Scientists have identified 50
individuals who are able to spot deception with great accuracy after testing
more than 15,000 people. Eyes for Lies is one of the 50 people.
More
Eyes has a 97.3%
accuracy rate (to date) after identifying truth and deception in 37/38 people
before the truth was known by watching media clips.
Eyes for Lies is not psychic.
Help:I've never uploaded a video before with blogger. How come it has the video window and a picture of it below? I can't seem to get rid of the picture below. Weird. Help!
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero tolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior.
A reader just sent me this article. It's hard to read. It's unfathomable that a mother could do this to her child. It's chilling, so please be advised. Here is another, even more graphic one.
For those who are new this blog, I called Penny Boudreau out the day I saw her plea for her daughter's return on TV. Nothing about her plea sat right with me. You can read it here. To read all my thoughts on this case, click on the labels below.
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero tolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior.
Today is a record-breaking day for "Eyes for Lies Blog". We are surpassing our highest visitor count in one day, all before 2:00 PM today. We have another ten hours to go.
So far today, we've had 2,287 unique visitors, 5,012 page loads, and 146 returning visitors!
Just thought you'd like to know.
Update: We broke all visitor record! The final tally for the day:
10,148 page loads
4,595 unique visitors
320 returning visitors
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero tolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior.
Ted Haggard was on Oprah this week. Did you see him? It was an interesting show. If you missed it, the entire show is on YouTube in four parts.
Read moreHaggard tells us that he is, in his own words, "not gay", and that he is a "...heterosexual male with homosexual attachments," according to his "first" psychologist. He doesn't inform us what the other consulted psychologists have said. It sure does make you wonder, doesn't it?
Haggard also tells us that he still faces temptation, but he no longer feels the need to be "compulsive"; in other words, act on his desires, simply because, he says, he has come forward with the truth and is speaking openly about it now.
Does that make sense to anyone?
Has anyone ever been cured of temptation because they confessed to their desire?
It sounds like the fancy language of denial to me, personally. Or, maybe Haggard is testing the waters to see how people respond to the word "homosexual"?
I don't disagree with Haggard that he has an internal struggle going on inside himself right now, because having homosexual desires, and being an Evangelical pastor don't go hand-in-hand. They are fundamentally at odds.
I personally don't think we've seen the last of this story yet. There is likely going to be another chapter. Whatever chapter unfolds, I only hope it doesn't harm other peoples' lives again.
I truly hope that Haggard finds the strength, the courage and the fortitude to embrace who he really is. When we accept ourselves as we are, we find true happiness, and only then can we truly be our authentic selves.
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero tolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior.
Court was told that Karissa and her mom had been fighting when Penny Boudreau followed her daughter out of the car with some twine and strangled her until she was dead. The girl's last words were "Mom, don't." Penny Boudreau told police officers later that she "did what she had to do," court was told.
I first wrote about the case last February. Penny Boudreau went on TV to plead for her daughter's safe return, but the words she spoke didn't sit right with me.
To read all my posts on Penny Boudreau, click on the label below.
_____________________
A reader just pointed out that I said last June I thought Penny Boudreau would confess. I totally forgot that! In hindsight now, I'm actually surprised it took her this long but we don't know exactly when she confessed to police, do we? _____________________
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero tolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior.
Here is your forum. Do you have a question? Feel free to ask it!
One reader today asked me if I could discern if someone was lying by watching a video of them, even though I couldn't understand the language spoken. The reader believed that because the person was calm, and relaxed, that this indicated they were not lying.
The answer to their question was no, you cannot use body language alone (any body language) to conclusively identify if someone is honest or deceptive. It simply cannot be done, and is dangerous to do.
It's not all about expressions. Language does matter. Emotions matter. Words matter. Facts matter. Behavior matters. The show "Lie to Me" isn't explaining the nuances of this ability very well.
It's also important that people realize there is not one universal clue that can be applied "across the board" to spot deception. Not one. What one person does when he is lying, another will do when he is honest. There is always an exception to every clue. Always. That's what makes deception detection so hard for the average person, because this is not about clues. It is about understanding human behavior, to the core.
Deception detection is more about the sum of inconsistencies, and the sum in total indicates deception. This is so important, and clearly not being communicated on "Lie to Me". Microexpressions, and the other clues shown on the show, are used in the process of discerning a lie, but they are not conclusive of anything in and of themselves, outside of indicating a person's emotional state of mind (which will just provide you with a clue).
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero tolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior.
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero tolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior.
Today on Oprah, Ted Haggard is speaking out. If you go to Oprah.com, and look at the preview of the show, it should be interesting. She is asking some great questions!
The AP also released this video yesterday of a young man who formerly attended Haggard's New Life Church.
Tune back later this week for my thoughts. In the meantime, you can read about my previous thoughts about Haggard. Did you know the first time I saw him, I just didn't trust him? It was his fake smile that never ended that clued me in that this guy had big secrets! That's always a big tip-off to anyone. When someone keeps a fake smile plastered on their face through everything they say, it's a good indication what you are being told is being sugar-coated, in a big, big way!
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero tolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior.
Clip of Rod Blagojevich talking to Barbara Walters on The View January 26, 2009
Read more I just decided to spend a few moments this morning to watch Rod Blagojevich, as several of you have requested my opinion, and all I can say after watching the first clip of him talking to Barbara Walters, on "The View", is that he is one slippery man!!
It's incredible.
Walters asks him some very direct questions, and he refuses to say anything. I sat there and said, well, if he claims to be being treated unfairly, well then, speak the truth, but he doesn't want to do that, either. This is behavior that does not support honesty.
Blagojevich is as evasive as one could get. He won't confirm or deny he even said some basic words. That's absolutely hilarious, actually.
Why would he do that, you ask?
Well, its another avenue he can use later to refute anything. He can deny he ever said such words, that it isn't even him talking, etc. You see, at this point, he doesn't know what the wire tap tapes about him contain. I suspect he has no idea how conclusive they are, and so until he knows the whole enchilada against him, he doesn't want to say anything that he can't later refute. That's slippery! He wants to claim all these things, but he won't stand on anything. It's absurd.
Blagojevich seems to find himself very important and has a grandiose sense of self, he doesn't seem to show a lot of emotions when he talks, he wants us to believe the world is out to get him, and that the rules the rest of the politicians abide by aren't fair to him. Add to that his evasive language, and the picture it paints, to me, isn't far off from what Cynthia McFadden has said others have called him in this interview.
Cynthia McFadden did a great interview, by the way. She really corners him good! She says, "This kind of talk would be okay so long as you didn't act on it. Is that what you are saying?"
Blagojevich says, "I think if you explore ideas and discuss things, and you are willing to think outside the box, and you test a variety of things, and you know you'll end up doing only the right thing, once you sort it all out, and that there is a process unfolding, that that is part of what it takes to be a leader and make the right decisions...."
It's total nonsense. I think that speaks for itself, personally.
Do I trust Blagojevich? No, I don't. He hasn't done one thing to support his honesty. Not one thing. Instead, he hopes he can convince people by being firm, aggressive and in-your-face about absolutely nothing, but proclaims his innocence. I suspect that this behavior has carried Blago a long time, but that isn't working anymore.
Blagojevich has had mannerisms from day one that have always had me on alert, and made me very cautious about him. I am not surprised at all to see him where he is at right now. I was surprised this didn't happen sooner, actually.
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero tolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior.
"48 Hours Mystery" profiled the case of Barbara Mullinex this past Saturday night. Barbara ended up dead in the harbor not far from where she lived in Southern California. She was stabbed over 50 times, and found with a butter knife in her eye. Clearly, it was a vicious murder, but the big question was, who did it?
There were three potential suspects: Bruce Mullenix, her ex-husband with whom she currently lived, her 17-year-old daughter Rachael, and Rachael's fiance, Ian Allen.
Read more"48 Hours" presented the story in a way to keep the mystery going as long as they could, but when you heard about the behavior and lies of Rachael Mullinex, it didn't take much for the average person to see who was guilty. Allen confessed, and tried to protect Rachael, but Rachael wanted us to believe she was abused by Allen, and that he knocked her out, kidnapped her and she was just a victim in this case.
But when you hear that Allen left Rachael alone at the house for an hour, and she could have easily called 911 to get help, or left the house to escape, her story clearly falls apart. Also, when she was on the run with Allen, she was left alone in the gas station, and could have cried out for help, but she didn't. Instead, she walks around the gas station, as seen on security video, without a worry. But the worst part was when Rachael text messaged Allen shortly after her mother's murder, during that hour that he left her alone. She didn't call for help. Instead, she typed the words "I love you" to Allen. That is what sealed her fate, or should have sealed her fate, for any doubters. It didn't take Eyes for Lies to see this.
I personally suspect that "48 Hours" did the interviews after Rachael's conviction, which should be taken into account, because, if this is true, it meant that the "high stakes" of Rachael's lies dissipated, and many of her clues would have dissipated as well. But even with that, Rachael's emotions were way off kilter. She was happy and smiling through the entire interview, which was very inconsistent with what she was saying. She smiled until the point where she talked about being convicted. Then her emotions changed, and changed notably. Suddenly that "I'm-innocent-girlish-smile" that she had on her face the entire interview dissipated when she finally felt pain. She tries to tell us the only mistake she made was dating Allen. Give me a break!
Rachael told us how much she loved her mother, but never shed a tear for her. She didn't even have a hard time talking about her mother being murdered. And when she told us Allen was abusive to her, she had absolutely no emotional connection to that, either. Rachael talks about highly emotional subjects, but never gets emotional. That's a big tip-off.
I did notice a few spots in the interview with Erin Moriarty where Rachael had a hard time concealing her deceptive ways. She ever-so-slightly indicated two or three times that she felt joy in being deceptive. Her face got a glow about it as she'd recalled a memory (her eyes looked upwards), and she'd grin ever so slightly. It was muted and very, very subtle, but it was there. Rachael also shows an expression of anger at the prosecutor when she talks about the fact that Rachael didn't call 911. Rachael purses her lips and licks them, very briefly. She is clearly mad, but manages to hide it very well. If Rachael was innocent, or cared about her mother, that memory would have caused her pain. Instead, she is angry because, I suspect, she knew she messed up.
I personally believed that Rachael was crying a true cry of desperation in the police interview at times, specifically when she was told she was going to be arrested for her mother's murder. She was distraught that she was caught. That devastates Rachael, but of course, I don't think her cry is consistent throughout that interview. It ebbs and flows from real to fake, depending on what they talk about. At one point, she cries out and then suddenly stops and talks normally (which is very abnormal). It might be an edit in the tape, or bad acting on Rachael's part. Either way, I do not trust Rachael and I believe the jury got this right. Rachael's dad is an innocent man.
I don't disagree with the prosecutor here when she says that she believes Rachael Mullinex is a psychopath.
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero tolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior.
Did you see "48 Hours" last night? It was a fascinating mystery. There some good clues. Did you notice them?
I went to 48 Hours website today to see what people were saying about the case, and I see it is a toss up. Some people believe Rachael Mullenix is innocent, others believe she is guilty. One person suspects the father, Bruce, did it.
What do you think? Feel free to share your thoughts below.
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero tolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior.
For a drama, amazingly, I enjoyed it. As my regular readers know, I don't watch too much on TV that is fictitious. It just doesn't cut it for me, but this show, naturally, had interesting content that relates to my passion, so I liked it. I will definitely watch it again.
I was surprised that the show focused on body language and more importantly microexpressions alone when there are so many other clues to deception. For those of you who read my blog regularly, you know there are a whole host of other clues that I use. See this poll.
I was a little concerned that people will think that just because someone touches their forehead that it will always mean the person doing the behavior feels shameful. This is not the case. As with all clues to deception, they cannot be applied across the board.
For me, each case needs to be looked at individually. If I applied clues across the board to all people I saw, I'd be mistaken equally as much as I am correct. In essence, I'd be no better than chance. Deception detection, for me, isn't about the clues as much as it is about the "inconsistencies" of behavior, speech, personality and demeanor. I am fearful that people will attempt to do this, and it could have devastating results. I've seen many people here on my blog attempt to read microexpressions, and miss the mark. In my opinion, not all head shakes "no" when someone is talking positively about something automatically means the person is lying. And if you can't accurately identify a smile and its meaning, it can be disastrous. Not all smiles mean a person is happy. Nor is every hand to the forehead shame. So please be cautious, and realize this is a TV show. Spotting deception is much more complex than what this show can cover in an hour. Liars are as diverse as the lies they tell. If it was only about spotting the clues to deceit, I think most people would be wizards.
