My friend Ricky Bella summed up the Senate inquiry into the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) case, “Janet Napoles’ appearance at the Senate . . . epic nothingness!”
Tess Bee seconded: “Session adjourned. Nga-nga! Nag-field trip lang siya talaga [She just went on a field trip].”
Ricky continues: Post Napoles Senate hearing thoughts . . . It has become the predominant complexion of Philippine politics since the shamelessly unrepentant comeback of the Marcoses to power
—spawning the wheelchair and hospital gimmickry of GMA and CJ Corona, the parole from plunder and brash resurrection of Erap ng Masa, the unpublicized graft and corruption from barangay hall to city hall, from municipio to capitolyo—and now this “spit-in-the-nation’s-face” denials and claims to innocence of Napoles, Sexy, Tanda, et. al. . . . If you have ton loads of money, whether legit or stolen, you can get away with anything! Can we still turn this damaged and damaging culture of plunder around? “You tell me . . .”
My eyes were glued—I had to control my bladder and my hunger—on the image of Napoles on television lest I miss some of her eye movements. When I went out to get some lunch, I noticed the radios or television sets of my neighbors blaring about the Senate hearing. The usually busy V. Mapa Street was almost empty—akin to those days when Manny Pacquiao had international fights.
And my neighbors were egging Napoles, “Speak up! Tell the truth. You owe it to all of us to reveal who among our legislators are involved in this PDAF scam!” “Your opportunity to serve our country well. Let go and tell all.” Ricky at Facebook implored: “Truth. Be fearless, be courageous. Take chances, live limitless.”
We witnessed a very unacceptable performance by Napoles. At the start, we were hopeful. We prayed before the start of the hearing that Napoles be guided by the Holy Spirit to speak from a clean conscience. Apparently, she had rehearsed very well to not answer questions relevant to the issue at bar. Obviously, she is very intelligent, and was able to know when to withhold the truth and to give curt answers.
No matter how much she tried, though, her eyes and facial expressions betrayed her. I knew when she was lying—I learned it from years of studying and using neurolinguistic programming or NLP on eye accession cues.
Author Andrew Bradbury wrote: “What to Watch for: The eye accessing cues are based on first-hand observations. What Bandler and Grinder noticed was that people tend to look one way or another, moment by moment, depending on which sensory system they are using and whether they are remembering something or constructing an image.”
“Eye accessing cues seldom occur for more than a short while—in some cases literally as briefly as the blink of an eye. And they occur in clusters—‘strategies’ as they are usually known, which is the main reason for their value. By accurately tracking a person’s eye movements in context, you can find out what ‘train of thought’ they tend to use when reaching a decision, planning some activity and so on,” he added.
Napoles’ words matched what she said. Now this is not mind reading. This is our eyes’ natural instinct to move up, sideways or down, left or right to match our verbal message. This cannot be learned and rehearsed; it is instinct. No matter if Napoles was properly briefed and rehearsed what she told the Senate committee, her eyes told the real story.