that she will be found--that if they try hard enough, they will be able to bring her home? Believing that Maddie will come back to them would lessen the pain--in every respect. It would take away the focus that their mistake may have cost their precious daughter her life.

Would that account for their behavior? I suspect so. I am sure the pain of that last thought is so overwhelming, it could destroy someone's life. Denial is a powerful coping strategy for survival.

When I watch the McCanns speak, I see genuine emotions supporting the situation, their actions and words. I do not see anything that is out of character for someone who is choosing to focus on only one outcome: the safe return of Maddie. While their emotions are not worn on their sleeves, they are clearly there. There is genuine sadness, feelings of pain, loss and duress, yet there is a stoic optimism that they are clinging to, perhaps to protect themselves from the devastating reality.

When I watch the two parents, they are motivated people. They are doers and goers. They are optimists and believe in the good of people. They were trusting people overall, and they didn't walk around in the world with the belief it was a dangerous place. They weren't people who lived in fear. Instead, they looked at the odds and assumed they'd be just fine - that they would be fine, if they took the basic precautions. I am sure they assumed the likelihood of their children waking up and getting out of their cribs was remote. They just never thought someone might abduct their daughter - a thought they may regret for the rest of their lives.

As a bystander, when we are not directly involved and it is not our child, nor our circumstance or our pain, it is easy for us to look at all of the potentials. But when our heart is entwined in the matter, and the horrific outcome only moves to devastate your life, it's not so easy to look at the worst-case scenario. Many people instead go into denial.

I understand and trust the McCanns are honest, caring people who are paying a horrible consequence for failing to safeguard against every worst outcome of their actions.

To read all of my opinions on the McCanns, click on the labels below and posts will come up in reverse chronological order.


Labels: [url=http://blog.eyesforlies.com/search/label/Gerry McCann]Gerry McCann[/url], [url=http://blog.eyesforlies.com/search/label/Kate McCann]Kate McCann[/url], [url=http://blog.eyesforlies.com/search/label/Madeleine McCann]Madeleine McCann[/url], [url=http://blog.eyesforlies.com/search/label/missing pesron]missing pesron[/url], [url=http://blog.eyesforlies.com/search/label/Robert Murat]Robert Murat[/url]


UNQUOTE

____________________
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx

https://thecompletemysteryofmadeleinemccann.blogspot.com/
Verdi
Verdi
Moderator/Researcher

Posts : 13709
Join date : 2015-02-02

Back to top Go down

Back to top Go down

Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time  - Page 2 Empty Re: Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time

Post by Rise like lions on 04.12.16 3:57

What Peter has done is just confirm what we have all believed to be true for a very long time.  What, in the old days, police used to call 'a hunch' is now called analysis, whatever we call it, it still works for me.
Rise like lions
Rise like lions

Posts : 23
Join date : 2016-12-02

Back to top Go down

Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time  - Page 2 Empty Re: Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time

Post by Verdi on 04.12.16 13:08

@Rise like lions wrote:What Peter has done is just confirm what we have all believed to be true for a very long time.  What, in the old days, police used to call 'a hunch' is now called analysis, whatever we call it, it still works for me.
Policing seems to evolved over the years from the worldly streetwise tough-nut into an academic institution requiring extensive qualifications and/or training in just about every imaginable field - science or otherwise.  I prefer the gut feeling anyday to the calculated approach of more modern policing - bring on Gene Hunt! 

Being old school, I recall the days when a personel department dished out application forms and kept files in order - then came the dreaded Human Resources invasion!  Same principle with the added irritation of staff with an over exagerated feeling of self worth and a lust for power.  The dedicated worker of the past was stripped of all control over their own domain and henceforth  controlled by analysis, statistics and thoroughly 'political correctness' - where's the fun in that?

Interviewing candidates for a job was a nightmare.  Ability and/or suitability for the vacancy became a thing of the past, replaced by minority group priority.  Once in an interview I asked a candidate how she intended to organise her working life around her expected child - the interview was immediately interrupted by the Human Resources bod, who in front of the interviewee, told me I couldn't ask question like that in an interview.  My reaction at the time can't be repeated here, suffice to say I was later recommended to attend a course on 'how not to interview' - I didn't attend!   I wasn't even being an 'ist' of any description - it was a genuine concern about suitability.

No, I can't go along with all this fan-dangled modernism.  BAH!

