peter hyatt news report jenks

Hyatt Analysis Services
824 Main St.
Old Town, ME 04468
Phone: (207) 951-5694
[email protected]
12 November, 2017
Client: John Captain III
Submission: Transcript of news video and video.
Context: This is the first of two videos submitted for Content Analysis. This is a news
broadcast shortly after the discovery of Tiffany’s remains.
Analysis Question:
SHANUA PARSONS (00:00 –00:17)
First at Five new information about the woman found dead in a local park, Police found
the body of Tiffany Jenks near the entrance at Blue Lake Park in Fairview, early
yesterday morning. Right away cops started investigating it as a homicide and now we
know that she died from a gunshot wound. KPTV’s Jamie Wilson joins us live from
JAMIE WILSON (00:18 – 0-:39)
Well yes Shauna the medical examiner just released the woman’s cause of death today
and we now know that she was in fact shot to death, no one is in custody and police have
not identified any suspects yet, and tonight Tiffany’s friends and family say this is simply
This now introduces Jennifer Jenks, via phone call, into the news report.
“Just total shock, I’m just, shocked, I… I’m still trying to wrap my head around it, it’s
hard to believe it’s real.”
There is no cut in the audio before the word “Just.” It appears that the subject, Jennifer
Jenks, began her statement without the pronoun “I.”
The context of the missing pronoun is “shock.” To be “shocked” is to express a natural
emotion in such a horrific crime. It is expected that one would say, “I am shocked” if, in
deed, there was no suspicion that something like this could happen.
If the subject knew Tiffany to be living a dangerous lifestyle, the death would still bring
some form of shock, as reality is difficult to embrace and takes time to process.
“___ Just total shock” avoids saying “I am shocked.”
The word “just” is a dependent word. This means the subject is thinking of other
emotions and reducing the other possible emotions to only “shock.” What other emotion
may she be thinking of? Often, people have a strong emotion of denial at this point.
“I’m just shocked, I, I’m…”
The subject stutters on the pronoun “I” which is a signal of anxiety. The context of
anxiety here is process: “trying to wrap my head around it…”
JAMIE WILSON (00:50 – 01:12)
Over the phone today, Tiffany Jenks’ sister Jennifer said she can’t believe this is
happening. They got the call yesterday after police found Tiffany’s body in Blue Lake
Park, Jennifer says Tiffany lived downtown; she didn’t have a car, and she can’t think of
any reason she’d be out there. The only red flag Jennifer can think of is an ex-boyfriend,
Tiffany described as abusive.
Note the reporter stated “Tiffany described as abusive” uses passive language. There is
no direct quote.
I told her to stay away from him and I know that she had had some interactions with him
after that, I didn’t think her life was in danger but, I, I, I don’t know anything more about
what happened to her that night or who she was with or what she was doing.
The subject does not use the ex boyfriend’s name.
Note she reports what she “knows.” People can only tell us what they “know”; therefore,
this additional and unnecessary reference should be considered very sensitive.
It brings into question what she asserts. It is often used when one speaks of what one
does not know, but then finds a point of “comfort” because they “know” and are more
confident of a single point. One should consider the quality and quantity of interaction
between Jennifer and Tiffany. This is not the language of close siblings.
This is a very weak assertion of domestic violence knowledge.
We next note that the “stuttering I” shows an increase in anxiety at this point: not
knowing “anything more” about what happened to Tiffany that night.
What could cause the increase in anxiety?
In context, it may be that overall lack of knowledge of Tiffany’s life, which is evidenced
above. Guilt for having such distance between the subject and the victim of a murder
will produce such anxiety due to the close relationship of siblings.
While casting doubt upon her own words, it would be interesting to learn what Jennifer
suspected, especially regarding substance abuse and the inherent risks of association.
The language suggests that Jennifer did not “know” much about Tiffany and what she
does “know” likely came from someone other than Tiffany.
What does such weakness in assertion indicate?
That he is not given a name by her (including a first name) adds to the weakness of
assertion: it does not appear that Jennifer believed the ex boyfriend was involved in the
When one is in shock, one is generally not concerned about slandering anyone: they blurt
out their emotions. That she does not use ex boyfriend’s name suggests:
a. Low personal contact with Tiffany
b. Little (if any) knowledge of Tiffany’s life current to the death;
c. Reluctance to accuse
JAMIE WILSON (00:50 – 01:56)
Jennifer says Tiffany was an accomplished runner, she was smart and she had a great job
at the Bonneville Power Administration but she quit a few years ago right after their
father died of cancer. Jennifer says Tiffany took it hard and turned to drugs and alcohol.
