Where's He Going?

My new substack:  Where's He Going?

My New Substack: "You Can Never Lie Twice"

My Substack

“You Can Never Lie Twice”

“You can never lie twice” was a teaching I received from my mentor, Avinoam Sapir, during one of his teaching sessions on Statement Analysis. Mr. Sapir, a former Israeli Army Intelligence officer, taught many investigators on the importance of analyzing statements. He used to say the above phrase from the Talmud. He explained further that one could not tell a two-tiered lie – that you could not say, for example, “I didn’t do it” (if he did), and later say, “When I said ‘I didn’t do it’ I was telling the truth.” That would be a two-tiered lie and, according to the Talmud, that is impossible. The following excerpt (obtained from Sefaria.org) shows the origins of that reasoning from the Talmud:

So, in Forensic Linguistics, we would expect a person who attempts to lie twice, that the person would qualify his second half of that two-tiered lie with a very subtle adjustment like, “When I said, ‘I didn’t do it,’ I meant what I said.” Or, “When I said ‘I didn’t do it,’ I say it again, ‘I didn’t do it’.” There can be many derivations to help the deceptive to couch or qualify the lie so that, by their rationalization, it isn’t a complete lie. A complete lie is a lie that is 180° opposite the truth, diametrically opposed, not 165° or 185°. People tell partial truths to justify in their own hearts there is some truth to their statement – therefore it isn’t a lie.

Remember all the following where the lie is qualified by context and/or introductions:

Alan Dershowicz, professor emeritus at Harvard Law School. 

“I unequivocally and without any reservations totally deny all the allegations about sexual contact.” A Florida court alleged on Dec. 30, 2014, that Dershowitz was one of several prominent figures to have participated in sexual activities with a minor employed by financier and convicted sex offender, Jeffrey Epstein. In April 2015, U.S. District Court Judge Kenneth A. Marra, presiding over a 2008 lawsuit seeking to re-open the Epstein case, ordered “sensational” allegations against Dershowitz be stricken from the record.

This is a denial statement, not a denial. He doesn’t tell us he didn’t do it. He’s simply issuing a denial statement. A denial for Dershowicz would be something like, “I didn’t have sexual contact with the accuser.” Be careful with denial statements. Saying, “I deny” is not the same as “I didn’t do it.” Denial statements are poor denials.

2. O.J. Simpson 

“I am absolutely, 100 percent not guilty.” OJ Simpson, at his arraignment on criminal charges of murder.

This is a good denial (albeit quasi-good). He’s 100 percent not guilty at this point in the criminal justice system. All accused aren’t guilty until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

3. Pastor Creflo Dollar

“She was not choked. She was not punched.” Pastor Creflo Dollar, pastor of an Atlanta, Georgia, megachurch, accused of choking and hitting his teenage daughter. On Jan. 25, 2013, prosecutors dropped a simple battery charge against Dollar, who’d completed an anger-management program. Pastor Dollar doesn’t say who didn’t choke her or who didn’t punch her. A good denial would have been, “I didn’t choke her. I didn’t punch her.”

4. Josh Powell

“I would never even hurt her. People who know me know that I could never hurt Susan.”

Josh Powell, who was named a “person of interest” Dec. 14, 2009, in the disappearanceof his wife, Susan. On Feb. 5, 2012, Powell killed himself and the couple’s two young sons. Police closed the active investigation on May 21, 2013.

“I would never” is a statement about the future, not the past.

5. Lance Armstrong

I have never doped. I can say it again … But I've said it for seven years. – 

Defamed bicyclist in a CNN interview with Larry King, Aug. 26, 2005. This is a very cleverly constructed denial. The best denial would be the stand-alone sentence, “I did not dope.” Instead he says “I have never doped. I can say it again … but I’ve said it for seven years.”

In interpreting denials, you need to look at the entire statement because the denier might add qualifiers, before or after what appears to be the denial. In this case, Armstrong qualifies his denial with a retroactive introduction, “I can say it again … but I’ve said it for seven years.” The retroactive introduction again makes this a poor denial.

Further, in looking at many of Armstrong’s denials over the years, there’s evidence that he defines “doped” in the legal sense: the failing of a dope test not the mere use of performance-enhancing drugs. That gives a new interpretation of, “I have never doped.”

Because he was ahead of the testing process, he enjoyed many years of never failing a drug test. Deceptive people will seize on poorly defined words to make you believe they’re saying one thing, when in fact, they’re saying something else. When he’s saying, “I have never doped,” he’s knowingly misleading us. It’s very important that all the words a subject uses in denials are mutually understood by all parties. The honest person will try to make sure everyone understands. The deceptive will encourage misunderstanding.

We have convinced ourselves that a statement that has a modicum of truth, even though it is misleading, is not a lie – because it is has some truth in it. In fact, if the statement is misleading, it is a lie.

Please listen in to my London, UK speech on February 21, 2025 at 06:30 EST

False Confessions - Substack

My Substack article on False Confessions:  False Confessions