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.
I watched Andrew Young tonight talk about Rielle Hunter and John Edwards. Wow. Just wow. That's all I can say. Stay tuned for my thoughts next week. I think some of you might be surprised at what I think...
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.
Read more What Ronald Cummings says in this jailhouse interview is quite revealing.
Interviewer: Have they asked you about Haleigh yet...What happened?
RC: ...They just told me that their main focus is not on putting me in jail, its about finding Haleigh.
Why would the police say that, if they didn't think Cummings knew something? Does this make any sense? It reveals to us that the police clearly believe Cummings knows more than he is telling us.
If Cummings was being looked at unfairly, you would have expected him to say something like, "Look man, they have the wrong person. The person who took my child is still out there, other children are at risk. I worry about my son!!"
Have you ever noticed he never has worried his son? That's another huge red flag--two in one sentence.
Cummings goes on to say, "The 911 call, I haven't changed my mind about the 911 call since the minute it was made."
What?
What would he change his mind about in the 911 call? The fact that Ronald thinks there is something he could have changed his mind about the 911 call is a concern for me. I wish the reporter would have delved into this more to see what Ronald would have said. I suspect he may have been talking about his threat to kill the abductor (because that is what this segues into, but one can never be sure).
He then babbles on that if he finds out who did it, he'll go after them. It's ridiculous babble, if you want my opinion. He says, "That still remains that it don't matter 40-50 years from now, if I found out whoever done it before they do, you know whatever, might be done whether they took Haleigh because they took because they lost a child, or whatever the case might be, you know, uhm...yeah...."
The word "yeah" here is indicative that Ronald is thinking as he is talking and he is confirming things to himself as if, "Yeah, that's right. That's what I want to say." It's uncommon for people to do this. When people are deceptive, some have a habit of verbal confirming to themselves that they are saying what they wanted to say. It's like there is a cognitive overload, and their thoughts of self-censoring slip out unconsciously. I've seen it multiple times.
In his ramblings, Cummings talks about how someone "stole" his child. Later on, however, he talks about how if Haleigh is found it will be because someone is reporting a "homicide". He says:
"They know I won't be the first ones to know. I wouldn't call'em or nothing else. They would probably be notified by the news media or...or somebody, you know...report'en a homicide, so that's how they'll know I haven't found anything."
Ronald is all over in what he believes. One minute he suggests someone may have stolen his daughter to replace their missing child. The next, he talks someone took his daughter and if she is found ,it will be cause it is a homicide. The two are contradictory. He seems to change his position as the wind blows... Then when the interviewer questions if Cummings is talking about him committing a homicide against the abductor, Cummings owns that, too, but that is clearly not what he was saying.
There is little sense to what Cummings says. When people have genuine feelings, their beliefs are consistent one way or another, or they don't own anything, if they are ambiguous. They don't blow in the wind like Cummings is here. Deceptive people often do this...
Interviewer: ...Do you think she (Misty) know more?
RC: That's a hard question to answer....It's hard to believe that she don't know more, but...It's also hard to believe that if she did know more, she didn't already talk, you know...especially if they got her locked up like they got me locked up...
Notice the pauses? They are suggestive that he is thinking as he speaks (hot spot for deception), rather than talking from his heart.
Cummings behavior towards Croslin is just crazy. If he truly was not involved and didn't know anything, he would be demanding the truth from Croslin. But he never has. Instead, he insanely defends her which makes no sense whatsoever, unless they are both in on this. His reply above is just more senseless ramble, if you want my opinion.
And the idea that Crolin will talk in prison could still happen, but Cummings may have scared her that if she does, she could face the death penalty. That would be enough for Cummings to be confident that Croslin will never talk. Life in prison or the death penalty? I think the choice would be easy for most people: Keep your mouth shut.
Cummings says interestingly, "I want my girlfriend to know I love her." Did Ron get a new girlfriend or is that a message for Misty (that he is still loyal to her so she stays loyal to him)???
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.
