Placeholder Content Image

Lie detection tests have worked the same way for 3,000 years – and they’re still hopelessly inaccurate

<p>Popular culture is fascinated with the ability to detect liars. Lie detector tests are a staple of police dramas, and TV shows such as Poker Face feature “human polygraphs” who detect deception by picking up tell-tale signs in people’s behaviour.</p> <p>Records of attempts to detect lies, whether by technical means or by skilled observers, go back at least 3,000 years. Forensic science lie detection techniques have become <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1541-1338.2005.00166.x">increasingly popular</a> since the invention of the polygraph early in the 20th century, with the latest methods involving advanced brain imaging.</p> <p>Proponents of lie detection technology sometimes <a href="https://www.press.umich.edu/3091709/lying_brain">make grandiose claims</a>, such as a <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11896-022-09566-y">recent paper</a> that said “with the help of forensic science and its new techniques, crimes can be easily solved”.</p> <p>Despite these claims, an infallible lie detection method has yet to be found. In fact, most lie detection methods don’t detect lies at all – instead, they register the physiological or behaviour signs of stress or fear.</p> <h2>From dry rice to red-hot irons</h2> <p>The <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1529100610390861">earliest recorded lie detection method</a> was used in China, around 1000 BC. It involved suspects placing rice in their mouths then spitting it out: wet rice indicated innocence, while dry rice meant guilty.</p> <p>In India, around 900 BC, <a href="http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2844&amp;context=jclc">one method</a> used to detect poisoners was observations of shaking. In ancient Greece a rapid pulse rate was taken to indicate deceit.</p> <p>The Middle Ages saw barbaric forms of lie detection used in Europe, such as the red-hot iron method which involved suspected criminals placing their tongue, often multiple times, on a red-hot iron. Here, a burnt tongue indicated guilt.</p> <h2>What the polygraph measures</h2> <p>Historical lie detection methods were based in superstition or religion. However, in the early 20th century a purportedly scientific, objective, lie detection machine was invented: the polygraph.</p> <p>The <a href="https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/228091.pdf">polygraph measures</a> a person’s respiration, heart rate, blood pressure, and skin conductance (sweating) during questioning.</p> <p>Usually a “control question” about a crime is asked, such as “Did you do it?” The person’s response to the control question is then compared to responses to neutral or less provocative questions. Heightened reactions to direct crime questions are taken to indicate guilt on the test.</p> <h2>The overconfidence of law enforcers</h2> <p>Some law enforcement experts claim they don’t even need a polygraph. They can detect lies simply by observing the behaviour of a suspect during questioning.</p> <p>Worldwide research shows that law enforcers are often <a href="https://doi.org/10.5093/apj2022a4">confident they can detect lying</a>. Many assume a suspect’s nonverbal behaviour reveals deceit.</p> <p>A <a href="https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/14636641111134314/full/html">2011 study with Queensland police</a> revealed many officers were confident they could detect lying. Most favoured a focus on nonverbal behaviour even over available evidence.</p> <p>However, <a href="https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-96334-1_3">research shows</a> that law enforcers, despite their confidence, are often not very good at detecting lying.</p> <p>Law enforcement officers are not alone in thinking they can spot a liar. <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0022022105282295">Global studies</a> have found that people around the world believe lying is accompanied by specific nonverbal behaviours such as gaze aversion and nervousness.</p> <h2>What’s really being tested</h2> <p>Many historical and current lie detection methods seem underpinned by the plausible idea that liars will be nervous and display observable physical reactions.</p> <p>These might be shaking (such as in the ancient Indian test for poisoners, and the nonverbal behaviour method used by some investigators), a dry mouth (the rice-chewing test and the hot-iron method), increased pulse rate (the ancient Greek method and the modern polygraph), or overall heightened physiological reactions (the polygraph).</p> <p>However, there are two major problems with using behaviour based on fear or stress to detect lying.</p> <p>The first problem: how does one distinguish fearful innocents from fearful guilty people? It is likely that an innocent person accused of a crime will be fearful or anxious, while a guilty suspect may not be.</p> <p>This is borne out with the polygraph’s <a href="https://nap.nationalacademies.org/read/10420/chapter/10#218">high false-positive rate</a>, meaning innocent people are deemed guilty. Similarly, some police have assumed that <a href="https://cqu-primo.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/f/1rb43gr/TN_cdi_informaworld_taylorfrancisbooks_9781843926337">innocent, nervous suspects were guilty</a> based on inaccurate interpretations of behavioural observations.</p> <p>The second major problem with lie detection methods based on nervous behaviour is there is <a href="https://journals.copmadrid.org/apj/art/apj2019a9">no evidence</a> that specific nonverbal behaviours reliably accompany deception.</p> <h2>Miscarriages of justice</h2> <p>Despite what we know about the inaccuracy of polygraph tests, they haven’t gone away.</p> <p>In the US, they are still used in some police interrogations and <a href="https://www.wired.com/story/inside-polygraph-job-screening-black-mirror/">high-security job interviews</a>. In the UK, lie detector tests are used for <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/domestic-abuse-bill-2020-factsheets/mandatory-polygraph-tests-factsheet">some sex offenders on probation</a>. And in China, the use of polygraphs in law enforcement may <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0031938414005964?via%3Dihub">even be increasing</a>.</p> <p>Australia has been less enthusiastic in adopting lie-detection machines. In New South Wales, the use of lie-detector findings was barred from court in 1983, and an attempt to present polygraph evidence to a court in Western Australia in 2003 <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1375/pplt.2004.11.2.359">also failed</a>.</p> <p>Many historical and current lie detection methods emulate each other and are based on the same assumptions. Often the <a href="https://muse.jhu.edu/book/13865">only difference</a> is the which part of the body or physical reaction they focus on.</p> <p>Using fallible lie detection methods <a href="https://journals.copmadrid.org/apj/art/apj2022a4">contributes to wrongful convictions</a> and miscarriages of justice.</p> <p>Therefore, it is important that criminal-justice practitioners are educated about fallacious lie detection methods, and any new technique grounded in fear or stress-based reactions should be rejected.</p> <p>Despite outward appearances of technological advancement, over many millennia little has changed. Fearful innocents remain vulnerable to wrongful assumptions of guilt, which is good news for the fearless guilty.</p> <p><em>This article originally appeared on <a href="https://theconversation.com/lie-detection-tests-have-worked-the-same-way-for-3-000-years-and-theyre-still-hopelessly-inaccurate-200741" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Conversation</a>.</em></p> <p><em>Images: Getty</em></p>

