crimson wrote on Mar 6^th, 2002 at 7:35am:




Nobody understands this more than me. i am a 16 year old sex offender who has been in counselling with a therapist that has more of a reputation than richard nixon. i have counselled with her for the last year of my life and i hate it. I dont deny my offense, and how i screwed up my life, but more importantly the life of a little girl and her family. But since the topic is probation let me get on that. When i first got caught with my offense i was put into jail for a lousy 10 days (i will tell you now i got off really easy, besides counselling and probation) and than i was put on house arrest for 5 months, without the gem (ankle bracelet) after i went to court and pleaded guilty i was put on intensive probation for the next two years of my life. I was told that i will not look at pornography and i will obey all of my probation rules. including poligraphing every sixths months maybe more. So now i am on intensive probation and i have taken two poligraphs, passed both . But there was a catch. just yesterday i found out that i passed my polygraph and now i am spending two more days in jail for it. dont get me wrong, two days is not much for somebody who commited a sexual assault but they got me for looking at porn on the internet......before i was on probation.....before i pleaded guilty, does aanybody see a problem with that. so i got my butt chewed because of something that really had no relevance to my case. so if you guys have any pointers on how to fix this i would greatly appreciate it. By the way i have been doing all my counselling homework and completing succesfull all of my homework, i have a job at Pizza Hut, go to high school, and i am at classes part-time at my community college. I think i am doing pretty well and the courts, probation, and couselling cant seem to see that. my grandma, who took me in right away thinks they should trust me, and i just keep trying to tell her that that will probably never happen.

While it looks like nobody has had anything to say here, I thought I would throw in my opinion. How is it that a juvenile is mature enough to know that they are doing something wrong when they commit a sex crime (ie a 14 year-old boy having sex with the 13 year-old girl across the street), but not mature enough to make a decision to have voluntary sex (ie that same 14 year-old's 15 year-old sister deciding she wants to have sex with the senior at school she has a crush on)? The double standard is alive and well. God Bless America.
I also noticed that the recidivism issue died. Watch my posts in Post-Conviction for the address of my future website that touches on this very issue, not just for sex offenses but for ALL offenses.

Guest and Skeptic

Don't hold your breath waiting for PolyLawMan to defend his statements. Apparently he is not mentally capable of debate. He hits and runs. I believe he is afraid that his poly job is about to end and, therefore, he is extremely angry. All he can think to do is make personal attacks. Watch him make me correct.

Even though I don't agree with many of their views, Public Servant and Breeze will debate. Isn't dissagreement the cause of debates?

Quote:


Oh, alright.  I'll hold my tongue

How about it, Polylawman? (Hint: the rates are available on the web.)

Skeptic

Polylawman-
Are you suggesting that this statement regarding recidivism rates is incorrect.  Please go on record, prior to the rates being posted.  Then we'll know who is talking out whos ass.

Sex offenders have the lowest recidivism rate, burglars the highest. 

You have NO idea of what you are talking about. Where did you get your info from george or from someone else twisting the truth.
I guess in order to make yourself feel better you also have to resort to talking about something you know little about.   
It sounds as though you have been wrongfully acused to.

Quote:


 
Sex offenders have the lowest recidivism rate, burglars the highest. 

"The polygraph is one more tool that can be successfully utilized to help keep these dangerous felons honest and perhaps off the streets."

I know of two cases where the polygraph was "Dead" wrong.

One was a sex offender who went on a cruise with his victims two younger brothers. This information was passed on to his clinician and probation officer by me but because he passes his polygraph no further investigation was undertaken. He has since been released from supervision and is residing in the same apartment complex of his victim.

The other was on probation for domestic violence. He took a polygraph, passed was given early termination of probation and promptly murdered his live in girlfriend and than shot him self.

This over confidence and reliance on the polygraph in the decision making process of releasing probationers, whether sex offenders or not, has got to stop.

