This is an interview that anyone who wants to learn more about the craft should watch .
Things you should look for:
- When does she speak freely and naturally?
- When is she speaking with slight hesitation, as she is carefully thinking about her word choices?
- When, as she describes the events, does she leave certain critical parts of what happened in the room out. Unexplained jumps in time?
- When does she 'skirt' around her purpose of being in the room?
- Does she truly feel horrible about being in danger/assaulted?
Now the big questions:
- Was she choked by Charlie Sheen?
Posts
8 comments:
Things I've noticed:
1. She shrugs her right shoulder a lot when she talks. ( signifies False statements perhaps ? )
2. She shakes her head a few times as if denying some of her statements. ( again perhaps False statements )
3. She smirks a few times when she talks about the police. ( perhaps Contempt against them due to the nature of her profession )
4. She tucked her hair twice behind her ear. ( signifies Lying perhaps )
5. Mostly , her eyes are looking down & left, & sometimes upwards & to the right . ( I think that means remembering )
6. Her hands are always clenched around the lower area of the body , legs shut tight. Not a lot of hand movement. ( defensive behavior I think )
My analysis : Well , I'm definitely no expert , & I'm mostly guessing here , but I think she's lying about the purpose of her being there , but things did get out of hand somehow & she's also frustrated she didn't get paid .
I'm really curios what you think ?
@Aziz
The eye movement could be, but don't know if she is right or left handed, so can't base on that.
In her speaking there is inconsistency that bothers me, especially the speed.
At the start she talks slowly then it starts speeding up. What I saw is at around 4:10 where she answers fluently she uses some gestures, where as until then she kept them tight. So this is one change.
Also when it was getting out of hand she got her hand to her head, to get her hair back. a self-comforting gesture maybe?
I also think the out of control bit is real. The reasons for her being there however...
Yeah also saw bunch of one-sided shrugs and contempt expressions. Also saw the use of hand gestures when she was talking about events in the room, which would show truthfulness, but nothing happens in her forehead or eyebrows when she's about to cry (though there could be plenty of reasons for that I guess).
I think it's possible she was lying about the whole paying for services thing too, since she uses repetition of the question asked at one point and her attorney jumps in mighty quick when the host starts asking those questions.
I didn't detect much, and so at first I assumed she was telling the truth. But around 4:55 and also later in the video, it sort of seems like she is trying very hard to conceal a smile. As the video winds down, it appears that her sympathy-inducing sadness emotions collapse altogether and her true, emotionless state shines through, indicating that she was probably just trying to manipulate the audience the whole time.
Regarding the question about whether she was choked, in this video she doesn't even mention being choked. She just says that he put his hands around her neck, and then let go.
The part about the envelope opener seems stupid. Who keeps an envelope opener in a hotel room?
wow... nice video! I think we should start with the background. She is an adult actor and so might be a very good liar.
I think that there is some truth to her story but mixed in with a lot of lies. The best lies are told with a bit of truth, wrapped around with lies. In the beginning we see many shoulder shrugs and, head nods and mouth locks. This COULD have been her normal baseline for we do not get to see her answer any baseline questions before the big questions. But, i think when she started to talk about the police and the incident in the hotel room, she was telling the truth or at least some of it and there was actually a decrease in all of those things mentioned above. This could mean that yes, she was lying a lot in the first part. The hardest thing to do is find the truth in between the lies.
So answering the questions, was she choked by charlie sheen, yes, but not in th way she explains. She is still not telling the whole truth and may have over exaggerated many things.
That is my opinion on seeing the clip once.
Also, she was very stiff...lack of movement. hardly any illustrators and very controlled. She showed hardle any emotion at all and no signs of sadness when she was 'about to cry' when she as explaining what was thrown at her.
In the beginning she's dismissive we did "whatever" and she continuously "shrugs off" the questions.
She's pretty hesitant when discussing her impression .
She seems insincere when she refuses to discuss the racist statements, she does her usual shrug off but stumbles over her words more and looks up to her right.
The way she leaves her mouth open after discussing Denise's reactions to the floozies makes me think she's pissed,but amused.Its catty.
Then when she tells what happens afterwards,she sounds like she has rehearsed this and when she stumbles and the interviewer helps her, she eagerly nods at him as if to say "believe me! believe me!"
She seems ashamed to discuss the sexual contact,she isn't lying but she wants to gloss over it and move past it.
When she mentions him putting his hands around her neck, she seems as if she has rehearsed this part. As she discusses the lamp throwing she adjusts her hair/strokes her face and her little throw motion is sort of "wild",and she continues with the distressed hand motions.
After her lawyer begins speaking and refers to Sheen as possibly being a "john" she seems to get her confidence and her contempt back and she puts her hair back in place and gets her hard face back on.
I don't see the lack of emotion in her face as a sign that she doesnt care, on the contrary she is so controlled that it seems she, a beautiful woman who makes her living being beautiful and doing something socially unacceptable,is trying to maintain as much of her dignity as possible.
I think she went expecting to be paid for sex.I think he choked and terrified her.I think her shock,fear of the cops and of ruining her rep as a professional party girl kept her from filing charges.And I think she feels like a whore and like people treat her like a whore and she wants someone to pay.Hell, she did her job and didnt even get paid, and for what she went through she deserves hazard pay.
I would ask her:
Is it normal for clients at parties to behave this way?
Why do you think people focus so much on why you were there instead of what was allegedly done to you? Does that even matter?
If your agent has another gig like this for you again, I bet you'll make sure to get paid up front,huh?
Why isnt Sheen being publicly humiliated and called out for his behavior?
BTW,I'm female so that affects how I see it.She's in a job that subjects her to scorn,she clearly is uncomfortable discussing it.And it angers her, I think her lawyer takes over then to keep her from becoming angry and showing her contempt of EVERYONE. MY gut reaction is that she is highly pissed off about being an unsympathetic victim, because she feels like she deserves the same respect and sympathy that a choir girl would get and on top of that, she deserves her money and she intends to get paid not only for services rendered but for her humiliation.
This is how i see it:
Firstly i think that she has had botox which is why there is a lack of facial movement in the brow area, and therefore a lack of sadness; although this could just be a big indicator that she is lying when showing emotions of sadness.
She lied about having a nice meal and it being 'lively' and i think she also lied about 'not expecting the night to end that way' due to her omission of contractions (did not instead of didn't); plus her use of 'absolutely' was unnecessarily overstating which indicates deception.
She is very stiff when talking about him putting his hands around her neck and also quickly shakes her head which indicates that this might not have happened. When she starts to talk about wanting to get away from him she starts using illustrators and her body loosens up, indicating truth.
When she says that he threw a lamp at her she looks to her lawyer, she could be doing this for assurance which can indicate deception. Why would she need to look at her lawyer to back up her own story?
She opens up when she is talking about him throwing objects throughout the room which suggests that he never threw objects at her directly but did throw them about the room. She also uses eye movements that indicate visually remembering throughout this conversation, which suggests that she is being truthful.
When it was suggested that she was being payed for sex she doesn't use contractions in her sentence and also uses overstating language which again indicates deception. She was definitely not there for the reasons she stated, and was most likely being payed for sex.
The only time she was completely telling the truth was when she was talking about the police. Her NLP (eye positioning) suggested she was checking her feelings out when she was talking about the cop, which indicates that she is right handed and so backs up the comments above.
Anyways that's my two cents. :)
Post a Comment