Then, I apologize for jumping to conclusions.  Though I think he should have put quotations around "victim"

Quote:

George

You are correct. I shouldn't have made my last comment in my first post. I was stereotyping. I should know better. As a matter of fact, my last polygrapher has been very professional. I also feel that the polygraph could be very useful in the treatment of most sex offenders, but that is a different subject.

DarkCobra2005

I was simply trying to relate my experiences with the hope of helping someone else. Interpret them how you please. So far I have taken about a dozen polygraphs. Most of the time, the polygrapher runs 3-5 passes. On one of those tests, I was shown one of my passes and he said that it showed possible deception. However, I learned later that he graded the question on that test as being inconclusive due to the other 2 passes. I have failed two (rated inconclusive) other questions that I was being truthful on. There are generally five to six relevent questions each time. I generally have to lie on four of them due to my situation. My failure percentage is higher on my truthful answers than my lies. During two of the three questions I missed, I know that I was distracted for just an instant. This is why I consider my failures to be random. I believe that if you asked me the same question a hundred times, I would randomly fail a few times. I have been taking these polygraphs for over two years now. Considering the extreme difficulty that others in my group have been having with polygraphs, I feel that I have been fairly successful at dealing with them. You are right when you say that I have defeated the system. But I also feel that I have defeated the polygraph test. The polygraph machine is only a small part of the test. The test is also about using psychological intimidation to get information.

I think the age of my victim is inappropriate for this forum. She is over 18 now.

This site rocks

I just ran across this site a couple days ago by accident. I read the downloads yesterday and found them very informative. I am getting off parole fairly soon and will probably have to take one more test. I am not sure I can integrate my techniques with the techniques described and I don't plan to try. However, I do find the information to be useful in detecting the particular mind game that my polygrapher is using at the time to try and elicit information from me. It also gets easier in that a violation at this point would only get me about 20 days in jail, in other words, it is even harder to intimidate me now.

To Algo,

   sometimes in life you make a wrong choice and its too late.  there are consequences, whether good or bad.  but a wrong choice shouldn't label you a bad person, people can and often do change for the better.  it happens all the time.    but hopefully we all learn from our bad choices, because we surely live with the consequences of them.  so just do the best you can and carry on.

John,

I wouldn't brand Algol a "sicko" based on the limited information he provided. For example, a highschool junior who dates a freshman might in some jurisdictions become a statutory rapist by his or her senior year. But by contemporary American sexual mores, such a person wouldn't be considered a "sicko."

Algol,

By the same token, while there are many legitimate criticisms to be made of polygraph practice, including those associated with post-conviction sex offender "testing," I wouldn't brand all polygraphers as "sickos," either. That's an ad hominem attack that does little to further discussion.

dimas wrote on Sep 16^th, 2005 at 7:06pm:


Actually they do check on me, but that is a different story. My friends and family (and her family) help protect me. I am always 100% honest with them. If I can't be 100% honest with the people that really know me (and care about me) then I would have to re-consider my belief systems.

I doubt that meditation would be a very effective way to pass a polygraph for an immoral person. I think that their mind would be to disorganized. 

Obeying the law and having a high set of morals is not the same thing. Adolf Eichman obeyed the law. I think most people would agree that his morals sucked.

When I took my polygraph  as part of the employment process, the examiner really made me feel demoralized, like I was some kind of criminal.  I was fortunate enough to pass but the series of questions really put me off.   

We sometimes hear about those government officials who sell secrets to the spies.  Clearly, they must have passed the polygraph.  Obviously a successful polygraph isn't a guarantee that the person you hire has integrity.   Their use is meanigless.

I apologize ahead of time if I sound harsh.  I just believe that the polygraph should'nt be used to screen employees, because  we are not criminals.  We shouldn't be treated as such.  Half the people on these boards are law-abiding citizens - which is why we are outraged that we were treated like criminals.

retcopper wrote on Sep 16^th, 2005 at 4:55pm:



Well in all reality the reason they DON'T check who he is living with is because they (probation officer and polygrapher) have a false sense of security and/or believe that the polygraph would catch this guy if something were not right.

The polygraph is a great tool, unfortunately to many it becomes the ONLY tool.

Johnn:

We agree on somehting.  Also, rather than rely on the polygraph I can't believe  no one checks on who he is living with.

Algol wrote on Sep 16^th, 2005 at 11:43am:


People like you make the rest of us law-abiding citizens look like the sickos.   You are  the reason why these devices are used.   In your case, the polygrapher is not the sicko - you are. 

I have to take polys as part of my S.O. treatment. Most of the time I pass even though I have to lie on about half the questions.

I married my victim when I got out. I am not suppose to have any contact with her, even though she was over 18 when I got out of prison.

I use to meditate a lot in prison. And I can go into a meditative state fairly quickly.

Occasionally I will fail a question. It seems to be random. One time I failed the question "Have I had any contact with my victim?" When I failed, the polygrapher would try to give me an out like "maybe a postcard or accidently got her on the phone". I ALWAYS say no to those "outs". 

When my P.O. questioned me about it. I just said "well, i am glad it is a question that you can check up on rather than something I cant prove or disprove like am I having thoughts of molesting children". When he called her, she just said "Are you crazy! He MOLESTED me, I would never talk to him!" This plays directly into their dysfunctional belief system and so I was cleared.

Sometimes I meditate before going on a poly. It seems to help. I also remind myself that the correct answer is the one that doesnt get me in trouble. I will say to myself "The correct answer is" followed by a verbal "yes" or "no" that is the desired answer. I have studied a lot of philosophies so I know that there is no real truth on these type of questions anyway. I also remind myself that quantum mechanics suggest that there are alternate pasts that can result in this current moment. So truth about the past is only probalistic. Quantum  equations work as well backwards as well as forward through the time line.

Sometimes I use this limerick to help me get in the mood before the test: (not sure about correct punctuation)

Schroedinger's cats' a mystery cat, he illustrates the laws
The complicated things he does have no apparent cause
He baffles the determinist and drives them to despair
For when they try and pin him down, the quantum cats' not there.

I have read about other techniques, but this seems to work well for me.

Hope this helps someone. These polygraphers are the real sickos.