Qualifiers, in Statement Analysis, reveals weakness.
Sometimes the weakness is appropriate weakness, while at other times, it is a signal of deception. Context is necessary as well as a more complete overall analysis.
"I did not kill my family."
"I don't think I killed my family."
This is an example of inappropriate weakness.
Appropriate weakness reflects a weak commitment by one who intends to be truthful:
"I think I locked my keys in the car." He cannot say "I locked my keys in the car" due to uncertainty. "I think I may have locked my keys in the car" further weakens the statement as the subject is likely entertaining other possibilities.
It is used by both truthful and deceptive people.
Ryan Braun's statemnet is an example of extremity in qualification. When alleged to have used Performance Enhancing Drugs, he did not say,
"I did not use PEDs."
Instead, his statement revealed his own feelings about the impact of PEDs in his life.
Question for Analysis: Did Ryan Braun use testosterone?
Statement Analysis rule: If the subject cannot bring himself to say he did not do it, we are not permitted to say it for him.
There is much revealed here. The first thing to note is he 'allows' for the possibility of use. This is a form of 'ingratiating' with him 'easing' psychologically, into 'acceptance' by his audience.
“If I had done this intentionally or unintentionally, I’d be the first one to step up and say I did it,” Braun said. “I truly believe in my heart and I would bet my life, that this substance never entered my body at any point."
Next, note "additional" wording: these are words that, if removed, still allow for a complete sentence.
How many words can you remove and still have a complete sentence?
This is an important point in the Law of Economy where the shortest sentence is best. It takes more brain processing and more linguistic effort to reverse this process; increasing not only importance, but the element of attendant emotion.
Next note the order: "intentional" came before "unintentional" in priority.
“If I had done this intentionally or unintentionally, I’d be the first one to step up and say I did it. I truly believe in my heart and I would bet my life, that this substance never entered my body at any point."
Lastly, not only has he come close to embedded admission, but the language shows that he is speaking from experiential memory.
Note the sensory thought process of not only entrance into his body (think Kate McCann, recalling her last hours with Madeleine, goes to the topic of ingesting) with "at any point."
Testosterone is thick, oily and often leaves the athlete with a sore bottom at best, and infection and swelling at worst. It is, therefore, a "memorable" occasion in life.
Braun is not only deceptive, he is revealing his personality traits and his habitual patterns of deception that he employes. This is a confident liar.
Here is a video by RT that responds to the BBC's claims.
Both clips and humorous satire, listen carefully for the qualifiers.
Qualifiers reduce commitment.
Over time and experience, the trained analyst is able to use context to determine intent to deceive.
As the world has moved to news, propaganda and now "fake news", that is, outright intent to deceive, far more than to persuade. Journalists, readers, bloggers and others, trained in analysis, will learn to spot these, both technically, and accurately.
Listen carefully, especially to the actual BBC claims to judge the quality of the qualifications offered: