People rarely lie outright; instead they withhold critical information in order to deceive. This is rightfully called "lying" and it is why we swear, under an oath, to tell "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help me God", calling upon ourselves Divine retribution should this vow be broken.
Jerry Sandusky has been accused of sexually molesting boys, years ago. He is not under oath.
In the face of allegations that he sexually molested boys, he responded on radio by saying:
"I am innocent of those charges."
This is not a lie. This is a truthful statement. To be "innocent" is not to deny the act, but the conclusion. He has not been in court yet and in our country we have a legal presumption of innocence. This legal presumption of innocence also works well in Analysis.
Those who are naturals at detecting deception will understand this principle and apply it well. In Analysis we are looking for truth, and a truthful, innocent person may ask themselves what they would say in any given situation. In the case of Jerry Sandusky, it makes things simple.
Let's assume that you were accused of sexually molesting boys many years ago and were a call in to a radio talk show being held about you.
What would the first thing you would say? What would be the loudest thing out of your mouth?
"I didn't do it. I didn't molest boys." This would be followed with "I did not molest that boy or any other boy" and as each question is posed, no matter what it is, you would continue to say "I didn't do it" in some form or another. You would not show sensitivity to questions about molestation even though you may feel your temper rise at repeated questions. In all of your answers, there will be nothing that even hints at allowing a possibility of it having happened because you are utterly (to the uttermost) disgusted at the thought of pedophilia. (If you have sexual attraction to children, you cannot do this analysis). ...read more