Backward State - Reverse Speeech Analysis of Ron and Misty

[Muffet]

If any LE dept were using reverse speech to solve crimes, it would be documented all over Oates' web site. But the best he can come up with is an ambiguous line published in a journal 18 years ago.

2 + 2

 

[badme102]

Just a quick question, is this for all threads on Haleigh or just this one? If people state something as fact, they need to have proof to back it up? TIA!

There is quite a HUGE difference between other 'facts' in this case and this .....um....stuff.

 

[Pondering Mind]

OK, here is the deal.

I need one clear cut example of where RS was used to apprehend and convict a criminal. Used by Law Enforcement. Not by a private detective.
This needs to be a case where LE stated they used RS to help them.

If you can't provide one simple paragraph (not a whole page) then I will shut this thread down.

However, I am more the willing to keep the discussion going if anyone can provide the info I requested.

BBM~ for Shawn.....sorry Tricia and Shawn..I know that post was not directed at me or to me, I just happen to be posting my last post (which is now this post :crazy....butting out now for real.............

 

[Tricia]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"This new frontier can be used as an exciting and new investigative tool ... the police department in Australia did verify that [Reverse Speech] located a murder weapon in the basement."
The National Private Investigators Journal. April, 1991.[/FONT]


You did emphasize ONE case, right?

Yes, and I did say not a private detective. This is verified by a P,I. magazine. I need the police to come out and say they used RS.
Also, and I apologize for not stating this but I need a U.S. LE agency. I forgot to take in the fact that perhaps other LE's in countries less developed would use this. Not saying Australia is less developed, it is not. But again, it was P.I. magazine.

Actual LE stating they used RS. LE in the United States.

 

[Karen Anne RN]

Karen I certainly can understand. I'm proud of him, and of you for helping him keep his oath. I know I wouldn't be that supportive in secret, behind closed doors. :angel: I would at least be beggin for clues, since I'm such a real crime buff. But your response still helped me out in having an overall understanding. Guess you like real true crime too? That's good being the type of work he does, you guys are very compatible.

I'm actually proud of him that he is able to keep it all to himself.

There are times, however, when I actually do know what is going to go down in his court, before he does. Many of the crimes and arrests are noted in our newspaper, both in print, and online. If I happen to see them, then I know before he does, unless he has read the paper that day

There was a horrible homicide commited on an elderly gentleman who lived alone, a few miles from where we live. Some heartless, cruel teenagers were arrested, and of course everyone in our area knew about it immediately. We never have crimes here that are in any way like precious little Caylee Marie, and since I have been here, no child abductions of the magnitude of little HaLeigh. Our home is way out in the country, and everyone knows everyone.

Thank you for your kind words.

 

[curvecuti]

OK. I am not going to get into the obvious.

Karen stated this as fact. Like she knows LE has this tool at their desposal and they can use it. This is just not true. You will never EVER see LE say they use RS. Again, they have voodoo at their desposal too. Just because it is out there doesn't mean they use it.

As far as your question I will assume you didn't mean to come across as a bit snitty because you know the rules apply to everywhere on the forum unless otherwise stated or understood.

In case there is any question on how it works on WS; If you state something as fact like "LE uses RS" you have to be ready to back it up. If you say, "I bet LE uses RS" that is an opinion.

Don't not nitpick please and create more work for our moderators.

Ok, I was not trying to be "snitty", I asked the question because I was not clear if it was required on all the threads. There has been some question as to people having to qualify their statements w/ links and proof. That is not being done on some threads here and I was wondering if it was required. Believe me, I will NOT ask anything else. Thanks.

 

[Karen Anne RN]

Karen, you need to provide some sort of legitimate back up for this statement.

You can't assume that because it is available law enforcement uses it. Voodoo is available and I bet you won't find cops sacraficing chickens to help with a case.

Karen, please provide something solid to back it up. If this is an opinion then please say so. Please do not state an opinion as fact.

Every other Saturday, my husband works with a police officer, teaching handgun safety. I will ask him if he can help provide some information.

I would think that the number of investigators who access this type of tool are not in the majority, however, my husband was very emphatic with his responses to my questions. I started going cross-eyed when he went form point A to point B, then point C, then started quoting 4th and 5th ammendment rights.....

 

[Muffet]

Wouldn't a DA know if RS were being used by his LE or grand juries? :waitasec:

 

[Tricia]

Ok, I was not trying to be "snitty", I asked the question because I was not clear if it was required on all the threads. There has been some question as to people having to qualify their statements w/ links and proof. That is not being done on some threads here and I was wondering if it was required. Believe me, I will NOT ask anything else. Thanks.