Sorry offtopic

____________________
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx

https://thecompletemysteryofmadeleinemccann.blogspot.com/
Verdi
Verdi
Moderator/Researcher

Posts : 13709
Join date : 2015-02-02

Back to top Go down

Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time  - Page 2 Empty Re: Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time

Post by Rise like lions on 04.12.16 13:26

Verdi, not feeling good at all today but your post made me smile.  I know exactly what you mean.  I don't know if we all get to an age/a point in life where we just stop wanting and/or being able to keep up with, all this new fangled bollox, or if it's a case of just knowing (as an integral part of a complete accumulation of all life's lessons and wisdom) so not needing it.  I'm rambling aren't I!  And no offence to the lovely Peter Hyatt.  (I loved his reason for getting into his work in the first place and he's such a lovely, humble guy).

agree
Rise like lions
Rise like lions

Posts : 23
Join date : 2016-12-02

Back to top Go down

Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time  - Page 2 Empty Re: Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time

Post by Rise like lions on 04.12.16 13:37

Another thing Verdi - your experience with the politically correct brigade reminded me of how I had to withdraw from a couple of long-term friends who welcomed this bandwagon with utter feminist glee.  One started training to be a social worker and the other some kind of support worker and their self-congratulatory enthusiasm abd pretentiousness drove me to distraction.  They actually had a conversation about the support worker's interview where that very question had been asked of her - the fury!! "They would never have asked a man that!" (by this time their men had been reduced to mere pond-life whose only use was to earn the cash so they could re-live their school days).
Rise like lions
Rise like lions

Posts : 23
Join date : 2016-12-02

Back to top Go down

Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time  - Page 2 Empty Re: Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time

Post by MayMuse on 04.12.16 14:06

@Hobs wrote:Hi verdi, Statement Analysis is a recognized science in the field of policing.
it allows for the interviewer to learn the truth and obtain confessions or an admission using only the subjects own words against them.
If it were not why then do police forces all over the country and even the word sign up to have their officers trained in it. Why does the F.B.I. use it and have their officers trained in it?
What about all the social services let alone business and HR use it?

Although the science like polygraphs is not admissible i8n court, the analyst is classed as an expert and is then able to testify and be questioned as to how they  came to their conclusions.

In the case of the mccanns interview, Peter, and previously the other trained professionals such as detectives, physchologists, social workers and the like all went over the interview with one aim, to see if there was evidence of sexual abuse or not revealed in the interview where they spoke freely using their own personal internal dictionary.

The conclusion was there there was evidence of sexual abuse.
There was also possibilityty that the parents themselves had been a victim of abuse- at least what was learned in the lecture i was at.
There would have been a more in depth  investigation and as a result conclusion at the 'professionals' meeting which was 6 hours long.

We learned that Maddie died in the apartment as a result of sedation.
Maddie was not alive when she spoke about Maddie beiung cuddled or when gerry had his loving father moment.
Kate does know where Maddie is currently.
The mccanns at no point showed any concern regarding Maddie.
There was no concern about what she have been going through, any pain.
Dead people have no more pain or feelings.
Their concern was solely about how they were feeling, their reputations.

The introduction of doors, windows, water, hygiene all indicated for sex.
This is something learned from decades of interviews with survivors of sexual abuse, that they remember the door opening/closing, lights going on /of, water and hygiene.

That someone mentions brushing their teeth or bathing  makes it sensitive to them that they needed to introduce it to the statement.
If you had to give a detailed account of what you did in one day, you wouldn't need to describe the minutia, you would only include that which was important to you.
You wouldn't need to tell us you brushed your teeth, it would be a given that you would do so first thing and last thing when doing your ablutions.
You wouldn't tell us every time you used the bathroom or washed your hands, or cleaned your teeth after eating, that you dried yourself with a towel after a bath or shower.
We all know you dry off after a bath or shower rather than run around naked  trying to get dry.
This is why when it is introduced, the interviewer wants to know why it was important enough  for the subject to tell us what they did.

Peter  gave examples of when doors/windows/water and hygiene were introduced in an interview and what was learned when the subject was further questioned on those sensitive areas.

WE learned that kate gave the children treats, crisps and biscuits.
The crisps and biscuits were separate from the treats which lead to the idea that the treats were the sedatives.

The mccanns told us what they did, when and why.
We have to believe them.

I learned a lot in this lecture, some i already knew or suspected, some i learned the when, the how.

The mccanns indicate for deception in their claims that Maddie is alive and findable.
The mccanns indicate for sexual abuse.

