The driver of a Toyota Prius says he was taken on a wild ride Monday after the car's accelerator became stuck, reaching speeds in excess of 90 mph on a winding, hilly portion of a southern California...
Another thing that stands out, we do not know why he was actually traveling on that interstate, on that day.
From a statement analysis perspective, we have a rule when a victim recounts the event- 25-33% should recount before the actual event, 33%-50% should be the actual event, and finally 25-33% should be post the event.
From everything I have seen his entire focus has been the actual event, and this is unnatural and should be examined further.
One of the hardest things to do is notice the absence of information, but it is an important part of the craft.◦
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
More on James Sikes
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
7 comments:
I find it kind of odd that he referred to the ordeal as a "game" when he referrs to getting close to the truck "early in the game"
John:
What training do you have in body language analysis? Are you FACS-certified? Truth Wizard-certified?
Chris, I noticed the same thing about his statement. In the previous post about Sikes, I wrote(I posted under anonymous) in the comments section about it being interesting that Sikes referred to the situation as a "game." Maybe Sikes just speaks that way; I don't know. But it did pique my interest as well.
We may not ever know for sure whether this guy is telling the truth, but my intuition says something is off about his accounting of what happened.
A nonanswer, John, followed by posts and comments on other topics?
What was that Statement Analysis says about changing subjects?
Look at 1:31. He does a subtle expression of contempt while stating "early in the game".
He also produces a shoulder shrug when saying "my pedal wouldn't do anything".
Post a Comment