Polygraph Critic Doug Williams Freed from Prison

Doug Williams upon release from the federal prison camp at Florence, Colorado

Polygraph critic Doug Williams, who was targeted for prosecution in Operation Lie Busters for teaching people how to pass or beat a polygraph “test,” was released this morning from the federal prison camp in Florence, Colorado and is now on his way back home to Oklahoma. We wish him Godspeed and look forward to his renewed participation in the public debate over polygraph policy!

8 thoughts on “Polygraph Critic Doug Williams Freed from Prison”

  1. Thanks for posting this George. And by the way there is no debate – the polygraph is an evil sick joke. It has never been accurate or reliable as a lie detector and my conviction and imprisonment proves that and also proves that the government knows that.

  2. Hell Yeah! Congratulations Doug! I am confident that you will receive the justice that you seek.

    Let’s roll.

  3. Doug,

    Love your cause! Keep making YouTube Videos – they can’t arrest you for that! Keep it instructional on techniques to use!

    You The Man!!!

  4. You were a police officer and how many child molesters are asked to take the examination where your teaching them to pass a polygraph? sad I have been a cop for 40 years and had used the Polygraph to clear good people too and to catch child molesters and other criminals also. You have put this info on world wide Web and everything from terrorists’ to crooks have looked at your sites, don’t you feel bad if someone who molested a small child was taught by you to pass a polygraph. I believe in freedom of speech, but you gone too far and you shamed your badge and department and country, just my opinion like you have the write to talk about polygraph.

    1. Joe, I completely understand where you are coming from, and it would be hard for anyone to read what you have written and not feel that a tool for catching criminals has been let out of the bag.

      However, what you may have missed is that if the polygraph is not reliable to detect lies and there are false positives and negatives, it just becomes an interrogation technique by intimidation, which may lead to false confessions. Our system is laid out so that the detectives and prosecutors find the evidence of a crime and try and prove it in court and not to try and get forced confessions.

      This is why people fight the polygraph test. You may be just so internalized with your well-intentioned belief you need to catch as many criminals as possible while not thinking of the collateral damage or the integrity of a justice system that puts the burden of proof on the state.

      My last comment is that with the internet and easy access to information nothing as widespread as polygraph testing would ever have a chance of staying hidden.

      Those are my thoughts anyway. I believe both you and Doug are good people with good intentions but with very different ways of seeing how the world should work and treat people.

  5. Douglas,

    I am compelled to support your decision to explain and create awarness about the untruthfulness of a so called “tool to detect lies” by government agencies. It is an intimidation tactic. While im sure it has equally been used to jail actual criminals, im sure it has been used to falsley punish innocent people. People put so much credibility in a pilygrphy test when Douglas was hibest and said it does not. He enabled families to have a chance to show they are innocent and falsly accused. He opened his mouth to a weakness of our government. Our government can do great things. They dont need a polygraph test to do that. Criminals are highly stupid and highly intelligent. If they want to get away with something they can manipulate electronics and people. Instead of wasting energy putting an innocent man to jail, the government should invest their time in creating a better system to uncover a true criminal. They should also apologise to Douglas and thank him for exposing a weak spot in the government so it could be fixed using our brains, not intimidation.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.