HiDeHO recorded it and i think also got the text and she will be posting it shortly.
Thank you Hobs and thank you in advance to Hideho for recordingi it. 
Question how do treats equate to sedation? Treats in my opinion are the crisps and biscuits Kate spoke of giving the children that evening to show she was a good mother and only gave theses snacks as "treats" and not all the time... so how is it separating them to conclude treats meaning sedation? As an add note I do not believe that scenario of treat giving and cuddles to be a true event in my opinion.

____________________
“Basically, I’m just an ordinary, straightforward guy who’s the victim of the biggest f***-up on this planet – if you’ll excuse the language.” bingo

Robert Murat talking to David Jones, Daily Mail, 02 June 2007
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-459316/Madeleine-Is-Robert-Murat-suspect-scapegoat.html
avatar
MayMuse

Posts : 2033
Join date : 2016-04-15

Back to top Go down

Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time  - Page 2 Empty Re: Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time

Post by Verdi on 04.12.16 23:22

Lord 'arry - for all those who think Peter Hyatt has the answer to all questions, feast your eyes on this if you have the time and/or inclination..

Sunday, December 4, 2016

What Is An Embedded Confession?


http://statement-analysis.blogspot.co.uk/2016/12/what-is-embedded-confession.html

Please, no blind adoration just because - if you understand a single point he is supposedly making, then let's hear the pros and cons.

I sincerely hope he's not trying to make a name for himself on the back of Madeleine McCann, let's face it, he wouldn't be the first.

Stuff and nonsense from where I'm standing.

____________________
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx

https://thecompletemysteryofmadeleinemccann.blogspot.com/
Verdi
Verdi
Moderator/Researcher

Posts : 13709
Join date : 2015-02-02

Back to top Go down

Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time  - Page 2 Empty Re: Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time

Post by Guest on 05.12.16 9:55

@Verdi wrote:Lord 'arry - for all those who think Peter Hyatt has the answer to all questions, feast your eyes on this if you have the time and/or inclination..

Sunday, December 4, 2016

What Is An Embedded Confession?






http://statement-analysis.blogspot.co.uk/2016/12/what-is-embedded-confession.html

Please, no blind adoration just because - if you understand a single point he is supposedly making, then let's hear the pros and cons.

I sincerely hope he's not trying to make a name for himself on the back of Madeleine McCann, let's face it, he wouldn't be the first.

Stuff and nonsense from where I'm standing.
I agree, I'm not convinced that Peter doesn't know the 'Amaral accusation' which is what Gerry is defending himself against. It doesn't take genius to look at that interview and pronounce they are being deceitful (we've all noticed body language etc. on occasions). The examples he uses are nowhere near relevant and his own rule for 'not an embedded confession' when appled makes the analysis void.
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time  - Page 2 Empty Re: Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time

Post by Hobs on 05.12.16 14:11

When Peter or any statement analyst analyses a statement or interviews a subject, all they ask to be told is the allegation.
For example, money was taken.

The interview and analysis is then taken allowing the subject to speak freely and to answer the allegation.
The analyst uses only the words written/spoken by the subject.

In this case Peter listened only to the words spoken by the subjects kate and gerry in response to the questions.

He noted the questions asked and their freely spoken responses to the questions.
In particular he noted tttheir response to the accusation "did you kill your daughter?"

Expected would be a strong denial, no I didn't.

Had they parroted the question in their response "No, i did not kill my daughter" they would have  shown themselves to be deceptive.

Instead we had the strong denial No.

Then they weakened the denial by  adding  "emphatic no"
Every additional word after the denial weakens the statement.
They then went further and beyond the boundaries of the question by explaining how they could not have killed their daughter and di (sposed) hidden her body indicating them for deception and guilt in Maddie's death.

Now that Peter  has indicated them for deception and also that sexual abuse is involved, he is interested in statements from the rest of the group to see who knew what, who was involved and in what way.

Earlier interviews are always better si9nce it is closer to the event and memories are fresh and untainted.
They would not be speaking knowing what else has been asked or questioned about their  story, they would not need to remember what versions they had previously told.

____________________
The little unremembered acts of kindness and love are the best parts of a person's life.
Hobs
Hobs
Researcher/Analyst

Posts : 1009
Join date : 2012-10-20
Age : 55
Location : uk

http://tania-cadogan.blogspot.co.uk/

Back to top Go down

Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time  - Page 2 Empty Re: Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time

Post by Verdi on 05.12.16 14:56

HKP wrote:
@Verdi wrote:Lord 'arry - for all those who think Peter Hyatt has the answer to all questions, feast your eyes on this if you have the time and/or inclination..

