Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Videos
Random
Playlists
Members
Registered members
Current visitors
New Posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Dark Theme
View sidebar
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Rugby League
Rugby League Talk
NRL Players and family members in hot water
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
[QUOTE="Morkel, post: 3000113, member: 8215"] This. It would be wonderful if there was a definitive way of finding out if people are lying. One problem is the "truth" is always very subjective. The same event witnessed by two people can be perceived very differently. Let's look theoretically at this situation - say the offender(s) are used to women being regularly attracted to them, willing to sleep with them, and going back to a private place almost always leads to sex. Now say that the offender quite regularly plays it a bit rough, and many women either enjoy it or don't speak up, that behavior can become normalised for the offender. On the other side though, the victim genuinely did not believe that going to a private place meant sex, especially as a different excuse was made to go there. They do not expect and do not consent to have sex, but effectively shut down in the process due to fear / survival instincts. They do what their instincts tell them to do to survive, and escape the situation without making their fear known. In this case, both version of events are 100% valid, despite being completely at odds. As for straight up lies though, obviously results of lie detectors are not admissible in court. I used to think that if they were, like, 90% accurate, surely that's far more accurate than "he said, she said, who has the best lawyer". But then I remember that lie detector tests can be easily tricked, so that 90% accuracy would go way down if lawyers and coaching got involved. Then of course you have the fabled drug-induced "truth serums" which may or may not exist. They probably do, however I'm sure there would be massive roadblocks on how ethical they would be to use etc. Then you go tin foil hat (at least I do). Are there 99% reliable ways of finding out the truth, but they're not publicly disclosed because those in power, not just politicians, but industry leaders, rely on bullshit to keep themselves in power? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Log in
Your name or email address
Password
Forgot your password?
Stay logged in
Log in
Don't have an account?
Register now
Active Now
Broncosgirl
Jazza
Footy Fanatic
1910
Broncosarethebest
Xzei
I bleed Maroon
achievedrap
KateBroncos1812
Bish
Foordy
Dazza 92
Bucking Beads
Fatboy
FACTHUNT
Kev_Guz
Tim K
Broncorob
matthewransom34@ic
ChewThePhatt
... and 12 more.
Forums
Rugby League
Rugby League Talk
NRL Players and family members in hot water
Top
AdBlock Message
Please consider adding BHQ to your Adblock Whitelist. We do our best to make sure it doesn't affect your experience on the website, and the funds help us pay server and software costs.