I also don't know why the show uses the polygraph, or at a minimum shows it. It doesn't make any sense. People with this ability do not need to use, nor would they want to use a polygraph. I suspect it is all for effect, but if people believe this show is "the science", it may send the wrong message. I think people should know the show is "based on science," but they need to take into account that it is a drama and entertainment, first and foremost. You can't forget it has been "Hollywoodized."
Did you feel like the actors were acting to you, or did it seem real to you?
It was a toss up for me. There were times when I was really absorbed into the show, and there were other times when I'd lose the moment because something wasn't right. That is very normal for me, and why I typically don't enjoy dramas or movies. It's nothing specific to "Lie to Me".
I did think, however, that "Lie to Me" did a good job with all the expressions and acting out emotions overall. Some were perfect! I think Monica Raymund did a superb job, and I really liked Tim Roth and Kelli Williams. I struggled, however, with Brendan Hines' character. He just didn't do it for me. He seemed to want to laugh or be giddy when he said really serious things, and it just didn't work for me. His character, in my opinion, is a liability rather than an asset, but I also have a horrible sense of humor. I am way too serious most of the time for my own good, and I know it. So take that for what it is worth.
What are your thoughts about the show seeming to endorse or at least show indifference to lying at times?
That's a great question. In the one scene, Dr. Lightman lied to the student to get her to confess what she knew about the murder by telling her another student committed suicide (which was a lie). In the police interrogations I've seen, when the police lie, it has had devastating results, getting honest people confused and mixed up. It's caused honest people, who are insecure, to doubt themselves and make false confessions. I do not believe in lying to subjects in interrogations.
As for Brendan Hines, and his radical honesty: Is it radical honesty when someone says everything that is on their mind? I think rather it is about having no tact. Being honest does not mean that one has to be tactless or say whatever is on their mind; nor does it have to be horrible in timing.
As for Dr. Lightman not going public with the information he found out about the senator, is that lying? I don't think it is. Just because we have become privy to information, and choose not to share it with people, in my mind, isn't considered lying. Now granted, if he was paid to do a job and discover if someone was lying, well, he had an obligation. In that circumstance, I would probably have to tell my client that I discovered the truth and that truth is not what I expected, and is more private than I ever could have imagined. I would likely refund his money, and refer him to talk to the senator. That wouldn't be lying, but choosing to respect the complexity of the situation I found myself in.
I am a firm believer you can be honest in 98% of situations with people; it's just a matter of what you say, and how you say it. If you don't like something, you don't have to say you hate it. You can always say something that you believe to be true instead of lying by changing the focus, and still dealing with the subject at hand (i.e., "The jeans you wore last night were my favorite. I prefer them to these."). There are always tactful ways to be respectful, truthful and not lie.
Were the microexpressions displayed longer in the show than in real life?
That's a good question. There were times when they clearly slowed them down, or replayed them so that people could see them, but I am not sure if they did that for every single one. I didn't pay that close attention. I would think they would have had to speed them up actually to make them 1/25th of a second, because when we make the expressions consciously, they are much slower. I don't know if they did that. That's a great question for the producers of the show! You'd need to contact them directly, as I am in no way affiliated with "Lie to Me".
Did you experience the scenes and lies like you do in real life, or was it different?
The answer is no, it felt different to me for a variety of reasons. It definitely felt like acting. I do have to say that it didn't seem natural for me to spot the lies on the show. It felt weird, probably because people were acting. More than that, to spot deception, a lot of what I do is match people's personalities to their behaviors. I look for inconsistencies. By looking at a face, I immediately get a sense of a person's personality, and that information gives me a foundation to understand people. Peoples' facial features give me valuable information, too. I talk about this in what I call "paralleling" elsewhere in my blog, and with actors, you can't do that because the actors don't play their true selves. The actors play "characters", and many times, the actors chosen for the part don't fit the "characters" they are playing. More than that, their behaviors across the board are not natural. They are scripted, so things don't occur naturally.
Interestingly enough, more than one of you have pointed out to me that I need to change careers and go to Hollywood to become an acting coach/consultant. I should help actors achieve their expressions, and hit the mark more. It's an interesting concept. I've always thought about doing that for the television commercial industry, because they miss the mark all the time! Missing the emotions and expressions in a TV commercial has to influence how people buy products. I bet you're not surprised to know I am rarely ever influenced to buy a product due to a commercial. I find them very ineffective for the most part.
Overall, I think the show is good, because it opens people up to a valuable science. It introduces that there are people who can spot lies by using body language and a host of other clues that people give off when they deceive. So, I'll leave you with a word of caution. Just remember, the traits of a liar are as diverse as the people who lie. Just because someone does something you think only liars do, it's not that simple. I can almost always find an honest person who does the exact same behavior for a different reason.
So there you have it, an inside perspective from a wizard. What did you think of the show? Will you watch it again?
*For more comments about the show from me, click on the "Lie to Me" label below.
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero tolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior.
Here is another audio clip of Eckhart from 48 Hours. What do you think when you listen to this? Does it support his story on 48 Hours, or diverge from it?
You can read my review of Bob Eckhart from earlier this week here.
Don't forget to set your recorders for Saturday night's "48 Hours Mystery"! The show is titled Lady In The Harbor.
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero tolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior.
This is absolutely the most heart-breaking news (more here) that I have seen this morning. George Anthony reportedly left, and checked into a motel. At some point, he missed a family meeting with their attorney, and sent his family a message that he wanted to end his life. The Orange County police tracked him down via his cell phone pings, and he is currently in the hospital for observation. He says he doesn't want to live anymore.
Read moreI can only imagine the hell that Cindy and George are going through. The pain is beyond what any of us could ever comprehend. Few of us seem to put ourselves in their shoes to truly try to understand. They have not only one tragedy of inconceivable proportions, but two to deal with. And if they are to accept the realities of what happened, they have to accept that this nightmare came from their own flesh and blood. What does that do to a person's sense of self-worth? I can only imagine it would bring you to where George found himself. How else could one feel?
