A fool’s mouth is his destruction, and his lips are the snare of his soul.
Proverbs 18:7 (KJV)
I wouldn’t call forensic statement analysis a “junk science,” but it is a relatively new one, probably more of an art. I would like to believe my own wide range of skills and experience with language, from transcribing notes for forensic psychologists while in college, to proofreading for academic presses, to contemplating the nuances of spoken speech as an actor in true-crime stories, might all be applied to helping people in real-world cases in the here and now.
Often a written or spoken statement is all investigators have, so naturally they are keen to extract as much actionable information from it.
I can’t think of a more compelling use of an English degree.
Death of a Songbird: The Murder of Katherine Janness
The Katie Janness case to me is compelling because I myself am an obscure songwriter with songs parked on SoundCloud.
Statement analysis is also especially relevant here, since so little information has been released to the public about this horrendous murder in Atlanta’s Piedmont Park in the summer of 2021.
What we, the public, do have are a couple of interviews with the victim’s longtime girlfriend, as well as her initial 911 call after she discovered the body. I’m attaching my verbatim transcription of it below as a public resource since I don’t think it’s ever been posted in written format.
Emma Clark 911 call
911: Atlanta 911, Operator 7959. What’s the address to your emergency?
EC: Sir, I’m at the entrance of Piedmont Park? I just … was searching for my girlfriend, sir, because I couldn’t find her! She’s dead. She’s here at Piedmont Park. Please help.
911: You said somebody’s dead—
EC: Oh my god.
911: —at Piedmont Park?
EC: Yes sir. Please send help. Please!
911: Alright. Yes ma’am, I’m going to send help to you.
EC: Oh my god. Oh my god.
911: Alright, can I get an, um, can I get your name please?
EC: Emma Clark? [sobs]
911: You said, what was your name, ma’am?
EC: Emma.
911: Emma?
EC: Clark. Yes, sir.
911: Alright, Miss Emma—
EC: Oh my god!
911: May I get a callback number?
EC: Oh my god! [phone number]. I’m out here by myself, sir, there’s nobody here— [inaudible]
911: [phone number]?
EC: Yes sir. Oh my god! [sobbing]
911: Alright.
EC: [sobbing and panting]
911: I’m here, Miss Emma.
EC: Oh my god! [whispered]
[inaudible]
[bleep]
911: [bleep] Where’s she at at—
EC: [inaudible]!
911: Where’s she at in the park?
EC: She’s right … near the entrance, like … I don’t know how to explain it to you.
[inaudible]
UI: [inaudible]
EC: Did you just see that!
UI: [inaudible]!
EC: That’s my fucking girlfriend.
UI: What the fuck!
EC: Yes!
911: Alright, [inaudible]—
EC: Please … Oh my god, [inaudible] like she’s dead, dead. Like, it’s so [inaudible].
911: Alright, I’m about to— I’m about to call Grady, okay?
EC: Please!
Grady: Grady EMS, what’s the address of your emergency?
911: Hey Grady, I have one for 1073 Piedmont Avenue Northeast.
Grady: [inaudible] have the caller on the line?
911: Yes m— Ma’am are you still on the line?
Okay I guess she must’ve disconnected. She said uh, her girlfriend is dead in the park.
Grady: Okay. Uh. Girlfriend is dead in the park?
911: Yeah, at uh, Piedmont Park.
Grady: Okay, did she advise where at in the park? It’s a huge park.
911: Sh, she was saying it’s, she was at the entrance.
Grady: Okay, at the entrance. Okay, can we get Fire and PD? I’m 915.
911: Yes ma’am. I already sent them. Thank you, 915.
Grady: Which operator?
911: 7959.
Grady: Alright, thank you. We’ll have that en route.
911: Alright.
Grady: Alright.
This is a test
I believe this case will be solved soon, within a month or a year. I am eager to apply a statement analysis approach here to validate the art itself. If it produces results that are backed up by harder evidence, that is a testament to its predictive utility. Of course, the contrary is a possibility, especially in inexpert hands. I want commitments on paper so the methodology can be evaluated later.
Caveat
If you’re horrified at the audacity of someone questioning the involvement of a grieving widow in this heinous crime, I understand. I never even wanted to listen to this 911 call in particular. I listened to Emma’s news interviews originally without a hint of suspicion. I thought Katie might have encountered some darkness from the music or bar scenes or unfinished business from the underworld, as her late father was apparently a convicted murderer.
Of course, based on statistics alone, the police are going to start with the victim’s family and associates. So I’m not breaking new ground here. And quite a few people were shocked to see that the Clarks spent GoFundMe proceeds on a new apartment. That’s what prompted me to reexamine everything.
I don’t believe any journalist is completely objective. It’s more honest to reveal your biases than to maintain that pretence. So, I think we’re looking at a narcissistic “discard” here, of a financially aquisitive younger partner wanting to discard an aging, graying, unsuccessful, out-of-shape spouse, coupled with jealous resentment. A lot of that is based on my own life experiences as an underappreciated creative. Others see an anti-LGBT hate crime. Some observers are reminded of Jodi Arias and Chris Watts; I think that’s what we’re dealing with.
Of course, I could be wrong. I’m an amateur. In fact I’m wrong probably half the time or more. I hope to get better at this sort of thing. The Good Judgment Project, a forecasting tournament in which I participated, says that practice helps. That and constantly updating your predictions as new information comes in.
One thing we are united on is the cause of justice. Absolutely no one deserves to die the way Katie did. This is a perplexing, complex case, so let’s not lose sight of the value of each other’s creative, divergent opinions in shining light into all corners of this darkness.