by Dr. Lillian GlassAre U.S. federal and Texas law enforcement authorities paying close attention to Tiffany Hartley, who has gone on a media blitz sharing her story about alleged pirates who shot her husband while riding a jet ski on the Mexican side of Falcon Lake? Are they truly keeping their eyes and ears open, or are they turning a blind eye and deaf ear because the topic of border control is such a political hotbed?
As a body language and communications expert, I can never turn a blind eye when I see so many signals of deception which are consistent in Tiffany’s many interviews.
The lip licking, sudden and extraneous jaw excursions, pleading hand gestures with palms facing upwards, looking down, excessive eye blinking, tilting of the head, pulling her body away, and shoulder shrugs when asked about and discussing key issues are huge red flags to me.
Likewise, I can never turn a deaf ear when I hear so many “uh’s” and “um’s” peppered throughout speech, dying off at the end of sentences when crucial information is being revealed, a monotone voice devoid of emotion, too much detailed and tangential information, righteous indignation, and most crucial of all, too many inconsistencies in a story.
It does not matter how many sheriffs or governors of states bordering the U.S. and Mexico border, or even of her in-laws, believe her. It doesn’t matter how many suspects or persons of interest are rounded up, or how many eyewitnesses come forward and rally behind her. Tiffany Hartley is exhibiting multiple signals of deception, which make her story very questionable, in my view.
One of the first indicators of deception is whether a person is consistent in their story. Tiffany Hartley has not been consistent.
As a body language and communications expert, I can never turn a blind eye when I see so many signals of deception which are consistent in Tiffany’s many interviews.
The lip licking, sudden and extraneous jaw excursions, pleading hand gestures with palms facing upwards, looking down, excessive eye blinking, tilting of the head, pulling her body away, and shoulder shrugs when asked about and discussing key issues are huge red flags to me.
Likewise, I can never turn a deaf ear when I hear so many “uh’s” and “um’s” peppered throughout speech, dying off at the end of sentences when crucial information is being revealed, a monotone voice devoid of emotion, too much detailed and tangential information, righteous indignation, and most crucial of all, too many inconsistencies in a story.
It does not matter how many sheriffs or governors of states bordering the U.S. and Mexico border, or even of her in-laws, believe her. It doesn’t matter how many suspects or persons of interest are rounded up, or how many eyewitnesses come forward and rally behind her. Tiffany Hartley is exhibiting multiple signals of deception, which make her story very questionable, in my view.
One of the first indicators of deception is whether a person is consistent in their story. Tiffany Hartley has not been consistent.
From first describing the shooters to what actually happened with her husband, her story has changed drastically. It changed from the first time she opened her mouth on air, where she was seen looking plain, with her hair in her eyes, to a more pulled together look complete with makeup and her hair pulled back.The more she appeared on TV the more she appeared to enjoy the attention. At first she was star struck even telling Gretchen Carlson on Fox and Friends that she and her husband watched her show every day. Then she continued to get more and more verbal and more and more inconsistent in keeping her story straight.
From pirates who shot at her and her husband from a distance across the boarder, they suddenly became teenagers. Then they were pirates again, who killed her husband. Then they were people who had her husband’s body. If someone was shot in the head and sustained a head injury, wouldn’t they sink to the bottom of the lake and drown? Why would anyone dive into the lake and retrieve a dead body at the bottom of the lake?
First she said she abandoned her husband, who was shot in the head, because she was too small to get him put on her jet ski. Then she said someone had him. How did she know anyone had him if she abandoned him? First she said they used an assault weapon and later she said she was looking down a barrel of a gun. First she said she was far away and now she says she is up close enough to see a gun barrel.
First, no boat was mentioned, then on Anderson Copper she said that in the one boat near her, “I saw two people but there was a third or fourth person in that boat, I just didn't see them." How does she know there was a third or fourth person in the boat if she didn’t see them? Was she on the boat?
First she said she abandoned her husband, who was shot in the head, because she was too small to get him put on her jet ski. Then she said someone had him. How did she know anyone had him if she abandoned him? First she said they used an assault weapon and later she said she was looking down a barrel of a gun. First she said she was far away and now she says she is up close enough to see a gun barrel.
First, no boat was mentioned, then on Anderson Copper she said that in the one boat near her, “I saw two people but there was a third or fourth person in that boat, I just didn't see them." How does she know there was a third or fourth person in the boat if she didn’t see them? Was she on the boat?
There are other inconsistencies which are equally disturbing. As Tiffany continues to come forward and speak, there is no doubt that the truth will eventually leak out.
When it does, her now supportive in laws will suddenly not be so supportive of her. They will have had more time to process everything she said to the media. Then they will immediately turn on her.
Instead of spending her time visiting media outlet after media outlet, in my view Tiffany needs to spend her time visiting a number of lawyers so she can find the right one for her if and when authorities finally open their eyes and ears and realize that she may not be the right poster girl for border control issues.
