Just wanted to warn there is a graphic image in the thumbnail of a video posted in this thread below, that's all!
So, this video is quite long and drawn out and it's just covering one interview. They get quite detailed and just rip this seemingly 'gone well' interview to shreds.
On that note, I would of really loved to see commentary on her interrogations (this is why I think it would be excellent if as many interactions with suspects as possible should be recorded in best quality possible. The body cameras that police are wearing now would be sufficient quality I'd say, but if we can get better quality in interrogations, that would be a huge opportunity for learning and study for analysts and make forensic and criminal psychologists jobs a bit easier).
Regardless, if you've been watching the all the Jodi Arias case footage as avidly as I have then you will find this interesting despite the length and detail this video goes into. It's probably a bit much for the average true crime consumer but, I guess you could say I'm a bit obsessed with this one in particular so I don't mind.
I find this case important because I think there are a lot of women who manage to come off very innocent and get away with crimes in a much different way than men do, and we should look closely at the people who have done it well to a certain extent, but have made mistakes and where those mistakes were so that they can be noticed or utilized to trip up cases like this in the future.
In this video Scott actually says he does not think she is a psychopath, and there was mention of BPD by Greg Hartley. I think it's hard to believe that she is not a psychopath, as the gruesome nature of the scene is *likely* not typical for a woman.
Women who kill men are usually quite shaken up after it, even if they did do it, the emotional upheaval and distress it elicits is visibly significant, they're often unable to eat, or even pick up their head, distraught by the murder. Her behavior is so so different from the behavior of most women in interrogation rooms who are involved in a crime.
They actually physically move their body more, they may act like a caged animal, they may come off angry, closed off, revengeful, defensive. And this resentment for law enforcement and the claims against them is obvious, the demeanor in which they retort is often over responsive, dramatic, and emotional. OR, it can go the other way and by overly emotional in an attempt to gain sympathy and appear vulnerable. But still, the exhibit a normal level of body language, postural differences, and lack an ability to sit still for. along period of time or appear calm and collected. In both of these instances or exmaples I mention, eye contact is not held for long periods of time- in the way that it is held and the pupils are very still, like Jodi Arias.
Women when found guilty of something will just appear erratic in some way typically. And recounting the 'events' that were not real, they made up, they are still emotional. Though it does appear quite fake most of the time. They may say I don't know a lot as well, or be avoidant in interrogation, refusing to give up accurate information, etc. But I could literally screen shot the posture of dozens of women interrogations, and their demeanor is completely opposite of how Jodi Arias's body langauge and posture was during her entire interrogation, and all the interviews, and court appearances.
She always sits up very straight, she never is restless, she never gets overly emotional, her eye contact is never erratic, she doesn't look away. She watches you, she stares at you almost, holding a long, but distance, even stare. She always appears extremely calm and collected. She never uses I do not know as an explanation, because she's already rehearsed and thought of entire scripts to use. She is never defensive, or emotional about this defense, she is almost overly compliant, while maintaining the innocent good girl act. There is a noted obsession with vanity that is unusual. And her tone. ofvoice never falters, not even when she recounts the horrible crime she supposedly witnessed the night her "lover" and herself were "attacked."
It actually reminds me *a lot* of the same 'base line' of demeanor and behavior as Erin Caffey:
her body language and the way she sits, the way she holds her neck and looks forward and does not change this position for long periods of time is very similar to the body language of Jodi Arias. Their behavior in the initial *first* interrogation or first questioning in my opinion says the most, as this is when a normal woman would be the most emoitonal, reactive, the crime would be freshest, the shock of being convicted or caught is at the most emotionally heightened state (or, it should be anyway). But not for these psychopaths, they remain calm and collected, and lack the ability to display emotional depth. They are *too* calm. It's not about analyzing what body language is present, as much as it is about, what is missing. In these cases with calculating, manipulative psychopaths.
That's just my opinion or my take on what I've seen so far of interrogation footage involving women, not being a well studied professional but just, average civilian, true crime geek.
example: compare @24:03 in "wrath of jodi" video to @0:58 in "dr. phil urges prisoner erin caffey to..."
