251–260 of 363 posts
If it is a politician, you will know as soon their lips are moving /s On a serious note, there is no way to know on a sophisticated liar, and there are 1000 tell tales on a bad liar.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Countless times when I was a kid (and sometimes now) people thought I lied when I was innocent because of timidity (and not diagnosed but maybe on the spectrum), so yeah I was unsettled. Uncontrollable smiles were the worst ("that makes you laugh!"). I can’t blame neurotypical people for having heuristics, but I’m still afraid to be interrogated in something serious with my reactions analyzed.
I have the same issue! When anyone asks me about something I haven't done (or should have done and did), I feel like they won't believe me anyway and go into a over-defensive/explanatory mode, basically acting like a culprit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have the same issue! When anyone asks me about something I haven't done (or should have done and did), I feel like they won't believe me anyway and go into a over-defensive/explanatory mode, basically acting like a culprit.
How does that tend to end?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s not. The purpose of interrogation is for the officer to gather evidence pointing to your guilt which will be presented at trial. The trial is about figuring out the truth.
> The trial is about figuring out the truth. Even that is an assumption.
The article seems to have avoided mentioning the easy way of detecting a lie - go and collect some evidence then compare it to what the person is saying. Incentives count as weak evidence for detecting lies. While not foolproof, it is much more effective than looking for verbal cues. Detecting lies by assessing someone's demeanour is a symptom. The average person seem to have this unshakeable belief that they are psy…
Even this is hardly fool-proof, since human memory is far from perfect. Someone might say "I was at Tesco's at 4pm" and later video evidence shows they were actually at Tesco's at 2pm. Did they lie or misremember? Unfortunately, police are often very quick to assume that such a small mistake is done in bad faith and that they're lying. In reality, a lot of people just won't remember the exact time they were at Tesco'…
Absolutely this.
Lying is a loose concept. Is it lying if I believe it is true? Is it lying if it's just an omission of truth?
You can spot nervousness, you can spot defiance.
I work in a field where people deceive almost 80% of the time, and less than 1 in 10 where caught. The way we approach this is by flanking. Using falsifiable questions the subject cannot determine your intentions, therefore is much more likely to tell the truth (less cognitive taxing).
"As a Homeland Security official told congressional investigators, “common sense” behavioral indicators are worth including in a “rational and defensible security program” even if they don’t meet academic standards of scientific evidence." What does that even mean? ... like there is a separate standard of evidence and there is a "we can get by without evidence" standard of evidence?
It's pretty obvious that there are useful truths that don't yet meet rigorous scientific standards of evidence. Like masks being useful in a pandemic or parachutes working. Non-serious "randomised trials" have been done with parachutes, and found no measurable effect - because for safety reasons the participants only jumped from an altitude of 2 metres or something. In sports medicine there are loads of things where…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To be fair, the last wave suggests that wearing masks has no effect in this pandemic[0][1]. Comparing Sweden and Germany (which have at least similar health systems and count similarly) the mortality rate of SARS-CoV-2 is about the same, where Swedes rarely wear any masks and in Germany it is mandatory indoors (accessible to the public) and even mandatory in some zones outdoors. Also when you think about it, the perm…
I'm impressed to see spring 2020 WHO mask denialism persist all way into this season. Virtually all countries that stuck to mask regimen a year ago despite the misguided advice regurgulated here have the epidemic under control for a long long while.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>when the police wants to interview you, the decision for your arrest was already made; That's not true. The police will interview everyone connected to a crime. Like if your SO turns up dead you're going to be one of the first people the police talk to. Depending on what else they've found they will have varying levels of suspicion. That level will absolutely change on how you do in that interview or if you refuse t…
Fine, but the police level of suspicion is not relevant. Never, ever agree to be interviewed by police without your attorney. There is no reason not to have someone who knows the game play for you. You have no clue what the police know or think they know already and your innocuous answer about something that seems unrelated may seem to confirm some wrong information they already have. Again, your word cannot exonerat…
Of course it is. The police aren't the sole decision maker in the process, but as a rule if they don't think you did it you won't get arrested. Conversely if they think they can prove you did it you probably will end up getting arrested.
>Again, your word cannot exonerate you but it can absolutely get you charged or even convicted.
Sure it can. Juries and the police are fallible and can be swayed by a convincing performance. Jeffrey Dahmer, as an infamous example, managed to get the police to return one of his drugged victims by convincing them he was drunk and it was a lovers quarrel.