Tweet
When it does, her now supportive in laws will suddenly not be so supportive of her. They will have had more time to process everything she said to the media. Then they will immediately turn on her.
Instead of spending her time visiting media outlet after media outlet, in my view Tiffany needs to spend her time visiting a number of lawyers so she can find the right one for her if and when authorities finally open their eyes and ears and realize that she may not be the right poster girl for border control issues.
15 comments:
I've thought from the beginning there was something to this story that wasn't sitting right. Glad to see someone else agrees.
I'm a huge proponent of stronger border patrol and enforcement of immigration, but let's do it fairly; not on the premise of an obviously false story.
I was wondering when you were going to write about her. I noticed when she cries there are no tears. Just like Susan Smith.
I've been checking here since the story broke. It's reassuring to know the lessons of this blog haven't fallen on deaf ears - simply the WAY she told the story threw up red flags all over my brain! Not one tear while retelling the story, seated next to his mother, who herself could barely breathe? Is she joking? And the biggest one of all: if she couldn't pull him over to her jet ski, they why the hell wouldn't she have gotten off of hers and on to his jet ski to take him for help??? It'd be a cold, blizzardy day in hell before I left a loved one to bleed out on a still-operating jet ski.
I have had the same feelings since the beginning. There is just something wrong about her expression, when she talks about her husband. She knows much more than what she is telling. My heart goes out to the Hartleys.
In virtually all situations like this, the lead investigative agency will put some of the investigative resources to the task of tearing the victims story to shreds, to completely reverse it, if they can. Watching how she talks in an interview is a resource, the same one an investigator would use if interviewing a criminal. The ultitmate facts of the case could be just about as she says, however, if they were there to buy drugs or something of that nature, even if the rest of the story is spot on, it would change her demeanor in how she addresses anyone. She would be acting very much as everyone says she does. I don't know, I haven't seen any interviews with her. I do know, that anyone that says they would have done this or that if they were in that situation conjures up the word "stupid". They don't know what they would have done in that situation, they weren't there, and chances are they have never even remotely been in a situation like this. So, observe her presentation inconsistencies, that's valid and worthwhile, but for the life of me or anyone else, don't even espouse how you would have handled the situation if it happened to you, because you don't know, and can't know, until you have been in a situation. Human nature is a weird box of tricks, and when a high stress situation comes up, you just never know which trick is pulled out of the box. While I haven't seen any of her interviews, I have seen people polarize based on their own life's situations. Mother in laws lean one way, mother's the other. Father's straddle the fence for the most part. Very interesting. Always question, that's how evidence comes out, but placing yourself in the situation is never a good investigative tool.
I totally agree with your summation. I look at her and immediately think something is up. I will be following this story.
Like a Said this is fishy just like the lake.Why would Mexizn Badits take time to take his body out of the lake that would take alot of time.
I can't imagine anyone buying Tiffany's account of events as the media and police have. My thoughts take me back to "Balloon Boy" where the Police insisted on Henne's innocence, and not a suspect, to keep him talking and appearing on every show who would have him....which was his ultimate downfall when his son Falcon (oddly same name as Mexican Lake!!) spilled the beans on national TV. I suspect Tiffany will slip up and the in-laws will finally come to their senses and turn on her, as in the Scott Peterson case.
Don, should one know themselves as having a strong, unbreakable character AND have proven said character in past high-stress, dangerous situations to think first of others' safety, they may have a much more clear idea of their response in a situation than you have. That, in and of itself, does not make them stupid. Simply more experienced. I said what I would have done, not what you would have done. That, sir, would be completely silly, as I don't very much about you.
On Anderson Cooper last night....
She knows the body is decomposing and is hopeful that someone will come forward with DNA.
I think that was the first time that she gave us a clear indication that he is not languishing at the bottom of Falcon Lake but that he more than likely floated over to the shoreline. By her own admission she was the last person to see him alive and dead.
She is the only one who knows with certainty that her husband was murdered.
Her DNA comment sent a red flag up. She is more desperate for someone to just say he is dead... maybe so she can collect his insurance. As it stands now, the best anyone can say is he's missing. That will not satisfy the insurance company. They will need a death certificate.
This couple lived a lavish lifestyle. I am thinking they were involved in drug running. Has anyone noticed how easy it is for someone to put a jet ski or boat in on the US side..and meet up with the drug cartel on the Mexican side without suspicion? Yes, they need to close that lake....for that reason.
I, too, have noticed something doesn't seem right but I'm holding off judgment for now. However, one point I wanted to make about your story is, the husband would most likely have been wearing a life vest and therefore would not have sunk.
See and all of you who said she was lying and hiding something, SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF YOURSELVES, so quick to judge and think you know it all. She was telling the truth.
Ok Sherlock, you have a new revelation about the case now?
Post a Comment