When we first see Diena Thompson's face in this video before the interview beings, she is portraying sadness, but whether or not it is genuine is another thing. Macro expressions are the easiest expression to fake. Then we hear her sniffle, which is suggestive that her sadness is real, and when the interview starts, there is no doubt Diena is emotionally upset here. The redness and glossiness in her eyes confirms it for us. Sadness, however, does support or disprove anything as a mother could accidentally or purposefully kill a child, cover it up and still feel these emotions on and off.
Read moreLook at the glow in Diena's eyes when she talks about the killer, "You may have hidden this long, but your time is limited." Diena seems to feel positive emotions when she talks about the killer. I find that absolutely perplexing. I can understand determination, steel-will, but a happiness glow? It makes no sense to me. I have never seen another person talk about finding a killer and getting a glow in their face. It is just unheard of...even with all the determination in the world. Most people bent on catching a killer are dead serious, but Diena is a strange exception.
If we play the turn around the game and consider the worst potential (not saying it is true) that Diena did have something to do with her daughter's death, could this be duper's delight?
Meredith Vieria says, "You still don't even know how your daughter died." Diena replies calmly, "No ma'am, I don't." Diena seems to have no urgent need to know how her daughter died. She seems accepting of it, doesn't she? I think this is quite unusual.
Watch when Meredith Vieria says, "But how do you handle that as a mom--the not knowing?
Diena says, "That's probably the worst part."
Diena's words and emotions completely contradict themselves when she speaks. She seems to glow with positive emotions, yet tells us this is the "worst part". I don't believe Diena here for an instant. It makes me question, does she know how her daughter died? Is this duper's delight?
Diena continues, "...the scenarios you make up in your mind might be worse than what the actual truth is." This statement fascinates me! I can't imagine the actual truth in finding how Somer was killed being better one way over another. She was killed, for Pete sake!
When we talk about dying, we often talk this way, that it would be better to die this way rather than another, but I've never heard someone say this about "murder". Is there a mother out there who would say having her daughter killed one way over another would be better or worse? I think murder in any definition is horrific no matter how it occurs. Diena's thinking is very strange here, and highly unusual.
Vieria ask Diena, "Do you find yourself looking twice, Diena, at people, always wondering am I staring at this monster and I don't even realize it?"
Diena replies, "Definitely. Without a doubt. Every time someone stares back at me, I wonder, are they staring back at me because they are the ones, and I don't know anything about what is going on, so...I don't want to falsely accuse anyone because that could wreck someone's life, but...this person needs to be brought to justice."
When Diena talks, I don't see any fear, which is highly unusual. Instead, I see slight disgust and an arrogant, almost cocky smile, which is absolutely perplexing. It would make sense that she is disgusted at people gawking at her (speaking negatively about her), but why the arrogant smile? Why doesn't she fear for her OTHER CHILDREN and her own safety??? Notice she says nothing about being afraid for herself or her children? Fear is what most people would feel in this situation, but it seems to be the farthest emotion from Diena.
Wouldn't you be panicked and even more panicked if you had other remaining children with a murderer still running free? Yet Diena, instead, talks about falsely accusing people. It sounds like babble to me. Notice how she pauses and how her thoughts change?
Vieria asks Diena, "Does your determination (to catch the killer) ever waiver or does it get even stronger?" Diena replies, "No. It gets stronger because he is going to get caught. He's going to do something wrong. He's obviously not a smart person, because if he were, he wouldn't have done this to begin with." Diena then says with a smirky smile, "It's an 'it'".
Most people's confidence would waiver when the police haven't made an arrest in three months. Why isn't Diena's?
Vieria ends the interview saying that someone out there knows something. You would think Diena would jump on that and plead for information, but she doesn't. She sits there calm, cool and collected like she is fine if this goes on for another five years. There is no urgency in her whatsoever to get this over with, to protect her children, other children, or to stop this madman.
I can only ask: Why?? I think Diena knows more than she is letting on...
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.
(Update added below) When I watch Vanessa Bulls testimony in this clip during the Matt Baker trial (which is only a small snippet), I do not see any indications that Vanessa Bulls is being deceptive.
