If you must lie, here's how to be convincing

Here’s how to lie. Make sure to sound inconsistent. Exaggerate and embellish.

And be sure to be over the age of 5.

Because if you sound consistent or stick to your story without wavering, you are lying. So says the psychologist testifying at the Michael Jackson trial.

Sounds a lot like the medieval method of immersing the accused in water – if you float, you are guilty; if you drown, you are innocent. Works every time.

The minister of my church made a similar comment on Easter. Not with respect to Michael Jackson, but with respect to the notion that the inconsistancies in the Gospel tellings of the whole Easter story make it more likely to be true. If a group of people had made the whole thing up- they’d have made sure the stories agreed with each other.

It annoyed me. I respect the right of any individual Christian to interpret the Bible as literally or unliterally as he or she wants. But I’d feel prefer a minister who interpreted scripture more literally and more conservatively than I do.

And I’d prefer that on EASTER- a day likely to bring in people who aren’t really sure they believe in Jesus anyway- the minister didn’t emphasize “Well, we don’t really know if it’s true or not but it probably is true because liars try harder to be convincing”.

Wow, so all those people on *Cops * **were ** innocent after all?

What I don’t understand is the “over 5 qualification”. Does this mean there are loads of unfounded abuse claims levied by the toddler set? I can’t even see that it’s referring to cases of legitimate touching being confused by a 3 year old as abuse - how many under-5s have any concept of proper or improper touching?

Oh, what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to tell the truth.

It just doesn’t have the same ring to it.