Hannah Anderson gives first interview since being kidnapped ...

The Daily Mail Online ^ | August 22, 2013 | Daily Mail Reporter

[Uncle Chip]

Kidnapping victim Hannah Anderson said in her first interview since she was rescued after a week-long abduction that she knows there are tough times ahead of her but she would get through them because her mom raised her to be strong.

In an interview with the Today show, she said: 'In the beginning, I was a victim. But now knowing everyone out there’s helping me, I consider myself a survivor instead.'

The 16-year-old also clarified some details about what her relationship with kidnapper James DiMaggio was like and why they exchanged 13 text messages on the day he abducted her after killing her mother and brother.

Denying that it was phone calls they exchanged, Hannah said the 13 texts were regarding arrangements to pick her up from cheer camp, explaining where exactly she would be and the address.

According to search warrants, Hannah exchanged about 13 phone calls with DiMaggio before she was picked up from cheerleading practice that day.

The San Diego County Sheriff's said it could not immediately explain the discrepancy.

Authorities have also said that letters from Hannah were found at the home. The teen said that they were written about a year ago when she was having trouble getting along with her mother and she sought advice from DiMaggio....

[Uncle Chip]

The media continues to repeat bad info because they can't be bothered to keep it straight.

The media is not the problem in this case. It's the central figure saying things that run counter to official police reports.

And people falling all over themselves to believe her.

[dmz]

The part about your commentary I find most puzzling is that you seem to think absence of information means she’s guilty of something.

Or that incomplete data means she’s guilty.

Or that inconsistent/incorrect reporting of data by the media means she’s guilty.

[dmz]

So the publicist says — but I have not seen those words coming from her father.

<><><<><

You do realize that that is what a publicist does, right? To speak for the family.

Amd btw, Hannah does not have the income to hire a publicist. Her family did that.

[Valpal1]

The picture is no substitute for a live person telling them. Why wouldn't they get that from Hannah.

Are. You. Stupid? A picture is hard evidence that either supports or contradicts what a live witness says.

Why do you think cops hate phone cameras and are always harassing citizens who use them to film cops? Because it disproves the officer's version of events.

Again you have no idea what the investigation does or does not know from Hannah. They are not going to publicly reveal what a minor child crime victim statements.

[dmz]

Then they should list the pictures and finger prints taken from the car and property.

<><><><

And why should they release all of that to the public at this time? To serve your prurient interests?

Laughable.

[Valpal1]

They have always said the phones were turned off after she was picked up from cheer camp.

The official police corrected the date of the cheer camp, the media hasn’t.

The phones were turned off after she was picked up from cheer camp. That date was Saturday 8/3, not Sunday 8/4.

[grania]

Hanna's a minor. She's been manipulated by the adults in her life. Her mother made the mistake of being in a relationship with someone who was too friendly with her teenage daughter, even seemed to allow it.

I'm sorry the mom and the brother are dead. But dating mom and teenage daughter? It's a recipe for disaster if that boyfriend's too close.

[Uncle Chip]

The article stated that they did not meet Dimaggio until the mother was 6 months pregnant with her.

If that is true --

However that statement came from their publicist not Anderson himself who was standing right there. Was there some reason why he couldn't have made that statement if it were true.

General rule of PR: Let your PR people lie for you.

DiMaggio's family PR says that they have all known each other for 20 years.

What's the harm in a paternity test to settle the matter rather than leave it up in the air.

[Valpal1]

Monetary incentive explains the media behavior in trying to sex up a story with confusion and controversy, what is Uncle Chip’s motive?

[Yaelle]

Seriously. The same freepers that would scream if their 16 year old baby girl was kidnapped are practically blaming an underaged girl for these crimes.

16 is not the age of consent. It doesn’t matter what she “let” this perv do, she is not old enough to make those decisions (though the law is lenient about two 16 year olds getting together for obvious reasons - hormones and neither one is competent to make adult decisions).

I am not saying she had willing sex with the man. But there are a ton of young teens who are emotionally coerced, or seduced into engaging in sex with abusive adults. Grooming works.

