>>6626919 (me) (lb)
>>6626896 (lb)
I'm only 4 minutes in. This is gonna take longer than I expected. But now i'm gonna finish.
I hope you stick around.
>but mostly i objected to the baker bullying.
>not the proper way
Yeah, sorry about that. I got angry for some reason. Shouldn't have. No point anyways. Waste of energy.
<5:05 in. So still some time left. But I think i'm gonna start skipping a bit. A lot of it is the same nonsense.
First 9 minutes of The Rick Dearman interview, analysed by Bombard debunked
(1/2)
At first she is spot on. He is telling the truth. He is telling the truth. But he is just recounting what happened when police came, why lie about that?
Then she states he's accessing memory. When asked what he was told he did.
This is partially true. Yes he is accessing memory, as you can see by his eyes being top-left (assuming that he is right-handed).
But his eyes are darting and his tongue is positioned as "shh". He is infact filtering memory, to figure out how to properly respond to the question.
Nothing inherently wrong with that, only the tongue stands out to me as there is something he do not wish to tell.
Then she claims that she can spot tears. I can't but they are coming later so who knows. This can be trained. What tells me it's not real is the total lack of wrinkles around the eyes and the mouth is relaxed.
(I just realized she doesn't even mention the mouth, and it is super important)
Fake pause for effect, and to help the tears get rolling.
Then trembling of the shin, I saw hin doing a weird twitchy motion. No trembling however, fis face is still wrinkle free. Not even the bridge of the nose as he pretends to hold back tears.
Then she spews some bullshit about real tears rolling backwards and fake ones rolling forwards. No sister, water moves at the path of least resistance, resistance don't change because you fake it.
She frames it as if, if he is fake crying then he just started now. Which she herself pointet out was not the case before.
She states the obvious. A lot of flowing. Yeah he got the waterfall running a while a go. Once it's started it's not hard to keep going.
Just a note. See how he nods when he list those involved. It could be nothing. But a lot of people involutarily agree or disagree with their own statements. Especially if they wants to convince others. This betrays them oftentimes.
Then at 3:46 she does the most priceless thing. She pauses the video right at the build up to a contempt smile. You can see the joy of knowing that he has fooled us (the host) oozing from his eyes.
An important note is that the contempt smile is one of the easiest facial expressions to spot because, apart from a few rare exceptions, that is the only facial expression that happens in only one side of the face, but incorporates all muscle groups in the face. See the side of his mouth.
And Bombard is ofcoarse not mentioning any of this…
He tries to hide it. I think he could feel the smile coming. So he brushed it off as laughing at the absurdity of the whole thing.
What betrays him however is the initial contempt and that there are still no wrinkles around his eyes.
He wen't from crying, barely ably to speak. To laughing and commincating clearly very quickly here.
4:53 This time I have to agree, that I can see the tears coming again. Butalso notice how he has to stare off in the distance when that happens. He also did that last time. That is the build up, focusing on crying. Once it's started it's easy to keep going.
5:05 She makes a general statement about how deceptive people think. This is out of the assumption that he has had no coaching.
If he is what he is claimed to be, Which i strongly believe, then to think he had coaching isn't too far fetched.
And right as she says "And we see swallowing" at 5:20 we also see another contempt smile. this time more hidden and in the left side of his face.
Also, and I know this is hard to see. But right as he throws his head back he is really fighting to hold back a laugh.
He's throwing around acting all devastated, but then where are the tears? Surely with such emotional outburst at least a single tear would have to drop?
5:51 I love how he wipes away the non-existing tear-drop.
She makes a point of us being able to hear it in his voice. But you heard the many times he shorted right before he spoke. This was deliberate. He is 100% coached.
She is obsessed with swallowing for some reason. As if liars are unable to swallow…
6:24 He sounds so devastated. Yet no wrinkling of the face around the eyes or the mouth, and still no tears. Which you'd think would be hard for him to hold back now since he felt the need to wipe them away before.
(2/2)
6:25 That's a smile (pic related), just checking to see if she is still buying it.
7:11 another invisible tear wiped from the face.
Also I want to point out that she mentions that he is accessing memory, again because of his eyes being top-left. But the way the camera is placed and where the interviewer is sitting makes the most comfortable way for him to position his eyes top-left.
I'm not saying this is 100% deliberate, just pointing out that I read that as a lot of false positives.
7:51 She says that the whole body is moving with him, showing congruense in his mind and his body. But if you listen to what he is saying, his body could just as well be agreeing to him actually doing these things.
8:06 She outeright tells you that he's an actor. Yet she reads him like he has never had training in this…
8:36 Notice how when he states "Horrific … detail" his body is no longer "moving with him", he became janky.
So while describing the acts his body was in agreement, but then when he stated how horrific it was it no longer agreed? hmm…
I'm gonna stop here, can't stay focused anymore. I will complete it later, as I said so I have it handy.
>The whole think is so freakin far out there - I just don't know
I completely agree. And I don't pressume to know at all.
The thing about this is. Yeah maybe you can tell that someone is lying, but you can't tell why and about what exactly. And it is not an exact science. Many factors at play.
I believed the kids. But I have a bias when it comes to kids, in my eyes they're too innocent to decieve. Which is why I rarely even try reading them. Haven't seen the mom or dad.
And you're very welcome.
Yeah I know I said bulletpoints. But I just had so much to say xD