Another thing (of the many examples discussed in this thread) that irks me is the inability of some writers from the US to draw a distinction between the verb "to lay (down)" and "to lie" (as in 'to lie down', for, mendacity is a different matter), especially when using the past tense, or, rather, how they are used incorrectly.
I have lost count of the number of pieces where I have read "s/he laid down" (on a bed), and every time I see it, my eyes narrow, and my teeth gnash and grind in mute rage at this travesty. Worse is when this is used in the context of a piece of writing that is supposed to be set in the UK.
In (British) English, when using the present tense, of "to lay", one writes, for example: You lay down a brick wall, or, lay down the law, or lay down your arms; you lay eyes on someone, lay hands on, lay your life down for someone (or something): The past tense of that verb is "laid". For example: You laid your life down for your country, or she laid down the law, or he laid hands on me.
Now, also in (British) English, when heading off to bed, eventually, what will happen (hopefully) is that you (will) lie down on your bed, you lie on the bed, or, he, or she, was lying in bed ("when I went up to see her, she was still lying in bed"). And, the straightforward past tense of this verb, when used in this context, is "lay" - thus, one will write "she or he lay in bed", or, "he lay stretched out".