Technology

Placeholder Content Image

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle caught out in another lie

<p dir="ltr">Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have once again had to bite their tongues after being caught out in another lie.</p> <p dir="ltr">At the beginning of their six-part Netflix series <em>Harry and Meghan</em>, a disclaimer hit the screen to say that all interviews were completed by August 2022 and that the royal family declined to comment.</p> <p dir="ltr">“All interviews were completed by August 2022. Members of the royal family declined to comment on the content within this series,” the statement read.</p> <p dir="ltr">However, sources have come out swinging to deny the claims, explaining that the royal family weren’t given an opportunity to comment.</p> <p dir="ltr">“Palace sources confirm Buckingham Palace nor Kensington Palace nor any Members of the Royal Family were approached for comment on the content of the series,” royal editor Robert Jobson tweeted.</p> <p dir="ltr">“Nor will be making any further comment on this or any other aspect of it.</p> <p dir="ltr">“Netflix claimed at the beginning of the series that they were.”</p> <p dir="ltr">Other family members who were targetted in the Netflix series include Prince William and Kate Middleton.</p> <p dir="ltr">The Duchess of Sussex was describing the first time she met the pair and how her outfit was “jarring” to them.</p> <p dir="ltr">“Even when Will and Kate came over and I met her for the first time. I was in ripped jeans and I was barefoot,” Meghan said.</p> <p dir="ltr">“I’m a hugger. I've always been a hugger. I didn’t know that could be jarring for a lot of Brits.</p> <p dir="ltr">“I guess I started to understand very quickly that the formality on the outside, carried through on the inside.</p> <p dir="ltr">“That there is a forward facing way of being then you close the door and you go phew, great we can relax now.</p> <p dir="ltr">“But that formality continues on both sides and that was surprising to me.”</p> <p dir="ltr">Prince Harry also took a dig at his sister-in-law, the Princess of Wales saying how it was ideal for the men of the family to marry someone they approved of.</p> <p dir="ltr">“I think for so many people in the family, especially men, there can be a temptation or an urge to marry someone who would fit the mould as opposed to somebody who you are perhaps are destined to be with,” he said.</p> <p dir="ltr">Harry also then attacked his father, King Charles, after claiming that he has a “second family” following the death of his mother Princess Diana.</p> <p dir="ltr">“I was brought up by friends in Africa,” he said.</p> <p dir="ltr">“I’ve got a second family out there. A group of friends that literally brought me up.”</p> <p dir="ltr"><em>Images: Netflix</em></p>

