Renee Ellory |  Eyes for Lies
  • Home
  • About
    • Articles
    • Media Appearances
    • Myths to Deception Detection
  • Services
    • Deception Detection & Credibility Training
    • Facial Profiling
      • The Science of Facial Profiling
    • Who has Renee trained?
  • Testimonials
    • Video Testimonials
  • Blog
  • Contact
  • Click to open the search input field Click to open the search input field Search
  • Menu Menu
  • Link to LinkedIn
  • Link to X
  • Link to Mail
  • Link to Facebook
  • Link to Youtube
  • Link to Instagram

Learning about the Innate

July 6, 2007/in Uncategorized/by Eyes for Lies

When you do something innately, you do it without thought. You do it without prior experience, or even knowledge of how or what you are doing. But somehow, deep within your brain, you do it. It’s rather amazing and bizarre, when you think about it, isn’t it?

Take blinking for example and try to explain it. Yes, blinking is an instinctive response but it is comparable. You know you do it, you know why you do it, you even know what happens when you do it — but can you explain exactly how it is that you blink? What exactly triggers you to blink? If you had to teach someone else to blink, what would you tell them? If they’ve never closed their eyelids, what would you say to get them to move those muscles? I for one wouldn’t have a clue. I don’t know the answers. I just know I do it but I don’t how exactly I do it.

For me, my innate ability, spotting deception, is similar. I know I can do it, but trying to explain how it is I come to my determinations is complex.

I started writing this blog as a test to myself first and foremost. Once I realized I could, in fact, see lies more than the average person, I continued the blog in hopes of trying to understand how it is I do what I do. I figured if I thought about each situation I encountered and recollected why I felt the way I did, perhaps I could understand it. And amazingly, I have learned a great deal by being a witness to my own thought process, as strange as that is.

But I can tell you even after two and a half years, I feel like I only understand a small segment of it all. I know bits and pieces — but I certainly don’t understand the whole enchilada. Not by any means. I think I could write for another decade and still not completely understand it all. Perhaps I will reach a point where I won’t be able to understand anymore. Perhaps I will reach a limit of conscious understanding that meets up with the unconscious, and that is where it will end. I can only guess at the limitations of my understanding.

But I do know of all the determinations I’ve made, one rule has become clear to me now, and I understand it better than ever. It’s the rule of “high stakes lies“. When someone lies, you get the best clues to deceit when the pressure is on. Once time passes, and the stakes disappear — the emotional response and feedback of someone who is lying dulls, if not dissipates completely. The pressure that causes clues to leak, turns off — as do the clues.

I’ve watched several cases in the past six months –where prior to or during prosecution — the person of interest gives off many clues to the fact they are being deceptive — but as time passes — and I see interviews five, ten, fifteen years later — the clues basically disappear. I have seen people I know who are being dishonest — appear totally honest years down the line.

When I first saw it, it stopped me dead in my tracks. My conscious understanding went deeper.

On that note, I made one call in my blog — that I have absolutely no confidence in anymore. I watched Jeffrey MacDonald talk about his innocence in the murders of his family more than thirty years ago. I watched him speak decades after the crime — and when I didn’t see any clues to deceit — I believed he was innocent.

Today, I stand in a completely different place. Unless I could see Jeffrey MacDonald talk shortly after the crime, or when he was prosecuted, I don’t believe I can make a determination as to whether or not MacDonald is honest or not. I simply couldn’t do it, and I won’t do it. I stand corrected. I now know better and have a better understanding.

But what is interesting is there are cases in the media where time has passed but the stakes involved in keeping those lies secret still bear down on the suspect — most specifically when they haven’t faced prison time or a conviction. In these cases, the clues to deceit still surface because they have a lot to gain from continuing to tell the lie — and a lot to lose if the lie gets exposed.

So, I will have to evaluate each individual situation to determine if the stakes are still high before making a determination of honesty or not. If the stakes have already been paid by time in prison — and there are no more stakes to lose in telling a lie — I will have to refrain unless I can see footage of the suspected person much earlier in the case — when stakes were still high.

So there you have it — fresh knowledge from my head. I hope you enjoy this journey with me as I grow, learn and define my abilities. Where this journey will take me, I don’t know — but I am excited to be on the path of discovery, even if there is a bump or two along the way! I am learning and growing – which is all positive.

Tags: Uncategorized
Share this entry
  • Share on Facebook
  • Share on X
  • Share on Pinterest
  • Share on LinkedIn
  • Share on Reddit
  • Share by Mail
https://www.eyesforlies.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/black-logo-smaller.jpg 0 0 Eyes for Lies https://www.eyesforlies.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/black-logo-smaller.jpg Eyes for Lies2007-07-06 18:38:002007-07-06 18:38:00Learning about the Innate
You might also like
Police to Dig for Stacy Peterson Today
Marriage and Lies
Paul van der Sloot: Dead at 57
5th HP Hard Drive Failure
A Genuine Smile
Oscar Pistorius Full Court Statement

NEW ONLINE TRAINING COMING SOON!
Get Notified of Future Courses

Renee Ellory has written this blog since 2006, dedicating her free time to help others understand people. By sharing her insights on human behavior, deception and the truth.

Many people have shared with Renee their personal stories of how her insight has greatly affected their lives. It definitely motivates Renee to continue to dedicate her time when she is available.

Renee tracked her accuracy publicly for 7.5 years, and was 95% accurate, whereas the average person is 54% accurate. She didn’t miss a case for five years sharing her thoughts before the truth was known! She is a scientifically tested and studied expert.

While she doesn’t track her cases anymore due to limited time, she still shares her opinions with the public when time allows.

Search

Search Search

Archives

Suggest a Topic

Recent Posts

  • Stress is the Great Unmasker. Use It. December 9, 2025
  • Do Liars Really Touch Their Nose More? Here’s the Truth. December 4, 2025
  • ChatGPT Told Me a Liar Was Telling the Truth—Here’s What It Missed.  December 1, 2025
  • ChatGPT Called a Liar “Honest” – Renee Reacts on Substack November 30, 2025
  • Pressure Testing an LLM: Hallucinations, Tone Drift, and the Cost of Lying Nicely April 16, 2025
Please note because this is blog is over a decade old some information has been lost in the multiple transitions between platforms. When you see a missing post or a post without comments, it was likely lost during a migration. Our sincerest apologies.

Thank you for visitiing!

Eyes for Lies | Renee Ellory

Link to: Off Topic: Photo Highlight of the Week Link to: Off Topic: Photo Highlight of the Week Off Topic: Photo Highlight of the Week Link to: Dogs & Cats: Lies for Money Link to: Dogs & Cats: Lies for Money Dogs & Cats: Lies for Money
Scroll to top Scroll to top Scroll to top