Casey Anthony’s Revealing Voice In AP interview Shows Shows Signals of Deception, Arrogance, Annoyance, and Hostility

 

Screen Shot 2017-03-07 at 9.19.55 AM.pngWhen asked how Caylee died she quitely and quickly  and in a breathy voice as she dies off at the end and says “I don’t know.”  To me that is a blatant signal of deception.

Screen Shot 2017-03-07 at 9.43.36 AM.png

Then the reporter asks Something about drowning possibly. Casey  immediately turns arrogant in her tone and gets louder in volume and  says everyone has their theories and punctuates it with a monotonous I don’t know devoid of any emotion.

Screen Shot 2017-03-07 at 9.46.40 AM.png She is asked so your parents had her. Her voice us up as if asking a question as she said “My did did?” To me that is a signal of deception.

Screen Shot 2017-03-07 at 9.49.04 AM.pngWhen asked how did it play. She say I did what I was told. I don’t remember too much of what  ( and then she hesitates and stops for a second and says happened. which is another signal of  deception in my view.

Screen Shot 2017-03-07 at 9.59.47 AM.png

When asked when things went wrong, he answer makes no sense. The reporter says ” IS that how it went” She says No  and there is a ( pause )  and then she slowly articulates “What I remember is my mom  coming in  before she went to work and saying goodby to us”.” AS she says this is sounds like she is putting a lot of effort into thinking about what she is going to say about this as she speaking time is slow. She then pauses. which is unnatural and says ” And then waking up several hours later.”

Screen Shot 2017-03-07 at 10.03.27 AM.png

And now we really see deception.  First she repeats exactly what the reporter says in parrot-like fashion. This is often a signal of deception n my view.”Several hours later” which she said is NOT “an hour or two hours” later as she now tells the reporter. So in essence she just lied as she now changed her story.  The reporter asks “Don’t you wish you know what happened.” Casey sounds very defensive in her tone as she says “Absolutely”.

Screen Shot 2017-03-07 at 10.07.11 AM.png

What happens next, is totally nauseating as Casey says Caylee would be 12 this year.When the reporter asks what would she be like, Casey projects her own rebellious attitude  at tat age and hostility on to Caylee as she says ” total- bad ass asn laughs and even goes so far as to describe the type of music the dead child would be listening to is she were alive.- classic rock and says how she would be playing sports and “not takin’ shit from anyone.” This is Casey’s projection and idealization of herself, which she clearly projected onto her dead daughter.

She now lives and works with the private investigator on her defense team Patrick McKenna. She then defensively says how she doesn’t care about what people think of her but the revealing part is when she says I sleep ” and then she pauses  for a second as she continues with pretty good at night.” to me that is a signal of deception as one wonders if she really does sleep pretty good at night when deep deep down in her subconscious she knows what happened to her dead daughter.

Screen Shot 2017-03-07 at 10.17.37 AM.png

What makes me further think this is deception is when she showed off Caylee’s a finger painting artwork to the interviewer and openly sobbed. Unike during her interview. she obviously she feels emotion about Caylee, and maybe that emotion is guilt and remorse for what she allegedly did to Caylee.

 

 

 

 

Body Language Signals of Anxiety, Insecurity, Deception & Spin During Loretta Lynch Aspen Interview?

Screen Shot 2016-07-02 at 11.34.39 AM.png

When someone stalls and spends a lot of time discussing the actual question they are asked, instead of answering it directly and immediately it raises a huge red flag.  It  may show that they are very anxious or  it may possibly indicate a signal of deception.

When reporter Jonathan Capehart of the Washington Post  at the Aspen asked  Lynch “What were you thinking?” she attempts to diffuse the question by saying “That’s the question of the day, isn’t it? The  tag ending “isn’t it” shows insecurity and the hope for agreement and a subtle message to the reporter to not be hard on her during the interview.

Instead of answering the question posed to her, she speaks about the question, instead of answering it directly  as she says ” And I think it is  a reasonable question. Its’ the question that is called up why what happened in Phoenix. ” In essence she is stalling . In doing so she is taking the time to gather and manufacture  her thoughts. Also she looks up as she tries to manufacture what she will say next.

She continues discussing the question instead of answering it directly which now adds even more suspicion to  the public in terms of her credibility with regard to meeting former President Clinton on the tarmac and what they  actually discussed. She says “people have wondered and asked questions about my role in the resolution in matters involving state department emails.”

Screen Shot 2016-07-02 at 11.14.03 AM

Her engaging in formal rhetoric and still not answering the question, further adds to the public’s suspicion  as does her looking down and away. In essence she is attempting to distance herself body language wise ,  as it clearly indicates that this is not a topic she wishes to discuss.