TV

Placeholder Content Image

“Absolute lie": Furious Charlie Teo hits back at 60 Minutes piece

<p dir="ltr">Neurosurgeon Dr Charlie Teo has slammed <em>60 Minutes </em>for claims that he charged hefty prices for futile operations that left patients severely injured and families with false hope.</p> <p dir="ltr">In a one-on-one interview with <em>A Current Affair</em>’s Tracy Grimshaw, Dr Teo responded to a “comprehensive” story aired by the program last weekend, in which multiple families shared their upset about the large financial burdens placed on them and feeling that they had been given false hope by the acclaimed surgeon.</p> <p dir="ltr">Dr Teo dubbed the report as “abhorrent and disgusting”, and while he admitted he had made mistakes in his career, he said the idea that he was simply in it for the money was false.</p> <p dir="ltr">“For some outsiders not sitting in the room with you having a discussion with the patient, it‘s so wrong for them to judge you on what’s going on in the room,” he said.</p> <p dir="ltr">“If someone is trying to portray me as some money-hungry bastard that was operating and hurting children based on money, that’s what I want to correct. It’s not that case.”</p> <p dir="ltr">The surgeon, who is currently under investigation by the Health Care Complaints Commission, told 2GB host Ben Fordham on Wednesday that he does have regrets about mistakes he’s made.</p> <p dir="ltr">“But I deny the accusation that it means nothing to me,” Dr Teo said.</p> <p dir="ltr">“I treat all my patients like a member of my own family.”</p> <p dir="ltr">When asked if he was sorry about the mistakes he’s made, Dr Teo said he was and that “you would have to be a sociopath” not to be sorry.</p> <p dir="ltr">“You’d have to be a sociopath not to be sorry because every mistake means some sort of bad outcome for the patient which means quality of life issues, sometimes even death, or paralysis, inability to speak,” he added.</p> <p dir="ltr">“I mean, if that didn’t affect you, you’d be like Dr Death, you’d be some sort of a psychopath.”</p> <p dir="ltr">During his 60 Minutes interview, Dr Teo responded to the case of one patient who lost their vision, explaining that he never gave 100 percent certainty that the procedure wouldn’t result in blindness.</p> <p dir="ltr">“If I had guaranteed that there was no chance of blindness, that is me saying the wrong thing, that’s misinformation,” he said.</p> <p dir="ltr">“I don’t do that, you can’t do that and not get sued, someone will sue you one day and after 11,000 cases, you don’t think if I have set out to a handful of patients I’d be sued by those patients?</p> <p dir="ltr">“In that case, I thought the chance of blindness was almost zero, but I never give a guarantee. They are claiming I said that I guarantee you won’t be blind, that is absolute lie, I did not say that I would never say that you be foolish to say that.”</p> <p dir="ltr">Dr Teo revealed that he has photos of his patients on his phone to remind him of the importance of his job, saying that he carried the devastation of failed operations with him every day.</p> <p dir="ltr">“There is a French vascular surgeon who wrote a book on the philosophy of surgery, and I don’t think you can put in any better words when he said ‘every surgeon carries with himself a small cemetery’,” he said.</p> <p dir="ltr">“My cemetery is not small, it’s a significant sized cemetery. (I have) pictures of my patients on my phone to remind me every day I’ve got to do it better.”</p> <p dir="ltr">While some of his former patients have been critical of the neurosurgeon, others have leapt to his defence, including 24-year-old Monica Lopresti.</p> <p dir="ltr">After she began to lose her memory in early 2021 but her blood tests returned normal results, it wasn’t until she received the results of an MRI in 2022 that it was discovered that she had a benign cystic tumour in the middle of her brain.</p> <p dir="ltr">Seven neurosurgeons turned her away, but Dr Teo agreed to perform surgery on her.</p> <p dir="ltr">Ms Lopresti said Dr Teo explained the risks, which included death, paralysis and being left in a vegetative state, and that she agreed to proceed with the knowledge of the risks.</p> <p dir="ltr">She added that “it just isn’t true” that the surgeon gave people false hope.</p> <p dir="ltr">“I wasn’t living a life. I was always calling in sick and I wasn’t having the quality of life that I wanted,” she told <em>news.com.au</em>.</p> <p dir="ltr">Since August 2021, Dr Teo has been banned from performing operations in Australia but still receives daily requests for help, telling the podcast <em>The Soda Room </em>that he estimates that nine patients a week are left without lifesaving care as a result.</p> <p dir="ltr">“So the sadness of the situation is that my entire practice was mostly taking out tumours that other people called inoperable, so that was 90 per cent of my practice,” he said.</p> <p><span id="docs-internal-guid-d0234247-7fff-3076-f61d-8fd3339b1f0e"></span></p> <p dir="ltr">“That’s 10 tumours a week. So that means, quite conceivably, that there are nine patients a week, who are missing out on either extension of life or cure from a condition that I know that I can help. Now that’s sad.”</p> <p dir="ltr"><em>Images: A Current Affair</em></p>

Caring

Placeholder Content Image

"I had to lie for him": Ben Roberts-Smith’s ex drops bombshell

<p dir="ltr">Ben Roberts-Smith’s ex-wife <a href="https://au.news.yahoo.com/roberts-smiths-ex-wife-unloads-163118252.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">has testified</a> against the SAS soldier, saying she was pressured to lie for him or lose her children.</p><p dir="ltr">Emma Roberts wiped away tears on her first day of giving evidence after detailing the breakdown of her marriage to Mr Roberts-Smith which resulted in a series of fiery text messages with a friend.</p><p dir="ltr">“I’m actually feeling so f***ing angry today,” one message read.</p><p dir="ltr">“I want to punch the f***ing c*** in the face,” another said.</p><p dir="ltr">The messages came nine days after Mr Roberts-Smith “left” for good.</p><p dir="ltr">It was also several months after Ms Roberts found out about his affair with a woman codenamed Person 17, she said.</p><p dir="ltr">The woman turned up unannounced on Ms Roberts doorstep, “crying a lot” and saying she had fallen pregnant with Mr Roberts-Smith, and revealing a black eye under dark sunglasses.</p><p dir="ltr">“I asked why she was not seeing him (any more). She kept pointing to her black eye and said, ‘because of this’,” Ms Roberts told the court.</p><p dir="ltr">Her testimony comes as the case between Mr Roberts-Smith and Nine newspapers continues, as the Victoria Cross recipient is suing <em>The Age</em>, <em>The Sydney Morning Herald</em>, and <em>The Canberra Times</em> for defamation in relation to a series of articles claiming he committed war crimes in Afghanistan between 2006 and 2012.</p><p dir="ltr">Ms Roberts said her former husband said “I was to lie” if allegations ever surfaced in the press in relation to the encounter with Person 17.</p><p dir="ltr">She recalled telling him she didn’t want to lie, and that he then pointed to their children.</p><p dir="ltr">“If you don’t lie, you will lose them.”</p><p dir="ltr">“I knew at that point I had to lie for him,” she said.</p><p dir="ltr">After the affair was revealed in a news article, Ms Roberts said she was asked to pose for a photo accompanying a front-page story in <em>The Australian</em>, saying the couple had separated at the time.</p><p dir="ltr">Though she denied suggestions from Mr Roberts-Smith’s barrister that they had separated at the time of the article’s publication, her relationship with Mr Roberts-Smith drew to a close in January 2020.</p><p dir="ltr">When money began to be withdrawn from their joint bank account at the time, she said she suspected it was being stashed in their garden.</p><p dir="ltr">But, when she did dig in the soil she found a pink lunchbox containing several USBs in duffel bags, which she gave to a friend who downloaded the contents to a laptop.</p><p dir="ltr">“I said ‘I do not want to see what’s on them’,” she told the court, recalling that she returned the box to the ground.</p><p dir="ltr">She also testified to seeing Mr Roberts-Smith downloading photographs of his time in Afghanistan onto his laptop, before watching him douse it in petrol and set it alight.</p><p dir="ltr">Ms Roberts denied that she was prompted by anger to fabricate stories to harm her former husband.</p><p dir="ltr">She will continue to give evidence as the trial progresses. </p><p><span id="docs-internal-guid-d13a2fb0-7fff-30c1-0aad-fa0bb2f416a0"></span></p><p dir="ltr"><em>Image: Nine News</em></p>