She joined Darren Littlejohn’s Buddhist recovery program but he hadn’t heard from her
since June, and he worried she was using again.
Between this observation of Jennifer, and the language of Tiffany, one would question if
Tiffany was either sexually abused by her father, or if her father (in Tiffany’s view) failed
to protect her when she was a child.
I thought she may have but I questioned her about it and she said she hadn’t so it’s hard
to know.
JAMIE WILSON (02:01 – 02:08)
Darren says Tiffany also told him about the violence in her last relationship, and he can’t
bear to think of anyone hurting her.
Here is an expected moment where Darren Littlejohn will reliably assert what Tiffany
told him.
She was a very petite woman, and just the thought of anybody causing harm to her, she
would be unable to defend herself.
He does not. If this thought is important to him, why does he not express it? He said,
“causing harm” to her, and not “hurt her”, which would have been a complete past tense
commitment. One might wonder if Littlejohn believed that Tiffany was actually in a
Domestic Violence relationship. He does not give a strong indication of this.
Why not?
If Littlejohn doubted Tiffany’s words, it may be suggestive of insight into her substance
Those who are self destructive in substance abuse will not only use deception, but will
seek to arouse pity in others. If Littlejohn had strong belief that Tiffany was being
physically assaulted, would he have taken action, given the presupposition of his level of
care of her?
It may be that Littlejohn did not believe Tiffany but it would be inappropriate to make
that statement after her murder.
He does not verbally commit to Tiffany being in a Domestic Violence relationship with
her boyfriend.
JAMIE WILSON (02:18 – 02:24)
Police will only say this is a homicide investigation and Tiffany’s family can only hope
for justice
She had a lot to give and… she didn’t deserve this and, I hope they catch whoever did it.
JAMIE WILSON (02:35 – 02:50)
And we have learned that investigators have spoken to Tiffany’s ex-boyfriend but again,
they have not identified any suspects in this case. Live in Fairview tonight, Jamie Wilson,
The Five O’clock News
The conclusion will be referenced in the final conclusion below.
II. Video Analysis
The second submission is related to the first. In the first we have tierary accusation of
domestic violence.
Please consider the previously submitted analysis including the basic pyscho-linguistic
profile of Tiffany.
The video has transcription superimposed on it.
Context: This was taken approximately 4 hours before the murder of Tiffany Jenks. In
it, John Captain is speaking with Tiffany Jenks. As surveillance video, the audio is not
strong. Also with general security video, it is not known if Tiffany was aware of being
recorded. As business owner, Mr. Captain would know the area is covered; therefore we
look for signals of “unintended recipient” in his language; that is, one who is speaking for
the benefit of those who watch the video. This is a form of deception in which the
subject may use the recording to later persuade.
TJ: Tiffany Jenks
JC: John Captain.
First is the transcript followed by the transcript with analysis. The conclusion is a
combination of both transcripts.
JC: Hey, do you love me?
TJ: “Make me a Mountain Dew and a vodka and just shut the fuck up.”
JC: “Shut the fuck up? Look at me.
TJ: “I will do whatever you want but I know that I can’t die tonight.
JC: You what?
TJ: “I’m not going to die tonight.”
JC: “Look at me”
TJ: “I’m not going to die tonight.”
JC: “Can’t you trust me and stop drinking, please?”
TJ: “Can’t you trust me that I want to and am trying?”
JC: “You’re not. I could have held you all night. Instead, you’re going to go to a hotel.”
TJ: “I don’t want to get you (involved)…I don’t want you to beat me up and you should
not have to deal with this
JC: “Beat you up?”
TJ: “This is my problem.”
JC: “But I’m in love with you” (crying)
TJ: “Thanks.”
JC: “And I don’t want you to go all the time and I don’t want you to be thinking that I hit
you or I hurt you. I never have you keep saying it, like I hurt you. I held you, you, from
stabbing somebody. I don’t man handle you. I’ve never hit you.
Did you know that?
Did you know I never hurt you?
I never hit you.
That’s me.
I never hurt you.
Tiffany look at me.
I never hit you.
You know you’re really take a part of everybody else with you when you drink and it’s
really sad.”
TJ: “I’m glad you continue to focus on that. That’s good.”
(end of audio)
Here is the transcript with analysis.
JC: Hey, do you love me?
