Well, I think it a little arrogant to think I have a deep onus on knowing how humans behave, as there is sooooooooo much diversity among humans and human cultures and often times, we are a mystery, even.unto ourselves, so if we don't even understand ourselves, how in heaven are we to assume we know how humans behave generally????i think this was the core of what i was getting at. for me i interpret that statement as a statement made by someone who is intending to be impartial (because i would intend to be impartial if i made that statement-stunning use of theory of mind, griefy. lol.)
i don't believe corax was saying that the person who makes an accusation must automatically believed.
she is saying, correct me if i am wrong, that assuming there is a victim and an abuser-and assuming we know conclusively which one is which-the correct place to put the weight of validity is on the victim's side.
(which, for the record, i agree with.) there are contexts where having an impartial account of what actually happened from both perspectives, is necessary. which is justice. which is history. which is science.
in my experience this is not generally the case. sometimes it is and sometimes it isn't. sometimes people straight up lie, but often times people just don't know what the truth is and they are filling in the details.
if you go based on what you've experienced, and not based on how humans behave, you will start running into problems the more frequently you engage with these types of situations.
So, let me get this right, if someone doesn't remember but they say things that sound like they do, that's not called lying thats called not remembering and filling in gaps?
That can't be considered truthful though can it?
Being truthful would be, in that instance, saying "I don't remember" or "I'm not sure if this happened like this". Just my take on the matter.
But look, I took the OP's need as a need for empathy, understanding and perspective, not necessarily a deep analysis of courtroom dynamics or the perp/victim dynamic.
Perp/victim dynamics can be very complicated and there can be loads of grey areas.
Lies are easier and easier to detect the more one commits to wanting truth, truthfulness and honesty in one's life.
Blanket claims without details or evidence to back it up can be suspect, not always, but certainly need to be taken note of. Of evidence needed before minds are made up.
Evasive answers, as I already mentioned, also need to be carefully taken note of. "The truth is somewhere in the middle" can be one such evasive, vague, prescriptive pat answer and not necessarily helpful, at all.