Legal

Placeholder Content Image

Blame it on Photoshop: Husband caught in ‘most ridiculous lie’

<p><span style="font-weight: 400;">A woman has revealed she divorced her husband after finding a photo of him with an embarrassing mistake.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">Tylar shared the demise of her marriage in a TikTok video, claiming her alarm bells went off after seeing a photo of her husband “with a bunch of girls” at a nightclub.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">While the image was fairly candid, Tylar noticed and took issue with one missing detail.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">“He’s not wearing his wedding ring,” she said in the video.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">The image was taken by a professional photographer and shared on the venue’s page.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">When she broached the subject of the missing ring with her husband, Tylar says her husband responded to her suspicions with the “most ridiculous lie” she’d ever heard.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">“He tells me that they Photoshopped his ring off,” she told her viewers while laughing.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">“They ‘Photoshopped his ring off’? Oh, sure they did.”</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">In a bold statement, Tylar announced, “We’re divorced.”</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">In a follow-up video, Tylar confirmed her husband’s story changed after their confrontation, instead claiming he had taken the ring off to wash his hands and “must have” forgotten to put it back on.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">“What a convenient time to forget to put your ring back on,” she said.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">The caption of her post read, “I’d love for this sound to go viral because he will know he’s the only idiot that would tell such a whopper!!”. It appears her wish came true too, with the clip receiving more than 2.2 million views.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">Thousands of users also showed their support for Tylar.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">“Girl, you are not divorced! He’s just photoshopped out of your life,” one wrote.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">“I can’t believe he thought you would believe that,” another said.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">From wedding photos to ‘photoshopped’ rings, Tylar declared her ex-husband was simply “a narcissist”. </span></p>

Relationships

Placeholder Content Image

Harry and Meghan admit secret wedding claim was a lie

<p>Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have confirmed that their "secret wedding" revealed in the shocking Oprah interview did not happen how it was described.</p> <p>The couple's publicised marriage certificate proved the claim was untrue and the couple confirmed this in a statement to<span> </span><a rel="noopener" href="https://www.thedailybeast.com/marriage-certificate-proves-harry-and-meghan-did-not-marry-in-their-backyard-as-they-told-oprah?ref=scroll" target="_blank"><em>The Daily Beast</em></a>.</p> <p>“The couple exchanged personal vows a few days before their official/legal wedding on May 19," the statement reads.</p> <p>Royal fans were frustrated to find out the pair lied, especially as Markle had said in the interview footage that the Archbishop of Canterbury was present at the vows.</p> <p>“You know, three days before our wedding, we got married. No one knows that. The vows that we have framed in our room are just the two of us in our backyard with the Archbishop of Canterbury,” Markle explained.</p> <p>Prince Harry agreed, saying, “just the three of us”.</p> <p>Stephen Borton, former chief clerk at the Faculty Office, told<span> </span><a rel="noopener" href="https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14411884/meghan-markle-prince-harry-wedding-certificate-three-days/" target="_blank"><em>The Sun</em></a><span> </span>that Markle was "obviously confused".</p> <p>“I’m sorry, but Meghan is obviously confused and clearly misinformed," he said.</p> <p>“They did not marry three days earlier in front of the Archbishop of Canterbury.</p> <p>“The Special Licence I helped draw up enabled them to marry at St George’s Chapel in Windsor and what happened there on May 19, 2018 and was seen by millions around the world was the official wedding as recognised by the Church of England and the law.</p> <p>“What I suspect they did was exchange some simple vows they had perhaps written themselves, and which is fashionable, and said that in front of the Archbishop – or, and more likely, it was a simple rehearsal.”</p> <p>The Archbishop of Canterbury has not commented publicly on the event, which has left others questioning whether it happened.</p> <p>Rev Mark Edwards, a C of E priest from Newcastle, also told<span> </span><em>The Sun</em>: “When I called Lambeth Palace to ask about this I was told Justin doesn’t do private weddings. Meghan doesn’t understand.</p> <p>“But the fact that the Archbishop has not commented publicly needs to be addressed,” he added.</p>