I know many people will say that the Anthonys should have reacted differently while they still could. These are people who don't understand our legal system, and what it is like to know or live with a psychopath. I personally don't believe psychopaths are created. I believe they are born, and one day, we will understand the defects of the brain that cause these dangerous people to act in the ways that they do. But right now, we are in the dark ages of brain science.
If you've never experienced a psychopath, and been forced to deal with their manipulation, control and lies, it's a world you couldn't possibly understand. People without a conscience are people with incredible power and influence because they have no boundaries. They will push others to the limits of sanity because it doesn't cause them any heartbreak to do so. Psychopaths are the ultimate manipulators. They can control the best of us, if we get too close.
My heart goes out to George and Cindy Anthony in these most difficult of times. I do not judge them for their behavior in any form. I feel great pain when I think of the situation they are in and I wish them the strength and courage to move forward, and ultimately peace in knowing the did the best they could with what they knew at the time. ________________
Fox also reported this:
A former boyfriend, Ricardo Morales, told investigators she had made jokes about giving Caylee baby medicine to put her to sleep, according to MyFOXOrlando.com. But he also said she seemed to have a normal relationship with her daughter.
So next time you hear something as sick as this, what are you going to do?
You can call the police, but if Casey says it is a joke, and the police believe her because she looks harmless, and she doesn't have any type of record, and the police believe she is not a threat to her daughter, what else can you do? Seriously, what options do you have to stop something so horrific as what happened to Caylee?
I believe I can pick out a psychopath more than the average person, but until you or I can prove they have an intent to harm another person, there is absolutely nothing you or I, or anyone else can do to stop such a tragedy from occurring. It's the price we pay for our ultimate freedoms as a society.
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero tolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior.
I didn't plan on doing a review of "Lie to Me", but many of you have expressed interest that I do. So, I'll see what the consensus is. If enough people vote, I will share my thoughts. Feel free to tell me what you are curious about below, if you are interested.
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero tolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior.
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero tolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior.
"48 Hours Mystery" profiled the story of Bob Eckhart, and Toni Soren (Heartsong) this past Saturday. Soren was found dead at the back entrance to the family home by her husband Eckhart. Soren was badly beaten in what cops called "overkill". If you haven't seen the show, you can watch it here, or you can read the story here.
I think people are likely torn in this case because there was no solid evidence to directly link Eckhart to the murder, and more than that, a jury did not convict him. However, on "48 Hours", the jury foreman spoke out and clarified his position. He said that 10 or 11 of the jurors actually believed Eckhart was guilty, but they didn't have the evidence to convict. You must remember that the police initially didn't think that Eckhart could have done this, so they didn't take a close look at him at the time when good evidence was still present. Eckhart wasn't arrested for six years.
Read moreWhen I watched Eckhart from the very beginning of "48 Hours", his speech seems contrived. He talked slowly and methodically. He seemed calculating. His emotions didn't match his situation, and his words, at times, were very odd and unusual. Furthermore, Eckhart's emotions were exceptionally dull. Other times, I believe they were flat out fake. The clues, to me, in this interview, were numerous and telling.
Here are some of my thoughts:
Eckhart says, "I remember my wife from meeting her the very first day with her eyes. I had seen her eyes for all of my life. I think I've... always been in love with her."
Notice the words, "I think" here. Does that convince you? Do you tell people you "think" you love your spouse, or that you love your spouse? The words "I think" show doubt on the part of Eckhart. I suspect it is a subconscious slip of the mind.
Listen to Eckhart in the 911 call. When the operator answers, Eckhart screams as if he is in a panic, or about to go over the edge. As soon as the operator talks to Eckhart, his tone and pitch changes instantly. He calms down. People who are in a panic or on the edge can't turn their emotions on and off sentence by sentence, or this quickly. This is a notable red flag for me.
Also listen to how Eckhart says, "My wife has been killed...by someone...here in my house." I find that statement strange. Notice the pauses? Someone? Here in my house? It shows thinking, which is unusual. In emergency situations, we usually go into auto-pilot and just react.
Eckhart says, "My fear is a guy like this could be doing it again...He'd have to be the most horrible monster in the whole universe to do that."
The words "a guy like this" are immediate red flags for me. It's as if he is talking about people in general who do this, not "this guy" who killed his wife. Very strange.
I also find his benign choice of words for the "murderer" of his wife fascinating here. I wonder if he ever used the words "murderer" or "killer" when he talked about his dead wife. He certainly wasn't in denial about this crime, because he had the news media at his house within days of her death. People who kill often sanitize their acts, and have a difficult time saying such harsh words as "murderer" and "killer". Why wouldn't he say "killer"? Does he ever use "killer" or "murderer"?
Then Eckhart tries to say that whoever did this must be a monster. Is that to say, "Look at me, I'm not. So how could I do this?"
Eckhart says when talking about Toni, "An incredibly beautiful little girl knocked on my door, and her name was Toni, and we talked for must have been six or seven hours," Bob recalls. "We could connect completely with no walls, no shields. Everything was just magic."
Do you notice how he never talks about Toni being the love of his life? How he loved her, how beautiful she was, how special she was, how this madman stole her from him? It's eerily missing. Also, does he have to think back to their early marriage to say something even remotely nice about Toni?
Notice how Eckhart has no anger whatsoever that someone has killed his wife. Why? I would expect to see some emotions of violation. Not only was his wife killed, but the killer was in his house. I watched the tape of Eckhart showing the news media around his house a few days after the crime, and I just don't see it. That's puzzling.
Also, did Eckhart stay in the house after the murders? Didn't he worry that staying in that house with his two sons after his wife was murdered? Wouldn't you worry about your kids if that happened to you? Especially since the killer has never been found. Wouldn't you worry they may come back to shut you up? Or harm your kids? How come Eckhart has no worry about that?
Also, the fact that his wife was murdered in that house doesn't seem to bother him. That's unusual, too. The sanctity of his home was violated, and that would bother most people.