Mr. Captain asks Tiffany if she loves him. It is in the form of a question. The audio is
very low and according to Mr. Captain’s testimony, Tiffany was drinking often and may
have been under the influence at this time.
To this assertion, the analysis of Tiffany’s meetings with the therapist agree.
Tiffany was above-average intelligence and likely was very high-functioning while under
the influence. At one point, Tiffany addressed working at the nuclear power plant while
As part of this overall context: the analysis of the two prior sessions with the therapist
not only indicate the intelligence level, but that, even under the influence, Tiffany could
both follow an argument and counter strongly.
TJ: “Make me a Mountain Dew and a vodka and just shut the fuck up.”
Tiffany does not answer the question, “Do you love me?” This indicates that the
question, itself, is very sensitive to Tiffany. We then look within the context in an
attempt to learn the source of sensitivity to the question of love.
We next note that Tiffany tells Mr. Captain to “just shut the fuck up.”
There are several things of note here:
1. She does not answer the question about love.
2. She introduces alcohol (and sugar) to the conversation.
3. She does not tell him to “shut the fuck up” but “just shut…”. This is a critical
The word “just” is a dependent word; it only works in a sentence if the subject is thinking
of something else (2 or more things) in comparison.
Tiffany is comparing silencing Mr. Captain to something else.
A victim of Domestic Violence lives life under the control of another. The abuser (in
D/V specifically) uses the threat of violence, predominantly, to control his victim. When
Tiffany says, “just shut the fuck up” she is able to isolate silencing Mr. Captain from
other issues within her mind. This is evidence of one who is in control rather than under
JC: “Shut the fuck up? Look at me.
Mr. Captain repeats her statement back to her in the form of a question. This suggests
that an element of sensitivity, perhaps, surprise (in context) of her words. “Shut the fuck
up” is distinctly disrespectful and dehumanizing. This is not due to cursing, but
silencing. Humans are created to communicate and are known by their communications.
Here, Mr. Captain may be expressing his surprise that she would want to silence him in
the form of a curse or insult. He then seeks to “sober” her up via eye contact.
TJ: “I will do whatever you want but I know that I can’t die tonight.
The question this statement raises is not about “dying tonight.” Tiffany’s words reveal a
deliberate and methodical outworking of self loathing’s consequence: death.
Mr. Captain, in context, represents “life”, or the opposite of “die tonight”, via that which
angers Tiffany the most: Mr. Captain’s opposition to substance abuse.
JC: You what?
Her statement on death is very sensitive to Mr. Captain, who asks her again. It is not the
first time she has talked about death with him, as evident by his repetition of seeking her
focus with “Look at me.” This is representative of the “voice of sobriety” or the “voice
of life.”
It is in stark contrast to the flippant and self serving statements made by the therapist,
particularly in his lecturing on taking his advice. The concern of the therapist was not
Tiffany’s alcoholism or substance abuse, nor her direct statements on suicide: his
concern was that Tiffany was not recognizing his own “brilliance” in life, including his
“ability” to move objects by his mind.
In short, he offered false remedies to one desperate, while Mr. Captain sought to save her
TJ: “I’m not going to die tonight.”
JC: “Look at me”
TJ: “I’m not going to die tonight.”
JC: “Can’t you trust me and stop drinking, please?”
This is how Mr. Captain “beat up” Tiffany. In Tiffany’s subjective and personal internal
dictionary, offering safety and sobriety is a “threat” and an “assault” to her self-loathing
Tiffany not only went back to the therapist’s abuse, but very likely would have done
anything to win his approval. This is strongly suggestive of early childhood abuse.
TJ: “Can’t you trust me that I want to and am trying?”
Tiffany separates desire from lack of success. This is an indication of the deception of
alcoholism which Mr. Captain (love) does not allow for:
JC: “You’re not. I could have held you all night. Instead, you’re going to go to a hotel.”
TJ: “I don’t want to get you (involved)…I don’t want you to beat me up and you should
not have to deal with this
This is true. Tiffany’s language in this period of time indicates a commitment to death.
Tiffany shows not fear of Mr. Captain, but a concern for Mr. Captain’s well being.
“…you should not have to deal with this” is an indication that Tiffany loved him and
knew he was up against something very powerful.
Tiffany was not only not afraid of him, but she was seeking his best interest here (love).
Tiffany was, in a very real sense, in control of the relationship. This is the direct opposite
of a Domestic Violence relationship.
JC: “Beat you up?”
Mr. Captain seeks to get her to address its meaning. Its meaning is found in context:
opposition to drinking (self destruction).
