mysteriew
A diamond in process
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2004
- Messages
- 23,811
- Reaction score
- 819
The investigators had been looking for Stacey in waterways. The family is looking for her in waterways. What are their reasons for believing she is in water? There are two known reverse speech examples from Drew Peterson indicating she is in water. Who is it that is suspected of knowing better where she is? Why is the belief of the investigators, and the family, that she is in water seem plausible but not from Drew Peterson's own words?:waitasec:
If you're not "buying" the validity of reverse speech then perhaps you can do your research on the subject. If you're still not "buying it", based upon your research, maybe you could come back here and post the data that supports your opinion for someone like myself to learn from.
I'm kinda with Robtomas in that I am pretty doubtful. But then I don't know a whole lot about it. Is reverse speech analysis acceptable as evidence for court use? Is it a technique that is commonly used in crime solving? Because frankly I haven't heard of it in the usual cases that I have followed. Do you have any statistics on the solve rate when reverse speech is used in crime solving? Or in locating missing persons? If it is successful, then why isn't it a more common tool in the LE arsenal? Is there a college, school or training facility that teaches reverse speech analysis? Is there an association that has set up acceptable standards for reverse speech analysis, if there is what is it called?