Then notice when Eckhart talks about Toni's extra-marital affairs. He says, "I think she had sex with another man once or twice." Watch his shoulder shrug when he says this. His body language tells us he has doubts about this. This is fascinating. I don't think he believes she slept with two men. So why is he trying to paint her in a negative light? When we lose a loved one, especially to murder, we usually idealize them. We don't even remember the negatives. It's way too painful, but obviously not for Eckhart. He seems to want to point them out, and possibly even exaggerate them.
At time marker 9:00, Eckhart says, "I used to describe it as living in nirvana." Then a few seconds later, in a distinct change of emotion, he goes into what I believe is a "forced" cry. To me, the cry seems very contrived. Notice, too, there are absolutely no tears, which is always a huge tip-off. Somehow Eckhart went into the sob that comes naturally from tears in the sinuses, but he doesn't have any tears. Oops! His facial expressions, too, don't fit with a crying individual.
Watch Eckhart talk about how he found Toni. I find the tone of his voice an immediate red flag. It's void of any emotions in what should have been a highly emotional and painful experience. If you didn't know the topic he was speaking about, you'd think he was talking about something benign like lifting up or moving a sleeping dog. But he is talking about finding his MURDERED wife, the supposed love of his life. The alarm bells are blaring for me here.
He says, "I lifted her up with my arm like this, and I held her up, and when I saw her face, I freaked out."
He "freaked out"? Knock me off my chair! This is nuts. Mind you, his wife was lying in a pool of blood, dead. Shouldn't that have freaked him out? Apparently not. He had to pick her up to get freaked out. It shows you the lack of normal emotional responses Eckhart had. This is very abnormal. An innocent person would have been very traumatized by simply seeing their wife in a pool of blood. Second, they'd wonder if the killer was still around, but Eckhart is the exception time and time again.
The words "freaked out" are also chillingly cold for a man who loved his wife. Monsters freak us out, people we love when they are injured devastate us, tear us up, cause us searing emotional pain. Notice at that point, there are no emotions on Eckhart's face whatsoever! That makes no sense. Our memories and emotions are highly intertwined. Eckhart is just an exception again.
Eckhart continues, "...and when I saw her eyes were beaten closed, I was just destroyed by it. I gently laid her back down and I said to myself, 'I don’t want to remember this.'"
Notice Eckart didn't cry, try to apologize to her, hug her, feel guilty he didn't protect her, wasn't there to help her, nothing. Notice it is all about Eckhart? Notice he has no emotions for what she endured, or her pain? There is no anger about who did this to her. It's surprisingly missing, and so are the tears when we'd expect to see them the most. They are absent. All big red flags.
There was no rape, and there were no valuables taken. Clearly, this wasn't a robbery, or a rapist, and what are the odds a stranger is going to go into overkill? What would be the point?
In talking about his alibi of being at the construction site, Eckhart says, "I was there until about...about 2:30." The pause in his speech in indicative that he has to think about it. He doesn't remember this. You would think his memories of that day would have been seared into his mind after an experience like that, wouldn't you? But if he didn't experience things as he tells us he did, he would constantly have to think to recreate what wasn't.
Bob Eckhart says he was in tears the entire time he was at his son's wedding six months later, yet when you see "48 Hours" show two clips from his son's wedding, Eckhart is dancing. Check out his moves on the dance floor! He's got this giddy swing going on, certainly not what a man would do if he was all choked up and devastated. In another clip shown earlier, Eckhart is standing by his son smiling. He certainly didn't appear to be choked up as he said. Here Eckhart's words seem to contradict his actions. It's another red flag added to the pile.
Notice when Eckhart talks about his shrine to Toni, he is void of emotions again. His voice pitch gives no indication that he is upset, sad or emotional on any level. He talks about the object like objects. Where is his emotional connection? Is this shrine just a measure to pull on your heartstrings?
When Eckhart was brought into the police station six years later, he says, "I don't think it is my blood." If you were innocent and you knew it, would you say "I don't think"...? I think you would say conclusively, "It is NOT my blood." To me, the words "I don't think" are an indication of hesitation, or insecurity.
Eckhart talks about being locked up before trial. He says, "Twenty months in jail is not something any one of us would want to do." Look at his emotions! Wow. He woke up. He felt discomfort for the first time in this interview, and look at all his normal emotions that come blaring out. Isn't this fascinating? Eckhart does have normal emotions when it is his pain. Why didn't he have any emotions for Toni? Notice, too, he doesn't talk about how vile it was to be locked up as an innocent man? Wouldn't it have bothered you to be in jail for two years, if you were innocent?
Watch his new wife's response when she is asked if she thinks it is conceivable that Eckhart could kill someone. Watch her head shake go all over the place as she says no. Try to say no, and do that. Go ahead. Don't you feel ambiguous?
It is fascinating that Eckhart made no phone calls between 12:30 and 1:41, isn't it? Isn't that the perfect opportunity to commit a murder? Yet the rest of the day, he was on the phone. Hmm.... and he didn't have an alibi for lunch. What are the odds? If he was out of town, surely he could have told police upfront that he went to Wendy's, and they could have vouched they saw him. Surely the police should have done that. What did he do for lunch that day?
At the murder scene, there is a knife block on the counter right near the drawer where the knife was pulled from. As the prosecutor said, what stranger is going to ignore that and open drawers? It defies logic. It takes time to search for a knife, whereas pulling a knife from a knife block is quick and easy. That is certainly suggestive that whoever did this knew where all the knives were kept.
Listen in court when the police interrogate Eckhart on tape, and Eckart says he has no idea why his blood was found on her. He is calm, cool and collected. He says, "I have no idea...no idea at all." There is no anger or frustration in his voice whatsoever. If the police are zooming in on you as the killer and you are innocent, are you going to be that calm?
Eckhart at one point says, "I don't believe that any human being in the whole world has the right to harm another being in any way." Watch how he shrugs his shoulder in doubt when he says that. You can't miss it. He is saying something affirmative, very affirmative, yet his body language is telling us he isn't convinced. Isn't that interesting?
Dow from "48 Hours" asks Eckhart: "What would be your reaction if the jury finds you guilty?"
Eckhart says, "I have to accept the life that’s given me. And I have to continue to walk on my path. And if it happened that way, I’m certainly going to be very, very sad."
