{"id":1787,"date":"2017-02-18T23:58:08","date_gmt":"2017-02-19T04:58:08","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/?p=1787"},"modified":"2017-02-19T05:59:19","modified_gmt":"2017-02-19T10:59:19","slug":"u-s-department-of-justice-effectively-concedes-that-polygraph-countermeasures-are-effective","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/2017\/02\/18\/u-s-department-of-justice-effectively-concedes-that-polygraph-countermeasures-are-effective\/","title":{"rendered":"U.S. Department of Justice Effectively Concedes that Polygraph Countermeasures Are Effective"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

The U.S. Department of Justice effectively conceded that polygraph countermeasures are effective in arguing against incarcerated polygraph critic Doug Williams<\/a>‘ motion<\/a> that he be allowed to engage in polygraph-related activities during his upcoming three-year period of supervised release. DOJ’s opposition brief<\/a> (PDF), filed on 10 February 2017, notes, at p. 2:<\/p>\n

In addition to training manuals and DVDs, defendant sold in-person, confidential, \u201cone-on-one\u201d polygraph countermeasures training sessions. During these sessions, defendant taught clients how to pass polygraph tests even if they were lying.<\/strong> (emphasis added)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The brief, which largely recaps details of the government-orchestrated “crimes” for which Williams was convicted, concludes by arguing that “the restriction on polygraph-related activities for the full term of supervised release is the minimum restriction necessary to protect the public.” This flies in the face of the polygraph community’s claims<\/a> that sophisticated polygraph countermeasures can be routinely detected and are ineffective.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The U.S. Department of Justice effectively conceded that polygraph countermeasures are effective in arguing against incarcerated polygraph critic Doug Williams‘ motion that he be allowed to engage in polygraph-related activities during his upcoming three-year period of supervised release. DOJ’s opposition brief (PDF), filed on 10 February 2017, notes, at p. 2: In addition to training …<\/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":[64,197,170],"class_list":{"0":"post-1787","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","6":"category-polygraph","7":"tag-countermeasures","8":"tag-doug-williams","9":"tag-operation-lie-busters","10":"anons"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1787","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=1787"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1787\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1791,"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1787\/revisions\/1791"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1787"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1787"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1787"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}