Financial data disclosed in federal court by NITV Federal Services, LLC, which markets the scientifically baseless Computer Voice Stress Analyzer (CVSA) to law enforcement agencies, reflect flat revenue and a multi-year sales slump.
The financial data was divulged in NITV v. Dektor (Case No. 9:18-cv-80994 in the Southern District of Florida) to support a claimed loss of more than $2 million in revenue.
Financial figures for the privately held NITV, which was founded by pseudoscientist Charles W. Humble to market his CVSA device and operator training, is not generally publicly available. A declaration prepared on behalf of NITV by certified public accountant Kevin R. Foyteck includes (at Appendix B) quantitative historical data on NITV’s revenue and customer base. Using Foyteck’s data, AntiPolygraph.org has prepared charts of NITV’s revenue and sales.
The data show that between 2015 and 2018, NITV’s revenue remained flat at an average of U.S. $1,710,251 per annum:
The data also show that NITV has had difficulty finding new customers, with the number of new customers per year steadily declining since 2011. It would appear that the market for bogus voice-based lie detectors is approaching its saturation point:
As previously reported on AntiPolygraph.org, the court awarded NITV a total of $849,347.92 in damages in its suit against Dektor, an amount that it appears, based on a recent court filing, NITV has thus far been unable to collect.
At this time, Dektor’s website (www.dektorpse.com) is offline, and Dektor and its sole proprietor, Arthur Herring III, remain under a permanent injunction essentially enjoining them from communicating any information critical of NITV, its CVSA product, or its founder, Charles Humble, to anyone.
It is worth noting that in 2009, a federal jury awarded competitor Elwood Gary Baker $575,000 in a defamation lawsuit against NITV. To our knowledge, Baker never succeeded in collecting this amount.
I think the end is near for “Dr.” Charles Humble and NITV. For the life of me I don’t see how a bankruptcy court and the aggrieved parties will allow NITV to bundle the debts NITV has run up from their failed pseudoscience CVSA product, and then run NITV under the same metric with the initials FS on the tail end of the company. I did some quick mental regression analysis and estimate for the last year, based on the above chart, NITV probably sold maybe 30 CVSAs in 2021.
I can imagine a government entity, and an examiner can get themselves in legal hot water, even with a signed waiver since NITV training tells the examiners to state that the NITV is very accurate, when the principals of the company have admitted publicly that the device cannot determine if one is lying.
As I mentioned an earlier post, E. Gary Baker DVSA will probably follow NITV into the dust bin since this fails for the same reason that polygraphy and CVSA fails. That is, there is no such device that exists that can tell if someone is lying.
Personally, I am sick of fake-a-roo Ph.Ds like Humble and Baker, and deceptive polygraphers like the Ribacoffs et al.
Here is a quick rehash of the case of the legal battle of the fake Ph.D Humble versus the fake Ph.D Baker. It appears the legal case of Humble and Baker has been settled with Humble paying slightly over $270,000 to Baker including court expenses.
I remember a court case in my city where on individual sued another individual for unpaid debts, which included reneging on paying for a marijuana debt. The judge threw out the case because dealing in marijuana was illegal.
As I mentioned in an earlier post, it is obvious that both Humble and Baker are knowingly marketing pseudo-science devices they know are not accurate. Humble claims his gadget in about 98% percent accurate, and Baker claims his device is 100% accurate. Both these characters are liars. In addition to this fraud, both are touting fake diplomas and in the case of Humble, fake research. This is illegal in Florida, but as mentioned many times, the government purchasing agents evidently are to slovenly to do a simple Google search to find out the truth about VSAs.
In the Steven Crowe case, the municipality had to pay out a multi-million dollar judgement in large part due to relying on the CVSA. Sooner of later, a law enforcement agency is going to get a crippling lawsuit because they failed to find out the truth about VSAs.
Also, as I said before, how is it possible to defame someone in the VSA industry peddling a pseudo-science gadget with a mail order Ph.D?