Dear Curvecuti,
My apologies. I assumed you were being flippant. I should not have assumed that because all questions are welcomed if asked nicely. You did ask very politely and I answered rudely. Again, I apologize. My only excuse is my guard is up.

You have to look at each statement individually and decide. When someone says, "Police Departments have RS at their disposal" that indicates that LE gives some creedence to Reverse Speech. That is why I asked for a link to this statement. One can't be provided so therefore it is an opinion. Like I said LE also has Voodoo at their disposal too.

If someone says, "Ron is a liar" you can pretty much take that as an opinion but you can also ask for proof.

Again, it all depends on the comment.

The one thing I am trying to avoid is any type of nitpicking that can grow in a high profile case like this.

Again, My Apologies.

Tricia

 

[Karen Anne RN]

I am following the case of Tara Grinstead who was one of the women he claimed to have killed. He sent me a message challenging me to find through his RS he was not the killer. I obliged. His RS from one of the videos clearly indicated he was not a killer. 4 months later he was indicted by a grand jury, and arrested for making false claims.

~~ Respectfully snipped ~~

Shawn, either late last year, or early this year, I had read some of your posts on the Caylee case. I had never heard of reverse speech analysis before that time, and found it to be quite interesting, especially the neurological aspect of it.

I listened to some of the recordings, and found it extremely helpful to use in-ear bud earphones to listen. However, I realized that one would have to be very skilled to find the RS, and very knowledgeable in the meanings of the words. In most of the recordings I listened to, I heard the same RS that was noted. But I found it to be very tiring. I easily spent half an hour listening to 2 or 3 samples. I know that you have done some work on both Caylee's case, and HaLeigh's, and have posted your findings here on this web site. How many hours do you think you have spent working on these two cases, in total ? I'm thinking it may be a lot.

 

[Tricia]

It is obvious that Shawn is not going to be able to come up with one small piece of proof that any law enforcement agency uses reverse speech as an investigation tool.

No one with common sense would use rs to investigate.

Again, if rs worked it would be the biggest thing to ever hit investigations of all kinds.

Shawn, you are a sincere and intelligent person. I am not trying to insult you. I am only trying to get WS members to use common sense about this topic.

What I resent is this thread/topic being presented as scientific fact, as being presented as something investigators use, as being presented as totally legitimate, when in reality none of this is true.

When something is presented as legitimate but no proof of acceptance by those who could show it to be legitimate exists then its time to shut things down.

I'll be back later tonight to see if I missed anything.

Tricia

 

[Tricia]

Feel free to carry on the discussion of this topic. I'll decide much later tonight whether to shut it down or not. Until then carry on . . .

 

[curvecuti]

Dear Curvecuti,
My apologies. I assumed you were being flippant. I should not have assumed that because all questions are welcomed if asked nicely. You did ask very politely and I answered rudely. Again, I apologize. My only excuse is my guard is up.

You have to look at each statement individually and decide. When someone says, "Police Departments have RS at their disposal" that indicates that LE gives some creedence to Reverse Speech. That is why I asked for a link to this statement. One can't be provided so therefore it is an opinion. Like I said LE also has Voodoo at their disposal too.

If someone says, "Ron is a liar" you can pretty much take that as an opinion but you can also ask for proof.

Again, it all depends on the comment.

The one thing I am trying to avoid is any type of nitpicking that can grow in a high profile case like this.

Again, My Apologies.

Tricia

Thank you Tricia. I appreciate your response. You are a classy moderator! :blowkiss:

 

[KOOL LOOK]

Thank you for your kind words.

:blowkiss:
Hi ya Kool Look! I understand why Tricia HAS TO protect 'Her Baby' and our favorite place to be. :blowkiss:
btw Kool~ Just want you to know that while we may disagree on this case, you are one of the most SPECIAL peeps here. You have such a good heart..a very rare quality indeed!

Thank you Tricia. I appreciate your response. You are a classy moderator! :blowkiss:

I don't know about Tricia, after reading Pondering Mind's post, I like to have never gotten my "Big Head" through the back door to run errands and get back to thank her and Karen. The lady at Burger King wanted to know why I had such a big "Sunny Smile" on my face. Two people stopped me in Bi-Lo Grocers and smiled too, guess smiles are contagious. Thank you, I worship you, hehehe

Tricia since you are trying to determine what you will do concerning this thread, I would like to offer something I do when I feel in a place that I'm thinking you may be feeling like.