Then she does double talk as she says ” to the extent that people have questions about that- my role in that .. certainly my meeting with him raises questions and concerns.”  Once again. she does not answer the question directly which is  yet another red flag  in public perception in terms of questioning her credibility here. As she says this she looks nervous. As you can see she is perspiring and shiney faced, especially in the areas on her nose and cheeks.This is often a signal of anxiety as reflected by the autonomic nervous system taking over.

Then she says in a staccatto” believe me I completely get that question” and  still , she is not getting to the answer of the simple question that was posed to her. She spins it  She looks away towards the audience and says UM AND and I think it is the question of the day. ( YET SHE STILL DOES NOT ANSWER THE QUESTION).

“The issue  is what is my role in how that matter is to be resolved. So let me be clear….WHEN SOMEONE SAYS “LET ME BE CLEAR” Oftentimes,  they are about to lie.  For instance, look at what Nixon said “Let me be perfectly  clear– I am not a crook)…So this may be   yet another a red flag for Ms. Loretta Lynch.

Then she goes on to say ” Now let me say how let me say how that is going to be resolved. NOW   I’ve also gotten  that question a lot. SHE STILL DOES NOT answer the question and engages in double talk.

Then she turns to the audience, not the interviewer  which is another red flag red flag s as she is attempting to try to get the audience to  be on her side and to garner favor with them. Once again she is stalling and  not answering the  simple direct question.

Then in a staccato manner,   she  says I get that question . She is not confident with her head up and looking directly at the interviewer. Instead,  as she says this   she looks away and her head is bowed down.

She continues with”  Certainly my meeting with him raises questions and concernes and believe me— ( when someone says” believe me”  it is usually  red flag and indicates that you  should listen carefully and perhaps  not believe them.

The interviewer asked if she was recusing herself from having any role in the final determination regarding Clinton’s emails.

Screen Shot 2016-07-02 at 11.29.53 AM

As you can she she is literally taken back by the question as she leans away . Below  she  shows the front of her hand as she puts it up towards her chest indicating that she is feeling vulnerable and defensive.

Screen Shot 2016-07-02 at 11.14.03 AM

She lets it be known that she doesn’t have a role in coming up with the findings.

When she says  I will be “except and corrects herself as she says accepting their recommendations, she stumbles over her words as she makes a  Freudian Slip. It makes one wonder if indeed she will be except or accept their recommendations. As she speaks, you do not see the palms of her hands which would often indicate truthfulness,  but rather the back of her hands which often indicates deception as you can see in the photo above.

Screen Shot 2016-07-02 at 11.23.45 AM

Now you see her looking extremely vulnerable as both of her hands in a triangular position covering her private parts and they are on her lap. She is also hunched over.

Screen Shot 2016-07-02 at 11.19.10 AM

When the journalist presses her about  the term “accepting ” and what she  actually means by that, you see the tension in her lower jaw which is not a good sign. Her eyes also open wide as though she has been “busted”.

Then she gets really formal in her verbiage as a means of protection and further indicating her vulnerability. She appears stiff and leans back as she attempts to distance herself.

Then she says there will be a review of their investigation, a review of what they found and a review of their determinations of how the case should proceed.

In essence it appears as though she is passing the buck. After all, she is the Attorney General who needs to make that decision, not the staff  who did the investigation and are making the recommendations. In essence, this means she is distancing herself and attempting to cover herself.

The excellent  journalist  then asks if the review will be done by her. You see her neck muscles tighten up as she continues to use the back of her hand  as opposed to her palms to spin the answer .

Screen Shot 2016-07-02 at 11.34.39 AM

The journalist’s body language reveals that he is on to her spin and double talk as he points a finger at her, something that is never done unless the person is feeling hostile toward the other . The  journalist’s finger point indicates his anger and frustration with Lynch’s answers.

She then says how the “initial” process will be resolved where she discusses the team involvement. She does NOT discuss the” final “process which is very telling.  She has now said how “career people” in the Dept of Justice will review it and how the FBI will review it and the FBI Director will review it and that will be the” finalization”.  But this does not make sense as she is the Attorney General who must make the final decision. If the FBI Director  is in the “finalization “why have her deal with the matter in the first place and why not just have the FBI Director make his “finalization” and decision and leave it at that?

Jonathan  then asks Lynch why she is relying on “career “people in the review process. She doesn’t answer the question, but  instead she spins it, and says  how the public wants to know what her role would likely be.. um was um a question or concern. The ums and phumpherting is not  a good sign. She says that because she is a political appointee there would be concern about how the case would go forward. Well what about career people in the government? Does the question arise that they may investigate a certain way because they may want to be politically correct and  have a vested interest in maintaining their careers?  Then she says that she has always maintained that this matter would UM be UM handled by the career people who are independent.  BUT ARE THEY REALLY INDEPENDENT IS THE REAL QUESTION?

