Former Arkansas Department of Corrections employee Trayesha Booth has filed a lawsuit against Charles Humble and his companies, NITV, LLC and NITV Federal Services, LCC.
Booth’s 8-page Complaint alleges the following general facts:
4. Plaintiff worked for the Arkansas Department of Corrections (ADC), starting in August 2023, who worked for the ADC until February 14, 2024, when she was terminated for failing a CVSA test when questioned about bringing contraband into the prison prison.
5. Plaintiff did not bring contraband into the prison. As alleged herein, the CVSA test is inherently unreliable, but, despite notice, the Defendants continue to market this device as reliable. Indeed, Defendants have been sued before and are aware of this issue yet continue misrepresenting the reliability of the CVSA.
5. Plaintiff was terminated on February 14, 2024, at which time she was a Correctional Officer II.
6. Plaintiff was supposedly accused by an inmate of bringing contraband into the prison.
7. Plaintiff was given a VSA once, and not told the result. She was then given a VSA a second time and told she was deceptive.
8. The voice stress analyzer test result, purporting to show that Plaintiff was deceptive, was false. Plaintiff was not lying or being deceptive. She answered all questions honestly.
9. The NITV sold the VSA that gave the test to Plaintiff and the Plaintiff [sic] to the ADC.
10. The NITV sells VSA devices to government agencies and private companies all over the United States.
11. The NITV claims that the VSA devices it sells can detect falsehoods and lies in advertisements and marketing materials. These devices are marketed to law enforcement agencies, such as the ADC, and private corporations, under the premise that these agencies and businesses can use these devices to determine when employees are lying for purposes of carrying out discipline.
12. This is false, and it is known to be false by the NITV. Studies have shown that VSA devices are about as likely to catch deception and lies as tossing a coin, or even worse. An observant witch doctor would almost certainly do better. NITV has never subjected its devices to peer review. NITV has never conducted double blind tests to establish the effectiveness of its devices. NITV did not develop these devices using the scientific method.
13. There have been repeated instances where people were found to have been deceptive, when it was later proven that they were not. This has resulted in a false confession and conviction for murder in California, charges wongly brought, and at least one person in Arkansas was fired based on a false positive, which defendants knew about, yet they have continued their actions.
14. NITV trains people working for agencies and companies to operate these devices. It tells them how to determine falsehoods and deceptive statements, but of course, this is bogus.
15. NITV’s trainers frequently consult on cold calls from the agencies they sell these materials to.
16. As a result of Defendants’ conduct Plaintiff’s reputation was harmed, and she was fired.
The complaint goes on to enumerate five counts against the defendants and demands a jury trial. The fourth count includes the allegation that “Defendants have been negligent in creating, designed [sic], advertising, marketing, and training on these devices. It is a defective product, and they know it” (emphasis added). Booth’s statement of claim states that “[a]t the time of filing, the amount in controversy does not exceed $75,000.00.”
The defendants have filed an 11-page Answer to Plaintiff’s Complaint denying liability and requesting that the complaint be dismissed.
The civil suit is case number 4:25-cv-00060-DPM in the United States Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas. Booth is represented by the law firm Sutter & Gillham, PLLC, which previously represented Bianca Fletcher, another Arkansas Department of Corrections employee who was allegedly wrongly terminated based on CVSA results.
I plan on making more detailed points later, but it appears that the Arkansas Department of Corrections management lacks the abstract reasoning abilities to learn from their mistakes. Although the Bianca Fletcher case was settled out of court, one can easily surmise that it cost the overburdened tax-payers of Arkansas a hefty sum including back pay, overtime hours to cover shifts and causing additional moral problems and adding to a rift between management and officers. Also, shame on ADC for believing an inmate over an officer based on a bogus “instrument.”
A reasonable person or institution should learn from their mistakes, but the ADC appears to keep touching the hot burner and wondering why they keep getting burned. Gov. Sanders needs to at least consider a management change at ADC.
I am willing to bet this case will be settled out of court since Charles Humble and company. obviously would not want to be questioned about a fake doctorate, fake research, a dubious bankruptcy and continuing to market a device they know does not distinguish between a lie and the truth.
