Richard D. Hall’s ongoing investigation into the bizarre disappearance of Madeleine McCann has unveiled an embedded story within the details of the McCann’s own statements about their daughter. Hall originally released his investigation into Madeleine’s disappearance in July 2015. Through statement analysis, deception and guilt can emerge out of the fine details, and that is exactly what Hall has found.
Hall recently interviewed Peter Hyatt, an experienced expert in statement analysis, to investigate further the degree to which the McCann’s statements are questionable, or even incriminating, as to their involvement in Madeleine’s disappearance.
In the interview, some notable inconsistencies in speech emerge which appear to further bolster Hall’s case that Madeleine’s parents know more about her disappearance than they are willing to say, and they likely think they’ve gotten away with it. Richard Hall explains:
In November 2016 I traveled to the United States to meet and interview Peter Hyatt. Peter is a highly respected expert in statement analysis and in his work he teaches other professionals and assists law enforcement on criminal cases. When we speak, the process of constructing sentences in our mind involves deciding which tense to use, which words to select from our vocabulary and what order to put them in. This mental process all happens in a fraction of a second. If somebody is constructing sentences from their experiential memory, ie, recalling something real that actually happened to them, the process of word selection follows particular patterns and characteristics, which can be easily identified by a trained statement analyst. If however a person is fabricating and being untruthful when they speak, the natural cognitive process of choosing and ordering words is interrupted, because the mind must censor and insert artificial information in a very short time period. This means the language of somebody who is fabricating is characteristically different and can be picked up by a trained analyst like Peter Hyatt. He has analysed in depth an interview that Kate and Gerry McCann gave in 2011 and throughout the entire interview both Kate and Gerry it appears show signs of deception. Not only that, Peter determines from their language what he believes to be what it is they are concealing. The conclusions are shocking.
“She was [an] incredibly beautiful baby, actually,” said Gerry McCann in an interview. Kate interjected:
We sound like the most biased parents on the planet now but she was just really compact and was really the really nice, round, perfect head… and… you know… and then she, she opened her mouth… the whole world knew she was with us…
Upon analyzing these statements, Hyatt explains the red flags he sees here:
So, I don’t assign to this a red flag because of the context. It does concern me at this point—it’s just a little bit of an alarm now—that in an interview of a missing child they are talking about her in the past tense. I expect some sort of follow-up that would be in the present tense. A single slip into past-tense is an indicator of belief or knowledge that the child is deceased, and that’s what’s concerning about that.
But there are also some other things… One of the things is this, parents of missing children who show guilty knowledge of what happened to the child will often find a subtle way of insulting the child, insulting the victim, blaming the victim, disparaging the victim… In guilty statements, within human nature, there is some drive to justify what happened, to clear oneself.
So, I don’t like several things about this; I don’t like a past-tense reference without following in present-tense. And we have a praising of the baby that I do like—”and then [when] she opened her mouth, the whole world knew she was with us,” is a subtle way of saying she was really loud. I’m not sure that sounds like praise… And given the setting of an interview, where the child is missing, it’s not something I expected to hear. Now, it’s not a point I’m going to hang my hat on, but I’ve been called to the attention now that maybe Madeleine was a bit loud for them.
Considering the recent reports of John Podesta and his brother matching the sketches of men implicated in the kidnapping of Madeleine McCann, maybe this statement analysis sheds some light into the criminal child sex trafficking network that is currently operating globally. Could the McCanns have had foreknowledge of their daughter’s abduction? Is there reason why they would refer to their currently missing daughter in the past-tense?
By the way, I’m not sure if anyone is paying attention at this point; there’s a missing child here that I’ve had no concern expressed for. This is why this interview jumped out at me. She’s actually bringing it to the point where her 3 year old child is some sort of intuitive expert. Your child is missing! What are you doing? When are you going to talk about that?
Delivered by The Daily Sheeple
We encourage you to share and republish our reports, analyses, breaking news and videos (Click for details).
Contributed by Ryan Banister of The Daily Sheeple.