Relationships

Placeholder Content Image

Wuhan doctors admit they were told to lie about severity of COVID-19

<p><span>Chinese doctors in Wuhan have been secretly filmed admitting to knowing how serious coronavirus was at the start of the outbreak, but were ordered to lie by authorities.</span><br /><br /><span>There is growing evidence the Chinese Communist Party misled the global community in the early stages of the pandemic, a new documentary by UK broadcaster ITV called Outbreak: <em>The Virus That Shook The World,</em> has claimed.</span><br /><br /><span>China informed the World Health Organisation (WHO) of the first 27 cases of COVID-19 on December 31, 2019.</span><br /><br /><span>However they did not report any deaths until mid-January.</span><br /><br /><span>But senior doctors in Wuhan were secretly filmed by a citizen journalist, and said they knew about the deaths as early as December.</span><br /><br /><span>“We all felt there shouldn’t have been any doubt about human-to-human transmission,” one doctor said in the footage.</span></p> <p><img style="width: 500px; height: 281.25px;" src="https://oversixtydev.blob.core.windows.net/media/7839576/wuhan-covid-1.jpg" alt="" data-udi="umb://media/839cf6b95524475189c53af0e096ed0a" /><br /><br /><span>“Actually, at the end of December or beginning of January, the relative of someone I know died of this virus. Many of those living with him were also infected including people I know.”</span><br /><br /><span>Another doctor said: “We knew the virus transmitted from human to human, but when we attended a hospital meeting we were told not to speak out. Provincial government leaders told the hospitals not to tell the truth.”</span><br /><br /><span>The doctors claimed that authorities knew the January Lunar New Year celebrations would accelerate the spread of the virus.</span><br /><br /><span>However they allowed the festivities to go ahead anyway in order to “present a harmonious and prosperous society”.</span><br /><br /><span>“They shouldn’t have allowed any gatherings,” one said.</span><br /><br /><span>“The provincial and local governments knew the threat but they continued to allow crowds.”</span><br /><br /><span>WHO infamously tweeted on January 14 about the virus: “Preliminary investigations conducted by the Chinese authorities have found no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission.”</span><br /><br /><span>Taiwanese experts interviewed by the program backed up the Wuhan doctors’ testimony.</span><br /><br /><span>Dr Yin-Ching Chuang from the country’s Infectious Diseases Prevention and Treatment Network said his team struggled to get an answer on whether the virus was spread through hand-to-hand transmission.</span><br /><br /><span>After they were granted permission to travel to China, the truth finally emerged in a meeting.</span><br /><br /><span>“We asked a lot of questions, very unwillingly they finally came out and said limited human-to-human transmission can’t be ruled out,” he said.</span><br /><br /><span>“What was the scale of infection? How big was this epidemic? How many patients were affected? We didn’t know. Only they knew this. Why didn’t China inform other countries of this human-to-human matter earlier?”</span><br /><br /><span>Nationals backbencher Matt Canavan has since accused Beijing of having “something to hide” and said it vindicated the Morrison Government’s calls for transparency.</span><br /><br /><span>“That’s why the federal government’s always been consistent in calling for a proper, transparent inquiry (on the origins of COVID-19),” he told Today.</span><br /><br /><span>“The question has to be asked – if China has nothing to hide here, why they are going to these sort of lengths to hide things?”</span><br /><br /><span>The prevailing theory as to how coronavirus began, is that it originated in bats and jumped to humans during a “wet market” that sold and butchered exotic animals.</span><br /><br /><span>China, however, has begun pushing the theory that the virus originated overseas and arrived in Wuhan through imported frozen food products.</span><br /><br /><span>The countries being accused include Europe, South America and even Australia.</span></p>

Legal

Placeholder Content Image

Fury after Prince William chose to “lie” about coronavirus diagnosis

<p>Kensington Palace is under fire over its decision to keep Prince William’s coronavirus diagnosis a secret for six months.</p> <p>It was recently revealed that the future King contracted the virus in April, just a few days after his dad Prince Charles and British Prime Minister Boris Johnson were also diagnosed.</p> <p>William was reportedly left “struggling to breathe” but chose to keep his diagnosis under wraps as he didn’t want to ensue panic.</p> <p>But now royal commentator Rob Jobson has taken a swipe at the Palace, accusing them of lying and undermining trust.</p> <p>Jobson said The Standard newspaper, where he works, asked the Royal Family back in April after hearing of William’s diagnosis and was told that he did not have COVID-19.</p> <p>“It was quite clear in the email that we had it from an impeccable source that he had tested positive to coronavirus,” Jobson explained on Sunrise.</p> <p>“We had an email back saying “we get lots of these impeccable sources and they prove not to be true and this is a case and point here.”</p> <p>“Well If that is not a denial then I don’t know what is.”</p> <p>Jobson said it’s “appalling” that the Palace would “lie” to journalists rather than offer a simple “no comment” which is the standard response when they don’t want to confirm a story. </p> <p>“I understand why they didn’t want to cause panic at the time, but it’s the precedent they’re setting here that is the problem,” he said.</p> <p>“If you start lying to the media about this the what else are you lying about and why should you be believed?”</p> <p>Jobson also took to Twitter to slam the news in a series of strongly-worded posts.</p> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> <p dir="ltr">Prince William’s decision to LIE about contracting COVID-19 earlier - for whatever reason - is appalling. KP were are asked several times by the media whether Prince William had contracted the virus and were told categorically “no”. This has created a serious issue of trust.</p> — Robert Jobson (@theroyaleditor) <a href="https://twitter.com/theroyaleditor/status/1323154789178499072?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 2, 2020</a></blockquote> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> <p dir="ltr">If the palace is prepared to LIE about an issue as serious as Prince William, second in line to the throne, contracting COVID-19 what else have they LIED about when questioned by the press and why should the media believe any denials going forward? This raises serious issues.</p> — Robert Jobson (@theroyaleditor) <a href="https://twitter.com/theroyaleditor/status/1323156062124580866?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 2, 2020</a></blockquote> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> <p dir="ltr">The fact is the palace lied about it. KP were are asked several times by several media outlets whether Prince William had contracted the virus and were told categorically “no”. The decision was taken to LIE, thus creating a problem of trust going forward. Poor judgement. <a href="https://t.co/hrJ1LqnAMO">https://t.co/hrJ1LqnAMO</a></p> — Robert Jobson (@theroyaleditor) <a href="https://twitter.com/theroyaleditor/status/1323154036640698368?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 2, 2020</a></blockquote>

Caring

Placeholder Content Image

Australian lawyer allegedly sacked for refusing to lie

<p>A <a href="https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au/criminal/legislation/corporations-act/">corporate lawyer</a> has commenced proceedings in the Federal Circuit Court after he was terminated from his position as a senior legal adviser with Meriton Property Services for allegedly refusing to lie in an affidavit.</p> <p>Sydney lawyer Joseph Callahan is claiming $556,500 in compensation and costs after being terminated from his $350,000 a year position in February 2020.</p> <p>He claims that during a meeting on 3 February 2020, his employer, billionaire property developer Harry Triguboff, demanded that he falsely state in an affidavit that Sydney Council had taken three years to approve a development application.</p> <p>According to his statement of claim, the lawyer responded by stating, “I’m a solicitor and can’t include something in an affidavit which I know isn’t true”.</p> <p>He says his employer then said, “Listen my friend, you write it my way or you can fuck off”, and “Fuck you. I pay you to win cases do you understand?”.</p> <p>Mr Callahan says he then told his employer, “I understand I am here to win cases, but it did not take three years to get the building approved, so I can’t give evidence to the Court that it did”, to which Mr Triguboff responded, “Enough crap from you. Write it my way or you are no good to me”.</p> <p>The lawyers says he stood his ground, telling his employer “Harry I won’t do it. It’s a lie”.</p> <p>He says his employer emailed him on 13 February 2020 to advise that his position had been terminated.</p> <p>Meriton Property Services refutes the allegations, filing a defence which states:</p> <p>“All allegations that suggest otherwise are strongly denied. Meriton disputes the sequence and nature of the events set out in the court filing”.</p> <p>The case is listed for hearing on 17 June 2020.</p> <p><strong>The offence of swearing a false affidavit</strong></p> <p>Swearing a False Affidavit is a crime under <a href="https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au/criminal/legislation/oaths-act/swearing-falsely-in-affidavits/">Section 29 of the Oaths Act 1900</a>.</p> <p>The offence carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison.</p> <p><strong>For the offence to be established, the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that:</strong></p> <ol> <li>The defendant swore or affirmed an affidavit,</li> <li>The affidavit was affirmed or sworn before a person authorised to do so,</li> <li>The affidavit was false in any respect, and</li> <li>The defendant knew the affidavit was false in that or those respects.</li> </ol> <p>In addition to this, <a href="https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au/criminal/legislation/oaths-act/false-statement/">section 33 of the Oaths Act 1900</a> prescribes a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison for the offence of making a false statement in an affidavit.</p> <p><strong>To establish that offence, the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant:</strong></p> <ol> <li>Swore or affirmed an affidavit,</li> <li>Made a false statement within that affidavit, and</li> <li>Knew the statement was false.</li> </ol> <p>Swearing to false information in an affidavit may also amount to perverting the course of justice, which is an offence under <a href="https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au/criminal/legislation/crimes-act/perverting-course-of-justice/">section 319 of the Crimes Act 1900</a> carrying a maximum penalty of 14 years in prison.</p> <p><strong>To establish that offence, the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant:</strong></p> <ol> <li>Engaged in an act or made an omission, and</li> <li>Did so with the intention of perverting the course of justice.</li> </ol> <p>‘Perverting the course of justice’ is defined as ‘obstructing, preventing, perverting or defeating the course of justice or the administration of law’.</p> <p><strong>Defendants have been found guilty of the offence for the following conduct:</strong></p> <ol> <li>Falsely swearing or declaring that another person was responsible for an offence,</li> <li>Attempting to bribe a police or judicial officer to avoid being prosecuted or punished,</li> <li>Using a victim’s phone or email in an attempt to create a defence to a crime,</li> <li>Encouraging or bribing another person to plead guilty to an crime they did not commit, to provide a false alibi and to give false testimony in court.</li> </ol> <p>Where it is alleged that a false affidavit was used in connection with judicial proceedings – such as court proceedings – a person can be charged of perjury, which is an offence under <a href="https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au/criminal/legislation/crimes-act/perjury/">Section 327 of the Crimes Act 1900</a> carrying a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison.</p> <p><strong>To establish the offence, the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that:</strong></p> <ol> <li>The defendant made a false statement under oath or affirmation,</li> <li>The statement was in, or in connection with, judicial proceedings,</li> <li>The statement concerned a matter that was material to those proceedings, and</li> <li>The defendant knew the statement was false or did not believe it was true.</li> </ol> <p>The maximum penalty increases to 14 years in prison where the prosecution proves that the defendant intended to procure the conviction or acquittal of a person for a ‘serious indictable offence’, which is one that carries a maximum penalty of at least 5 years in prison.</p> <p><strong>Defences to the charges</strong></p> <p>In addition to prove each ‘element’ (or ingredient) the charges, the prosecution must disprove beyond reasonable doubt any legal defence which a defendant validly raise in court.</p> <p><a href="https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au/criminal/defences/">Legal defences</a> which apply to these offences include:</p> <ol> <li>Duress</li> <li>Necessity, and</li> <li>Self-defence</li> </ol> <p><strong>Professional obligations</strong></p> <p>In addition to obligations under the general law, a solicitor or barrister who falsely swears to information in a legal statement such as a statutory declaration or affidavit is liable to disciplinary action by the Law Society of New South Wales, including being <a href="https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au/blog/lawyers-struck-off-for-professional-misconduct/">‘struck off’ for professional misconduct</a>.</p> <p>Going to court for an offence against justice?</p> <p>If you have been charged with an offence against justice such as swearing a false affidavit, contempt of court, perverting the course of justice or perjury, call Sydney Criminal Lawyers anytime on (02) 9261 8881 to arrange a free first conference with an experienced criminal defence lawyer who will advise you of your options and the best way forward.</p> <p><em>Written by Ugur Nedim. Republished with permission of </em><a href="https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au/blog/lawyer-allegedly-sacked-for-refusing-to-lie/"><em>Sydney Criminal Lawyers.</em></a></p>

Legal

Placeholder Content Image

This is what happens when you lie to Judge Judy

<p>From <a href="http://www.oversixty.com.au/finance/legal/2017/08/judge-judy-lets-dog-loose-in-courtroom-to-determine-true-owner/" target="_blank"><strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">letting a dog in her court room</span></strong></a> to determine its true owner, to dealing with <a href="http://www.oversixty.com.au/finance/legal/2017/10/this-might-be-judge-judys-snappiest-comeback/" target="_blank"><strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">witnesses who can barely string a sentence together</span></strong></a>, Judge Judy Sheindlin has seen it all behind the gavel in her long-running court based reality TV show.</p> <p>There’s a reason <a href="http://www.oversixty.com.au/entertainment/tv/2017/08/judge-judy-on-how-she-locked-down-a-59m-a-year-salary/" target="_blank"><strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Judge Judy earns the big bucks</span></strong></a>, and if you’re trying to get one past television’s most famous legal personality, odds are you’re going to get caught out.</p> <p>The people in today’s case found this out the hard way, when they tried to deceive the 75-year-old television icon and found themselves caught out, almost immediately.</p> <p style="text-align: center;"><iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/KjGCjbdDrtk" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe></p> <p>Judge Judy is currently in its 22nd season, which commenced Monday, September 11, 2017.</p> <p>Do you watch Judge Judy?</p> <p><em>Hero image credit: YouTube / Community</em></p>

Legal

Placeholder Content Image

The psychology behind why we lie in emails

<p>There’s been quite of lot of attention in the media recently surrounding the empty words and meaningless phrases we use to fill our emails of late.</p> <p>As Fairfax Media’s Natalie Reilly writes, “It appears to be a poorly kept secret that a large part of adulthood involves sending missives back and forth without ever actually achieving anything.”</p> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> <p dir="ltr">adulthood is emailing "sorry for the delayed response!" back and forth until one of you dies</p> — Marissa Miller Kovac (@Marissa__Miller) <a href="https://twitter.com/Marissa__Miller/status/703085321643278336">February 26, 2016</a></blockquote> <p>Reilly continues: “But, in 2017 we're at peace with such messiness – likely because we have accepted how much we hate talking on the phone – and now just need to know how to dodge, delay and ultimately decline plans in the most painless way possible, while simultaneously sending out emails asking why there is a delay with X and when can we meet to discuss it.”</p> <p>More than ever people seem to be comfortable with a cluttered inbox, to the point where a range of common expressions have been created to control the messiness.</p> <p>Here are four of the most common:</p> <p><strong>1. “Hope you're well”</strong></p> <p>Rather than a genuine wish for someone to be faring well, this is just a statement used to precede the topic of the email which is much less pleasant.</p> <p><strong>2. “Just checking in”</strong></p> <p>This is quite a cheesy line, especially for people who are working in a corporate environment. This only means you haven’t received a response to your question.</p> <p><strong>3. “Not Sure if You…”</strong></p> <p>This statement generally hides the actual malice in the email’s content!</p> <p><strong>4. “Sorry! Your Email Went to My Junk Folder!”</strong></p> <p>Sorry to be the bearer of bad news but this is almost certainly not what happened. </p>

Technology

Placeholder Content Image

Is it ever ok to lie as a caregiver?

<p>No matter how honest and truthful you may believe yourself to be, the fact is, everyone has told at least one lie in their life. Whether it’s something small like, “I don’t remember you asking me to take the bins out,” or a much more serious betrayal like cheating on a partner, we’re all guilty of being dishonest from time to time. When it comes to caregiving, however, is it ever ok to tell a lie?</p> <p>According to a survey of more than 700 carers by <a href="https://www.agingcare.com/articles/why-caregivers-lie-157559.htm" target="_blank"><strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">AgingCare.com</span></strong></a>, 73 per cent of people taking care of ageing family members have lied to them – and 43 per cent admit they fib at least once a week.</p> <p>So, what are they lying about? For many, it’s all about concealing how they really feel. “65 percent of frequent fibbers say that they tell untruths in order to hide their real emotions from the ones they're taking care of,” the survey found. And, given the vast array of emotions (both <a href="http://www.oversixty.com.au/health/caring/2016/05/the-4-negative-feelings-every-caregiver-experiences/" target="_blank"><strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">negative</span></strong></a> and positive) that caregiving can evoke, it’s not exactly surprising.</p> <p>However, it turns out lying to the person being cared for isn’t necessarily always a bad thing. Researchers have found that “therapeutic lying,” <a href="http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/forensic-psychiatry/therapeutic-lying-contradiction-terms" target="_blank"><strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">defined</span></strong></a> as “the practice of deliberately deceiving patients for reasons considered in their best interest,” may be beneficial when communicating with sufferers of neurodegenerative conditions like dementia.</p> <p>“While therapeutic fibbing isn’t appropriate for every circumstance, when used correctly, it offers a much kinder, practical way to stop troubling behaviour and reduce emotional distress,” Dr Amy D’Aprix writes in a column for <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-amy-d/white-lies-when-fibbing-is-therapeutic_b_3381458.html" target="_blank"><strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">The Huffington Post</span></strong></a>.</p> <p>That being said, however, Dr D’Aprix admits there are some situations in which you should avoid lying – even it if it’ll make your loved one feel better. “It’s not appropriate to tell a therapeutic fib because “the truth will hurt.” In these instances, it denies someone their full human experience. So, when a woman with dementia loses her husband, she’s entitled to know. It may cause significant emotional pain, but grieving is part of the human experience. On the other hand, when therapeutic fibbing positively impacts health and well-being, it’s very useful.”</p> <p>Are you a caregiver? Have you ever used “therapeutic lying” as a method of calming your loved one down? Share you experiences with us in the comments below.</p>

Caring

Placeholder Content Image

Is it ever okay for children to lie?

