Sergeant1107

Has ATF charged or named the examiner who was involved?  Why not?  On the other hand, if the examiner was in on the game, wouldn't ATF say CM's were used to cover him from Mongol payback? At this point, neither of us really knows for sure, do we?

Posts in this thread by "U.P. Chuck" and "Dis May Ed" suggesting that I am somehow connected with a website called FalselyAccused.com originated from a single IP address that traces to Norman, Oklahoma, home of Doug Williams, who in the past has masqueraded on this website as a satisfied customer of his own services and last year bizarrely challenged me to a fistfight, stating: "I look forward to beating your bloated face into a bloody pulp, and stomping your fat ass."

For the record, I have no connection with FalselyAccused.com.

Yes, it is George!  Looks like he is trying to pass himself off as a lawyer.

Go to Go to page:  http://www.falsely-accused.com/library/faqs.html

Click on question below:

Should I submit to a polygraph examination?

Tell me is isn't so!!  George referring to his polygraph associate as a "reputable polygrapher"!!  

Very interesting.

This would seem to confirm not only are countermeasures effective, but also that the same government agencies utilizing polygraphs in pre-employment screening are fully aware of how easily they can be defeated.

Though the ATF is able to train its agents to pass a polygraph test, the agency still uses lie detectors as part of its screening of potential new hires. ATF spokesman Mike Hoffman said the polygraph is just one of a slew of tests of a candidate's background.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081028/ap_on_re_us/biker_gang_busts;_ylt=AgujwtFpKR...

Polygraphs tested mettle of agents in biker case
By THOMAS WATKINS, Associated Press
Mon Oct 27, 8:16 pm ET

WEST COVINA, Calif. – Weeks of drinking and carousing to win acceptance in a notorious motorcycle gang came down to a nerve-racking moment for three undercover federal agents: taking a polygraph examination in a room full of armed bikers.

Flunking could threaten what would become a three-year probe into the Mongols Motorcycle Club — not to mention the agents' own safety.

Federal prosecutors say all three Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives agents were prepared for the challenge and passed the tests, critical moments in the investigation that culminated last week in multistate raids and at least 64 arrests on charges including murder, drug trafficking and torture.

The Mongols had been infiltrated before, so gang leaders went to extraordinary lengths to test their "prospects," including running background checks and having a private investigator administer the polygraph tests.

The Mongols ratcheted up pressure by standing directly behind the agents while they were hooked up to the polygraph, Assistant U.S. Attorney Christopher Brunwin said.

"Is it scarier to see the threat that is facing you, or ... taking a lie detector test while someone is standing behind you with a weapon?" the prosecutor said. "They could be getting ready to shoot."

Each agent had been given all they needed to assume a new life — an apartment away from their family, a new Social Security number and a cover story. They had also been trained to pass the lie detector.

"It's a remarkable undertaking that the agents whose lives were at risk displayed this level of courage," Brunwin said.

In all, four ATF agents were accepted into the Mongols "brotherhood," though one agent was not required to take a polygraph test. Officials did not say why.

John Torres, the ATF agent in charge in Los Angeles, declined to discuss how the three beat the polygraph, but said undercover agents generally compile cover stories that echo their own lives so they can tell them more believably.

"Our guys are highly trained and they were pretty much hand selected to do this mission and for their ability to think fast under pressure and beat the box," Torres said, referring to the polygraph machine.

Though the ATF is able to train its agents to pass a polygraph test, the agency still uses lie detectors as part of its screening of potential new hires. ATF spokesman Mike Hoffman said the polygraph is just one of a slew of tests of a candidate's background.

A straightforward polygraph test is accurate about 90 percent of the time, said Edward Gelb, a Los Angeles-based polygraph examiner and past president of the American Polygraph Association. To beat the odds, people can learn how to control their pulse, breathing rates and other responses, though doing so convincingly can be tricky.

"They would have to learn to control their responses without appearing to be controlling them," Gelb said.

California polygraph examiners do not require any state certification, so Gelb wondered how much experience the Mongols' tester had.

The Mongols' background checks and lie-detector tests were not only to prevent a repeat of the 1998 infiltration that led to at least 29 arrests, but to assess aspiring members' willingness to commit crimes for the gang, prosecutors said.

Mongols circulated photographs of the undercover agents among the criminal underworld to see if anyone recognized them, Brunwin said.

On one occasion, a Mongol grew suspicious after coming across an old photograph of one agent posing with ATF colleagues.

"They were telling him, this sure looks like you," Brunwin said. "It seemed like he'd been caught."

The agent convinced them it wasn't him.

Torres said not all agents can handle undercover work. Those that do it feed off the thrill of maintaining a facade.

"It is the adrenaline, it's being able to get one over on the bad guy," Torres said.

Torres said the agents in the Mongols investigation never committed a crime during the investigation, he said, and were still subject to random drug tests.

Four women colleagues posed as girlfriends to help in the ruse, providing backup and an excuse that allowed the male agents to avoid having sex with women who hung out with Mongols, Brunwin said.

According to the indictment, the Mongols awarded each other special clothing patches, or "wings," after they engaged in extreme sex acts, like having sex with a woman with a venereal disease.