I hope this case goes to trial, but I doubt it will. There will likely be a settlement like in the Flecher case since Ms. Booth may need the settlement sooner than later although this is a winning case based on the past court history of NITV and NITV FS. The defendant’s law firm will probably shop around for a friendly judge, and if they don’t find one, they will come to the bargaining table. As I said earlier, NITV FS and Charles Humble do not want to be examined closely and under oath.
If Ms. Booth or her counsel are reading this post, I would like to remind E. Gary Baker won over $200,000 by winning a jury verdict. Also, as I said earlier, Baker peddles a pseudo-science device similar to the CVSA and is morally lacking like Humble and Co. I do not know how much Ms. Flecher won, but in my history of being a court observer, settlements tend to be less than jury verdicts. Of course, I hope Ms. Booth’s lawyers do what is best for Ms. Booth and she will be in my prayers.
One more tidbit I find interesting is Ms. Booth is using the same firm as Ms. Flecher, whereas Humble and Co. found a new law firm.
I am also concerned about the lie industry firms and workers hunting down African-Americans.
I intend this open letter to be a friendly heads-up to the commissioner of the Arkansas Department of Corrections: Dexter Payne, it has come to my attention that another one of your employees has “failed” a computer voice stress analyzer test. As you may remember, another one of your employees also “failed” a CVSA, which resulted in a court settlement.
First off, there is no known independent research showing the CVSA to have more than coin flip reliability, in fact the CVSA did even achieve 50% reliability in some research.
In addition to having failed in the ADC, the CVSA failed big time in the Steven Crowe case. Because of this failure, California taxpayers had to cough up roughly $7,500,000 for a settlement. As you may know, the California state government is in the process of removing the CVSA due to its known unreliability. To put it simply, the CVSA is junk science.
In your profile, you mentioned that you worked your way up from a correctional officer to the commissioner. You mentioned also that you are firm and fair. I am taking you at your word. Therefore, I am respectfully asking you to do away with the CVSA since it is driving a wedge between your hard working, and highly stressed staff and ADC management.
Also, NITV has a history of throwing clients under the bus. Please read the response to the latest lawsuit and note that NITV is implying that ADC did not use the “technology” correctly.
I also noted that you hold a Master’s from ASU and hopefully you have some respect for academic integrity. As you may have noted, Charles Humble “earned” a faux Ph.D from an unaccredited, and now closed, “university” that was located in a strip mall but still refers to himself as Dr. Charles Humble. Don’t take my word, do a Google search. He also claims a dubious study in a make believe peer reviewed journal that claims the CVSA is near perfect. As you may have noted, Charles Humble has a fast and loose relationship with the truth.
I am not a lawyer, and some of the jargon is hard for me to understand, but by reading the defendant’s response, the plan is to shop for a friendly judge, and if that doesn’t work to use the EUSA to throw the Arkansas Department of Corrections management under the bus and leave them holding the financial payout bag. It is known that NITV generously contributes to politicians, mostly republicans and Arkansas is a red state. Arkansas has a history of governors for sale from at least the Bill Clinton era (flying on Tyson’s jets, etc.) to Sarah Sanders (the $20,000 lectern for a European holiday with the girlfriends) so the defendant’s lawyers are no doubt on a shopping spree as I write this.
As I mentioned earlier, ADC should have learned from the last incident that the CVSA is absolute garbage. As the old saying goes, “fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.” I am also reminded of the classic Mark Twain quote, “it is easier to fool a man than convince him he has been fooled.”
I imagine it would be a plainiff’s attorney’s dream to put “Dr.” Charles Humble and other NITV people on the witness stand and entering the ABC interview and the fake Chapman study into evidence. I remember how the counsel for “Dr.” E. Gary Baker went thru Humble and company like shit through a goose. And the kicker was, and is, Gary Baker also markets a similar pseudo-science device. There is no way competent counsel will ever allow Charles Humble on the witness stand or anyone at NITV. But by golly, if they do, I will find a way into the court room to watch the show.
So again, at this juncture it appears the plan for the opposing counsel is to shop (buy) a friendly judge, and if this doesn’t work, throw the management at ADC under the bus (again).