Operator
911 Where is your emergency?
Angelika G
Hi, I’m uh, I’m in the Hudson river by Cornwall yacht club. My fiancé fell in the water. Can you please callanybody.
1. “Hi” is a polite greeting. In an emergency situation a greeting is not expected. Excited utterance of the emergency is.
2. The subject uses the pronoun “I’m”, and stutters over it indicating a possible increase in anxiety. This stuttering could also be a result of the unexpected initial question “where is your emergency?”
3. The subject only speaks for herself. “Hudson river” on its own would answer the question. The subject tells us where she is. Not “we”.
4. “My fiancé” This is an incomplete social introduction indicating a less than perfect relationship between the subject and “my fiancé” at this time. We expect to hear his name.
5. Does a kayaker “fall” in the water. Did he capsize? She does not say. He “fell”. Is this congruent with a kayaking accident?
6. “please” is polite again.
7. What is it that the subject wants? She wants the operator to “call anybody”. This is not a request for help. She has not asked for help to be sent. She only wants the operator to “call”. This lacks urgency and action that would help “my fiancé”.
8. “anybody”. If the subject does not know who specifically should be sent then “send help” is expected. Not the vague “anybody” who is only to be called.
This is the priority sentence in an emergency call where the subject’s fiancé is in grave danger. Within it there are numerous points of concern.
Operator
Alright. What’s your name?
AG
Angelika.
Operator
Tell me exactly what happened.
This is a good question.
AG
We are kayaking, my fiancé flipped over. He’s in the water right now
1. Are they still kayaking? Is the present tense congruent with the emergency situation?
The “fiancé” still does not have a name. We expect to hear his name if the relationship is good at this point. It should be as he should be elevated in status in her verbal perception due to his being in peril.
2. What is “in the water”? This is a passive description of the “fiance’s” situation. She is withholding vital information. Is he under the water? Is he face down floating in the water? Is he moving? Is he holding onto his kayak? She tells us none of this information that is vital in assisting the operator.
3. In an emergency call we look at whether the subject is helping in every way they can or whether the operator is having to force he information from the subject. The subject here does not appear to be forthcoming with the information as is expected.
Operator
Alright stay on the phone with me OK.
AG
I can’t get to him. It’s very windy and the waves are coming in and I can’t, I can’t paddle to him.
1. “can’t” is repeated 3 times. Anything in the negative is doubly important as is anything repeated.
2. The subject gives us the reason why she can’t. This is sensitive to her.
3. She does not say the wind is too strong to paddle to him.
4. She does not say the waves are too big to paddle to him.
5. If she got off the phone would she be able to paddle to him?
He’s getting, he’s getting further and further away from me. I, I… He’s gonna drown! Please call somebody.
1. The subject tells us that he (still no name) is going to drown. We should believe her.
2. The subject stutters on the pronoun “I”. This is an indication of an increase in anxiety.
3. Again, she does not request help for the “fiancé”. She requests “call somebody”
Operator
We’ve got help on the way. Stay on the phone with me Okay?
AG
Okay. I have you on the speaker cause I’m, I’m trying to paddle. The waves are very strong. I can still see him floating, but I’m getting further and further.
1. Again, the sensitive reason why. This is now a cluster of blues likely indicating critical missing information from the subject.
2. Does the subject have a need to persuade us that she is trying to help her fiancé?
3. The passivity in describing her fiance’s situation continues. He is “floating”
4. The word “but” either minimizes or refutes what came before. What came before was him floating.
Operator
Okay, good. So, he’s still, he’s still above water, right?
AG
He is in the water, yes. HOLD ON BABY! Oh my God.
The subject avoids answering the question making it sensitive to her. Remember a direct lie is stressful to the brain and will be avoided.
The shouting to the “fiancé” “Hold on Baby!” This is likely for the benefit of what we call in analysis the unintended recipient. In this case the operator or anyone who may listen to the 911 call recording.
Note the fiancé still remains nameless indicating a bad relationship between them.
Operator
We’ve got everybody coming out there, okay.
AG
Okay. I can’t see him anymore.
What is it that triggered the subject reporting that she “can’t see him anymore”? It is the imminent arrival of help.
Operator
You don’t see him?
AG
No. Oh my God.
The call drops out.
The operator calls back
AG
I don’t see him anymore. I’m afraid he’s drowned.
This is difinitive from the subject. Is she pushing this narrative? Before she was “Afraid he is going to drown”, and now moments later She is afraid “he’s drowned” all while she is on the phone not trying to save him because of what she is unable to do reported in the negative with the reason why (very sensitive).
Operator
Okay, what’s his name?
AG
Vince. Oh my God. I’m in a red kayak, but he fell in and I couldn’t swim to him. I couldn’t paddle to him.
Finally, the subject tells us the name of her fiancé. It is only however from a direct question from the operator. She did not give his name freely.
The subject reports that she is in a red kayak. Why is this important to her? She then refutes or minimizes this with the word “but” and reports what she couldn’t do again. This time she says she couldn’t swim to him? This is incongruent. She is not likely talking from experiential memory and is deceptive.
Operator
Did he have a life jacket on when he flipped over?
AG
He had a little, um, like a floating thing. He didn’t have a vest.
Oh my God
Operator
Can you see the kayak still?
AG
No, the kayak went under water. The water is very cold. I’m afraid he…oh my God.
“The kayak went under water” is reliable on its form.
Operator
Can you see the rescue boat? We have a boat in the water coming to you guys.
AG
I’m not worried about myself. I’m worried about him.
The subject again avoids the question and reports what she is not worried about.
Conclusions
1. The subject’s language indicates that her relationship with her fiancé is not good at the time of the incident.
2. The subject does not request help for her fiancé.
3. The subject does not report reliably the status of her fiancé during the call. If she is unwilling or unable to say it we cannot say it for her.
4. The subject does not report reliably that she is, or has attempted to help her fiancé.
5. The subject is deceptive in her account.
6. The subject shows indicators of critical missing information as well as a lack of experiential memory when giving her account.
Angelika Graswald admitted to letting her fiancé drown after pulling the drain plug from his kayak. She was convicted of criminally negligent homicide in the death of Vincent Viafore in 2017 and spent just two and a half years behind bars.
Posted 2nd February by Through the Lens
https://lensofstatementanalysis.blogspot.com/2020/02/angelika-graswald-911-call-statement.html?m=1
