''Do Not Harm'' Review

And yet again another great episode of Lie to Me. Probably one of my favorite so far.

This time, Lightman teams up with Foster in order to find a missing girl (played by Madeline Carroll, who funny enough I had just seen in the movie Swing Vote). As for Torres and Loker they have to find out whether a peace activist is telling the truth about what happened to her.

My favorite story of course was Lightman's case. Actually, he is the only one who has interesting techniques to find out whether people are lying. Like faking calling his daughter a bitch so that Foster could examine the parents' reaction.

Oh and by the way, I had not guessed that it was the psychologist that took the girl all along.

As for the other case involving Farida Mugisha, to be honest that was a little more boring. I just don't get the same thrill watching Torres and Loker working a case that I get watching Lightman.

So what did we learn? Well turns out, if you're talking to someone about something and they touch their ear, it probably means they're hiding something. I'm going to try this one out this week and see what I can dig up on my friend, hahahaha (*evil laugh*).

What about you guys, how did you like the teaming of Lightman/Foster and Torres/Loker?

Source here


1 comment


What's wrong with this comment?

Let us know why you think this comment is inappropriate.

Mar 13, 2009 5:51AM EDT

one thing i found interesting was the subtlety of half truths. she was telling the truth, it just wasn't her truth. it seems that the only way to tell is to listen to the inconsistency of the details, or passions in a narrative. it seems to me that deception detection breaks down in situations where someone is mistaken (they believe themselves to be telling the truth), when they are reiterating a lie (someone lied to them), or when they are telling half truths (like in this episode) or omitting information (not telling the whole truth, but still not lying).
i also want to see an episode with a subject who over uses rationalization (... like me), which is essentially lying to yourself, and believing the lie. in most cases, someone who rationalizes will only change their opinion when they have been shown to be wrong in their figuring (or are introduced to new information), but for Lighman and team, who rarely have all the information, convincing someone who believes there own words that they are not admitting the truth to themselves should be interesting. someone who has A.D.D. might be amusing as well; it would be difficult to tell if the emotional response was to the current situation, or simply to a passing thought. for that matter an insane person would be interesting in the same manner, but then i cant imagine a truly insane person possessing any information of consequence.

Want to comment on this? First, you must log in to your SideReel account!