Sunday, December 4, 2016

What Is An Embedded Confession?








http://statement-analysis.blogspot.co.uk/2016/12/what-is-embedded-confession.html

Please, no blind adoration just because - if you understand a single point he is supposedly making, then let's hear the pros and cons.

I sincerely hope he's not trying to make a name for himself on the back of Madeleine McCann, let's face it, he wouldn't be the first.

Stuff and nonsense from where I'm standing.
I agree, I'm not convinced that Peter doesn't know the 'Amaral accusation' which is what Gerry is defending himself against. It doesn't take genius to look at that interview and pronounce they are being deceitful (we've all noticed body language etc. on occasions). The examples he uses are nowhere near relevant and his own rule for 'not an embedded confession' when appled makes the analysis void.
It's all too vague for my liking. 

So something said in general conversation means nothing but in the context of a criminal investigation, or some other scenario, it can or may be interpreted differently?  So what if particular language used turns out to be indicative of a particular behavioural pattern - it can't be proven to be relevant until such times as an investigation has concluded.  By that time it's too late so the whole process is a waste of time - I can't even see how it can be used as circumstantial evidence or intelligence.

A classic case of hindsight! 

I remain sceptical about the subject.

____________________
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx

https://thecompletemysteryofmadeleinemccann.blogspot.com/
Verdi
Verdi
Moderator/Researcher

Posts : 13709
Join date : 2015-02-02

Back to top Go down

Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time  - Page 2 Empty Re: Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time

Post by Hobs on 05.12.16 21:53

@Verdi wrote:
HKP wrote:
@Verdi wrote:Lord 'arry - for all those who think Peter Hyatt has the answer to all questions, feast your eyes on this if you have the time and/or inclination..

Sunday, December 4, 2016

What Is An Embedded Confession?










http://statement-analysis.blogspot.co.uk/2016/12/what-is-embedded-confession.html

Please, no blind adoration just because - if you understand a single point he is supposedly making, then let's hear the pros and cons.

I sincerely hope he's not trying to make a name for himself on the back of Madeleine McCann, let's face it, he wouldn't be the first.

Stuff and nonsense from where I'm standing.
I agree, I'm not convinced that Peter doesn't know the 'Amaral accusation' which is what Gerry is defending himself against. It doesn't take genius to look at that interview and pronounce they are being deceitful (we've all noticed body language etc. on occasions). The examples he uses are nowhere near relevant and his own rule for 'not an embedded confession' when appled makes the analysis void.
It's all too vague for my liking. 

So something said in general conversation means nothing but in the context of a criminal investigation, or some other scenario, it can or may be interpreted differently?  So what if particular language used turns out to be indicative of a particular behavioural pattern - it can't be proven to be relevant until such times as an investigation has concluded.  By that time it's too late so the whole process is a waste of time - I can't even see how it can be used as circumstantial evidence or intelligence.

A classic case of hindsight! 

I remain sceptical about the subject.
Hi Verdi.
Statement analysis can be used in any situation where information is being given, politicians, criminals, social work, family and friends (although it is not recommended you analyse them if you want to stay friends with them  although if you need to seek the truth about something important such as in relation to infidelity etc it can come in handy)
The ewhole idea is to let the subject do the talking.
You make the allegation against them such as did you take the money or better still ask them to write out everything they did on the specific day from when they woke up to when they went to bed.
Based on their answers you then seek to learn the truth from the subject using their own words.
Nothing else matters and it is better if the analyst knows nothing about the case except the allegation.

In this case Peter was interested and only used the Australian interview, both in the big  6 hour conference and then in the smaller2 1/2 hr conference.

Only the words spoken in the interview by kate and gerry in response to the questions was looked at, and it  looked not only at phrases, it looked at apirs of words and single words in the context of the interview and  when compared to the decades of knowledge from criminal cases, social services and the like.
This is why certain words and phrases are flagged up as sensitive although they on their own do not indicate guilt, they indicate that it is sensitive enough to the subject that they felt the need to introduce it and then  further investigation is needed to learn why it was sensitive.

Peter is aware of the Maddie case as i introduced ot to him on his blog.

Initially from the example i sent he could not conclude deception or innocence, I then provide a couple of other examples that had caught my attention.
After many months  and prompting he did look at another example and concluded deception.

