Grand National why is she lying?

[Movingonup2023]

Just read an article about a woman who was hit by two horses and how she was knocked unconscious, remembers waking up and hearing her daughter screaming. I’ve just watched the video and she was hit by one horse the other went alongside her. She stood up albeit tentatively straight after, didn’t pass out on the ground, so why lie? It’s on camera there for all to see. I really don’t get it I mean yeah it must have been shit scary and sore but that’s enough you don’t need to make stuff up.

Mmm-hmm. And having said that, would you definitely expect the Sun to include that in their article? If so I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.

Direct quotes in the article relating to the accident itself are “I remember seeing the horses hurtling towards me. It was terrifying.” and then “I remember waking up and hearing my daughter screaming." That's it. It jumps straight from before-the-accident to after-the-accident.

To begin with, it'll have been a Q&A format, so that part of the interview may have gone something like

Q: What's the last thing you remember about the accident?
A: I remember seeing the horses hurtling towards me.
Q: And how did you feel at that point?
A: It was terrifying.
Q: What about the impact itself, do you remember the horses hitting you?
A: No, I don't remember anything after looking up and seeing the horses heading for me. There's about five to ten minutes that I don't remember at all; it was like I was completely out of it although apparently I just looked a bit dazed.
Q: So what's the next thing you DO remember?
A: I remember waking up and hearing my daughter screaming.

and then the Sun journalists trim out the bits they think are boring, keep the carefully-selected quotes and write their own story around them. It's how these articles work. They'll also even edit the direct quotes "so that they flow better" so she may not even have actually said "waking up".

Steward's Enquiry pronto! (Tonto)

But then that’s on her for giving an interview in the first place who actually trusts the press? I would have wanted to proof read it before going to print which makes me look like a liar. The waking up part just doesn’t stand true given the footage.

Fair enough but if you are so confused and traumatised then why give an interview at all posing with sad face photos? Surely if you are that badly impacted by what happened the last thing you want to do is pose for the media. These interviews have the same posed photos every single time.

Just because she got up doesn't mean she remembers getting up. I fractured my skull falling down a ladder. I passed out before I hit the bottom as far as I am aware and came round in a first aid room. According to those around me I got up and walked to the first aid room. I had severe concussion.
Do not make assumptions about things you know nothing about OP.

Well, you seem to trust the press, given that your subject line is "why is she lying" and not "why is the Sun making shit up again?"

Your entire bugbear with her, personally, seems to be that she (may have) used the phrase "waking up" to refer to the process of moving from a state where she was not conscious of what was going on around her to a state where she was.

Everything else is written by Sarah Ridley of the Sun (plus, possibly, assorted subeditors) but it's the woman who says almost nothing about the accident itself who's lying?

Not making assumptions taking what SHE was quoted as saying. Don’t say stuff that isn’t true. The sun can make up all the shit it wants but when people are happy to put their face to the article which either has incorrectly quoted them or embellished what has happened that’s on them. I can only take what I have seen and watched which I think qualifies as lying so that’s why I asked which I am perfectly entitled to do.

Brains undergoing trauma do not process information in the usual way, meaning they may be gaps in memory and things may be misremembered. Memory is notoriously easy to be affected by outside events, so things feel real which are not. Lying implies intention to deceive which is not necessarily the case here.

Why is everyone so keen to go down the brain injury route? At no point does she hit her head the horse whacks her right on the legs, she doesn’t fall down so not hitting it then. She is standing right afterwards holding weight off the injured leg. She may have passed out later from the pain but as she was seated down for treatment I don’t see her hitting her head then either.

Op I literally have a cctv video of an incident that happened to me.

I wasn't knocked out.

My recollection doesn't match with the cctv.

This. Your brain focuses on survival and sort of simplifies memorising other details. This happened to me when I was in a car crash. I would have sworn that the guy who pulled me out of the car also put his coat around me but witnesses told me it was two completely different men.

I did not mention brain injury. The way information is taken in and processed is different during traumatic incidents. Nothing to do with injury, more to do with which part is most active in order to maximise survival chances. Memory is particularly affected during this time. There is a lot of information online about brains during trauma.

No one's suggesting that you aren't ENTITLED to do it.

Various people are suggesting that the way you're doing it (and doubling down while in some cases misrepresenting what other posters are talking about) doesn't show you in a particularly good light.

But you are absolutely entitled to keep doing it.

I've had to go and watch it because this thread keeps popping up. It's a non event. Who cares what she said.