1. Go into their brains dictionary of between 25,000 and 30,000 words
2. Choose what words to use and what words not to use;
3. Decide which information comes first as a priority;
4. Decide where to place each word, so that communication is complete.
This all takes place in less than a micro-second of time.
In this, we have two denials:
1. The Reliable Denial
2. The Unreliable Denial
The reliable denial scores very high, well above 90%, for truth and it is something that, in media, ends the story. "I didn't take PED."
This has the pronoun "I", which is something a person uses millions of times.
This has the past tense verb "didn't" or "did not", which the person can reliably use since the accusation is having done something in the past tense; and...
The person shows that his brain is focused directly on the allegation: PEDs.
2. The unreliable denial:
Sometimes avoids using the pronoun "I", such as a teenager who says, "didn't do it, ma!"
Might avoid the past tense "did not" and instead opt for "would not" or "would never" or even the vague time sense of "never", as in, "I never used PEDs" like Marion Jones and Lance Armstrong said many times.
It is not reliable.
He may also say, "I didn't use anything" ,which looks at the topic, "PEDs" and avoids it.
This is because lying directly causes a disruption in the speedy transmission of words above, and causes the liar internal stress.
Even when someone is lying, they are often thinking about the very event they are attempting to deny, and the thought transmits to words, which "leak out" to us.
Here is the Twins' pitcher Ervin Santana who has tested positive for illegal substances (PEDs).
Statement Analysis gets to the truth and knows if he did it or not. A guilty person might even say "I am innocent", which is true enough: he has not been convicted!
"I am innocent" avoids saying, "I didn't take PEDs" or "I did not take illegal drugs."
The truly or "de facto" innocent do not need to interrupt the speed of transmission with pauses such as "well", or give us a romance novel like Ryan Braun did. The more words one uses, the less likely we are going to hear the simple, "I did not use PEDs."
Let's see if Ervin Santana used or not:
Twins pitcher Ervin Santana suspended 80 games for positive PED test
Ervin Santana said: "This is unexpected news for me and my family. I am issuing this statement so the public knows where I stand. First, my deepest apologies to my family, fans, colleagues, teammates and my current employer the Minnesota Twins. I am very disappointed that I tested positive for a performance enhancing drug. I am frustrated that I can't pinpoint how the substance in question entered my body. I would never knowingly take anything illegal to enhance my performance. What I can guarantee is I never knowingly took anything illegal to enhance my performance. That’s just not me, never has been and never will.
“Ever since I was a child I always had to work harder than everyone. Not too many people believed I could become a Major Leaguer. I worked hard to achieve everything I accomplished and I take pride in proving that through hard work dreams can come true."
Let's look at this again, with analysis:
"This is unexpected news for me and my family.
It is unexpected for him, first, and then for his family. "This" is closer than "that", and "this" is that he has failed a drug test. He was not likely expecting to fail, or to be tested, but he does not clarify which.
I am issuing this statement so the public knows where I stand.
This is good: he is about to let us know where he stands and will say "I did not take PEDS", right? Because if he did not take them, it is where he should be standing.
First, my deepest apologies to my family, fans, colleagues, teammates and my current employer the Minnesota Twins.
"First" indicates logical response. This must be the first thing he says, right? That he did not do it.
Instead, he apologizes. He does not contend that he did not take PEDs, nor does he contend that the test result is false. If he did not take them, the test should be wrong. Instead, we find apology.
The apology produces priority:
Please note that it is his "current" employer and not his employer. Does he expect to be traded? He was given a new contract for $54,000,000.
I am very disappointed that I tested positive for a performance enhancing drug.
Note the disappointment is that he tested positive. Did he use a masking agent that he felt would have covered up the test result? He is disappointed ("very") in the failed test.
I am frustrated that I can't pinpoint how the substance in question entered my body.
Note the expression of frustration. He does not say he did not take it, but is frustrated not being able to "pin point" how it got into his body.
*please note that testosterone injections are large and painful and given in the rear end. Was he thinking of this painful injection when he chose to use the words "pin point"? This is similar to what Ryan Braun did when he lied about it, too. He said, "...at any point..."
I would never knowingly take anything illegal to enhance my performance.
"Would never" is the unreliable denial above.
Note that this prohibition is only for illegal drugs to enhance his performance. Why might he take something illegal, if not for performance? Recreational use should be looked into.
What I can guarantee is I never knowingly took anything illegal to enhance my performance. That’s just not me, never has been and never will.
Why would he need to apologize if he did nothing wrong, knowingly?
Please note that when he issued a "guarantee", he moved into statistical deception, but it is now combined with "would never" which is future/conditional tense, further weakening by the need to persuade or "guarantee" in speech. He is now deception indicated using the techniques of statement analysis. Not only does he fail to issue a denial, but he imbeds that he knows the precise "pin point" the needle entered his rear end, how often he took it, and that he likely was told that the masking agents would fool the test.
“Ever since I was a child I always had to work harder than everyone.
Here he uses the word "child" to describe himself. This is strongly linked to childhood abuse, with 80% likely being childhood sexual abuse. That he may use illegal drugs for self medication is something that those who love him should look into.
Not too many people believed I could become a Major Leaguer. I worked hard to achieve everything I accomplished and I take pride in proving that through hard work dreams can come true."
Ervin Santana is lying. He deliberately used.