TJ: “This is my problem.”
Tiffany ignores the use of her language and refers back to alcohol. This is to reinforce her
concern for Mr. Captain’s well being.
JC: “But I’m in love with you” (crying)
TJ: “Thanks.”
This is where Tiffany was the most “beat up”, even more than the attempt to mitigate
substance abuse. Being “loved” was the threat posed by Mr. Captain to Tiffany Jenks.
What does this love (love and sobriety cannot be separated due to context) threaten?
JC: “And I don’t want you to go all the time and I don’t want you to be thinking that I hit
you or I hurt you. I never have you keep saying it, like I hurt you. I held you, you, from
stabbing somebody. I don’t man handle you. I’ve never hit you.
Did you know that?
Did you know I never hurt you?
I never hit you.
That’s me.
I never hurt you.
Tiffany look at me.
I never hit you.
You know you’re really take a part of everybody else with you when you drink and it’s
really sad.”
TJ: “I’m glad you continue to focus on that. That’s good.”
Tiffany uses the word “that” to distance herself from both the issue and the one standing
between her and death.
Was Tiffany a victim of domestic violence at the hands of John Captain?
The answer lies within Tiffany’s own words, more than Mr. Captain’s denial.
Based only upon the analysis submitted, we may know that Tiffany was:
An exceptionally intelligent young woman.
She also gives verbal indication of early childhood abuse and was, in deed, controlled by
her therapist.
Domestic Violence is not considered such by a single act of violence, but of a pattern of
control. In fact, few victims of D/V suffer ongoing violence: they are controlled by the
threat of violence and learn to adjust to life “walking on eggshells.” This expression
describes how the victim copes, day to day, living tentatively, sometimes even moment to
moment, in attempts to pacify their abuser.
“I woke up, brushed my teeth, got dressed and went to work.”
When an analyst sees this statement, he focuses in upon the unnecessary addition of
personal hygiene:
“I woke up, brushed my teeth, got dressed and went to work” is written in response to
“tell me what you did the day…” in an investigation.
The inclusion of acts of personal hygiene indicate missing information from the
statement. The most commonly found missing information is Domestic Violence.
When people are asked to tell us about what they did on a given day, they cannot tell us
every thing they did, lest the statement would never end. They must, by necessity, edit
their version. What remains are the memories of what is most important to the subject. In
the above statement, she included the most unnecessary detail of brushing her teeth. This
is something everyone does, but is found in fewer than 10% of statements.
Why did she include it?
In the above statement, she was being investigated for missing money from her company.
Analysis showed that she did not steal the missing money, but upon returning to the
company, the investigator asked, “Has there been other crimes?”
The owner stated that there was a large theft of lap top computers. Local police had not
found the perpetrators but there was no forced entry.
Here was the solving of that crime.
Our subject wrote that she “brushed her teeth” because it was important to her.
Because she was living with a violent boyfriend. In fact, he had bullied her into stealing a
copy of the key, and leaving the alarm off the night he and his gang stole the lap tops.
Why did she have a need to tell police that she “brushed her teeth”?
For a victim of D/V, life is out of her own control. She (and sometimes “he”) is
controlled by the threat of violence from the other. When she woke up, she went into the
bathroom and for a very few minutes in life, with a locked door, her life was her own.
She was in total control and it meant a great deal to her, while others would not have
given it a second thought.
For just a few moments in life, she felt safe. She was behind a locked door and it was just
her, by herself, looking at her face in the mirror, tending to her own needs. It was, for
this snapshot in life, her own life that mattered.
Domestic Violence victims do not always show fear of their abusers. This is a common
misconception. It is often the very opposite: they minimize the danger they are in. This
is found in the language: minimization, deflection and even blaming of self.
There is a distinct dynamic between John Captain and Tiffany Jenks that does not exist in
the interaction between Tiffany and her therapist.
John Captain represented no challenge to Tiffany, to overcome.
John Captain was a threat to Tiffany’s self destruction while the therapist actually
provides support and encouragement for her to destroy herself.
John Captain shows Tiffany’s best interest in his language. The therapist distinctly
shows his motive is self-gratification at the expense of Tiffany’s wellbeing.
The interaction between Mr. Captain and Tiffany shows freedom for Tiffany, while the
interaction between Tiffany and the therapist shows domination and control over her.
Tiffany preferred the therapist to her boyfriend because the therapist not only represented
a challenge to her, but because John opposed Tiffany’s desire to die.