When the attorney questioning Vanessa says, "How do we know to believe you, Vanessa?", Vanessa replies, "Because what do I have to gain from this right now?" As she continues, she glares (tenses her eyelids) in anger as she looks across the room. "I could possibly lose my job as a teacher. Everyone is looking at me really bad right now. I'm setting things right."
While Bulls is by no means humbled by her actions, which is disheartening, and comes across quite arrogant considering the implications of her actions, I think her testimony from what I see in this clip is truthful. She speaks without hesitation, without interruption and I do not see any indications that she is thinking on her feet. Her memory seems to come fluid and natural.
Read moreSome people have questioned that Bulls can gain financially and that may be her motive (it's possible), but unless we see any indications for something like this, I would not jump to these conclusions, personally.
* * *
This morning I saw more testimony of Bulls (Thanks, S) and I must say that what struck me most about Vanessa is that she knew so much information. I kept trying to envision Vanessa just listening to Matt without being supportive, but I can't see Matt divulging so much information to Vanessa without her partaking in the conversation and offering "positive reinforcement".
Vanessa says thing that raise my alarm bells. Vanessa says "..He mentioned that he would leave a note, and he said that he would type it, and I said (shaking her head no/slight laugh) that's never going to work. You're going to be caught, and he said 'oh no she types everything.'"
That's bone chilling. How much more advice or insight did Vanessa offer him to get the job done?
The prosecutor says, "Had it not occurred you that if he killed one wife, he might kill another?" Vanessa says, "I thought he would, but he promised me that we would be so happy that he would never do that."
I'm haunted by Vanessa Bulls testimony...
YET, I must say that we should commend Vanessa for coming forward. Had she not done so, I think Matt Baker would be a free man today. So, thank you, Vanessa, for finally coming out and telling the story about Matt Baker and stopping this mad man from hurting another person. Without you, he may have killed again and again.
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.
Misty Croslin, 18, faces six counts of trafficking in prescription medications, while Ronald Cummings, 26, is charged with three counts. Hank Croslin Jr., who is Misty's brother, Sykes and Brock each face one count of trafficking in prescription medications.
You can read more here. Thanks to those of you who sent this story update!
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.
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.
Sometimes I have trouble with embedded video. I don't know why. Sometimes it loads, other times it doesn't (all the while the code is still there--anyone know why?) If the video fails to load, click here.
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.
The judge in Matt Baker's trial has just now sent the jury to deliberate... We are on a verdict watch now. If anyone hears anything before I do, please let me know.
At the end of the trial, Matt's shoulders were slumped, and he was withdrawn into himself as he rocked in his chair slightly. He wasn't feeling confident. Once the judge sent the jury to deliberate, Matt stood up and no one talked to him. He clearly felt alone as he stood there as everyone avoided him. I think reality is starting to set in...
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'm watching it now. It looks like both sides have finished presenting their evidence and now will present closing arguments after a break.
What I saw this morning was the prosecution showing their evidence in tapes, emails, etc. as exhibits. They showed emails where Matt and Kari write to each other when she is feeling really ill. She wrote that she felt worse than she had in a long time--that her hands were trembling and Matt replies back with an email offering to make her a chocolate milk shakes and then says, "Just kidding". It's bone chilling, if you read the transcript or saw what Vanessa Bulls said. Bulls testified that Matt talked about poisoning her with a shake, but after tasting it Kari wouldn't drink it. This was two weeks prior to her death.
Another time, the prosecution reveals emails between Matt and Kari where he writes of having a good time the night before and Matt mentions something about getting "pills". Kari asks him that the previous evening wasn't good enough? My heart bleeds for Kari...
Both of these support (corroborate) the testimony of Vanessa Bulls and what she told the court. I wish I had tuned in to see her! I missed it.
Matt Baker is 1000 times more evil than I even saw on 20/20 and 48 Hours. I knew when I saw him there that he was creepy and complete untrustworthy, but I didn't know the extent of his sickness. This man needs to be locked up for life!!
I think it will take me an hour for my stomach to settle. I almost had to put the garbage can on my lap as my stomach was so worked up just listening to the court and seeing Matt sitting there during the testimony as if he were an attorney himself: completely emotionless and detached.