This was one case amongst the many that he covers on his blog, often involving missing children or adults.

He has been proven correct in most of them where a verdict has been found.
Others we know who why and how, just not where the remains are, and in one case everything proved that the mother killed her child or allgedly knew who had done it (she blamed her own father in the opening statements), the jury , seeing fame and money from a shocking verdict decided she hadn't done it and was only guilty of lying.
Sadly you can protect against everything except a dumb jury.

He recently had another look atthe case as he had sought an example and transcript.

The Australian one was an excellent example showing that Maddie was indeed dead, they were involved and knew where she was.
In this case he wanted to learn if sexual abuse was involved (it was) the mccanns told us so.

Peter is far too busy with his training and private work to spend all his time looking at the mccann case.
He does not benefit from it financially since if he were to be taken onto the case, he would remove all reference to her from his blog as he does with other cases or he does not post about the case in hand, Privacy and integrity of the investigation.

He may or may not be aware that the mccanns are suing Dr. Goncalo Amaral.
I doi not know if anyone has sent him transcripts, i doubt it though as it is not really relevant to the case of what the mccanns did to Maddie aided and abetted by the tapas 7.

He has asked for early transcripts of interviews with them and the group as they would be the least contaminated and  almost excited utterances, where they are selling their version of events before anyone started to question them.

Even though interviews have gone on for the last almost 10 years and the mccanns are aware that their story is being questioned, they still have to say what happened and, with a lie they have to remember what they have already said and to who.

As time passes they seek to explain away a problem only to cause another problem elsewhere.
they contradict themselves, the timeline changes, what they saw and did changes, what they say changes.
Each time reveals more of the truth, we see what is sensitive, what isn't, wherte we have missing time.

Peter Looked only at the transcript of the Australian interview, nothing else they said.
There are linguistic rules to be followed, when we speak we choose what we are going to say, the tenses and pronouns all within a microsecond of thinking it.
it is these instinctive rules that do not change and lead us to learn the truth or the lie.

My own bugbear  is now i have some understanding of it, TV adverts drive me nuts.

The mccanns have told us Maddie is dead.
Maddie died in the apartment.
It was accidental perhaps over sedation or a fall as a result of sedation.
Kate knows where Maddie is dumped.
There is evidence of sexual abuse.

This is what has been revealed in one short interview where they were allowed to speak freely.

____________________
The little unremembered acts of kindness and love are the best parts of a person's life.
Hobs
Hobs
Researcher/Analyst

Posts : 1009
Join date : 2012-10-20
Age : 55
Location : uk

http://tania-cadogan.blogspot.co.uk/

Back to top Go down

Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time  - Page 2 Empty Re: Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time

Post by Verdi on 05.12.16 22:44

@Hobs

Pleased be assured, I've read your explanation on the subject repeatedly but it makes no difference to my opinion.  I was hoping to generate some discussion on the pros and cons but that went down like a lead balloon.  Unsurprisingly I appear to be in a minority but don't wish to disrupt such a popular topic any further - for that reason, I will withdraw unless I have a question or comment on a specific point.

As said recently, I appreciate your need to defend you interest, as I appreciate the time you take to respond and comment in such detail.

____________________
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx

https://thecompletemysteryofmadeleinemccann.blogspot.com/
Verdi
Verdi
Moderator/Researcher

Posts : 13709
Join date : 2015-02-02

Back to top Go down

Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time  - Page 2 Empty Re: Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time

Post by Guest on 05.12.16 23:00

@Hobs

Sorry but that's balderdash! Peter mentioned throughout the video that this was only his opinion (not science). The Australian interview answers were given after literally hundreds of interviews appearances etc. The story was in answer to Amaral's theory / accusation and anybody (without any statement analysis training) can hazard a good guess that they were being deceitful (whether that be tone, body language or hesitances). Peter has just concluded the Amaral theory was correct, how convenient for him. As for that transcript being evidence of sexual abuse.......... that's not evidence it's an interpretation
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time  - Page 2 Empty Re: Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time

Post by Tony Bennett on 06.12.16 8:18

HKP wrote:@Hobs

Sorry but that's balderdash! Peter mentioned throughout the video that this was only his opinion (not science). The Australian interview answers were given after literally hundreds of interviews appearances etc. The story was in answer to Amaral's theory / accusation and anybody (without any statement analysis training) can hazard a good guess that they were being deceitful (whether that be tone, body language or hesitances). Peter has just concluded the Amaral theory was correct, how convenient for him. As for that transcript being evidence of sexual abuse...that's not evidence it's an interpretation
I think we may be being a little harsh on Hobs and Peter Hyatt here.