I set boundaries and limits. :dance: Reminds me of dealing with my own children. When they want something, and I'm not in agreements, I set some rules to follow with making clear my view point on the subject.

Perhaps, making a post at the beginning of this thread that Websleuths doesn't endorse "Reverse speech Analysis", with any disclaimers you feel appropriate to apply. Laying out any rules you want followed, such as making sure posters define whether their giving opinion versus facts. Links that are allowed specifically to this thread, like the one rule already mentioned about the "Selling of stuff" links. Clearly stating your opinion and view of how you feel about the subject.

And as you have already said, if someone can produce such LE involvement with this tool, then you will look further into any possibilities about these boundaries and limits. Often I even leave myself with an "out" option that if I begin to see it harming or disrupting the very concerns I had to start with, I reserve my right without "pouty, whining faces" to change my mind and put a stop to the conditional trial/test period as you are the one ultimately that gets the credit for all things good about websleuths/ all things bad about websleuths whether you actually had any involvement or not. People still look upon you as the ultimate owner and leader. :twocents: So I'll support your decision either way.

 

[believe09]

I don't know about Tricia, after reading Pondering Mind's post, I like to have never gotten my "Big Head" through the back door to run errands and get back to thank her and Karen. The lady at Burger King wanted to know why I had such a big "Sunny Smile" on my face. Two people stopped me in Bi-Lo Grocers and smiled too, guess smiles are contagious. Thank you, I worship you, hehehe

Tricia since you are trying to determine what you will do concerning this thread, I would like to offer something I do when I feel in a place that I'm thinking you may be feeling like.

I set boundaries and limits. :dance: Reminds me of dealing with my own children. When they want something, and I'm not in agreements, I set some rules to follow with making clear my view point on the subject.

Perhaps, making a post at the beginning of this thread that Websleuths doesn't endorse "Reverse speech Analysis", with any disclaimers you feel appropriate to apply. Laying out any rules you want followed, such as making sure posters define whether their giving opinion versus facts. Links that are allowed specifically to this thread, like the one rule already mentioned about the "Selling of stuff" links. Clearly stating your opinion and view of how you feel about the subject.

And as you have already said, if someone can produce such LE involvement with this tool, then you will look further into any possibilities about these boundaries and limits. Often I even leave myself with an "out" option that if I begin to see it harming or disrupting the very concerns I had to start with, I reserve my right without "pouty, whining faces" to change my mind and put a stop to the conditional trial/test period as you are the one ultimately that gets the credit for all things good about websleuths/ all things bad about websleuths whether you actually had any involvement or not. People still look upon you as the ultimate owner and leader. :twocents: So I'll support your decision either way.

I want to add to this that Tricia has the additional pressure of having to consider what other windows it would open in terms of beliefs/opinions-would we need to have a "Using Voodoo to determine Guilt" thread? Or a "Throw a Dart At A Board and pick the suspect?" Thread??

 

[Tricia]

I want to add to this that Tricia has the additional pressure of having to consider what other windows it would open in terms of beliefs/opinions-would we need to have a "Using Voodoo to determine Guilt" thread? Or a "Throw a Dart At A Board and pick the suspect?" Thread??

Thank you Believe09. You hit the nail on the head with this post.

Waiting to hear from Shawn.

 

[debs]

Man, I was just gonna see what I could do with voodoo, too........ooo ooo.

(we now take you back to your regularly scheduled serious conversation)

 

[kiki the parrot]

:laugh:

Man, I was just gonna see what I could do with voodoo, too........ooo ooo.

:laugh:

arrot:

 

[TxLady2]

I don't understand this backwards speech thing, how it works, or what it does. But I do not believe for one minute that LE ever uses this method to determine truth or lies, and I am 99% sure that it would NOT hold up in court. If polygraphs are not admissable unless both sides agree... which is rare... then I would think that these reverse speech techniques are not admissable either. Most judges would consider it junk science, IMO.

 

[TxLady2]

If I am understanding this RS, then it is all about the interpretation of someone's speech by playing it backwards, am I correct? So wouldn't LE agencies have to have an "expert" on hand to be able to interpret it? Are there that many experts in this method?

I have a son who has worked in LE for 18 years. To my knowledge, the only way they solve cases is by good, old-fashioned detective work. I can ask him if he's ever heard of RS, and if it has ever been used by his department, but I can almost guarantee what he will tell me.

Tricia, thank you so much for being more than generous and fair. I believe you must have the patience of Job. It is interesting.... but then flying saucers and the paranormal are interesting too... I just don't believe everything I read or hear.