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 haven't found video of Vanessa Bulls testifying, but I have found a detailed description here. Vanessa details all the ways that Matt thought about killing Kari.
(Baker) started talking about things he could do. He talked about putting something in milkshakes. He talked about making it look like she had hung herself. He talked about tampering with the brakes of her car. He talked about maybe doing a drive-by shooting,” Bulls says. Baker told her that he ordered “chloroform” Online and had looked for Ambien and roofies, or the date rape drug.
I think it is the nail on the coffin for Matt Baker, personally.
What I find so sad about Bulls testimony is that she knew Matt was intent on trying to kill his wife and she did nothing about it. That baffles me, but when people are young, they don't ever believe they have really met someone crazy enough to do it. That's the only thing I can think of...
And then to read that after the murder, when Bulls went to his house with her family to see if Matt was okay, that he winked at her, it is just chilling. If that doesn't convince a jury, nothing will!
To read all of 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.
Nancy Grace had Dalia Dippolito's phone call from jail to her soon-to-be ex-husband on her show last night. Did you see it? It was fascinating, mind-boggling and chilling all at the same time. You get to see into the world of someone who is manipulative and I suspect is a psychopath! Dalia tried to tell her husband she was innocent and everyone else is lying --so common for a psychopath.
If you aren't familiar with this story, click here for earlier updates. It's a MUST SEE!
Read moreI tried to find video snippets of the show online today, but I am unable to locate any. If you get to see it, I think anyone can see how psychopaths are able to manipulate people into trusting them. She is so persistent that she won't give up until she gets her way! She makes everyone, if only for an instant, question if maybe she is right. Obviously, she has perfected her game, but this time she took it way too far and the reality of what Michael and the rest of the world saw on the video can't be explained away this time, though Dalia sure tries again and again.
I am confident Dalia can make most people question their sanity (judgment of right and wrong/truth and lies) and take up her defense more than the majority of the time. I suspect Michael may have fallen victim again had it not been for the police video tape that is undeniable. He shouldn't even be talking to her or helping her in anyway! Very sad to see into the world of such horrific manipulation!
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.
Nancy Grace had on a woman who claims to have babysat baby Gabriel in December for Elizabeth Johnson. Her story, which seems credible to me, doesn't look good for baby Gabriel. According to the babysitter, he was scared, dirty, without toys and Elizabeth said if he cried too much, to just drug him (that he was already drugged up!). Elizabeth picked the babysitter from Craiglist and didn't know a thing about her, according to the babysitter.
Many of you have asked me to share my thoughts on the Smiths. I did so here on my Topic Suggestion Page.
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.
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.
What is so fascinating about the Bruce Mullenix in the video is his body language when he speaks. After Erin Moriarity says Bruce had a "rock solid alibi" the night of the murder, if you only watched Bruce's body language and tried to discern if he was honest or not here, you would likely conclude Bruce was being deceptive. He shakes his head no when he says yes, and he shrugs his shoulders when he says "Yeah, and I knew that" to Erin Moriarity.
Read moreYet Bruce is NOT lying here. If you thought he was, you'd be clearly mistaken.
The reason I point this out is because there is not one universal clue to deception, and I want people to see this conclusively. Yes, shrugging of the shoulder, or shaking of the head opposite to verbal clues can indicate deception, but when you see it, it doesn't always mean that someone is being deceptive.
We know that what Bruce is saying here is the truth. The police made him a suspect, their number one suspect at the time, and cleared him. Bruce Mullenix was also out of town when his ex-wife, Barbara, was murdered. And to back it all up, I believed Bruce when I saw him talk. His behaviors were very consistent with what he was saying to me.
Well, how could that be, you ask?
For me, deception detection is not all about the clues. I can't stress that enough. When I look at a person, I have an immediate sense of their personality. I don't know if it is facial features, or expressions, but I can usually tell people many facts about a stranger with stunning accuracy, without ever saying a word to them -- by simply looking at them, or a photo of them (see what I call paralleling). With that, I listen to what a person says, to see if it matches their personality type, and their typical, expected behavior. That's how I come to the conclusion whether someone's behavior is natural and honest, or deceptive, much of the time. The clues only come as supportive evidence for me.
