Sie,

I fully understand where you're coming from. The method I chose to use is quite radical, not to mention risky. But it worked. I have managed to discredit a polygraph in a manner that the examiner will have a tough time explaining.

No possibility of having the conviction overturned. It is an undisputed fact that the girl was in my house for several days. The conviction is based on "discussing illicit sexual acts", which is very hard to prove or disprove. I freely admitted to discussing this girl's sexual activities and her need to stop them. The ability to argue that the discussions were not illicit is very difficult.

On the polygraph itself we are in agreement. Reliance on this flawed machine causes serious problems on both sides. Some of my fellow probationers are a definite danger to society, and I certainly would not want them to be released on the basis of a polygraph. Fortunately, there is only one therapist in this area, and she doesn't rely on the polygraph results to make her decisions. This is caused in part by my experience with the poly.

Quote:
   

Sorry, I just can't follow the logic of admitting to something illegal or immoral specially from someone on sex offender probation. But if the approach has or is working for you I wish you the best of luck.

If the charges against you can be proven to be false, i would seek a post conviction overturn.

As for me, I'll continue to argue that the reliance on the polygraph in the decision making process of releasing someone from supervision poses a threat to public safey. My aguement focuses not only on the polygraphs vulnerability to countermeasures as discussed on this site but also its lack of scienific validity recently put forth by the National Academy of Science.

Sie,
I fail to understand your reasoning. The issues surrounding the polygraph examination have absolutely nothing to do with the seriousness (or lack thereof) of my underlying offense. In your eyes you see me playing a game, but to me this is no game. This is serious business, carefully planned and executed, and about to come to some closure.
I would ask you this question about your concerns regarding polygraphs and deceptive / innocent people: Is a person more likely to avoid detection by using the countermeasures touted on this site or by admitting to numerous acts known to be illegal or immoral? My method certainly would not allow a true sex offender to be released so he/she could re-offend. You can bet on that. The main reason this worked for me is a fundamental one - that I am NOT a pedophile,  child molester or sexual deviant. This fact had been determined by my therapist some 18 months prior to my first poly.
I chose not to use the countermeasures approach, because it is too difficult to prove that they were performed, by either the examiner or the examinee. Written answers, polygraph charts and police reports, on the other hand, cannot be disputed, as they are tangible objects. This is necessary, because I can't file suit on the basis of my own admission that I wiggled my toes during a question to skew the result. I would be laughed out of the courtroom within the first 5 minutes. That suit will be filed by the middle of next week, and I will be providing a copy of it to an esteemed member of this site for his personal perusal and comment.
I am sorry that you are having troubles with polygraphers due to the information you get from this site. Be careful there.
If I may ask, what was your offense and sentence?

Quote:


It makes no sense to me.

As I stated once before, you decided for whatever reason to cut your losses and copped a plead. Your choice. Playing this kind of game is foolish and reckless. Your making a joke out of the seriousness of your/this kind of offense. 

Just for the record, I too am a registered sex offender and telling by your posts you have a lotta work my friend. Yeah, I'm an opponent to polygraph screening but not because I may be wrongly accused of deception and denied access to my family. Rather, what scares me is the offender who is wrongly deemed  nondeceptive, released from supervision and reoffends. This gives everyone a black eye.

What scares the shit out of me is the proponents of polygraph refuse to acknowledge the limitations and vulnerability of the "Art". This poses a real threat, as far as I'm concerned, to the publics safety.

Because I've tryed to argue the issues put forth by this site, two polygraphers refuse to test me and I've come real close to being kicked out of the sotp. Now ain't that a bitch?

Been kind of busy, so haven't been able to keep up. Batman, I picked up a girl who had run away from home because her father had found out she was sleeping with my little brother. She was 15, he was 17. I had discussed her sexual activity with her, specifically to tell her to stop. In Georgia, that is a crime if the child isn't yours or your not a mental health professional. BTW, I notified her mother the following morning of her whereabouts. It took the father a week to convince the police to come to my house in Florida and get her (and me, too). The girl denied that I had done anything "wrong", but that doesn't matter either in these days, because she is too "immature" to know what she is saying. As for discrediting the polygraph test, it was a mutual decision between myself and my attorney to rattle some cages, because we disputed the State's right to order me to take the test. We couldn't go to court to stop it, because the Florida authorities would have merely refused to continue my supervision, forcing me to leave my home and job to go live in a state I didn't want to live in.
To StanTman, you are the idiot. On Friday, January 24th, 2003 the Grievance Committee of the American Polygraph Association opened discussion of my complaint against the examiner. Do you think I would file such a complaint for something I fabricated? Oh, but you don't believe that either, do you. Why don't you ask them yourself. The chairman's name is Dan Sosnowski, and his e-mail is SOS4911@aol.com. He may not tell you anything, but never fear. I will be posting the actual text of my complaint on my website that I am putting together on Angelfire. Stay tuned. And if you want to be legitimate, then register here instead of being a guest.
To Skeptic, thanks for the reply to StanTman. My sentiments exactly.

Quote:


"StanTman",
Since I think it's safe to assume you're of the "pro-polygraph" persuasion, I can't think of much that doesn't make "you all" look like a bunch of idiots.  You certainly don't seem to need much help from us.

But that's just my opinion

Skeptic

Jim.
I think your story is very interesting. It appears though hat you read a little to much science fiction when you were growing up. Where did you get it? If you made it up entirely yourself then I think you really need some type of counseling .
Come On George can't you find anything more credible than this clown. This just makes us all look like a bunch of idiots.

Orolan,

Found your initial posting on this thread interesting.  I'm curious as to why you were required to undergo post-conviction sex offender polygraphs in the first place.  What exactly were you convicted of, if you don't mind my asking?

Also, what was your motivation, other than trying to discredit the polygraph process, for doing what you did during your first post-conviction exam in April 2000?

Batman

Thanks, beech trees, for the response to Mr. Shitty. My sentiments exactly. Obviously just a lurker trying to stir something up.
Fair Chance, neither test was videotaped. Under Florida Polygraph Association rules, the examiner is required to either record the audio or videotape it. This is part of the problem with the examiner releasing the documents, etc. I don't recall seeing a recorder, and he will neither confirm nor deny the existence of a tape. There also is a rule stating that only 4 exams can be given in one day, but I know I was #6 for the first one, because I went last.
I haven't done much lately, due to the holidays, but I'm about to get it rolling again. I'll keep everybody posted.

Quote:


Mr. Shitty,

If you had taken the time to read the posts above, you would see that the only victim in this anecdote is the originator of the thread.

As to your characterization of him 'whining' about the violation of his rights, could you please point out where that occurs? I don't see any whining, merely the retelling of a pretty bizarre tactic with regard to spoiling the use of the polygraph in this fellow's probation.

Were any of the polygraphs in this thread videotaped?   Again, it would be helpful to know if there were "confessions" or the results were based strictly on polygraph interpretation.

Regards.

I think polygraphs are bullshit and anyone with mild control over themselves can defeat them....but you my friend deserve nothing,you whine about you're rights,but what about your victim(s)....I can't side with you on anything..you are wrong!!!!

orolan wrote on Dec 26^th, 2002 at 11:09pm:


This is erroneous. A violation of probation can lead to arrest and imprisonment so it does indeed carry the right to legal counsel.

Some advise, if you decided to take a plea to cut your losses, the system owns you. Accept it.

Next, because of the nature of the charge and the ingrained belief of the polygraph mythology in American society, you'll have very little chance of prevailing against the very powerfull alliance of your sex offender treatment program, the Dept of Corrections and the polygraph community.

Now if I may ask, how did you happen upon this run away? Did you notify the police? How did you locate her parents? Did she spend anytime at your place? Where you alone? 

Besides trying to help this lost and troubled child, where and what was your error? 

Understand it. Accept it.

Thanks Sie for the statute citation. Quick on the response there. The statute is very clear, but people are having their probation revoked because of allegedly "failing" the polygraph. The vast majority of them have no knowledge of the statutes, and a probation violation carries no right to legal counsel, so you can't get a Public Defender. It is sad that the judges would permit it, but they do.
You are right, Marty. I definitely threw them for a loop. That is why I was anxious to see how the second test turned out, the one they refuse to talk about even 18 months later. I suppose I'll have to let the judge compel them to tell me.
On the matter of doing things I shouldn't be doing, that never was an issue. I picked up a runaway, and she made this up in retaliation for me finding out where she was from and notifying her parents as to her whereabouts. You know the saying "No good deed goes unpunished". The fact that the very same judge that sentenced me allowed my two daughters, then 9 and 12 and now 15 and 18, to continue living with me tells the rest of the world that even he found some doubt in the girl's accusations. But a guilty verdict is a guilty verdict, so he did what the had to do.
I think there is a lot to this situation that can be helpful to people reading this board, so I will post updates as progress is made. Who knows, might even have a shot at getting some severe limitaions put on these tests, if not getting them banned outright (one could hope).

sie wrote on Dec 26^th, 2002 at 12:15pm:


Looks like a recognition of the basic unreliability of the polygraph. One wonders whether an affirmative statement that amounts to confession (as opposed to a DI interpretation) could be used. I suspect cases like Jim recounts are rare indeed -lol. Probably threw them for a loop.