Indeed I think we have been indebted to Hobs for many years on CMOMM as she has shared certain principles with us that undoubtedly do hold good. 

For example, 'distancing language', of which we have seen dozens of examples in this case: 'this girl' etc.

People like judges, the police and social workers are formally trained in how to spot liars. Leaving aside body language and facial expressions, eye contact and all of those visual things wich can tell us so much (and also have done in this case), words themselves can also tell us much.

Two common examples are these:

1. Long rambling denials, instead of a simple 'No'. Peter Hyatt would be supported by every statement analyst and expert in lie detection on the planet in analysing: 'No. And that's an emphatic no', and the long rambling answer that follows, in very much the same way as Hyatt has done.

2. When asked about an incident, where a person answers 'I would have done this' instead of 'I did this', this is recognised everywhere as good evidence of not telling the truth.

I would compare the emerging discipline of statement analysis with those of psychiatry and psychology. It is perfectly possible to have psychiatrists and psychologists who DO know what they are talking about, and are true experts. But experts can disagree; look how many court cases there are where expert psychiatrists and psychologists disagree with each other. Is John Smith mentally ill? One says 'Yes', another says 'No'.

Where I am particularly sceptical about Peter Hyatt's analysis, however (and Hobs'), is where he strays into informing us that certain words tell us to be on the look-out for sexual activity or sexual abuse.

Hobs has mentioned that the use of words like 'water' and 'shower' may be indicators that someone is thinking about sex a lot, or referring to sexual activity. Peter Hyatt has now added the concept that the use of words like 'doors' and 'windows' also reveal that someone is referring to sexual activity

I would like to see the evidence for these assertions.

@ Hobs, can you help us here? Can you please point us to any literature at all on the subject, preferably peer-reviewed, where we can read what statement analysts have claimed to have discovered about the use of words like 'water', 'showers', 'doors' and 'windows' and whether they indicate or refer to sexual activity? Thanks.

On that point especially, I share the sceptcism of Verdi and HKP, but am willing to look at any good evidence with an open mind

____________________

Dr Martin Roberts: "The evidence is that these are the pjyamas Madeleine wore on holiday in Praia da Luz. They were photographed and the photo handed to a press agency, who released it on 8 May, as the search for Madeleine continued. The McCanns held up these same pyjamas at two press conferences on 5 & 7June 2007. How could Madeleine have been abducted?"

Amelie Mcann (aged 2): "Maddie's jammies!".  

Tony Bennett
Tony Bennett
Researcher

Posts : 15497
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 71
Location : Shropshire

Back to top Go down

Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time  - Page 2 Empty Re: Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time

Post by BlueBag on 06.12.16 8:56

But experts can disagree; look how many court cases there are where expert psychiatrists and psychologists disagree with each other. Is John Smith mentally ill? One says 'Yes', another says 'No'.
Yep.


It's a voodoo science.

Whilst there are some obvious giveaways (palpable lies and evasions) I don't have much truck with opinion or interpretation of someone's ramblings.

In my opinion, innocent people can say emphatically "no" and also ramble.

People have been hanged on the say-so of experts giving opinion.

I prefer facts.
BlueBag
BlueBag

Posts : 4991
Join date : 2014-06-06

Back to top Go down

Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time  - Page 2 Empty Re: Peter Hyatt releases statement tonight (Sunday 27 Nov 2016) about his NEXT analysis of the Madeleine McCann case >> coming in a few days' time

Post by Tony Cadogan on 06.12.16 9:05

HKP wrote:@Hobs

Sorry but that's balderdash! Peter mentioned throughout the video that this was only his opinion (not science). The Australian interview answers were given after literally hundreds of interviews appearances etc. The story was in answer to Amaral's theory / accusation and anybody (without any statement analysis training) can hazard a good guess that they were being deceitful (whether that be tone, body language or hesitances). Peter has just concluded the Amaral theory was correct, how convenient for him. As for that transcript being evidence of sexual abuse.......... that's not evidence it's an interpretation

Balderdash indeed! Hobs’s last post is almost incoherent. Perhaps she is not feeling too well?
avatar
Tony Cadogan

Posts : 102
Join date : 2016-07-25

Back to top Go down

Page 2 of 6 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum