Friday, October 26, 2012

"I Wouldn't Believe Me, Either"

If someone says to you, "I wouldn't believe me, either" or anything like it that allows for the possibility that they are lying:

take their advice.

25 comments:

john said...

So simple yet so revealing..

Anonymous said...

Eyes for Lies said something similar once.
She said that when someone tells you something negative about themselves, believe them.

Anonymous said...

What is someone said 'Honestly ,I don't know why' SOmeone said this in an email to me, It made me red flag it as deception. Wrong? Or right?

rob said...

Rob’t Sigg issued a statement.

“There are no words to express the sorrow that I and my family feel for the pain they are suffering. We are devastated by the knowledge that my son, Austin Sigg, has been arrested and will be charged with the murder of their beautiful daughter Jessica.”

“This horrible event is a tragedy for both the families, as well as the community. I ask also for your prayers and support for Austin’s mother, whose courageous act — unimaginably painful for any parent — has put this tragedy on the path to resolution,” Rob Sigg said. “I am hopeful that as the legal process unfolds, the Ridgeway family may come to know peace.”

as quoted by http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Latest-News-Wires/2012/1025/Colorado-Teen-confesses-to-Jessica-Ridgeway-s-murder

Statement by Austin's father. Seems to be a game-player, but knows how to sound sincere.

Sorry-OT

Skeptical said...

This is off topic but to me is an example of why people today are more easily deceived and perhaps is am example of why Casey Anthony got away with murder. She is serious and that's what makes it a sad kind of funny.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CI8UPHMzZm8

mommaklee said...

@Skeptical-- About deer crossing lady, it's a very well done joke. She says she was in "3" car accidents. She wrote at least "3 or 4" letters. She stammers at the part about not being able to brake quickly and avoid the deer....I posted a link to this video a few days ago because I thought it would be an interesting exercise in SA to detect if it was a joke or not.
It is funny though, she had those radio hosts convinced she was for real.

Jen said...

How do the rules of SA apply in this scenario:

When there has been previous deception, like when a husband has been caught lying before about where he was (golfing vs bar) and the next time he comes under suspicion he says, "I know that I have no right to ask you to trust me, or believe me..but I was at the driving range/golf, etc." Or, 'I know I have a long way to go earning your trust, but I promise, I'm telling the truth'.

I know those statements are FULL of sensitivity but is it justified, being that the previous arguments have taken place or is he just plain lying about sitting around in a dive bar while he's supposed to be out getting some fresh air & exercise...or better yet spending the day with his family?

BTW-life has gotten a lot more complicated since I've been learning about statement analysis, lol!

Hobnob said...

The critical sequences involving the American comedy actress – Lisa Donovan – who, at considerable expense, played the part of Kate McCann was cut from the final version of the Channel 4 program because “the representation of what Kate had done on the night that Maddie disappeared was not convincing and raised some doubts”.

This is hardly surprising given that Mrs McCann’s story, which is analysed later, is not credible.

Sus said...

Typical convo at my house:
Hubby, "I know you can't believe me, but blah, blah, blah."
Me, "Nope, I can't believe you because you told me so."
Hubby, "SA isn't always right!"
Hahahaha. I'm driving him insane.

john said...

Hi hobs,when is this being aired?

john said...

SUS,that's so funny,my girlfriend and I are the same we're scared to talk to each other ..lol

Hobnob said...

Hi John that was a quote regarding the mockumentary by the mccanns a couple years back.

It was announced it would be a reconstruction of the events that night blah blah ( basically a panicked rebuttal of the Goncalo Amaral documentary)
Much fanfare was made about the American actress who would play kate etc ( she also had to sign a confidentially agreement)
As it turns out gerry made the above comment when it was asked why the actress playing kate had been cut from all the scenes. Kate herself appeared to fill in the gaps and what was supposed to be a reconstruction turned into a love fest of look how happy and togeather we are, look here comes daddy shall we let him in (as she unlocks the door) what was shown of the reconstruction was mocked wildly since the street scene was brightly lit unlike in real, they couldn't agree who was standing where Gerald McCann strongly disagreed with Miss Tanner’s evidence and says he was standing, talking to Jez Wilkins on the opposite side of the road and that he did not see Miss Tanner walking by. Jez Wilkins told the PJ that as he was walking home, with his child in a pushchair, he spoke to Gerald McCann and he agreed with Miss Tanner they were on the narrow pavement on the apartment side of the road, but added that he did not see her. The northerly direction that Mr Wilkins was believed to have been headed suggests that during their conversation Gerald McCann would have been facing south and could not have missed seeing Miss Tanner.

Mr Edgar lightly dismissed these significant discrepancies by saying:
“The most important thing, Jane, is not where Jez and Gerry were actually stood because there are inconsistencies in every major investigation. The only thing that matters is that they did not obstruct your view of the man you saw"
plus the fact never noticed opened shutters and windows.

PS does anyone else think this looks like kate with a fake porn star moustache?

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_mXbRBcSh0gs/ShJZa9inajI/AAAAAAAAC5Y/gbzXlkRDAEM/s1600/IMG+010.jpg

Hobnob said...


kate mccann

Kate mccann with a dodgy 70's porn star moustache anyone?

Also note the similarities between 2 of the suspects and gerry mccann and russell o'brien

2 of the e-fits

ferry mccann

russell o'brien

Spot the similarity

The photofits so far of all alleged suspects

All the alleged suspects that might be involved. from egg man to pimple man via posh spice and cooperman.
Pick a pocture any picture and win a prize.

