Hi--

>Thanks for the reply, but are you saying that in your experience there's
>no way to detect? That swindlers acted just like truth-tellers? That even
>though you have been defrauded, you have not constructed your own
>deal/don't deal heuristic? That defrauders were just as free with
>personal information as honest people?

That's right. The defrauders even went so far as to say that some or most
of the equipment that they had offered had already been sold (and was
therefore not available!). They were definitely not "pushy", were talkative,
and in one instance the wife continued when her husband was not available.
The prices were good, but I have successfully purchased equipment many
times from people whose prices were relatively far lower (and therefor more
suspect). People who intentionally defraud are good at sounding normal and
reasonable and at presenting themselves in a non-threatening way. (They
do not want you to be suspicious until they have had time to get away -
thenon-appearance of the equipment followed by the non-answered [or busy]
telephone are the give-aways that all is not well. Before that, all is very normal.) I guess if you can establish employment location of the seller, it would help - but in casual sales for moderate amounts of money, that is
both awkward and difficult (and many sellers are legitimately not regularly
employed). The only conclusion that I have (reluctantly) come to in many
trades is that someone who sounds old will be the least likely to describe
equipment accurately, and will be the most likely to be troublesome on a
return (BUT THIS IS ONLY A TREND!). Hope this helps.

>Unfortunately, you have considerable empirical evidence backing
>you, if that is your statement, because liars are caught only 10% above
>chance level in most studies. And those numbers hold for even professional
>"detectors" such as police and FBI! I hold out hope that there are
>ways of detecting at higher levels. We'll see when the numbers come in.

David