The 84-count racketeering indictment against the primarily Latino gang lists allegations including murder, attempted murder, racially motivated attacks on black people, torture, and gun and drug offenses. At least 44 defendants have appeared in court, all of them pleading not guilty. It wasn't immediately known if they had been assigned defense attorneys.

Last week, the government barred Mongols members from wearing clothing displaying the group's trademarked name or logo in what was called a first-of-its-kind seizure of a gang's intellectual property.

Among those arrested were the gang's former national president Ruben "Doc" Cavazos and current president Hector "Largo" Gonzalez. The gang is based in Southern California, but federal and local agents arrested members is six states from the West Coast to the Midwest.

Until his arrest, Cavazos lived with his son and other family members at a home on a quiet and well-to-do street with sweeping mountain views in West Covina, about 20 miles east of Los Angeles. Neighbors said he moved in a couple years ago and had landscaped the front of his property with a new retaining wall and several palm trees.

A woman at the house who declined to identify herself said Cavazos worked as a hospital CAT scan technician.

A neighbor who asked not to be named for fear of retaliation said he often would often be woken at 3 or 4 a.m. by the sound of several motorbikes.

when they say that Ridgeway passed his Polygraph it is understood that he was asked questions that pertained to his involvement in the murders that they were investigating

notguilty1 wrote on Oct 26^th, 2008 at 11:44pm:



You just refuse to read anything that doesn't support your opinion don't you?  I guess if you can just allow yourself to ignore things you don't agree with you can aways declare yourself right.  I haven't said anything about Ridgway not being a killer. I just said that because specific information concerning his polygraph has never been released it is a fallacious argument for you to conclude and contend that his polygraph results prove anything one way or the other about the accuracy or validity of polygraph. This is an entirely different issue from is guilt or innocence. The way that blood is collected at crime scenes hasn't changed much in 25 years, the composition of blood hasn't changed much either. What has changed is the way it is analyzed and our understanding of the information we receive from it.

The consensus among scientists are that alien abductions have not really  happened, but they must be wrong because there are ten times as many people claiming abduction by aliens than are complaining about failing a polygraph while telling the truth.


Sancho Panza

we don't really know what the word "passed" means in this context because no one has ever said what questions he was asked. Everyone seems to assume that he was asked if he committed one or more murders, but we don't know that. He may have been polygraphed as a witness rather than a suspect.If he gave them leads that they were trying to confirm the the questions might have been different and he may not have even been asked "THE BIG QUESTION. I know that a blind review of his polygraph charts were later scored as inconclusive by an examiner who did not know the name of the person taking the test or the case that was being investigated. I know that false positives and false negatives occur in tests. Most of all I know that a relatively small group of reported errors does not invalidate polygraph.  

notguilty1 wrote on Oct 26^th, 2008 at 4:39pm:


Thats just one of the differences between you and I. You read an article or two, add your preconceived notions that you formed mostly from the other posters here and you use this severely limited and one-sided information to form a concrete opinion and make statements like "the Gary Ridgway case, one that has no question"  That is a pretty good example of Selective Observation.

I still have questions about the Ridgway case and until those questions are answered, I still have the ability to retain an open mind. 

While  news reports state that he "passed his polygraph", we don't really know what the word "passed" means in this context because no one has ever said what questions he was asked. Everyone seems to assume that he was asked if he committed one or more murders, but we don't know that. He may have been polygraphed as a witness rather than a suspect.  If he gave them leads that they were trying to confirm the the questions might have been different and he may not have even been asked "THE BIG QUESTION. I know that a blind review of his polygraph charts were later scored as inconclusive by an examiner who did not know the name of the person taking the test or the case that was being investigated. I know that false positives and false negatives occur in tests. Most of all I know that a relatively small group of reported errors does not invalidate polygraph. I also know that it really isn't fair to judge the state of Polygraph today by a test that was conducted 24 years ago especially absent more case specific information.

So I am not avoiding explaining the Ridgeway case, I am am just refusing to jump to conclusionsas long as plausible alternative explanations exist.  Jumping to conclusions with limited information seems to be your job. 


Sancho Panza

I noticed that you conveniently avoided explaining the Gary Ridgeway case, one that has no question

See everybody is good for something. I was looking for an illustration to explain causal reductionism stemming from selective observation and here you build a fine example into your post and top it all off with a conclusion that gives a pretty good example of non sequiter.

When you rely only on examples where polygraph may have been less than perfect to arrive at your conclusions, you ignore the thousands of polygraph examinations whose results were confirmed accurate. If polygraph were pure chance as you claim there should be somewhere closer to a 50/50 split.  

The reason we should be looking for some explanation other than countermeasures in the Mongols case stems from the N.A.S. report you like to cherry pick. 
Quote:
 
I do not believe that under those circumstances the goverment would encourage agents to attempt countermeasures because if they were caught trying them they would have been killed. 


The number of people in your "group" is growing?   If the petition here is any indication It's growth is less than 200 a year. There are more people than that reporting alien abductions.


Sancho Panza

claims that it is easy to train examinees to “beat” both the polygraph and trained examiners require scientific supporting evidence to be credible. However, we are not aware of any such research.  The Polygraph and Lie Detection (2003) 
Board on Behavioral, Cognitive, and Sensory Sciences and Education (BCSSE)
Committee on National Statistics (CNSTAT)  PG 147