Would you be sad if you were wrongly convicted? Or would you be mad and feeling violated?
Dow says: An innocent man going to jail? Eckhart replies, “Yeah, absolutely," Bob says. "It would be a... [raised eyebrow as he thinks]...travesty."
This is ABSOLUTELY FASCINATING! He had to think about what it would be like for him, if he were to be wrongly convicted. He had no feelings to guide him. That was mind-blowing for me.
Watch Echart's reaction when he hears the jury finds him "not guilty".
Suddenly he is full of emotion, yet when he talked about Toni, we saw none of this. Does Eckhart only feel for himself? That's very common for psychopaths. The only emotions they feel are their own. You sure do wonder. Look at his true and genuine smile!
Listen to how Eckhart talks to the reporters. In an angry tone, he says, "All I am going to say to you is I am free."
You can feel Eckhart's emotions here. This is what we should have seen when he was wrongly accused, but we didn't (revealed or concealed). But now, his emotions are genuine, real and true. He is steaming mad! He glares at the media now. Is that because he has the confidence of a jury behind him (I don't think he knew at that time what they would later tell "48 Hours")?
He continues, "As I should be. I didn't do it."
I find it odd how he says he didn't do it second, and not first. This is not a clue, it is just notable.
Dow says you've gotta know there are still people out there that think you killed your wife. Watch Eckhart. Look at his emotions. Listen to the inflection in his voice. All of this was completely missing when he talked about being wrongly accused. It was completely missing when he recollected memories of Toni. Why isn't he Mr. Calm again? Instead, you see this anger in him. It's the anger that I suspect bubbled up one day and was inflicted on his wife in a fit of rage--in a crime of passion.
Eckhart continues, "But I know what I did and what I didn't do. I know I didn't kill my wife, so what they think, that's their problem to deal with. Hopefully somewhere along the line, I can create the...there will be enough truth that will be brought out in this case that exoneration will be complete."
CREATE? Need I say more?
Eckhart continues, "They're going to have to find the people who did this incredible act. I won't rest until that is brought out."
Notice "the people"? Isn't this interesting? Does he think there is more than one person now? Why the change? Also notice he doesn't use the words "killer" or "murderer"? Do they make him feel uncomfortable?
Eckhart also say he won't rest until these people are brought to justice, but then why doesn't he go out and try to find the true killer himself? If it bothered him that badly, why isn't he on a quest? Do you see how ridiculous this statement is? He won't rest until everyone else does what he wants. Give me a break!
I think you can see I'm not buying Eckhart's story.
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero tolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior.
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero tolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior.
Several people have written to me and asked for my opinion about Bob Eckhart. Eckhart was tried for the murder of his wife, Toni, but was set free by the jury--a jury which said they believed he was guilty, but weren't able to convict due to a lack of evidence.
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero tolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior.
I really enjoyed watching these clips. They were somewhat "healing" for me. They reflect my own experiences in life, quite beautifully. It feels so good to say "There! That's how I feel!" It feels even better to watch Dr. Cal Lightman do what I've always wanted to do in my adult life, but chose not to: call people out on their lies! That's what was so healing for me. Yes, I see life through very similar eyes, and at times, it gets overwhelming.
Furthermore, I have tried to offer others glimpses of what it is like to see through my eyes when people ask, only to see people gloss over in a fog of unknowing when I try to explain it. I've learn to accept I was not someone who was easily understood, but this show offers hope for me. It's exciting. It feels good. People will finally understand what it is like to have this ability (and to be me).
Fox, at least from the pilot previews, has nailed it.
Read moreThree of the four clips really "hit home" for me.
I really related to Clip 2. I work for myself and I have been in countless business meetings where I have seen heaps of *stuff*. I would have loved nothing better than to unload it, or call people out on it just like Dr. Lightman does in this clip. Would it ever feel good!! But of course, to actually do so in real life wouldn't go over well. I can tell you, people would write you off as a loony! So watching Dr. Cal Lightman do what I've always wanted to do with the audience on this side--now that's healing!
I also got a great chuckle out of clip #3 for the same reason as clip #2.
In clip 4, when Dr. Cal Lightman walks out of his office and on to the streets, he sees one lie after another. In February of 2007, I wrote a post I titled the "difficult side" (of this ability). I wrote about all the emotions that I encounter when I am out in public and how it can be overwhelming for me. I also see lies, too, from time-to-time as shown in this video, though not as frequently --it just depends where I am, and more or less if I can hear people talking. This clip is not "unrealistic". I was actually taken by it after watching it. I was like "Wow". They captured it. They got it. They nailed it!
The only thing I didn't get was in Clip 1. Why do they use a polygraph? It doesn't make any sense. Is it simply for effect--for show dramatization?
Thankfully, I have a very caring and compassionate husband who is willing to listen to all my experiences, and lets me vent out all the stuff I see, because much of what I see is not "socially acceptable" to talk about. It's not politically correct. It's the stuff that we as a society don't talk about, we don't want to face, that we would rather deny and bury. It's the stuff we hope that no one else sees. It's the stuff sometimes even I won't dare to write about here on my blog because it is too damn personal for the people whose lives I see into without ever asking to!
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero tolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior.
Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito's murder trial for Meredith Kercher began today in a Perugia courtroom. New reports are saying that the media has descended upon the beautiful, picturesque town in droves to cover a trial that could last for up to a year.
I read the news and found some interesting tidbits. I never knew that Knox had been arrested before. Did you?
[BBC.com] Reporters descended on Amanda's home city of Seattle in search of more details of her private life.
They discovered that the Washington University student had been arrested and fined in 2007 for her role in a drunken party that police were called to.
A picture began to be painted of a "party girl" who abused drink and drugs and had an active sex life.
The Guardian.co.uk displays a photo of Knox in the courtroom earlier today, and I find that photo as well as the one of Knox with Sollecito the day of Kercher's body discovery fascinating.
If you were facing trial for murder, for a murder you did not commit, and it was the first day you appeared in court as the world peered on with countless reporters all glaring at you, would you be relaxed and comfortable enough to smile casually? Knox's face in this photo looks notably relaxed to me.
[Guardian.co.uk] A smiling Amanda Knox walked into a frescoed underground Italian courtroom this morning at the start of her trial for the murder of her British fellow-student Meredith Kercher.
