{"id":2952,"date":"2001-04-04T15:00:09","date_gmt":"2001-04-04T20:00:09","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/?p=2952"},"modified":"2026-05-09T23:25:13","modified_gmt":"2026-05-10T04:25:13","slug":"oversight-of-the-daniel-king-case","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/2001\/04\/04\/oversight-of-the-daniel-king-case\/","title":{"rendered":"“Oversight of the Daniel King Case”"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n\n\n

Steven Aftergood of the American Federation of Scientists’ Secrecy in Government Project <\/a>writes<\/a> in today’s edition of Secrecy News<\/a>:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

OVERSIGHT OF THE DANIEL KING CASE<\/p>

Yesterday the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence held a closed hearing to consider the case of Daniel M. King, a Navy officer who was accused of espionage, held for 520 days, and then released last month when the Navy was unable to substantiate the charges against him.<\/p>

“What happened to Petty Officer King is alien and antithetical to our system,” said Jonathan Turley, King’s civilian attorney, in a lengthy prepared statement submitted to the Committee.<\/p>

Among numerous government abuses alleged by the defense team in its testimony, the handling of King’s indeterminate polygraph examination stands out. “A routine ‘no opinion’ glitch on a polygraph was allowed to mutate into an espionage investigation from the very first day,” said Turley.<\/p>

A blow by blow account of the repeated polygraph sessions was provided in a statement by JAG attorney Lt. Matthew Sidney Freedus, a member of King’s defense. Told that he had failed the polygraph test, “King admitted that he had occasional fantasies about espionage over his 20-year career, but stated unequivocally that these were just fantasies and that he would never do anything to hurt the Navy.”<\/p>

“It should be noted that it is very common for individuals working in the national security field to have fantasies of committing espionage,” according to Lt. Freedus.<\/p>

“In fact, during an interview several months later, [the polygrapher who examined King] acknowledged that fantasies of espionage were common and even admitted that he had thoughts of espionage.”<\/p>

“It is deeply troubling to me that the Navy has never issued a formal apology to CTR1 King and his family for this colossal miscarriage of justice and that no government officials have been held accountable,” Freedus concluded.<\/p>

Rather inexplicably, “the Navy congratulated the prosecutor in this case and awarded her the prestigious Meritorious Service Medal.”<\/p>

Testimony that provides the government’s view of the case is classified. None of the government statements from yesterday’s closed Senate Intelligence Committee hearing can be released, a Committee spokeswoman said.<\/p>

But the statements of the three defense attorneys are presented here:<\/p>

http:\/\/www.fas.org\/irp\/ops\/ci\/king\/index.html#ssci<\/a><\/p>

A press release issued yesterday by the King defense, including a relatively concise Fact Sheet presenting its perspective on the case, is posted here:<\/p>