<p>A lie, as we know, is intentionally trying to deceive another person by saying something that isn't true.</p> <p>And at around age three, children understand the concept of lies – and can tell porky pies themselves.</p> <p>By middle childhood, their lies become more sophisticated and sound much more believable.</p> <p>As children become older, they can distinguish between different types of lies, such as those that are about being polite or protecting someone else.</p> <p>So children lie, and they lie in many different ways.</p> <p>It's clear that children learn to lie, and the older they get, the more successfully they learn to cover up the truth.</p> <p><strong>They lie to:</strong></p> <ul> <li>Avoid getting in trouble: "I didn't do that drawing on the wall." </li> <li>Get something they want: "Mum said I could have cake."</li> <li>Avoid having to do something: "But the dog spilled that milk, he should have to clean it up!"</li> <li>Blame others: "Jack hit me first."</li> <li>Protect themselves from embarrassment: "My (imaginary) friend had a toilet accident."</li> <li>Protect someone else from embarrassment: "But Georgia doesn't know how to put mud on the cat."</li> <li>Exaggerate when playing: "My friend Olivia said that I could stay at her house for the weekend."</li> <li>Be polite about something they do or don't like: "Dad said I can't eat green things."</li> </ul> <p>So is telling lies okay? According to research conducted with almost 200 parents of children aged 3½ to 6, it all depends.</p> <p>The researchers were interested in two questions: Do parents believe that there are some situations where lying is acceptable? If so, do parents teach this to their young children?</p> <p>Promoting honesty within your family, encouraging cooperation and using humour can often be good ways to discourage bad habits.</p> <p>In all, parents admitted that there are times when it is okay to lie. They nominated lies that are about protecting others as being the most acceptable.</p> <p>But parents weren't actively teaching this to their young children – instead, they were teaching their children that lying is unacceptable and that they should always tell the truth.</p> <p>So if a child was caught lying, the parent would discuss why it was unacceptable and why it's important to tell the truth. Basically, there was a difference between what parents believed and what they taught their children.</p> <p>There were also times when parents were undermining their own message. They either told lies themselves in front of the children, or they asked their children to fib (such as "Don't tell Mum we had takeaway tonight").</p> <p>If parents did teach their young children that it is sometimes okay to stretch the truth, then those children were more likely to tell lies than those who were taught that it's never acceptable.</p> <p>In this study, the children lied on average 9.44 times over two weeks.</p> <p>It's clear that children learn to lie, and the older they get, the more successfully they learn to cover up the truth.</p> <p>Promoting honesty within your family, encouraging cooperation and using humour can often be good ways to discourage bad habits. Guiding your child's behaviour, rather than labelling them as a liar, is also a way to encourage truth telling at a young age.</p> <p>As children get older, you can have more conversations about the difference between intentional untruths that are dishonest and little white lies that are socially acceptable.</p> <p><em>Written by Jodie Benveniste. First appeared on <a href="http://Stuff.co.nz" target="_blank"><strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Stuff.co.nz.</span></strong></a></em></p> <p><strong>Related links:</strong></p> <p><a href="/lifestyle/family-pets/2016/07/14-photos-that-prove-every-child-needs-a-sibling/"><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><em><strong>14 photos that prove every child needs a sibling</strong></em></span></a></p> <p><a href="/lifestyle/family-pets/2016/06/expert-tips-for-connecting-with-your-grandchildren/"><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><em><strong>5 expert tips for connecting with your grandchildren</strong></em></span></a></p> <p><a href="/lifestyle/family-pets/2016/07/top-tips-for-protecting-children/"><em><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong>Top 10 useful tips for protecting your grandchildren</strong></span></em></a></p>

Family & Pets

Placeholder Content Image

Lie-flat seats are finally coming to economy class

<p>There’s nothing that makes you dread flying economy more than walking past those plush, spacious seats in first class. However, we have great news; there will now be a seat that will turn every row of the economy cabin into a flat bed, allowing all your dreams to come true.</p> <p>These "Sky Couches" can already be found on Air New Zealand’s Boeing 787 Dreamliner and 777 wide body jets, and at $150, are about half the price of an upgrade to premium economy.</p> <p>A new design from seat manufacturer Geven indicates it's a trend that's soon to catch on. On flights featuring their new “Piuma sofas”, passengers can upgrade their booking (in advance or on board) to an entire row wide enough for two to sleep. Depending on the airline, the cost of the upgrade is estimated to be about $200 per person.</p> <p>For airline, this is an opportunity to turn half-empty flights into profitable ones. With that in mind, it’s not surprising to see that several airlines, including South African Airways and Air AsiaX, have already signed letters of intent to purchase the so-called Piuma Sofas. </p> <p>Watch the video above to see how the new chairs will work.</p> <p>Would you use something like this? Let us know in the comments below. </p> <p><strong>Related links:</strong></p> <p><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong><a href="http://www.oversixty.co.nz/travel/travel-tips/2016/04/10-usa-destinations-with-spectacular-scenery/"><em>10 USA destinations with spectacular scenery</em></a></strong></span></p> <p><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong><a href="http://www.oversixty.co.nz/travel/travel-tips/2016/04/12-packing-tips-to-travel-with-one-suitcase/"><em>12 packing tips to travel with one suitcase</em></a></strong></span></p> <p><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong><a href="http://www.oversixty.co.nz/%20http:/www.oversixty.com.au/travel/travel-tips/2016/04/how-to-carry-important-travel-documents/"><em>The best way to carry travel documents</em></a></strong></span></p> <p> </p>

International Travel