Rules Update - Truth Detection Abilities & Defenses against them

What exactly will someone using Torture, Torment, or Dread Surgery be able to tell happened when someone willpowers the use of those skills?

Additionally, how would Disordered Mind work in the same situation? Is it distinguishable from the use of willpower?

Disordered Mind

1 FP; Traits: Divine (Chaos), Caster
This prayer renders the caster immune to truth compelling skills, spells, or abilities for a duration of one hour. The caster cannot lie and escape detection, but merely is able to resist any compulsion to speak the truth, and can choose to remain silent.

I know that Truth of the Gypsy is the Trump card for all Gypsy when asked a question. Does this skill still Trump Interrogations?

What exactly will someone using Torture, Torment, or Dread Surgery be able to tell happened when someone willpowers the use of those skills?

They will know when the person doesn't answer the question, yes...

Disordered Mind and Truth of they Gypsy still do what they say they do - nothing has changed with how they work.  The addition of the Interrogation trait only affects Willpower.

The real heart of my question is can someone at this point tell the difference from someone remaining silent during torture due to willpower, or disordered mind?

"Any caster that uses an effect (skill or spell) is aware if it is successful or not, and why it was not successful if it failed. This information is vague, and not specific. For example, if you use an Enfeeble Mind on someone, and they use a latent spell as a defense but play dumb, you will still be aware the spell failed because a latent spell was used to defend against it."

So the Torturer would know it was a latent effect, versus a skill, that was the reason they did not answer the question.

Because this is a somewhat touchy metagaming subject...should the person calling willpower against truth detection do so at the time he is using it to lie, or is it permissible, if a rules marshal is present, to have that marshal be the arbiter of your willpower. 

As it stands, regardless of whether or not you use a willpower to defend against it, you know the statement made was a lie (or suspect such). In the case of willpower, you only know out of game, which can easily lead to metagaming.

Also, if the person using willpower makes up some outrageous and patently unbelievable answer, is the torturer forced to believe that lie?  The wording implies that he must since he believes that his truth telling ability was successful.