LE has to be keeping the media out of this for a reason. They must not need to keep Haleigh's information out there, IMO, or they would be doing so. This tells me they've got their leads and all they need now is to find Haleigh. They have consistently centered on areas close to the home.
MOO, from using statement analysis techniques-- I believe Misty and Ron are more than likely the center of this investigation.
More about statement analysis here:
http://www.crimeandclues.com/oct964.htm
and here:
http://www.statementanalysis.com/
That is very interesting Indigo. In fact with the few facts we have in the case it might be fun and interesting to subject the interviews that Misty has given media to the techniques in that article.
I know that it would be completely unreliable, unscientific but might be fun to see what we come up with
As I read the article I saw immediately:
1. Extraneous Information (as you pointed out also in another post)
2. Lack Of Conviction :
"investigators should note if the person feigns a loss of memory by repeatedly inserting
"I don't remember" or "I can't recall." They also should look to see if the person hedges during the narrative by using such phrases as
"I think," "I believe," "to the best of my knowledge," or "kind of." These phrases, also called qualifiers, serve to temper the action about to be described, thereby discounting the message before it even is transmitted.
Clearly, the person giving the statement is avoiding commitment, and warning bells should ring in the investigator's ears"
She not only changes her story as she speaks to media, she does so in a manner we cannot consider consistant with how others do so when they are telling and retelling an acccurate story, instead of adding embellishments as she remembers them through the retelling. She changes the facts of the story significantly
3. Balance Of The Statement :
"Statements should be more than just a series of details. They need to sound like an account of the event. A truthful statement has three parts. The first part details what was going on before the event occurred; it places the event in context. The second part describes the occurrence itself, i.e., what happened during the theft, the rape, the fire, etc. The last part tells what occurred after the event, including actions and emotions, and should be at least as long as the first part. The more balanced the three parts of the statement, the greater the probability that the statement is true."
We have talked about her uneveness of her story many many times. Lots of extranous info up front, tells what happened after the event. But no information of the event
She also shifts her pronouns and and I would be interested to go back and see where she does so. Could be a regional language issue or it could fall in line with what is outlined in those articles.
Very interesting thank you Indigo!
JK