Dr. Maureen O'Sullivan says it best when she says, “They [wizards otherwise known as naturals] seem to have templates of people that they use to make sense of the behavioural deviations they observe... So it is not a set of disembodied cues, but embedded behaviours that are consistent with each other as well as with the kind of person exhibiting them (source).”
So next time you spot a clue to deception, don't be quick to call someone a liar by one or two clues alone. The process is a lot more complex than what it appears on the surface. I personally recommend focusing on the facts and looking for inconsistencies, first. That will be much more reliable and trustworthy for the average person. Had we done that in this case as well, Bruce would have been cleared quickly, and focus would have fallen where it should, on Rachael Mullenix and Ian Allen.
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.
The state of Texas has taken on the case and is now pursuing murder charges against Matt Baker. His trial starts today. His attorney asked for a change in venue, but was turned down by the trial judge. More info from the WacoTrib.com.
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.
While you think you are doing your body a favor by eating a light dinner at a fast food restaurant, or helping shed the pounds by carting a frozen lunch from the grocery store to work, the reality according to new research is that you might be eating anywhere from 8 to 18 percent more calories than you are told on the packaging or nutritional label. That's what Susan Roberts, a professor at Tufts University, found in her latest research. Check out the article here.
While no one can say with any certainty if these are oversights, or modifications to help sell product, it definitely raises my eyebrows. When money changes hands and people depend on profits from sales to make a living, it always pays to be cautious. I am happy to hear that people are checking up on this! I feel bad for people who have medical conditions and depend on the accuracy of these labels.
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 am catching up on the TV shows I recorded while I was on vacation this week, and last night I thoroughly enjoyed the show The Birthday Party from CBS Live to Tell series. Did you see it?
It's about a federal prosecutor who got abducted at gunpoint, and managed to survive being held hostage. When he was released, he called his home and found his co-workers looking for him. When he told them his story, it was so over-the-top that no one believed him at first. His story involved abduction, sex, drugs, prostitutes, etc. They thought Stanley had flipped his lid. There was quite a bit of humor in this because of who Stanley is as a person.
Stanley is a straight shooter. He is one to like rules, respect rules and follow them. Yeah, it makes sense he was drawn to federal prosecution. He isn't one to stretch them for his convenience. That's just not Stanley, and for his co-workers to disbelieve such an honest Abe is part of what made the story so fascinating. The second angle that was so fascinating for me was watching just how honest Stanley was when he stared down death in the face-- how he truthfully he answered his captors questions. At times, I cringed. I am unusually honest in life, but I would have minimized my answers where Stanley didn't.
When Stanley was asked what he did for a living, I couldn't believe he said he was a federal prosecutor. I would have maybe said, "lawyer". I thought saying federal prosecutor was going to be his death sentence, but in the end, I think with these guys, it actually saved his life.
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.
According to Fox News, Josh Powell is putting up his house for sale (Thanks, Russ, for the update). That's obviously not a good sign, if it is true.
Listen to Josh's neighbor, Tim Peterson, talk about Josh. Tim tried to retrieve a swing set he lent to the Powells. Do you hear the frustration and anger in Tim's voice? It's biting, isn't it? What indications in Tim's voice let you know he is angry and frustrated?
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.
As you all know, I had my wisdom teeth extracted about a month ago. I must say I am glad it is behind me! That day, naturally, I was quite tense and dreading the visit. I kept saying to myself as I sat beside my dad who drove me that morning, "What they heck are you doing submitting yourself to pain knowingly?"
Read moreI had to continually remind myself that I had been dealing with pain for six weeks and this was how I was going to get rid of it! I had an urge to flee that appointment that was strong and it took a lot of logic to keep me moving toward that office. It was a battle.
When I entered the waiting room, there was nothing else to do except survey the room. I didn't have the frame of mind to even attempt to read something. I knew with my nerves doing that would be fruitless. So what else was there to do, but look at the faces before me?
