Faking It: Tears of a Crime

The series is garbage. A bunch of so - called 'experts '. expertly 'analyse' the behaviour and mannerisms of people who they KNOW are guilty of the crimes of which they are accused We can all play that game! " scratches nose" - guilty ! "Waves hands" - guilty.! Well yes - because you KNOW the outcome. Bunkum and pseudo- science to titillate the (apparently) murder - obsessed viewing public. Pathetic!

To the nay sayers - you obviously don't understand the law. In the case of Prince Andrew, they cannot say that they know 100% he is guilty. They may know it and so may the Police. But until he is charged and then convicted (IN A COURT OF LAW) of course they have to be careful. I found it an interesting series. Should do one on Mark Lundy from NZ. Good case of overacting.

It's very easy to pick out these tell tale signs in the already convicted..but none of this would be useful without all the other evidence. This programme couldn't be made about suspects because they'd be wrong more times than right...

I think we all have the experience to see what someone's body movements is saying.

I loved body language expert Judi Jame when does used to cone on the big brother show and do live descriptions of the housemates movements, 😂 this is the sane only about people who have been egotistical in trying to get away with murder.

The experts on the show faking it are just explaining what they were doing to try act normal when they've been going about their lives after murdering someone.

They are telling us what they did in the interview room. It's good to see the way that people get questioned by police, and that it's no wonder how a lot get away with serious crimes.

There should be a body language expert there for all interview rooms because innocent people would get out quicker and not be held just because the police think they're guilty when the criminals get out on bail and end up killing people sometimes the see day the police release them now that's where they've made many mistakes.

As another reviewer pointed out, this is nothing more than self-described "experts" pointing at behavioral characteristics and claiming that they are somehow indicative of lying when the subject has already been exposed as a liar. In one case in the first series one of the "experts" actually engaged in the very behavior they claimed indicated lying *while they were saying the subject was a liar*!

It's well known to any investigator worth his/her salt that people behave differently and react to stress differently. Italians are well known for talking with their hands-- does that mean all of them are lying all the time? Of course not!

This isn't science by any stretch of the imagination-- it's the opinion of snake oil salesmen who would be working carnival sideshows if they hadn't scammed their way into a television show. Just as with bite mark analysis & hair analysis, these interpretations of behavior are highly subjective and are certainly not scientific.

Two points because some of the stories are interesting to those of us who haven't heard them before but minus 10 points to the so-called experts for their laughable, transparently bad "analysis".