If this is the answer to the allegation, it must be flagged as "would never" is conditional/future tense, that is, unfulfilled at the time of the answer, and, by itself, is weak.
If the subject said "I didn't molest my daughter" and then adds "I would never harm her", the denial is strong: First Person Singular, past tense. It is not weakened by the additional sentence's inherent weakness.
This is because the question has been answered and the subject wishes to distance himself from that which is vile. Without a strong denial, however, we cannot substitute the weakness of future/conditional tense for a strong, first person singular, past tense, event specific denial.
We do not conclude deception on a single indicator of sensitivity, but look at the entire statement in context.
For someone who did not molest his child, "I did not molest my daughter" is something that will come without sensitivity indicators. Once this has been established, it is appropriate for the subject to add that this is something that would never happen.
A guilty person will give indicators, that is, indicators plural, of deception. They will avoid, in open conversation (the free editing process) of choosing their own words and say "I didn't do it."
We have seen this in suspects who have spoken to the media for months on end, knowing that many suspect them, yet never openly stating, "I didn't do it."
For the guilty, "I would never" is easier to say than the stressful oppositional lie of "I didn't do it", yet the future conditional should be viewed in context.
By itself: it is not reliable. If the context shows deception, then the subject likely did it and "wouldn't" do it again (this comes up in theft a great deal)
For the innocent: A strong denial will be first made, without sensitivity indicators, and then the conditional is acceptable, but without a strong denial, the conditional is weak and should be flagged as such.
DO NOT FORGET:
The free editing process versus reflected language. It is vital in application. More on this later this evening.
No comments:
Post a Comment