The first woman I noted was a heavier-set blond woman, probably in her 30s. She was reading what appeared to be Reader's Digest. I was envious she felt like reading. That lucky beast!! Her hair was up in a ponytail and she was wearing comfortable sweats and sneakers.
As I looked her over in quick, hoping to be not obvious glances, I became more and more envious of her. She was clearly not one of today's victims, I thought. I watched her foot wiggle as her left leg was resting on her right knee. The movement her foot made was soft and flowing. It was calm, as if she were singing a tune in her head. Clearly, she was not stressed or tensed in the least. Her body language was relaxed. She had an outward appearance that nothing much mattered. I sat and wondered the nature of her visit: a post-op appointment? A second opinion? Whatever it was, it was going to be painless for her. That was obvious. If only that could have been me, I thought.
I envied her as I watched her. Subsequently, she was the first to be called in to see the doctor, and as I suspected, she came back out within minutes, happy as a lark as she went on with her day. What I would have done at that moment to trade places with her!
I was looking for comfort. I wanted to see another person there in my shoes who was coping better than I was, who could calm me with their self-assured demeanor -- a lucky find in a desperate hour when the desire to bolt is stronger than the desire to stay.
Instead, I sat with all four limbs planted down beside me. My feet squarely planted on the floor, my hands tightly gripping the arm rests. For some reason in times of stress, we humans have a need to literally feel "grounded". Why is that? We don't want to feel in any way uneven, or unbalanced. Strange, isn't it? I probably was rapidly shaking a foot or a leg, but I don't consciously remember doing it. And if you watched me, my eyes darted around the room in an endless search for comfort, which I couldn't find. I needed something, anything interesting to engage me. A happy woman in a chair, who was content, was not it! Or, I wanted an empathetic connection.
The next person who I feasted my eyes on came in the door dressed in a suit. Yeah, he was easy pickings. As he walked to the receptionist window with a briefcase, it was obvious he was a pharmaceutical salesman. No luck there. Most patients at an oral surgeon don't come in dressed in a suit nor do they carry a briefcase. He was absent of all fear or worry, too! Damn. He went in to greet the receptionist through a private door.
I wanted company! I wanted a companion in my fear and apprehension. I didn't want to feel like the only one.
Next, a couple walked in and went to the receptionist window. He was all friendly, bubbly and talkative: typical husband! He even talked for his wife to alert the receptionist she was here for her appointment, but his wife anything but happy and bubbly. She looked down as she walked in and sat opposite from me. Then she glanced out the window. She was in avoidance mode. These two people were simple people. Their faces told me they were kind at heart. They were hard-working people dressed for manual labor. She wouldn't give me eye contact, so I kept my glances cursory, but I couldn't keep my eyes off of her either.
She was clearly in pain--in agony, actually. The tension in her body matched mine, maybe even worse. By the look on her face, it became clear she likely had a toothache of major proportions. I think she had it worse than I did. I felt bad for her. This woman clearly reminded me of people I had known in the past who had a serious fear of the dentist. I suspect she had avoided one to the point of no return and it was the pain that finally made her relent.
As I glanced at her again and again, I tried to look mindlessly across the room. Her face just wreaked of fear. It took everything she had within her to keep herself planted in that chair. She refused to look at anyone and finally found a moment of peace when she spotted a finch in the tree outside the window. Her relief was as temporary as the bird that perched on that branch for a second before flying off again.
Just watching this woman across the room made me tense. That good old saying comes to mind, "Watch what you wish for!" I found myself getting more and more edgy. I so wanted to reach out to her to say, "I know how you feel...hey, we're in this together. We're not alone!" but her body language was clearly conveying to me, "I'm at my limit right now emotionally and physically", so I held back in my desire for a connection. I caught myself about to speak three times -- desperate not to feel so alone, but I knew it wasn't the place or time. Her needs and my needs were not the same.