Dressed in jeans, a grey, black and white striped top and grey hooded tracksuit jacket, she chatted in a seemingly relaxed way with her lawyers.
Is Knox that naive to believe she will walk free without a worry? Her character, her behavior and her actions to date certainly don't support she is a person who is naive. She certainly didn't live a sheltered existance -- especially after spending a year in a foreign prison.
Why doesn't she have an ounce of worry? Most innocent people in her shoes would be shaking in their boots, panicked, worried, or fearful of what the outcome will be. Is Knox arrogant enough to think she will get off without a hitch, is she that emotionally detached, or self-delusional? This photo begs us to ask why.
Also, the day that Meredith Kercher's body was found, I found Knox's behavior interesting as well. If you are completely innocent and uninvolved in the murder of your flatmate, wouldn't you be rattled to the core that a murderer came within footsteps of where you co-habitated?
Wouldn't you feel fear that this murderer is still lurking out there that morning when the body was found, and that they could still be watching you? Wouldn't you fear that you could be the next victim?
Yet when we watch Knox and Sollecito kiss and interact that day, we see none of these emotions. It's absolutely perplexing! They seem to have no fear, which is very abnormal. There seems to be no stress in their faces whatsoever. Did they know they didn't have to worry?
Ever since I heard that Knox said that she was in the flat that night [my post November 9, 2007], and that she heard a scream, but was scared so she covered her ears, my alarm bells went off on high.
No one hears a blood curdling scream, and doesn't know the source, but covers their ears. As humans, when we hear a threatening noise, albeit a scream, a loud bang or thud, we don't just decide to cover our ears without knowing what is going on. Our natural, biological response is to investigate the noise. It's a protective measure we all have within us, an instinct for survival, because that noise could ultimately be warning that we, too, are in danger.
We only cover our ears when we know what is going on, but don't want to listen to the wretched noise before us. This statement shows that Amanda had some awareness of what was going on when Kercher screamed. To me, that is bone-chilling. I don't think Knox lied about this bit of information. I suspect she was there and she did hear a scream, and perhaps she did cover her ears, but I believe she knew what was going on. It's too strange of a lie to come up with if she wasn't there or wasn't in some way involved. She just changed the details, and those details give her away.
Do I think Knox killed Kercher? I have no clue, but I do see enough that makes me question that Knox has not been honest with us, and at a minimum she didn't help a roommate who she knew was being violated in one form or another. Instead, it appears from what she says, she stood by and listened, and turned her cold back to a person in desperate need of help.
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero tolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior.
Curtis Vance, the suspect in the murder of Anne Pressly, spoke out to the media today.
Read My Thoughts HereHe says very little, but his behavior and words here are very telling.
Vance says that he did not kill Pressly, and that seeing Pressly's family was "sad".
Sad.Can you believe it?
He thinks he should feel sadness!
If you are wrongly accused, I can guarantee the first you emotion you are going to feel is not sadness for the victim or the victim's family. If your life as you know it could be over because you are being wrongly accused of a murder you didn't commit, you will, without a doubt, feel mad or violated that people have this all wrong. You will be frustrated that people aren't seeing the truth for what it is. Sadness would be the furthest thing from your mind.
Clearly Vance's emotions are abnormal and unusual, which is a big red flag.
Listen to what Vance says to the reporter. The reporter asks Vance, "What was it like seeing her parents there today and all of her friends and supporters?" Watch what Vance says. It's mind-blowing.
He says "It was gooh..." Does he mean to say "good"? Notice he stops himself mid-thought and changes the course of what he is saying. He is thinking as he speaks. Look at his head shake, too, as this all occurs.
Does that give you the chills?
Does it make any sense?
I think it is pretty obvious Vance was about to say the word "good" which is supported by his affirmative head shake which then changes course as he changes his thoughts. This is a strong indicator that seeing Pressly's family today for him was a positive experience.
Is that how you would feel if you were wrongly accused of killing some woman? Would it feel good to see her family as they glared at you with hatred and disgust? Of course not. But if you had some sick pervsion, it might.
A few words, one emotion, and changing thoughts are quite revealing, wouldn't you say? It's chilling.
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero tolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior.
READ MOREWhen I listen to the 911 calls, I don't hear anything that tips me off or concerns me. I don't hear a man who is nervous or who sounds like he is acting, or making up a story. And when I watch Kronk on GMA, I also get the sense he is sincere.
I'm a little bit perplexed by Kronk's persistence with the police if he didn't get close to the bag prior to December 11th. If he didn't know anything conclusive (i.e., investigate it more than he is saying), why didn't he just brush it off and forget about it? This raises my eyebrows and leaves me wanting to ask more questions, but nothing more.
I keep wondering if Kronk smelled the smell of death that day in August as he and his co-worker stood by the side of the road catching some shade, and that strong smell is what led Kronk to investigate the area further, and led him to spot the bag. What he did from there, I don't know.
Who thinks of the smell of death, and concealing that smell in a decaying swamp?
Have you ever thought about that?
It's rather unusual. Then again, it may not mean anything. He may have just added up the pieces, and knew that the bag and the "white" material underneath was not good one way or another.
I will stand on this: I do not think Kronk knew the Anthonys or had any contact with them. I also believe Kronk when he says he had nothing to do with Caylee's disappearance. I believe Kronk when he says that.
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero tolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior.
Through Oprah.com, Suze Orman is offering her latest book, 2009 Action Plan, a $9.99 value, free to the public for one week (offer expires January 15th at midnight).
Considering the tough economic times, I thought I would share this news with you even though it is off topic. Suze Orman is sincere when she says she wants to help people. She gives sound advice!
DOWNLOAD EXPIRED
Thanks Oprah and Suze for working to help make people's lives better! If you haven't been watching Oprah lately, she is spending much of her time in 2009 helping people live their best life. Go Oprah!
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero tolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior.
Many of you have asked me over the past several months if Sarah Palin is lying about Trig being her son. People have run rampant on the Internet with speculation that Trig is actually Sarah Palin's daughter's baby.
I have refrained from comment simply because the only truth I can rely on is what I see people say for themselves, and last night, I finally got the opportunity to see Sarah Palin talk about Trig being her son. The Greta show aired the segment.
