A huge swath of what is called “police science” is not science at all–it is “junk science,” according to actual scientists.
As we see in one after another news story about Gabby Petito, the press is eager to latch onto the opinions of “expert witnesses” from “online sleuth” mobs for quotes–that is how desperate they are to generate capital from using the name of a deceased young woman for clickbait. That in of itself is a huge industry–current and former cops and intel agents as media pundits combined with vapid news stories that regurgitate “opinions” sans facts.
What makes these “dead girl” stories interesting though, is that they highlight the specific junk science behind these online gangs of police–and one need only look at what junk science is to get an idea how flawed these narratives are–just a bunch of media pundits from intelligence services, trying to influence an eventual jury against the pre-judged boyfriend.
So, let’s take a look at these flawed “police sciences” and weed out fact from fiction in the narrative. For starters, let’s define junk science. I will use a common and simplified definition from Dictionary.com:
In these lurid stories, the focus point is always a narrative packed with gender-bias, and in this case, the pure fictitious pseudoscience of “body language analyses,” which is about equal parts “science based in fact that can be replicated,” and “personal opinion mixed with inflammatory amounts of personal prejudice and subtle linguistic manipulation of targeted listeners.”
From my own 15 years of experience in the security industry, and other places, I can assert that we can to a limited extend “read body language,” about as much as we can speak cat or dog language. We know when another mammal is hungry, thirsty, feisty, aggressive, passive, and so on–and that’s about it.
I can tell you that women who are in trouble can turn on tears at will. I can tell you that men who might become violent can be as passive as a sleeping cat one minute and explosive as a bomb the next–and the same goes for women who do violence too, though seldom did I witness men using tears like women do.
But body language analyses is pure speculation after that–did she touch her neck as a safety cue because her innermost thoughts turned to her “abuse” at the hands of her “abuser”–after she slapped him?
Does the guy at airport terminal lucky seven walk with one shoulder lower than another, with a distinct bend of the elbow, like a gunslinger, having trained on firearms for many decades? Or is it a “bricklayer’s bends” due to hauling a mortar board around for forty years favoring one arm, and tipping your shoulder and elbow outward?
Maybe it’s “long haul truckers whiplash” or something else less sinister (though you yourself can have fun walking around like a gunslinger, and watching security personnel look at you funny, I don’t advise doing it.)
Or…is it “wu shi jian,” something western observers are less likely to even know about, much less factor into their (culture biased) analyses of that one funny shoulder.
In the last scenario, there is no substantive difference between a stooped shoulder on one side of the body, and a crooked elbow caused by arthritis, joint inflammation, or other malady–and that’s why body language reading is nearly 100% speculation, and while that feeds our biases, and our ego’s when we are correct, none of it has the backing of science.
So as sad as this story is, it merely highlights how hidden cult religion does it’s work in the western press–and gives us clues about the narrators themselves, while leaving us hanging for facts of any kind.
Here is just one of many stories headlined
SIGNS OF FEAR Alarming red flags in Gabby Petito bodycam that ‘could have saved her’ as expert says she was terrified not anxious , by junk pusher journalist Chris Bradford
He goes on and “Gabby Petito was “terrified” not anxious when cops quizzed her in Utah, an expert says.””
- Well, that’s splitting a fine hair isn’t it? Terror of course being the new highly inflammatory buzzword for everything that challenges DVIC narrative and its narrators gendered white knightery–that handed down directly from the Queen of England herself, as we see in the narration of former Scotland Yard detectives who believe that “stalking” alleged stalkers is fair game–for vigilante’s.
- To say “terrified” implies that she was faced with a jihadist in a bomb vest. To say “anxious” leaves the door open for rational, and even scientific explanations. The author chose an expert who leaned on “terror” and all of its connotations. And that is what junk science IS, and what it does: it prejudices the listener with “plastic words” and worse. Any judge would strike that testimony, but the damage done to a jury is complete upon utterance.
- Anyone who is about to go to jail for assault and battery of a mate, a boyfriend, or a spouse is likely to be in “fear,” and to run a story about that no-brainer indicates “bad journalism” designed to push a certain narrative. Gabby was indeed likely afraid of consequences for her actions, and she herself said that “she was sorry she was so mean” to Brian Laundrie
- this is another “no shit Sherlock” moment, as discussed above, but with the added benefit of “online sleuths” highlighting how BAD body language analyses is. Here’s the quote a “scary sign” that Brian Laundrie “wanted to shut his fiancée Gabby Petito up.”
Gabby alleged that Laundrie had told her to shut up as she appeared to admit that she hit him first. Body language expert Patti Wood said: “The first super scary indicator is where she puts her hand up to show what her fiancé allegedly did to her.
Ooooooh! SUPER scary! SUPER FEAR!!!
God forbid that a woman should experience SOOPER fear! Poor babies! Little helpless babies!!!Babies!!! Who can breed when “sooper fear” is alll around us! SAVE THE WHITE FEMALE NOW!
SUPER fear, like ALL men walk through EVERY DAY in the west. targeted by internationalist bankster mafias full of Saudi’s jihadi’s, and Indian “web sleuths” and Israeli junk science peddlers like Avinoam Sapir and his spawn!!!