I was the first of the two of us to be called into the back. In between my discussions with the doctor, I saw her enter the room across from me and before I knew it, I saw her go to get an panoramic x-ray. The doctor said it was required for the work they were going to do. Then I heard her say to the doctor, "I know. I'm a weird cat. I do wear my night guard, but I wake up with it at my feet. It's crazy, but what can I do? I take it out in my sleep and don't even know it."
I could overhear their discussions in bits and pieces. She had some serious infection and had obviously ignored her mouth for too long. They were discussing options for two different problems, and one of them required an immediate extraction. I saw her side profile. She was ghost white, and I suspect on the edge of a panic attack. Her body was rigid and tense as she sat in the dental chair. Then her door closed just before mine did and I never saw her again, but according to my dad, she took the same fateful walk I did out the back door where there were no stairs, but a car waiting to whisk you away! She gave up a tooth or two, too. I will never forget her face.
I just thought it was interesting how we wear our emotions on our face, how a visit to the oral surgeon's office, where the stakes are high, can reveal a lot of details about who is having some serious work done and who is not...
Body language is often more powerful than words, if we only take the time to watch and observe.
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 written to me and asked me to review the video of Josh Powell. The police have named him a person of interest in the disappearance of his wife, Susan, and they say he has not been cooperative with them. I think most people see that Josh's behavior is definitely abnormal and I do not disagree. Josh, if you want my opinion, knows more than he is telling us. He couldn't look more like a deer caught in headlights than he does here in this interview. He is constantly thinking before he speaks, doesn't answer questions directly, and he shows little to no concern for his wife at all.
Read moreHere are my thoughts when I watch the video:
When the interview first starts and the reporter asks Josh how he is doing, I find it interesting how Josh has to think about it before he answers the question. He says after a pause, "Um.... well, I've been trying to figure out....what I can do so I don't sit idle...." Does this make any sense? If your wife disappeared and you didn't know what happened to her, would you worry about occupying your time so you don't "sit idle"?
Now imagine the flip side, that you do know what happened to your wife and it was haunting you, would idol time be a big concern? Josh's choice of words here is haunting to me. I also find it interesting how he talks about dealing with "this", presumably talking to the media, repeatedly. It is obviously annoying for him to talk to reporters. If he knows nothing about his wife disappearance, I would think he would welcome continued exposure to help find her, wouldn't you?
I find it strange how Josh says, "I was just going to go in and get my kids...because..... you know....they're family." He clearly is not an expert at thinking on his feet and is not well versed at doing this and it shows. Many of his statements make little to no sense. He is having trouble connecting basic thoughts.
The reporter asks Josh again, "How are you doing..." and Josh answers with, "You know people have been really... helpful and supportive, so .....its been........it's been really hard, but.... you know, you just keep going..." Notice how Josh doesn't answer the question? I also noticed how Josh's thought changes in the middle of this sentence. It's as if a vision in his mind's eye changed his thought process. He was starting to say one thing (that people are helpful), but he changes it to how difficult it has been. More than that, it looks like he keeps making contempt and disgust expressions, doesn't it? He has a personality that may do this naturally, so I can't be sure. I'd like to see more footage of him to see if this is case specific or natural for him.
The reporter asks Josh to tell him what happened that night. Do you notice that Josh doesn't answer the question directly? Instead he says, "Yeah, a....just a lot of times I just go camping with my boys..." Josh doesn't provide any details of that night whatsoever. Instead, he talks about what they usually do--not what they did. This does not support honesty.
And what information we do get from Josh makes absolutely no sense. What father takes two children under five out camping after 10 PM on a sub-freezing night? Its ridiculous, and obviously points to some sort of cover-up.
When Josh says, "I just went.... with the boys..." the pauses are indicative that he is thinking on his feet--not speaking from his memories. I also see more contempt on his face again. It's subtle, but it seems like every time he thinks of key times during that night, he feels this emotion.
The reporter asks Josh, why he didn't call in sick and Josh responds, "...You know... I didn't, ah........I was somehow thinking it was Sunday. I didn't go to church and ...I just missed a day and I thought we'll go and come back Sunday."
Is anyone buying this? Has this happened to any of you who are married with children? Have you missed a Monday at work because you lost track of time??
