{"id":161,"date":"2007-08-24T07:57:20","date_gmt":"2007-08-24T11:57:20","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/?p=161"},"modified":"2007-08-24T07:57:20","modified_gmt":"2007-08-24T11:57:20","slug":"lawyer-claims-polygraph-clears-ex-marine-jose-nazario-of-iraq-killings","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/2007\/08\/24\/lawyer-claims-polygraph-clears-ex-marine-jose-nazario-of-iraq-killings\/","title":{"rendered":"Lawyer Claims Polygraph Clears Ex-Marine Jose Nazario of Iraq Killings"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Sonja Bjelland reports for the Inland Southern California Press Enterprise in “Lawyer says polygraph clears ex-Riverside cop of Iraq killings.”<\/a> Excerpt:<\/p>\n

<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

A former Riverside police officer accused of killing two detainees while on duty as a Marine in Iraq passed a polygraph test in which he asserted that he had never been involved in a serious crime.<\/p>\n

While supporters of Jose Luis Nazario Jr. say the test exonerates him of the federal voluntary manslaughter charges he faces, polygraph experts say the examination proves nothing because the questions were too vague.<\/p>\n

Polygraph results are rarely used in court. In federal court, it is up to the discretion of the judge whether to admit such results as evidence.<\/p>\n

<\/span>The polygraph results were released as conflicting information about the case involving the killings after a firefight in Fallujah continues to be made public.<\/p>\n

In the next few weeks, a federal grand jury will decide whether to indict Nazario. He has not yet entered a plea and it is unclear when any trial might begin.<\/p>\n

Federal authorities declined to speak about the case, saying it is still under investigation.<\/p>\n

Nazario took the polygraph as part of the hiring process at the Riverside Police Department, said attorney Emery Brett Ledger, who released the polygraph documents. Nazario took another polygraph for the Riverside County Sheriff’s Department and passed.<\/p>\n

A question typical of such polygraphs, according to experts, was the one used by Riverside police: “Since your 18th birthday, have you committed a serious or undetected felony crime?”<\/p>\n

The results stated “no deception is indicated.”<\/p>\n

Los Angeles-based polygraph expert Edward Gelb said that the employment-screening polygraphs do not have the same accuracy as when a questioner asks about a single incident.<\/p>\n

“It’s all about how you ask the right question,” Gelb said.<\/p>\n

When asking about details in a specific crime, the polygraph can be right 91 percent of the time, Gelb said. But employment-screening polygraphs ask fewer questions and do not inquire about one specific incident.<\/p>\n

Nazario’s police polygraphs are not the only ones at issue in this case.<\/p>\n

Military author Nathaniel Helms said the investigation of Nazario stemmed from a polygraph test taken by a fellow Marine for a Secret Service job.<\/p>\n

Helms said that information comes from an interview he conducted with Cpl. Ryan Weemer while researching a book, “My Men Are My Heroes: The Brad Kasal Story,” about the war in Iraq.<\/p>\n

Helms also spoke to many of Weemer’s squad mates and said none of them mentioned witnessing any war crimes. But Weemer’s attorney, Paul Hackett, said that although Weemer applied for a Secret Service job, he never took a polygraph test.<\/p>\n

<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

<\/span><\/span><\/span>For discussion of the Nazario case, see Ex-Marine and Cop Jose Nazario, Charged With Eight Killings, Passed LAPD and Riverside P.D. Pre-Employment Polygraph Examinations<\/a>.<\/p>\n

<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Sonja Bjelland reports for the Inland Southern California Press Enterprise in “Lawyer says polygraph clears ex-Riverside cop of Iraq killings.” Excerpt: A former Riverside police officer accused of killing two detainees while on duty as a Marine in Iraq passed a polygraph test in which he asserted that he had never been involved in a …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-161","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","6":"category-polygraph","7":"anons"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/161","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=161"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/161\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=161"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=161"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=161"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}