Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How can you tell if someone is lying?

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 363 posts

Re: How can you tell if someone is lying?

#321

Post by imbnwa »

tarsinge wrote: post #118
foobiekr wrote: post #65

David Simon's book, Homicide, has an apropos section: """Terry McLarney once mused that the best way to unsettle a suspect would be to post in all three interrogation rooms a written list of those behavior patterns that indicate deception: Uncooperative. Too cooperative. Talks too much. Talks too little. Gets his story perfectly straight. Fucks his story up. Blinks too much, avoids eye contact. Doesn’t blink. Stares.…

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.

Funny you mention this, Freud wrote a whole essay about how people how people who suffer neurotic disorders are in serious risk of being convincingly misinterpreted when being drilled under pressure in legal settings, and that legal officials need to rethink what they think true speech is, as a neurotic will indict themselves even if they're innocent

Re: How can you tell if someone is lying?

#322

Post by Cullinet »

laurieg wrote: post #161
MrDrDr wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for posting - I found this video fascinating. Made me think about the law in the UK. Interestingly when arrested here we are told : “You do not have to say anything. But, it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence.” I’d be interested if anyone has experience of the UK system and if the same strategy…

I'm definitely not a lawyer, but I believe that the court may draw an inference from your silence. You are innocent and decided to remain silent only to have a perfect explanation that fits will all evidence known to the police weeks later. Why didn't you offer this earlier? There is an interesting TV show called 24 Hours in Police Custody[1] that follows people in the 24 hours after they are arrested. Naturally, the…

"Plenty of people do just answer "No comment" to every question, even after consulting a solicitor."

precisely because that's the best advice that you will get from a solicitor in the circumstances!

I rather belaboured my earlier responses to this same question, because I wanted to make it understood how rarely there's any justification to arrest someone. UK LEO arrest people by default and they absolutely do not have a automatic right to arrest anyone and certainly not only to bring you in to interview.

Re: How can you tell if someone is lying?

#323

Post by rhizome »

LocalPCGuy wrote: post #80
airstrike wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IIRC their 95% failure includes failing to spot explosives and the like in their scanners

I went through a screening with a "robot" - in quotes because it was literally a breadboard with a bunch of wires sticking out of it, a battery and a squarish box. Didn't even have to open the bag to show the agents what it was, went right through the scanner with no comment. And I was nervous as hell cause I was sure I was going to have to explain it, maybe even show that it worked. But nope, not a peep.

It would be pointless for the scanners to ping on copper, ABS, or batteries because every single flyer would have to open their bags and buttholes. It's the C4 and other pyro that they want to know about.

Re: How can you tell if someone is lying?

#324

Post by Cullinet »

lawtalkinghuman wrote: post #291
leetcrew wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm definitely not a lawyer, but I believe that the court may draw an inference from your silence. You are innocent and decided to remain silent only to have a perfect explanation that fits will all evidence known to the police weeks later. Why didn't you offer this earlier? this is my understanding of the UK system too (note: I am an american). it's quite different in the US because, among other things, the jury i…

The negative inference comes from the fact that you can't push an affirmative defence at trial that you haven't hinted at during questioning. So, if you are arrested for beating up X, and you invoke your right to silence, THEN at trial you put forward a defence of "I wasn't there!" without any substantive evidence to back it up, the prosecutor can say "well, look, if there was an alibi, why didn't you tell the police…

"The negative inference comes from the fact that you can't push an affirmative defence at trial that you haven't hinted at during questioning."

absolute nonsense

the statute with the meaning that you are trying to whitewash your argument applies only to application for dismissal of the indictment based on a claim it's reasonable for you to have provided earlier thereby preventing the proceedings progressing to court

Re: How can you tell if someone is lying?

#325

Post by Cullinet »

thinkingemote wrote: post #163
MrDrDr wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for posting - I found this video fascinating. Made me think about the law in the UK. Interestingly when arrested here we are told : “You do not have to say anything. But, it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence.” I’d be interested if anyone has experience of the UK system and if the same strategy…

I'd also be interested to hear the advice, particularly as the Police seem to have a number of situations where you must give them varying amounts of information, and could be committing an offence if you don't, and other situations where you can say "no comment" to everything including name and address even when arrested. It's really confusing. For example, the police can get you to show your documents, name, addres…

if you are stopped lawfully the law does require you to identify yourself if asked, generally.

this requirement you linked to also provide your address I'd have to look at further to tell you categorically that providing your ad is specifically in connection with this stature, but when you are asked to identify yourself providing a address is quite normal, but I am surprised that I actually don't know if you have to give your address with your name by law or if your name is always sufficient for all other cases. it is equally likely that I'm trying to clarify ambiguity that arises only from the language of the linked information of course

Re: How can you tell if someone is lying?

#326

Post by simonh »

13415 wrote: post #302
simonh wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lie is a mismatch between what I believe and what I say. It has nothing to do with objective truth. We sometimes talk about lying versus telling the truth, but this is a shorthand. What we mean by telling the truth is saying what we believe to be true. No reasonable person would say that someone is lying if they say what they believe to be true, but it turns out they are mistaken.