The posh spice lookalike turned out to be similar to an Australian multimillionaire heiress with a good alibi and even better lawyers, whereupon they all shut up.

Their private dick had huge fanfare press conferences to reveal the posh spice and cooperman e fits both of which were roundly mocked with the pink princess playing pretendy cop

Hobnob said...

Sus said...
Typical convo at my house:
Hubby, "I know you can't believe me, but blah, blah, blah."
Me, "Nope, I can't believe you because you told me so."
Hubby, "SA isn't always right!"
Hahahaha. I'm driving him insane


It is never a good idea to use SA on family and friends if you want to keep them.

You cannot turn it off once you have turned SA on, however, you can minimise it (well i can) and i only turn it up if there is something serious that has happened or has been said where the truth needs to be known.

Often the fact they know you are aware of SA and can spot deception to some degree is enough to stop the more outrageous fibs.
Don't use it to nit pick every fib or white lie.
Ie if you say "does my butt look big in this?" and he says "you look fine honey" don't beat him over the head because he has been deceptive, the poor guy can't win. If he is honest and says yes, you get all upset and if he says no, you get upset because he is telling a white lie :)

Use your talent wisely.

Apple said...

Jen,
EEK! Those statements concern me. Anyone else want to answer Jen's question? It is important.

john said...

Cheers hobs,the similarities are there for all to see..

john said...

Seventies porn star,hahaha

Luke said...

Hi Peter,
This is my first time commenting on any site anywhere. I have followed your work for at least a couple years and I respect everything you do. What im wondering about is why no one is covering the biggest presidential scandel since Nixon. Im so disturbed by what im witnessing as far as political bias, fox news and talk radio seem to be the only places you can go to get the truth. The Libiya situation is unraveling more and more each day but the major news networks refuse to challenge what Mr. President says or does. I dont know what the President would have to do for the mainstream media to actually cover the story, its amazing the cult like following this man has. Anyway thanks again for all you do, I just needed to get this out there.

Luke said...

Hi Peter,
This is my first time commenting on any site anywhere. I have followed your work for at least a couple years and I respect everything you do. What im wondering about is why no one is covering the biggest presidential scandel since Nixon. Im so disturbed by what im witnessing as far as political bias, fox news and talk radio seem to be the only places you can go to get the truth. The Libiya situation is unraveling more and more each day but the major news networks refuse to challenge what Mr. President says or does. I dont know what the President would have to do for the mainstream media to actually cover the story, its amazing the cult like following this man has. Anyway thanks again for all you do, I just needed to get this out there.

Luke said...

Hi Peter,
This is my first time commenting on any site anywhere. I have followed your work for at least a couple years and I respect everything you do. What im wondering about is why no one is covering the biggest presidential scandel since Nixon. Im so disturbed by what im witnessing as far as political bias, fox news and talk radio seem to be the only places you can go to get the truth. The Libiya situation is unraveling more and more each day but the major news networks refuse to challenge what Mr. President says or does. I dont know what the President would have to do for the mainstream media to actually cover the story, its amazing the cult like following this man has. Anyway thanks again for all you do, I just needed to get this out there.

Hobnob said...

Jen said...
How do the rules of SA apply in this scenario:

When there has been previous deception, like when a husband has been caught lying before about where he was (golfing vs bar) and the next time he comes under suspicion he says, "I know that I have no right to ask you to trust me, or believe me..but I was at the driving range/golf, etc." Or, 'I know I have a long way to go earning your trust, but I promise, I'm telling the truth'.

I know those statements are FULL of sensitivity but is it justified, being that the previous arguments have taken place or is he just plain lying about sitting around in a dive bar while he's supposed to be out getting some fresh air & exercise...or better yet spending the day with his family?

BTW-life has gotten a lot more complicated since I've been learning about statement analysis, lol!


Hi Jen
The responses are full of sensitivity.
If he were innocent of anything there would be no need for qualifiers and/or sensitivity regardless of what when on previously.
That he feels the need to add qualifiers indicates there is a reason to. (if he were drinking it can usually be smelled on their breath unless is is something like vodka which as no real smell)

You yourself have answered your own question Jen.

Sus said...

Haha HobNob, The lies are a bit bigger than my butt. (Pun intended)

Jen said...

Hobnob: Thank you for your response...I know that his statements are suspect & I usually know when he has been drinking (actually it's not the drinking that causes the argument, he's part of a golf league & their outings often include alcohol ) but more the fact that I have caught him saying that he's going to play golf...an activity which usually consumes most of the day...only to find out later that he didn't really go.

He said that he spent the entire time hanging out at 'some bar', (initially he stuck to his golf story after I smelled intense cigarette smoke on his clothes & pressed him on details that weren't adding up...but when I didn't let it go & actually threatened to call mutual friends he came up with the bar story). Now each time he goes 'golfing' I call several times & he always seems to conveniently leave his phone in the car or not hear it ringing.

Each time a confrontation follows and he says things that mirror the comments above along with more infuriating accusations...like, 'Your being paranoid', or 'making up something to argue about'...or my favorite..."What the hell, I don't question your every move"...or something along those lines. I guess I was hoping you guys would tell me I'm causing the problem by being overly analytic, and the sensitivity in his responses are due to my pressing & revisiting the conflict over & over. No such luck, huh?

Anonymous said...

Why do you think he sounds like a game player? I can't imagine how difficult it is to word a statement like that knowing your son did something so heinous.

Molly said...

What about this..."if I wanted to cheat on you I already would have!"
To me sounds like there was at the least, opportunity.