When the reporter asks Josh if he has any idea of where his wife could be, watch how he swallows awkwardly as he shakes his head no. People often salivate when they are nervous and uncomfortable. Why would he be nervous if he had nothing to hide?
I just keep seeing this surreal look on Josh's face, like a "deer in headlights" look over and over again. Its a highly unusual look like he is bewildered he is where he is right now...
The reporter talks about how the husband is often the first person looked at in cases like this. Josh says, "I, um, didn't do anything.....I don't know where she is at....I don't even know where to start looking." Josh comes across as robotic here to me. He has no emotions whatsoever, which is very notable considering he is married to Susan.
The reporter ask Josh, what do you tell the boys about their mom? Before Josh speaks, watch how he awkwardly swallows again and how he makes a very distressed facial expression. Obviously this question makes him very uncomfortable. Josh then says, "By the time it all started, I'd...I was already....ah....I was already late and...went to bed and its been hectic ever since." What is he talking about? Does this make any sense?
"Hectic"? If you wife was missing, would "hectic" be the word that comes to mind?
Josh does not think quickly on his feet. That's for sure. With that, I suspect he was not a pathological liar. He really struggles at this... It makes me wonder if he lost his temper at some point and something horrible happened. That reminds me that I read that there was a wet spot found on the carpet. If this is true, its incredibly ominous...
When the reporter ask Josh what time his wife went to bed, he just says, "She just went to bed that night." He doesn't give us any details again. He deflects the question with a generic statement. I suspect, sadly, that she never went to bed and that is why he doesn't have an answer.
The reporter says, "And what time did you go camping, would you say?" Josh says, "Um...I...you know, I got out to a pretty late start."
The reporter says, "Nine-ish?"
Josh says, "No it was later." Notice Josh doesn't have any time frame for reference because he wasn't paying attention to the clock. This is supportive he didn't "plan" to go camping. If you plan to go camping with little kids, you are aware definitely aware of the time. Kids get cranky without sleep.
Josh says, "Basically......um......I'm just trying to .....figure out what I can do...and (head shake yes--as if he is confirming what he said to himself) and both try to find her and...try to.....take care of (shoulder shrug) life in general (positive self-affirmation again -- indicative of someone thinking on their feet, not telling us what they know is true)."
Clearly Josh is not telling us his true thoughts, if you want my opinion. He is trying to deflect, but he is horrible at it!
The reporter continues, "Where did you guys camp?"
Josh replies, "Um....we went down south to the...(looks around)...to some trails down there."
The reporter questions, "To the Moab area?"
Josh says, "No, no...uh, we actually just went down to ...the.... Pony Express (self-affirmation again)."
The reporter says, "They actually have campgrounds down there?" and Josh thinks for a second and says, "Ah....I guess there is a few." He guesses? Wasn't he saying he was just there? If he was, he wouldn't have to guess would he??
I believe Josh knows a heck of lot more than he is telling us. I don't see anything in this interview that supports honesty, if you want my opinion.
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 am wondering if people are having a difficult time posting with the new "Echo" comment system. If you are, go to my website (not blog), click on Contact and then fill in the form and tell me. While I won't be able to help you directly as I can't troubleshoot your computer from mine, I will take note of it. You, however, can seek help directly here. I posted a question asking for help and got a response in 3 to 5 minutes.
Haloscan, my old comment management tool, told me I either had to move my comments to another website or I could upgrade to Echo for $9.99 (or something close to that) a year. So I upgraded. Right now, I am not so happy with it, but I am going to give it some more time. It's just not as intuitive as Haloscan was. That's for sure! But the positive news is that you can post pictures and videos now in the comment section and you can now log in with your log-in from facebook, twitter and several other sites! Or you can post as a guest.
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 arrived home on Saturday evening at 8:00 PM. It was a balmy "zero" degrees outside LOL! What a welcome!
So, for all of you who made requests while I was gone, if you could post them here, it would make it easy for me to review things. I'll likely get back to posting in the next couple of days. I have mountains and mountains of things to unpack in the meantime and laundry to catch up, let alone a pile of bills calling my name!
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.