Tiffany’s statements on death show more than preoccupation. She was suicidal. The
ethical and possibly criminal neglect on the part of the therapist is in contrast to Mr.
Captain’s pleading.
Tiffany uses harsh language to both.
There is contempt in the statements. In the analysis between Tiffany and the therapist, it
is the therapist who holds Tiffany in contempt. He was threatened by her intellect and
not only responds in a petty and harsh manner, but does so while deliberately ignoring
her suicidal pleas. He offers her his “psychobabble new age” remedies which were
actually interpreted by Tiffany as contemptible.
Tiffany exhibited fear, not or Mr. Captain, but of her therapist. She was acutely afraid of
displeasing him and he shows his awareness of this fear in an exploitative manner (see
analysis on sexual boundary).
Tiffany showed contempt of Mr. Captain in this very specific context: self loathing.
The sister of Tiffany did not have first hand information. The sister’s language shows
much distance between herself and Tiffany which is why the sister’s language regarding
Domestic Violence was passive.
Although more sample is needed, it is evident that Tiffany Jenks suffered early childhood
trauma (the language strongly suggests sexual abuse) and was more than situationally
suicidal: her self-loathing was deeply engrained, self medicated and, at best, ignored by
her therapist.
The analysis showed that the therapist did have a strong impact upon Tiffany’s life, well
beyond ignoring her pleas for help. She sought his approval and due to insult, he refused
to give it, even though he was cognizant of its impact.
Tiffany’s self destruction was incessant. A major trigger for it was her father’s death;
something recognized but ignored by the therapist.
The therapist showed jealousy of a personal nature, towards Mr. Captain. His “anti John
Captain” language did not include elements of safety from Domestic Violence. He
limited himself to alcohol and ignored what Tiffany said to him about her boyfriend. His
position of going to her hotel room was that he was only hindered by having a present
girlfriend. This sent a deliberate and powerful message to an acutely vulnerable self
destructive young woman.
Tiffany’s destruction would be the “justification” for the therapist, who felt personally
insulted by Tiffany, and threatened by her intellect.
Though he was not charged, he contributed to her death in the sense of abdication of his
duties, and exercised a mindful, or knowing sense of control over her.
Analysis Conclusion:
Tiffany Jenks was not in a Domestic Violence relationship with John Captain.
John Captain was falsely accused by both Tiffany Jenks’ sister and by Tiffany Jenks’
Jennifer Jenks does not indicate knowledge that Tiffany was in a Domestic Violence
Darren Littlejohn does not indicate belief that Tiffany was in a Domestic Violence
Tiffany Jenks was, however, in an emotionally and psychologically abusive relationship
with her therapist, who exerted acute control over her, and refused to take appropriate
ethical steps to overcome her suicidal ideation and preoccupation with death.
The former does not show motive, but distancing language and an overall lack of
awareness of Tiffany’s life. The language indicates hearsay and speculation, at best.
The latter, however, used language that was distinct in envy against Mr. Captain. It
indicates that his own sexual interest was threatened by Mr. Captain’s presence and that
he was deliberately manipulative of Tiffany.
The motive of this manipulation showed two priorities. The first was financial. This was
recognized by Tiffany, herself, as she saw through his feigning of a busy scheduled and
showed how quickly she could change his stance by offering money. She did this
The second motive for falsely blaming Mr. Captain lies within the therapist, himself. The
language reveals a small minded, petty and easily insulted man who was distinctly
sexually interested and exploitive of Tiffany. He crossed long established boundaries of
“best practice” in the mental health field with her and sought to control her due to his
own insecurities.
Tiffany was very likely a victim of early childhood sexual abuse and was both selfloathing and preoccupied with death.
The therapist recognized this, yet was either incapable or unwilling to intervene on her
behalf, due to his own need for her to recognize his inflated sense of importance.
Mr. Captain appeared to be “beating up” Tiffany, in Tiffany’s subjective personal
dictionary, due to his verbal attempts to alleviate the consequences of alcohol abuse in
her life.
A Domestic Violence relationship is a relationship that is controlled by the abuser,
whether or not violence exists, due to the inherent threat of violence.
Tiffany showed a sense of control over Mr. Captain, via emotional exploitation. She was
comfortable in confronting him, cursing at him, and making demands of him. In this
sense, she exercised control; something a victim of Domestic Violence does not have.
The control exerted by the therapist does not show signals of Domestic Violence
(violence or the threat of violence) but was acute in its nature.