She then says she will be informed of those findings as opposed to never seeing or reading them,  but she will be accepting their recommendation. This statement is startling  to the public as she revealed that there are cases that she never sees or reads.

Then Jonathan Capehart asks her what she was thinking when the former President Clinton was on the plane. She said they spoke about his grandchildren and then she gave tangential information about how the grandchildren were great . ( That is too much information. Then she said they spoke about Janet Reno, Then she says “It really was a social meeting. It really was”

When people  the word REALLY, and they use it many times in a sentence it may be a signal that they are often  trying too hard to convince you and that it may very well be a signal of deception.

In keeping with his excellence in journalism, Jonathan Capehart poses a question about how President Clinton first  selected her for office and how they are good friends and why she didn’t ask him to leave the plane. She doesn’t answer the question. Instead, she  says she certainly wouldn’t do it again. Of course she wouldn’t because of all the backlash. But  her refusal to answer that specific question speaks volumes.

When Capehart  asks her what she would say to the American people who had concerns that the system was rigged. Instead of answering  it directly, she double talks and says how she can understand how the public would feel that way because of her meeting with President Clinton on the plane. Then she answers by saying that the public has to look at what they do every day.  She needed to have said immediately instead of stretching it and hemming and hawing in order to sound more credible.

Screen Shot 2016-07-02 at 12.54.15 PM

Then when Jonathan Capehart  asked when we might expect the acceptance of these findings, she laughs. This is no laughing matter.  In fact to many her laughter was disconcerting as though the investigation might not be competed until after the election. She says in terms of timing I actually don’t know that.  She goes on to  deflect  her involvement as she says she doesn’t have  insight as to the nuts and bolts of the investigation. The question is WHY NOT? As Attorney General in a very high profile case, it would seem that she needed to be abreast of what was taking place every step of the way. She says how the Dept of Justice is working hard and she is proud of that work, YET SHE DOESN”T KNOW WHAT THAT WORK IS with regard to this case. This is known as double talk.It does not make sense that she as the Attorney General would not be informed at each stage.

Keep in mind this is NOT a political blog nor am I a political person.  I have NO agenda and no dog in this fight so to speak.. I would say the same thing if Trump was under investigation or any other political candidate was in the same situation as Hillary Clinton. As  body language expert my aim is to be neutral and to only report what I see and hear. What I have heard  with Loretta Lynch, the Attorney General of the US  during this interviwe in Aspen has been high anxiety, possible signals of deception, and a lot of  spin and double talk in Lynch’s  rhetoric.

 

 

.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Prince Willliam Doesn’t Need Justin Beiber’s Toxic Advice on Propecia Where Side Effects Include Impotence and Man Breasts


 

Justin Bieber clearly needs a reality check. The  cheeky teenager had the audacity to insult the Royals by his Toxic statement that  Prince William’s thinning hairline is downright embarrassing. 

Beiber  obviously doesn’t believe that  “bald is beautiful .“ But when he hits his late 20’ or early 30’s we may hear him singing a different tune (no pun intended).

Bieber told UK’s  Rollercoaster magazine. “I mean, there are things to prevent that nowadays, like Propecia,” Bieber said.

He added, “I don’t know why he doesn’t just get those things, those products. You just take Propecia and your hair grows back. Have you not got it over here?”

 Justin expressed is naivety and ignorance on several levels. On one level, there are those who  gladly accept themselves and their thinning hairline and don’t care  about it. They believe there is a lot more to them than the way they look and how many hairs they have on their head.

 Besides many women like myself  think men who are bald are sexy , just as men who have thinning hair, or a lot of hair, or greying hair ,or any colored hair are sexy. For these women a man’s hair is irrelevant when it comes to his looks and attraction.

Next,  the Prince as  with many men, would  no doubt much prefer having a few less stands of hair than suffer the side effects ofPropecia (like erectile dysfunctionimpotence, low libido and gynecomestica (man breasts).

 These men who don’t share Beiber’s Propecia  sharing advice know that the devastating truth for many men who take the drug is that the side effects did not disappear after they stopped taking Proecia and that years later still suffering in silence with a seriously reduced quality of life due to erectile dysfunction and impotence.

The purpose of this site is to spread the word  to others considering using Propecia and also to provide as an informational exchange and gathering place for those who are already suffering.

So  here is a message to uneducated Justin. Justin before you make ignorant statements like recommending that the Prince or anyone else begin using Propecia when they see a few less hairs on their head, know what you are talking about.

 Believe it or not, because of the enormous stage Beiber has and the number of males he can reach through his music, he has a lot of people’s ears-both males and females. The last thing  any male teenager or young adult (or  man at any age) would want to do would be to heed Beiber’s advice without knowing the risks that the drug could potentially change their life forever- and not in a good way.