Monday, November 29, 2010
Tiffany Hartley: No Investigation Part 1
Tiffany Hartley: No Investigation Part 1
by Susan Murphy Milano and Peter Hyatt
In the majority of intimate homicide cases connecting the dots of the alleged crime happens with facts often not reviewed by all parties in a case. The victim's actions prior to going missing or their remains being discovered can all but vanish. This is problematic and can limit answers from coming forth. Law enforcement, at times, may not have enough evidence to proceed so it goes into the cold case or unsolved category.
Not only this, but prosecutors, unless the case has new evidence, must move on to the next case to be considered for prosecution. Heavy case loads and under staffing are the norm. The surviving families can be clueless especially when the person likely involved is someone they would never suspect or believe to have harmed the person now missing or deceased. So they often remain quiet.
Sometimes, especially in the passage of time and ever increasing frustration, families contact experts like those in Crime Wire, to connect the dots and have the case presented with new information and facts in hopes if opening an investigation. Sometimes a fresh look can make all the difference in the world.
The families, exhausted with frustration, but pressing forward just the same, will ask outside experts and consultants to view a case file, which may include interview transcripts. Here, Statement Analysis can be of great value. Statement analysis, also called "statement validity assessment", "content analysis", "investigative discourse analysis", and "scientific content analysis" is a technique that can be used to detect concealed information, missing information, and whether the information that person has provided is true or false. Statement analysis involves an investigator searching for linguistic cues and gaps in a subject's testimony or preliminary statements and using follow-up questions to uncover discrepancies.
The family may seek the assistance of a profiler who can give a road map to what type of person could commit a certain type of crime.
In domestic homicides, a domestic violence expert and advocate, with too many years experience in helping families, is contacted, and is then able to advise the family of what steps can be now taken, especially when an initial investigation ended up as a cold case.
In the case of David Hartley, missing since September 30th, we are faced with a unique and perplexing situation.
It is not that law enforcement has done a poor job with the investigation, but rather:
Law enforcement hasn't even bothered to conduct an investigation.
Zapata County, Texas, Sheriff Ziggy Gonzalez received a report of a missing and presumed dead individual with the only witness being his wife.
He did not question a single aspect of her story.
Although her story sounded incredible, he did not follow any investigative protocol; no polygraph, for instance, for the only witness to this crime.
He also claimed to be unable to search for David Hartley's body, nor to investigate an alleged murder. Why? Because the only witness to the crime said, repeatedly, that it happened on "the Mexico side" in open water; as if such a demarcation could be known.
So, based upon the word of only one unpolygraphed witness, Sheriff Gonzalez refused to conduct an investigation.
Can it be imagined that a spouse could enter a police station and report a murdered spouse in such a way as to have law enforcement decline to investigate? What would have happened if Scott Peterson had been believed on the day of the initial report? Would police have then, as Sheriff Gonzalez did, simply say, "no need to investigate; I took a look at Scott and can tell he is truthful"??
It is an absurdity that it only heightened when media follow suit and fail to ask questions of Zapata County. Can someone call himself an "investigative journalist" and simply accept the word of the man who refused to investigate?
Somehow, an experienced sheriff heard a story of a head shot murder, with "spraying" of gunfire, by ruthless Mexican "pirates" (note that pirates and drug cartels may not be the same thing) who, not only shot at Tiffany without a single hit upon her or her jet ski, but also "decided" (Tiffany's word) to let her go; but then opened fire and missed; yet did not think an investigation was needed. Somehow, this is what happened, yet journalists have remained silent? Media, for the most part, has hailed Tiffany Hartley as a hero?
We believe friends and family members of missing person David Hartley are having their doubts about what really happened to their loved one.
The poll question will show what the public thinks. Thus far, in our experience, the public overwhelmingly believes that Tiffany Hartley is deceptive in her interviews and is responsible for the disappearance of David Hartley.
Having said this we are asking the media and both the Mexican Government and the FBI to at the very least investigate David Hartley’s case.
It is not possible for the events with the jet skis as described by Tiffany Hartley to have taken place.
1) She claims David was thrown from the ski while in motion. The jet skis require a key by any user either around the wrist or attached to the life vest to run. Once the key was released from its’ ignition, the jet ski came to stop and fell into the water;
2)The life vest David wore after “being shot” as Tiffany claims would have kept his body face up in the water (according to experts) therefore she did not turn over David to see any wound;
3)There is no balance board or rudder on the jet ski and Tiffany at 110 pounds or anyone for that matter could not have “turned over a body in water”;
4)Tiffany claims there were 3 boats (or 2 whatever story you believe) the wake in the water or motion from the propelled motor engines of the boats make it impossible to keep the jets skis in one place as a matter fact manufacturer instructions for jet skis owners say to stay out of the way from other boats when in the water because it will interfere with the jet skis performance and it is dangerous and can shut the jet skis down immediately.
If you reenacted the events in a lake any as told by Tiffany Hartley the findings would conclude that David Hartley did not die as we were lead to believe.
The media has opted to believe this woman without a shred of evidence or facts.
As an important example: below is a transcript from Nancy Grace on 10/5/2010
GRACE: Well, I`ve got to tell you something, Lt. Garza, I really believe her. And the fact that the body has not been discovered yet, and that the jet skis has not been discovered, that doesn`t concern me at all. Can`t you look at this lady and tell she`s telling the truth?
Nancy Grace of all people to actually say on the air “Can’t you look at this lady” speaks volumes as it relates to understanding and reporting on intimate partner crimes and homicide.
Then Nancy Grace asks defense attorney Richard Herman. This is interesting as Herman himself lost the love of his life, his wife to a horrific murder. He understands better than most and he can smell the nonsense a mile away. When he calls it likes he sees it on the Hartley case Nancy Grace shuts him down.
RICHARD HERMAN, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Nancy, her story sounds ridiculous to me. Why would they aim a gun at her and not shoot her and not take her jet ski? Pirates just don`t come up to people and shoot them for fun of shooting people. I don`t know what went on here. It`s tragic. This man apparently is dead. But the story sounds absolutely ridiculous.
GRACE: No, no. Because I have prosecuted cases where victims were murdered, were gunned down just for the hell of it.
With Nancy Grace's claims to be able to just "look" at someone and know the truth, we have 80 years of research via polygraph for nought. We don't need polygraph, statement analysis, forensics, interviews, interrogations, or even crime scene analysis: We only need Nancy Grace to "look" at someone and she can tell us if the person "did it" or not! This is ego run amuk.
Nancy Grace, Anderson Cooper, Jane Valdez-Mitchell, Geraldo, Gayle King and others in the media, have been played. We challenge anyone in the media to prove us wrong. Each of you reported a story, nothing more. Please stop calling the only eye witness and possible suspect “cute” or looking at her as though she is not capable of planning the perfect murder.
Tomorrow we continue with more facts, including why Statement Analysis has concluded that Tiffany Hartley is deceptive in her interviews. Our conclusion will give readers a course of action to take to help find justice for David Hartley.