This study differentiated between the language of deceptive and genuine pleaders who were pleading for the return of a missing loved one during a televised press conference. The Wmatrix linguistic analysis tool was used to examine the language of 78 pleaders. Approximately half (n = 35) of these individuals were deceptive and were responsible for the disappearance. Transcripts of the pleas were analyzed for various linguistic cues, and a separate analysis was conducted across gender. Results revealed that deceptive pleaders used the word ‘they,’ singular indefinite pronouns (e.g., ‘anybody,’ ‘somebody’), and exclusivizers/particularizers (e.g., ‘just’) significantly more than genuine pleaders, while genuine pleaders used more temporal words (e.g., ‘days,’ ‘weeks’), and the word ‘we’ more frequently in their pleas. Specific gender differences were also revealed across credible and deceptive pleaders. Our analysis of linguistic differences across pleader veracity provides an enhanced understanding of the ve...