And other right wing miscreants–the truth is the right wing is very huge, and very scary, and these days, very few of your troubles/gang stalking comes from the Ku Klux Klan! Most of it is internationalist mafias, targeting you–not the KKK at all!
!Many is the man who has faced violence, and even death because of the wagging of a woman’s tongue, so much so that the religionists all have a parable or two in their religious textbooks about that alone.
But because there is just too much gender biased total bullshit packed into that one claim alone–with the “experts” focus on “what he did to her”–and her at that point on her way to jail for assault, as you might recall–I will skip any analyses of it, and move on to a more telling sign that the “expert” is a walking pantsload–this, which I will number, and then discuss below the “experts” total fluffery that simply passes for more DVIC speculation and bad science:
[The EXPERT] said: “She’s in distress, crying or on the edge of tears. Gabby is ‘talk crying’. This shows she is feeling vulnerable and scared and wants to protect herself.
- as discussed elsewhere, talk-crying is what is called in other circles as “white women’s tears,” and this exact “crybullying” has gotten many black, brown and other men LYNCHED throughout history–not to mention how many white men have been battered because of this evolutionary adaptation–and beyond that has no science behind the claims of the expert.
“There’s a lack of breath and calmness in her voice. It’s a signal of stress and fear. She is the one that looks scared.”
- another no-shit-web-sleuthie moment. Seriously, did you just say that?
Wood said Gabby gives a “cleansing wipe” as she rubs her hands on her thighs while explaining that “she’s not trying to be mean”.
- a cleansing wipe? I sense a few too many pow-wows and chant circles on our narrators aura. Am I the only one? Listen, Lady–a cleansing wipe? WTF is that exactly? Can you show me the Youtube channel where I can study the “cleansing wipe”–maybe point me to a study or something? Riiiight. I didn’t think so. Meantime,when I am not manstruating, we call those things “wet-wipes” and we use them after man-stress, just after dumping a BIGGER load than you are plopping out right now.
Gabby told police: “I was apologizing to him and saying, ‘I’m sorry that I’m so mean’.”
and :Wood said Gabby is trying to wipe away what has been perceived as “meanness”.
- riiiight. Scrubbing away our sins, as it were. Exactly the way I scrubbed my prints off a pistol one time, and tossed that little .22 into the….oh wait. Never mind. THAT NEVER HAPPENED!!!!(true story).
‘I WAS APOLOGIZING’
The expert warned that the vlogger may have been distressed because she was being questioned at the roadside where others could potentially see.
- Well, thanks for that commentary, “expert.” Maybe, you are commenting anonymously in a news article because you are totally full of shit, but the journo who asked you for your opinion knew that you would come through with some biased, inflammatory junk science–from an “expert.” Thanks, but mo thanks, Signed, Alan Smithee
Lets take a look at the junk science of “handwriting analyses” and fair disclosure: I have a relative who used to do handwriting analyses for the Chicago Mob, deeply embedded in the police department of John Burge, during the entire span of the Chicago Police Torture scandals. Also see “John Burge and the Legacy of Police Torture” for more on that, with a “torture timeline”.
See it with your own eyes! Waste your own eyes time! Listen folks: handwriting analyses boils down to only two things: the suspect wrote it or the suspect didn’t write it, and anything in between that? No science anywhere backs it up–its 100% opinion.
After that it boils down to DNA and fingerprints, which is “pretty close to” science–with LOTS OF EXCEPTIONS even then!
I vaguely foreshadowed* this handwriting analysis problem here, just because media narratives are that predictable. But also because I recall how damaging these junk sciences can be, and what false convictions/ squandered estates/5150 psychiatric lockups/etc. can arise from them.
From there, we move on to the (mostly) junk science of forensic photography. I like to recall how the FBI had butch-banged women following me around after I wrote a story about one of America’s first “manufactured terrorists” in a little old college newspaper (which, despite its collegiate post, was in fact the largest college newspaper in the entire United States at that time.)
This claim that I make above can be verified by a “body language analyst,” who I named here who was with me when this happened–he eventually became an FBI informant–and he went on to study women’s gaits and postures and even earned a masters degree in that exact junk science, lol.
Last, but certainly not least, we come to the many, many problems of “forensic photography.” As I have noted elsewhere, police and other agents of the police state are indeed compiling databases of “freethinkers” who refuse to be cowed by the anti-constitutional, civil rights and due-process free processes of the wets and its true and actual “police state.”
That said, I wrote about how irresponsible, gender biased coverage of Gabby Petito’s case has web-sleuths (these are WHO gang stalkers ARE) speculating that her eyes were “puffy” because of crying, rather than because she migh be a pot smoker–I have as much evidence that pot causes red, puffy eyes as these web-sleuths have evidence that crying ALSO caused red puffy eyes.
I might also note that the word “puffy” has an entore genre of pornography surrounding its usage–feel free to do your own research on that, m-kay? But these slob-sleuths speculating online, and the journalists who enable them are a truly sick lot indeed.
The entirety of this, in sum, is that JUNK SCIENCE x BIASED, LURID, TRULY UNHELPFUL NARRATIVE= TAINTED JURIES at each and every point–which is what deep state cult religion IS, and what they DO–andwhy alternative media is ultimately the true “saviour” of free speech.
Prove your case with science folks, or STFU.
*foreshadowing events is one of my favorite literary tells.