These days, all False Accuser statements are, I assume, video taped.

Surely if someone like crooked Danny Day (the guy who falsely accused retired fireman David Bryant of rape) was seen in the original video by the jury, they would have spotted him as a liar?

We know police are told "they must be believed" and come up with rubbish like "you are not at fault" even if the false accuser is clearly after money but the camera must reveal licked lips, constant sips of water, shifty eyes, contrasts when they have to slip into the fantasy compared to the truth.

Police obviously notice this but are instructed only to get convictions and not the truth. But a jury, seeing those taped interviews before the liars have had professional instruction and time to rehearse, would see straight through the lies.

Are they shown these tapes during trials?

The contrast between the original shifty lies and the later groomed slick show would be revealing, to say the least.