4 ms·

these statements are suspicious: “Imagine me carrying a dog and a body, I mean come on,” Ms. Hodgetts said. An inocent person typically just says “i didnt do

by vfc1 8y ago

these statements are suspicious: “Imagine me carrying a dog and a body, I mean come on,” Ms. Hodgetts said. An inocent person typically just says “i didnt do it”, but this attempt at providing justification is suspicious. She could have an accomplice that helped her carry the body and know a lot about it. “I’ve had me septic done, me incinerators searched, me house done four times” Incineration would be a way to make the bodies dissapear in the middle of the countryside, but its the woods they could be buried anywhere. Again she is providing way too much detail and justifications, its like she knows something. “Nobody found anything” - suggesting that there was something to be found.

Pica_soO 8y ago
You have very wrong assumptions about a innocent person. Some people are just naturally awkward. Some even try to play detective and pretend to compare themselves to the killer.
vortico 8y ago
Those statements are picked for journalism effect. Alone they sound suspicious. If surrounded by 20 minutes of conversation on the subject, they wouldn't seem out of place at all.
- vfc1 8y ago
  Innocent people typically dont talk like this. It does not mean that she did it, but it could indicate deception, like she knows more of what she is letting on. I couldn’t find other similar suspicious declarations from others, that is why i thought it was worth pointing out. The fact that the journalist chose to include these statements might indicate that the journalist thinks the same, that there is something wrong with this lady story.
  - dsfyu404ed 8y ago
    >Innocent people typically dont talk like this. Over the course of a conversation innocent people say all sorts of things that can be used to implicate them when taken out of context. That's one of the reasons anyone with more brain cells than you can count on one hand doesn't talk to cops in an even remotely adversarial context.
    - vortico 8y ago
      "But officer, I wasn't speeding! If I was, I'd be going 90mph and my engine would explode!" "So you were going 89mph and knowingly operating a vehicle with a dangerous engine?"
    - vfc1 8y ago
      And over the course of a conversation, guilty people say all sorts of things to persuade others that they are telling the truth. That is how criminal investigators catch many guilty people, that and body language combined with context. And saying things like: they even searched my house 4 times, I couldn't have carried the body, they even searched my incinerator, they couldn't find anything, shows an excessive and unnecessary intention to persuade, typical of guilty people. It could just be her baseline, as an overly justificative person raised in a certain way. Each sentence in isolation by itself is not indicative of guilt, but these are red flags that indicate a direction where to dig deeper, as there could be some deception going on here. of course the full interview text would be needed, we cant conclude anything based on a couple of loose sentences here and there.

by vfc1 8y ago

Pica_soO 8y ago

You have very wrong assumptions about a innocent person. Some people are just naturally awkward. Some even try to play detective and pretend to compare themselves to the killer.

vortico 8y ago

Those statements are picked for journalism effect. Alone they sound suspicious. If surrounded by 20 minutes of conversation on the subject, they wouldn't seem out of place at all.

vfc1 8y ago
Innocent people typically dont talk like this. It does not mean that she did it, but it could indicate deception, like she knows more of what she is letting on. I couldn’t find other similar suspicious declarations from others, that is why i thought it was worth pointing out. The fact that the journalist chose to include these statements might indicate that the journalist thinks the same, that there is something wrong with this lady story.
- dsfyu404ed 8y ago
  >Innocent people typically dont talk like this. Over the course of a conversation innocent people say all sorts of things that can be used to implicate them when taken out of context. That's one of the reasons anyone with more brain cells than you can count on one hand doesn't talk to cops in an even remotely adversarial context.
  - vortico 8y ago
    "But officer, I wasn't speeding! If I was, I'd be going 90mph and my engine would explode!" "So you were going 89mph and knowingly operating a vehicle with a dangerous engine?"
  - vfc1 8y ago
    And over the course of a conversation, guilty people say all sorts of things to persuade others that they are telling the truth. That is how criminal investigators catch many guilty people, that and body language combined with context. And saying things like: they even searched my house 4 times, I couldn't have carried the body, they even searched my incinerator, they couldn't find anything, shows an excessive and unnecessary intention to persuade, typical of guilty people. It could just be her baseline, as an overly justificative person raised in a certain way. Each sentence in isolation by itself is not indicative of guilt, but these are red flags that indicate a direction where to dig deeper, as there could be some deception going on here. of course the full interview text would be needed, we cant conclude anything based on a couple of loose sentences here and there.