If she is immature and a bit stupid, she is 16. Also, she doesn’t have to be a genius. It is less ok to rape or kidnap the less smart, not more ok. She doesn’t know how to mourn correctly according to freepers. She just is. She’s a kid.

And who the bleep told her she will have to go through worse in her life?? (The quote in the article where she says something like “I can do this so I can get through worse things in the future” or something like that. I’m sorry but most people never have to live through anything as being kidnapped, raped, and having your mother and brother cruelly murdered so a creep can be with you.

[dmz]

Monetary incentive explains the media behavior in trying to sex up a story with confusion and controversy, what is Uncle Chip’s motive?

<><><><

I would not be surprised that as more information comes out, Uncle Chip will turn his back on his current viewpoint, and begin to side with those who wait for the fog of war to dissipate before making pronouncements of guilt or innocence.

Is that reasonable, Uncle Chip?

[Yaelle]

It doesn’t matter if the girl is lying abut anything at this point. She is the victim no matter what in this case. Could she be a monster wanting to be with this creepy uncle and having her family all killed?? Believe it or not, that would be extremely rare for a middle class teenage girl. But if that is true, she still didn’t commit the murders and is still too young to consent. She is still the victim even if she wanted her family murdered!

But Occam’s razor dictates that she was not involved with or in favor of her mom and brother being murdered. Any sex is still rape because she is underaged. You are awfully passionate about blaming her.

[Uncle Chip]

The phones were turned off after she was picked up from cheer camp.

So then that is what the cell phone report said???

2 minute call -- 20 minutes before cheerleading event pickup.

1 minute call 18 minutes before cheerleading event pickup.

'''''''

Is that what you are saying??? that the telecom carrier listed the cheerleading event on the bill and in the report??

[Valpal1]

That is what it says on the search warrant on page 5 along with the date, which police have officially corrected in public.

http://media.nbcbayarea.com/documents/DiMaggioWarrant.pdf

They have never deviated from that except to correct the date. It is you and the media that refuse to let go of the confusion.

Hannah’s public statements do not contradict the police statements on this issue. Any conflict is solely in the minds of those claiming there is a discrepancy.

[Uncle Chip]

The spokesperson for the department corrected and changed the date of the cheerleading event from Sunday to Saturday but did not correct and change the date of the 13 phone calls.

Do you have any evidence to the contrary???

[Valpal1]

Let’s go back to Occam’s Razor and may I suggest you learn to use it more proficiently in your armchair sleuthing.

Which is more likely;

that a teenage kidnap victim would publicly lie about whether there were texts or phone calls which is easily provable by electronic evidence held on both the phone and the phone company records which are already in the hands of the police

or

there was a dating error on the search warrant, something that chronically plagues our justice system and results in things like wrong door raids or warrants being invalidated by the courts.

[Valpal1]

Read the damn search warrant page 5. It clearly states the events believed to have occurred together on that date. The date has been corrected. There is no reason to assume that because the date has been changed that the events no longer occurred together.

Occam’s Razor (again).

[Valpal1]

Link to the search warrant for the Anderson residence.

http://media.nbcbayarea.com/documents/DiMaggioWarrant.pdf

[Uncle Chip]

So then you have no evidence to the contrary other than your Occam theory:

She spoke this morning about "texts" on Saturday not "calls". The police called them "calls". Texts and calls are recorded and reported differently on phone records. There could have been "texts" on Saturday and still "calls" on Sunday.

Do you really think that the police are incapable of finding and reporting the correct date from a phone record???

Regarding public lying -- LE closed the case yesterday so she is free to say anything she wants without fear especially when it is not under oath.

[Valpal1]

Except the phones were turned off on after she was picked up from practice that is what the warrant says, that is what the cops say. The warrant says 8/4 the cops now say that it was 8/3. They changed the date of the events, not the order or concurrence of the events.

She was picked up on Saturday, therefore the phones were turned off on Saturday.

Your assumption is misconceived and not based in fact or even good basic reasoning.

It is not the only dating error on that warrant, one occurs in the first paragraph, but is verbally corrected (this warrant was done over the phone by dictation).