The therapist sought to isolate Tiffany from Mr. Captain, who represented sobriety and
life to Tiffany, even while Tiffany showed obsession with death and suicidal ideation
verbalized repeatedly.
In a sense, Tiffany was uncomfortable with Mr. Captain, while being comfortable with
the therapist.
Being in a place of trust, sobriety and physical safety (“held”) was uncomfortable, or
“outside of Tiffany’s comfort zone) due to her self loathing and suicidal ideation.
With the therapist, Tiffany could feed the self loathing and receive the “punishment” that
she “deserved” from him, including his passive aggressive insults, his demeaning of her
intellect, and accept him relegating her to a role of both “girlfriend” (sexual) and
“patient”, which he uses to inflict emotional pain upon her.
Mr. Captain is best seen in light of intervention. He sought to physically stop Tiffany
from using a knife.
The therapist gave her an unrealistic, unmanageable, and ultimately false remedy to stop
the self destruction.
These two men stand in stark contrast ,one to another.
The therapist “supported” Tiffany by his insults, dismissiveness and default
encouragement to live deliberately reckless.
Mr. Captain “beat up” or “assaulted” Tiffany by offering safety, security and sobriety.
For one who believed she deserved to be punished and ultimately die, Mr. Captain was a
threat to her.
This is not an uncommon or unusual pattern of victims of early childhood sexual abuse.
That many of Tiffany’s issues became exacperated at the death of her father warrants the
thought that her father may have been responsible for her abuse.
Women who were victims of early childhood sexual abuse by their fathers often develop
a pattern that includes:
1. Desperate need to gain approval of male who is in a role of authority
2. Acute attempt to “remake” the father-daughter relationship, including
3. Self loathing.
In spite of talent and an above average intellect, the victim often experiences an inner
self-loathing that shows itself in
Substance abuse
Reckless lifestyle
Sabotaging of positive relationships
Victims of such can react with “fear” of one who offers a happy, fulfilled and safe
environment, and can even report feeling “unsafe” in the very place where safety is
This is likely due to the brain’s acclimation to fear by a male figure (father) which
becomes what the brain is accustomed to. This is often referred to as “comfort level.”
Tiffany showed acute and immediate suicidal ideation. She showed preoccupation with
death. She deliberately put herself under the control of an abusive, needy and exploitative
therapist of whom she sought to win his approval. While doing so, she showed signals of
hatred towards the relationship that represented life, safety and approval towards.
The therapist could have readily diagnosed this and referred her to a female therapist.
Instead, he, driven by both money (as Tiffany recognized) and by his own ego (which
Tiffany also recognized) he kept her on the path of destruction while offering only bare
lip service to sobriety.
For Tiffany, “overcoming” and “winning over” the abusive therapist may have been akin
to overcoming early childhood abuse at the hands of a male authoritative figure.
In this sense, Mr. Captain was a “threat” to this plan.
It is the belief of this criminal analyst that Tiffany Jenks deliberately sabotaged her own
happiness and put herself in harm’s way to fulfill the self loathing that comes from
childhood trauma.
Mr. Captain may have been the only true support in her life and was, upon her death,
vilified for attempting to save her life.
Mr. Captain’s love (safety/life/sobriety) was to destroy Tiffany’s desire to end her life.
Even as Tiffany was conflicted, her retreat to alcohol was to strengthen her desire to lie.
Mr. Captain “beat up” her plan to end her life.
It is most likely that Tiffany Jenks was a victim of early childhood abuse, likely sexual,
and likely at the hands of a male authoritative figure.
The therapist, had he had interest in helping Tiffany, would have addressed this in their
first session. He, however, was interested only in himself, and in exploiting her, for his
own need for recognition. In this role of abuser, Tiffany “loved” him.
John Captain had interest in helping Tiffany life. In this, she likely had moments of
being terrified of such love.
Her language does not indicate he “beat her up” physically, but assaulted her self
destructive patterns in life.
Mr. Captain’s battle was not only against Tiffany’s powerful past childhood experiences,
but against those experiences coupled with the therapist and a weak family tie.
The task of overcoming this was daunting, even if it were to be only Mr. Captain versus
Tiffany’s mental health status, but he was also battling the cruel encouragement of the
therapist, through both direct abuse and abdication of his role, in trying to save Tiffany’s
Tiffany Jenks loved Mr. Captain, but was unable to overcome her own inner pain. Had
she been given appropriate professional intervention, she might have.
Mr. Captain is left bereft of not only Tiffany Jenks, but with many questions about her
death and a false accusation against him.