Not really, if you think about it, lying is knowingly saying what you believe to be false and what you say is also false. If what you say is accidentally true, then you tried to lie but failed. If you misdirect someone by saying the truth - e.g. because you know the person would assume the opposite of what you say or because you omit a presupposed fact such as that the gas station someone asked for is not closed -, t…

That’s not right at all. Lies are false statements about your own knowledge. Even if the fact your lying about happens to be true, you are still lying about your knowledge of it. It’s important to distinguish between the act of lying, the intended result of the lie and the relationship to the true facts. Those are all independent things. You can’t “fail to lie”, though you can fail to deceive with your lie.

Suppose my daughter is accused of stealing the sweets. I might lie by saying I saw her in the garden at the time they were taken. Even if she was actually in the garden then, and didn’t take the sweets, I’m still lying about my knowledge of these things because I didn’t see her in the garden.

Even if I lie about remembering something, such as that I saw her in the garden (maybe it was a long time ago), and it turns out I did see her in the garden I’m still lying because I didn’t recall the memory when I said I did.

>“If what you say is accidentally true, then you tried to lie but failed.”

No, because you still misrepresented your own knowledge. You did not deceive someone with your lie and maybe led them to the truth, but it was still a lie.

Re: How can you tell if someone is lying?

#327

Post by simonh »

hutzlibu wrote: post #220
Veen wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article shows neurotypical people should have the same concerns. Interogators who think they know how to spot lying are usually wrong, regardless of whether they are interviewing neurotypical people or people on the spectrum. I'm not on the spectrum, but I was a rebellious kid who didn't like to take shit from teachers. My defiant and sarcastic reactions to accusations were often considered evidence that I'd done…

"My defiant and sarcastic reactions to accusations were often considered evidence that I'd done wrong when I was innocent." You were rebellious. From the point of view of a common teacher, that means you are not innocent. There is actually a old common saying, when some kid got a beaten, but it later turned out to be not guilty of that ... "well, he deserved it anyway" or "well, then the beating was in advance for so…

Having been through army basic training, I can confirm this is not an attitude unique to school teachers. To be fair, discipline and self control is incredibly valuable even if it’s not the be all and end all.

Re: How can you tell if someone is lying?

#328

Post by darkerside »

theelous3 wrote: post #249
darkerside wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They were assessing character and yes, making a judgement on it, which was their role. I find it likely that OPs behavior came off as seeming vindictive and spiteful, even if not intended that way. They would have done better to observe specific behaviors (which they did fairly with "slouching"), but their intent was likely to judge character and fit for the school, based on the evidence in front of them. Not saying…

> if you can demonstrate remorse and desire to change, it goes a long way It sounds like you're presuming to know more about what happened there than you can. I fully expressed remorse, and explained how in hindsight I understand that what I was doing was disruptive, and that I wouldn't behave that way in the future, etc. Their rubbish analysis was just that. Also, how is "slouching" a fair thing to observe in analys…

Yeah, I wasn't there and don't presume to know what actually happened. This will come off the wrong way, but I don't know another way to say it so... Feedback is a gift. Even if it's wrong, it is based on some kind of truth in someone's perception. Sometimes it's truly worthless, but I believe there's always something to learn from our fellow humans, even if they express their message in an utterly disgusting way.

Re: How can you tell if someone is lying?

#329

Post by darkerside »

nitrogen wrote: post #239
darkerside wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They were assessing character and yes, making a judgement on it, which was their role. I find it likely that OPs behavior came off as seeming vindictive and spiteful, even if not intended that way. They would have done better to observe specific behaviors (which they did fairly with "slouching"), but their intent was likely to judge character and fit for the school, based on the evidence in front of them. Not saying…

Not saying it's easy, especially for a kid, but if you go in front of a panel like that, if you can demonstrate remorse and desire to change, it goes a long way. This only furthers the advantage of those most willing and able to lie. Especially so when the system and punishment is arbitrary and capricious rather than rooted in first principles. We should focus on outcomes and shared goals, not easily faked attitudes.

Why do you assume it's a lie? I'd say it's at worst uncorrelated to the truth. And, apart from whether you mean it or not, I believe there's value in learning how to tell people that you do. It's up to you then to decide whether you want to use that power to lie.

Re: How can you tell if someone is lying?

#330

Post by seppin »

clouddrover wrote: post #45
seppin wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One thing to add: > And inadmissible in court in many places: I'm not aware of any place that accepts polygraphs in a court.

Then I'll quote the article: "In the United States of America, (where polygraph testing is a growth industry) the admissibility of lie detector test results is determined by courts and legislators on a State by State basis. In the Federal legal system, test results are inadmissible as substantive evidence. Whilst some States have allowed test results in criminal trials, States such as such as California have prohibit…

Has anyone been convicted on a pollygraph alone? If so, that's a scandal.
Post reply on HN