-Marty

Marty wrote on Dec 25^th, 2002 at 11:20pm:


The 2002 Florida Statutes
 
Title XLVII
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE AND CORRECTIONS Chapter 948
PROBATION AND COMMUNITY CONTROL View Entire Chapter 
 
948.03  Terms and conditions of probation or community control.-- 


1.  As part of a treatment program, participation at least annually in polygraph examinations to obtain information necessary for risk management and treatment and to reduce the sex offender's denial mechanisms. A polygraph examination must be conducted by a polygrapher trained specifically in the use of the polygraph for the monitoring of sex offenders, where available, and shall be paid by the sex offender. The results of the polygraph examination shall not be used as evidence in court to prove that a violation of community supervision has occurred. 

If the examinee was to make an admission post test I'm sure that confession can an will be used in a court of law. In my opinion of the statute, absent an admission or a confession of a violation of probation, the results of a polygraph ALONE can not be used to prove a violation has occured.

Quote:

Could you (or anyone here) please provide the statute details?  Out here in CA if someone tells a psychologist they are molesting kids it is illegal for them NOT to be turned in. Hard to imagine a polygrapher would have more latitude for treatment.


Quote:

Of course, however if you told them you had molested 2 kids at your home and just couldn't take the guilt anymore, what do you suppose they would do then? A PD would be remiss in their duty if they did not check it out - thoroughly.

Quote:

Sure, if you were not on probation.  As you know, probation can be revoked for far less than a proven admission.

Quote:

Ah, but this is the nub of it. This question is typical of a "control" question. One that you are expected to lie on. One that the polygrapher will do their best to convince you is an important measure of your character so that not only will you lie, but you will worry about being caught in the lie.  It is in fact your response to this kind of question that the examiner will use to gauge whether you are "deceptive" on the relevant ones. What a mind game it is.

Quote:


Well, while your story still sounds very bizarre, your credibility has gone up since not only did you register, but you provided an email as well. Perhaps you are one of the rare people that has successfully used ad hoc countermeasures - though not in the conventional sense. One assumes from that rather daring approach that you are also not engaging in related illegal behavior. Keep it up.

-Marty

This is Jim. I have registered now, so this is my name on this board henceforth.

To Twoblock, you are correct. Although the Florida Statute that authorizes the polygraphs clearly states that they are a tool for treatment and the information gathered is not to be used for a prosecution, it's obvious that this is not what was intended for me. The lawyer I was using at that time has retired, so I'm on my own for now.
To Marty, I can understand where your coming from, but look at it this way. If I wandered into the local police station and told them I robbed the bank down the street last week, how long do you think that would hold me after they called the bank and found out it had not been robbed? A confession to a crime requires that a crime be committed to do any good. This was the basis of our reasoning, that while I could admit to possessing child pornography, it would do no good if none could be found. Does that make any sense to you?
During the pre-test interview, where the answers to the questionnaire are discussed, it went like this: "I see that you answered here that you have had contact with minors. Tell me about it." "My children are minors, and they have stayed with me." During the actual test, this would be one of those "other than what you have already told me..." questions. So what would your response have been, had you neglected to tell the examiner that you also had contact with your landlords kids, your employer's kids, the Girl Scout selling cookies, etc? Another one is the "Have you broken any laws in the last six months?" question. If you answer in the affirmative, you are forced to sit there and attempt to remember every time you may have exceeded the speed limit, or rolled through a stop sign,etc. If you answer in the negative, the examiner will automatically score your response as a lie, because he will assume that you have broken a law and you are aware of it. These, along with many other questions, is one that the person taking the test can very easily and inadvertantly either tell a lie during the interview, or during the test.
But I digress. Yes, it was a risk doing what we did. What we don't know is what happened on the second test a year later, and why I am suddenly exempted from taking any more tests. That is why I am asking if anybody frequenting this board has any knowledge about my legal right to the test results, graphs, etc.
Also, Marty, allow me to apologize for the tone of my previous reply to you. A little too strong there on my part.

Twoblock wrote on Dec 24^th, 2002 at 10:50pm:


If the story is as he said and he was in fact innocent then he told the polygrapher that he was in fact guilty of the crimes the polygrapher asked about.  Anyone that confesses to another person (outside of exempted persons) serious crimes should expect to be turned in. There no doubt confession is the basis for probable cause so LE was not out of line. For someone under probation supervision it is, in addition, sufficient to revoke probation.

While discrediting the polygraph is interesting, the idea of a lawyer putting their client at risk (and if that story is true Jim is damn lucky) by telling then to confess to crimes they did not commit is not fathomable.  I assume the session wasn't taped. It should have been.

Another point is that generally polygraphers ask the questions first, perfunctorily on the relevant ones, with concern and in detail on the control ones (other than what you have told me did you ever .....?)

When the examinee admits to a relevant question up front it tends to shorten the interrogation phase.

-Marty

Jim

If the story is as you say, the polygrapher was acting in concert with LE and made a false and damaging report to the police that caused you to be harassed and embarassed. Make him prove the charge in a court of law. Your lawyer should know what to do this. I can't give legal advise because I am not a lawyer. I am capable of handling my own legal situations at the federal level, if any arise, however.

No matter what the crime, LE should not be allowed to ride rough-shod over anyone outside the limits of the law. Lying and making false reports (charges) against a person is not within the limits of the law.

So Marty, were you born a skeptic, or did a lousy life make you that way? I see you are listed as a "senior" user. Does that imply that you are competent, or just that you've been lurking around here a lot?
The story is true, and I am a real person. And yes, when my lawyer and I develop a plan to discredit a polygraph, I listen to his advice. I would think that anybody on this site who truly wants polygraphs discredited would see this. So what are you doing here?
If you don't have anything constructive to say, just stay away. Other people need the bandwidth.

Quote:


Do you regularly confess to things you didn't do based on your lawyer's advice?  Frankly, the story is hard to swallow - but it was entertaining.

-Marty

I have taken 2 post-conviction sex offender polygraphs. On the first one, in April 2000, my lawyer told me to tell a lie every chance I got. So I did. I gave an untruthful answer to everything except the known things like my name. If I did something, I said I didn't. If I didn't do something, I said I did. End result was that when I arrived at home after the exam, I had a yard full of cops and probation officers. Seems that the examiner had called my probation officer and told her that I had several thousand child pornography photos, books, magazines and movies in my house, and that I had viewed some of them immediately prior to leaving the house to go take the exam. After an exhaustive 7 hour search that ended near midnight, they all left. They managed to find a VHS tape with about 30 minutes of a soft-porn movie taped of late-nite network TV and a Cosmopolitan magazine with bikini-clad teenagers in it. They also took my computer, which was returned 5 months later after being pronounced "clean" by the FDLE. 
I took the next one in May of 2001. My lawyer instructed me to tell the truth on this one, which I did. The examiner expressed his surprise that I was even there. He thought I would be in prison. When I told him what had transpired, he expressed disbelief and felt that I must have somehow gotten rid of the evidence before the police got there. He refused to acknowledge my point that the police were there before I was, thus I had no chance to hide anything. Throughout the entire second exam, the examiner constantly accused me of using countermeasures. He completed his question sequence, unhooked me, and told me I could leave.
I never heard another word about the second exam. My probation officer refused to discuss it, and the examiner wouldn't return my calls. To this day, I don't know the results of it. I do know that this past spring, when it came time for another annual test, I was told that I would no longer be required to take them. Since that time I have attempted to obtain information, to no avail.
It all came down to me sending a certified letter to the examiner seeking documentation. He replied with a letter of his own telling me to get it from my probation officer.
To the crux of the matter. My probation officer has a statutory right to refuse to give me the documents, and has exercised that right. I take the position that since I paid the examiner to perform the exams, I have a right to the documents. The examiner feels that since I was ordered by the DOC to take the exam, I have no right to the documents in spite of having paid for the exam. I am probably going to file suit against the examiner to compel him to give me the documents. I am also filing a complaint against him with the various associations that he belongs to, although I don't expect any action in my favor from them.
Does anybody out there have any advice to offer about this issue, before I jump in with both feet?