When I watch this video, and Palin tells us she is frustrated, it is very evident in her expressions that she is just that. You can sense a tension in her that corroborates what she is saying. Her eyes squint up in anger,and at the same time I see a sadness that she is not believed. Her facial expressions match her message, and her emotions are completely consistent with what she is saying.
Sure, if she was lying, she might be frustrated too, but I would expect to see other indications that she is being dishonest and I don't.
Also, if Sarah Palin's daughter was pregnant, don't you think that her friends and the community where she lived would have seen it and come forward? Surely, as the governor's daughter, people would have noticed. I think that because no one has come forward about this, it also supports what the truth is here. It would be awfully hard to shut up an entire community, or to keep Palin's daughter isolated for that many months, don't you think?
So, let's put that rumor to rest as well as the topic of Sarah Palin! This is just too tabloidesque for my personal tastes [squirming]!
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero tolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior.
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero tolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior.
Did you see the moving interview that Patrick Swayze did with Barbara Walters this week? It was painful to watch, and inspiring all at the same time. Swayze is facing his cancer demons head on, yet not willing to give in and relent to them. He is waging a war against a very lethal disease until, he says, he feels the battle is no longer worth fighting.
What I found so powerful in this interview with him and his wife were their emotions, body language and facial expressions. Each movement Swayze and his wife make sends a message. Each movement, each expression, because their emotions are so intense, tells you what is coming before the words are spoken. You see their thoughts on their face before they say a thing. You see and feel a deep anger, and fear. You see and feel courage, happiness, and love. You also see a tension in Swayze that is undeniable. It's gut-wrenching because it is so real and so raw.
This is one interview where you can really work at understanding two true and honest souls. In this video, they are an excellent pair to study the intricacies of human behavior. Facing mortality, both of these people are trying to accept what is, and do the best they can in an admittedly horrible situation. They go from hope and expectations to accepting the reality of what the future will bring. They wince at the thoughts as they come to mind. Who wouldn't in a time like this? It's a balance I don't think anyone can fully understand and appreciate until they themselves stand on that pronounced yet teetering ground of life versus death -- yet through their emotions and expressions, they give us a window into their world and an inkling of what it must be like.
I wish Patrick Swayze and his family peace in this difficult time, the strength and courage to move forward. I want to thank him, too, for standing up and saying what is on his mind, and sharing with everyone his true and honest thoughts. It takes guts and a stable emotional state to level in a time of your life when you are dying.
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero tolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior.
Dr. Paul Ekman noticed when he did his research on facial muscles and he tried to replicate emotions in other people, he started to feel them, himself. If, for instance, he frowned for a period, he began to feel down.
Explore this. It's amazing. Make an angry face. Keep in there a couple of minutes. Do you feel anything? Does your heart rate go up? Do you feel angry?
Next time you don't know what someone is feeling and they make a funny facial expression, try to replicate it. It may give you some insight into how someone else is feeling.
I must say since I read this, I find myself doing gestures, making faces and general trying to physically put myself into other people's bodies, and the information is often quite revealing. At a minimum, it gives me feedback if I am thinking in the right direction or not.
You can read more in Dr. Paul Ekman's book "Emotions Revealed".
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero tolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior.
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero tolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior.
Answer: From my experience (remember I am a natural and not a scientist), the answer is no. Most of you got that right! To read about microexpressions from a scientist, read the work of Dr. Paul Ekman.
This past Christmas holiday, I saw my husband reveal two concealed emotions. It wasn't that he was talking in contradiction to what he was saying, he just wasn't expressing the "depth" of his emotions verbally. One time his lip sneered upwards (contempt) and another time his nostrils flared (anger). In each instance when I saw the concealed emotion, I was a bit surprised, and I asked him if that was how he was feeling, and he said yes. I also asked him if he knew he made these microexpressions, and both times he said no. Fascinating stuff, isn't it?! I can never get enough of this stuff.
BTW, my husband I are very happy together. The contempt came at me while we were playing a game.
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero tolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior.
I'd be fibbing if I told you I wasn't looking forward to the new show on FOX coming out this month called Lie to Me. I am really excited for the concepts and work of Dr. Paul Ekman and his colleague Dr. Maureen O'Sullivan to finally get mainstream media attention so that the average person understands what human lie detection is all about.
So many times when I've shared my biggest passion in life with people that I have a talent to spot deception (that was studied by Ekman/O'Sullivan), I get a response of "Oh my sister is in to psychic stuff, too." You don't know how exasperating that is! I'm not into psychic stuff, and find that comment annoying because it shows a total lack of understanding of the concepts I just spoke about. But of course, with anything new, it takes time for new knowledge to be understood and respected.
I have no doubt in 100 years this science will be vital to all societies who seek justice and truth, but at this time, we are on the infant stages of recognizing this as a science. So I am hoping this show is a whopping success because it will help people open their mind to a new concept -- a concept I am very passionate about, a topic I have put my heart and soul into for 4 years.
Comment Policy: This blog is about understanding human behavior. You have the right to state your opinion if it is respectful. Disagreements are encouraged if they meet this standard. This blog is about deception and not about politics or religion--hence discussions on these topics will not be tolerated. Anyone who violates these general rules will be immediately banned. I have a zero tolerance for rude and disrespectful behavior.
Disclaimer:All data and information provided on this site is for
informational purposes only. Eyes for Lies Blog makes no representations as to
accuracy, completeness, currentness, suitability, or validity of any information
on this site & will not be liable for any errors, omissions, or delays in
this information or any losses, injuries, or damages arising from its
display or use. This is a blog and expresses opinions of the author. Just
because Eyes for Lies does not believe someone does not mean they are (a)
lying, or (b) a liar. All information is provided on an as-is basis. Eyes for Lies does not take
any responsibility for comments published by its readers. Readers publish comments at their own risk.
By reading this blog, you agree to the terms expressed
in this link.
Copyright
Notice 2004-2011
The content of this blog cannot in any way be reproduced, replicated, copied,
duplicated or performed in any manner without express written permission from
Eyes for Lies. You don't want to get caught in a lie, do you? Ask first.
