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.
A lot of small departments. Other than a few, the big city departments aren’t gullible. The dream of landing a department that would potentially purchase a hundred CVSAs isn’t becoming a reality
Doesn’t look like California is a good hunting ground anymore for a mega-order. A few years ago, AP posted an article mentioning that NITV revenue is flat. I can see selling two or three “instruments” to smaller departments, such as the Arkansas Department of Corrections. A $20,000 expenditure will fly under the radar even for ADOC, but a $1,000,000 contract would take multiple layers of approval, and at least one bureaucrat may think to Google NITV.
Getting back to ADOC. They bought two CVSAs, and one of them has gotten them and NITV into hot water. That is a 50% hassle factor, which, interestingly enough, is the agreed-upon reliability of the CVSA by independent testers. Therefore, if NITV sold 100 CVSAs, and 50 of those got NITV sued, that could be overwhelming for NITV and the various agencies that use this pseudo-science.
Finally, it appears the case of Moore v. NITV FS has stalled. If anyone has any updates, please post.
They’ll blame it on user error, didn’t know what he or she was doing, read the charts wrong. The owners’ egos are too inflated to take the blame for their inadequate money maker. If it can’t be admissible in court, then it’s clearly not reliable.
I know, NITV FS craps all over their customers, and the customers don’t seem to care, with the exception of California. NITV left a customer holding the bag to the tune of $7,500,000 on the Stephen Crowe case.
A while back, Brittany mentioned “Dr.” Humble thinks his customers are stupid since they suck up all his bullshit. While this is partly true, look at the clowns at the Arkansas Department of Corrections, who believe the CVSA can tell if someone is lying by hooking them up to a microphone and a soundcard-equipped laptop.
With all that said, I think one of the selling points of the CVSA is that it allows Barney Fifes to pretend they are Sherlock Holmes since they are using a “scientific instrument” which measures “micro tremors.”