http:\/\/www.fas.org\/sgp\/news\/2001\/04\/turley.html<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n<\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Steven Aftergood of the American Federation of Scientists’ Secrecy in Government Project writes in today’s edition of Secrecy News: OVERSIGHT OF THE DANIEL KING CASE Yesterday the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence held a closed hearing to consider the case of Daniel M. King, a Navy officer who was accused of espionage, held for 520 …<\/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":[310,309,318],"class_list":["post-2952","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","category-polygraph","tag-daniel-king","tag-ncis","tag-senate-select-committee-on-intelligence","anons"],"yoast_head":"\n"Oversight of the Daniel King Case" - AntiPolygraph.org News<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/2001\/04\/04\/oversight-of-the-daniel-king-case\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\""Oversight of the Daniel King Case" - AntiPolygraph.org News\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Steven Aftergood of the American Federation of Scientists’ Secrecy in Government Project writes in today’s edition of Secrecy News: OVERSIGHT OF THE DANIEL KING CASE Yesterday the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence held a closed hearing to consider the case of Daniel M. King, a Navy officer who was accused of espionage, held for 520 ...\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/2001\/04\/04\/oversight-of-the-daniel-king-case\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"AntiPolygraph.org News\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/AntiPolygraph.org\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2001-04-04T20:00:09+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2026-05-10T04:25:13+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"AntiPolygraph.org\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@ap_org\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@ap_org\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"AntiPolygraph.org\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"2 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/antipolygraph.org\\\/blog\\\/2001\\\/04\\\/04\\\/oversight-of-the-daniel-king-case\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/antipolygraph.org\\\/blog\\\/2001\\\/04\\\/04\\\/oversight-of-the-daniel-king-case\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"AntiPolygraph.org\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/antipolygraph.org\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/369226985d60d0cd81bc388f32f13fc0\"},\"headline\":\"“Oversight of the Daniel King Case”\",\"datePublished\":\"2001-04-04T20:00:09+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-05-10T04:25:13+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/antipolygraph.org\\\/blog\\\/2001\\\/04\\\/04\\\/oversight-of-the-daniel-king-case\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":418,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/antipolygraph.org\\\/blog\\\/#organization\"},\"keywords\":[\"Daniel King\",\"NCIS\",\"Senate Select Committee on Intelligence\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Polygraph\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/antipolygraph.org\\\/blog\\\/2001\\\/04\\\/04\\\/oversight-of-the-daniel-king-case\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/antipolygraph.org\\\/blog\\\/2001\\\/04\\\/04\\\/oversight-of-the-daniel-king-case\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/antipolygraph.org\\\/blog\\\/2001\\\/04\\\/04\\\/oversight-of-the-daniel-king-case\\\/\",\"name\":\"\\\"Oversight of the Daniel King Case\\\" - AntiPolygraph.org News\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/antipolygraph.org\\\/blog\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2001-04-04T20:00:09+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-05-10T04:25:13+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/antipolygraph.org\\\/blog\\\/2001\\\/04\\\/04\\\/oversight-of-the-daniel-king-case\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/antipolygraph.org\\\/blog\\\/2001\\\/04\\\/04\\\/oversight-of-the-daniel-king-case\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/antipolygraph.org\\\/blog\\\/2001\\\/04\\\/04\\\/oversight-of-the-daniel-king-case\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/antipolygraph.org\\\/blog\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"“Oversight of the Daniel King Case”\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/antipolygraph.org\\\/blog\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/antipolygraph.org\\\/blog\\\/\",\"name\":\"AntiPolygraph.org News\",\"description\":\"Original reporting and commentary about polygraphs, voice stress analyzers, and other purported "lie detectors."\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/antipolygraph.org\\\/blog\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/antipolygraph.org\\\/blog\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/antipolygraph.org\\\/blog\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"AntiPolygraph.org\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/antipolygraph.org\\\/blog\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/antipolygraph.org\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/antipolygraph.org\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/polygraph-quackery.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/antipolygraph.org\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/polygraph-quackery.jpg\",\"width\":1355,\"height\":799,\"caption\":\"AntiPolygraph.org\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/antipolygraph.org\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/AntiPolygraph.org\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/ap_org\",\"https:\\\/\\\/bsky.app\\\/profile\\\/antipolygraph.bsky.social\",\"https:\\\/\\\/www.youtube.com\\\/user\\\/AntiPolygraph\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/antipolygraph.org\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/369226985d60d0cd81bc388f32f13fc0\",\"name\":\"AntiPolygraph.org\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/352648b7de416838c71aefdde2aafa386ca68af8d96ef52138d397773bfbeff1?s=96&d=mm&r=x\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/352648b7de416838c71aefdde2aafa386ca68af8d96ef52138d397773bfbeff1?s=96&d=mm&r=x\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/352648b7de416838c71aefdde2aafa386ca68af8d96ef52138d397773bfbeff1?s=96&d=mm&r=x\",\"caption\":\"AntiPolygraph.org\"},\"sameAs\":[\"http:\\\/\\\/antipolygraph.org\\\/blog\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/antipolygraph.org\\\/blog\\\/author\\\/antipolygraph-org-administrator\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"\"Oversight of the Daniel King Case\" - AntiPolygraph.org News","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/2001\/04\/04\/oversight-of-the-daniel-king-case\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"\"Oversight of the Daniel King Case\" - AntiPolygraph.org News","og_description":"Steven Aftergood of the American Federation of Scientists’ Secrecy in Government Project writes in today’s edition of Secrecy News: OVERSIGHT OF THE DANIEL KING CASE Yesterday the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence held a closed hearing to consider the case of Daniel M. King, a Navy officer who was accused of espionage, held for 520 ...","og_url":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/2001\/04\/04\/oversight-of-the-daniel-king-case\/","og_site_name":"AntiPolygraph.org News","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/AntiPolygraph.org","article_published_time":"2001-04-04T20:00:09+00:00","article_modified_time":"2026-05-10T04:25:13+00:00","author":"AntiPolygraph.org","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@ap_org","twitter_site":"@ap_org","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"AntiPolygraph.org","Est. reading time":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/2001\/04\/04\/oversight-of-the-daniel-king-case\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/2001\/04\/04\/oversight-of-the-daniel-king-case\/"},"author":{"name":"AntiPolygraph.org","@id":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/369226985d60d0cd81bc388f32f13fc0"},"headline":"“Oversight of the Daniel King Case”","datePublished":"2001-04-04T20:00:09+00:00","dateModified":"2026-05-10T04:25:13+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/2001\/04\/04\/oversight-of-the-daniel-king-case\/"},"wordCount":418,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/#organization"},"keywords":["Daniel King","NCIS","Senate Select Committee on Intelligence"],"articleSection":["Polygraph"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/2001\/04\/04\/oversight-of-the-daniel-king-case\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/2001\/04\/04\/oversight-of-the-daniel-king-case\/","url":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/2001\/04\/04\/oversight-of-the-daniel-king-case\/","name":"\"Oversight of the Daniel King Case\" - AntiPolygraph.org News","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2001-04-04T20:00:09+00:00","dateModified":"2026-05-10T04:25:13+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/2001\/04\/04\/oversight-of-the-daniel-king-case\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/2001\/04\/04\/oversight-of-the-daniel-king-case\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/2001\/04\/04\/oversight-of-the-daniel-king-case\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"“Oversight of the Daniel King Case”"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/","name":"AntiPolygraph.org News","description":"Original reporting and commentary about polygraphs, voice stress analyzers, and other purported "lie detectors."","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/#organization","name":"AntiPolygraph.org","url":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/polygraph-quackery.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/polygraph-quackery.jpg","width":1355,"height":799,"caption":"AntiPolygraph.org"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/AntiPolygraph.org","https:\/\/x.com\/ap_org","https:\/\/bsky.app\/profile\/antipolygraph.bsky.social","https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/user\/AntiPolygraph"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/369226985d60d0cd81bc388f32f13fc0","name":"AntiPolygraph.org","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/352648b7de416838c71aefdde2aafa386ca68af8d96ef52138d397773bfbeff1?s=96&d=mm&r=x","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/352648b7de416838c71aefdde2aafa386ca68af8d96ef52138d397773bfbeff1?s=96&d=mm&r=x","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/352648b7de416838c71aefdde2aafa386ca68af8d96ef52138d397773bfbeff1?s=96&d=mm&r=x","caption":"AntiPolygraph.org"},"sameAs":["http:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog"],"url":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/author\/antipolygraph-org-administrator\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2952","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=2952"}],"version-history":[{"count":7,"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2952\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":5510,"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2952\/revisions\/5510"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2952"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2952"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2952"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}