I am a registered sex offender in the Mid-West.
My crime was a one-time case of indecent exposure.
I plead guilty to another case of indecent exposure in order to meet a plea-bargain with the District Attorney.  I did so, knowing I was innocent of this extra charge in order to avoid jail time.
I am now going to madatory therapy, where I sit and listen to guys who raped their sons and daughters talk about how much they enjoyed it.
I now get a mandatory polygraph test every six months while I am on three years probation.  I pay a greasy-haired, shady looking fellow, $300 a pop to take a 1 hour polygraph test where he grills me on what I have done in the past six months.
I failed the first two tests and my probation officer threatened to revoke my probation.
She told me that I was probably out killing little kids and hiding the bodies somewhere.
So I got smart.
I went to the "Sting The Polygraph" website and bought the manuel teaching me how to beat the polygraph.
I am thinking of revealing my situation in a lawsuit against my therapist and the city that sentenced me when I get off of probation.  I would like to sue for every penny I put into the polygraph test.
What I hate the most is that this greasy, dishonast bastard that gives me the test is actually making a good living off of ripping off guys like me.
As a convicted sex offender and a graduate of psychology at the state university, let me tell you one thing about sex-offenders.
Most serious crimes...like rape...are crimes of anger not sex.
Ripping guys off with this bogys lie detector testing will only increase the anger...no subside it.
The lie detector test is most likely counter active in the case of sex offenders.
I know I'm pissed...but I plan on using my anger productively, not in a way to hurt society.

Jack sure takes a lot of artistic licence when he posts a message, nowhere did I say I was a child molester. I was looking for ideas on how to get myself out of paying for these tests. I do not need the tests to get out of jail. I take the tests at the request of my theripist. I feel that every four months is too often. State law in Florida says every year.
The polygrapher suggested that we do it every four months and the theripist goes along with that skedule. Does that sound a little  self serving. An additional note here:
I have not reoffended.
After 10 years of theripy and 5 years of polygraphs I feel that I have taken enough of the damn things.
One of the things we learn in theripy is empathy. I paid my debt, but it was too much for a child to go through and searves no purpose. 
NO CHILD should have to go through a polygraph for any reason. It makes him or HER a secondary victem.
I thank the moderator for defending me.
Jack the point I was trying to make was that a child does not know that he is being deceived by the examiner just like he/she was deceived by an abuser, and is even more abused by a system that allows what happens to adults to happen to children.  I did what I did and I am taking my lumps for it, but there are no controls. Some people are taking tests once a month in my group. 
So Jack get off the politicaly perfect bandwagen and stop your editorializing.

My son is a convicted sex offender on probations right now. I would like to let you guys in on a little secret. 

When you are placed on probation with a sex offence they can brand you with any type of probation they want. Almost all probations concerning sex offences the person is placed on intensive probation. Which means that your probation officer can make you do almost anything they want you to. They can make you move within a week if they want, they can tell you whom you can and can not talk to. Where you can work, when you can work, cerfews, and none of this has to be approved by the courts or do they have to have a rational explaination for this.

What i have found with the iowa sex offender program is that my son was placed on a pretty strict probation to start off with. But they didnt do "everything" they could have. They use the polygraph to either decrease or increase your priviledges during probation and since they do not have to explain WHY they are doing this they can use 'tools' like the polygraph without worrying about the legal stuff about it. So my son started off with a cerfew, pretty strict work limitations, they didnt put one of those security bracelets on him, but he had to see them every week. Since he failed the polygraph he has the bracelet, he has to see them every week and also gets a phone call most nights, his cerfew is tighter, and he isnt allowed to hang out with anyone 21 years of age or younger. 

Since they could do all this at any given moment without explaination they are saved from having to prove the polygraph as being an exact science or a legitimate tool in the case of a sex offender. If they "feel" there is something going on they can tighten the belt around the person's neck at any moment and the polygraph is just another extension of thier "feel".

I hope you can understand this. 

jack wrote on Oct 18^th, 2001 at 2:49am:


In the interest of clarity, and to further the discussion on this thread, I'd like to point out that if you're referring to the original subject of this topic, you're in error. It's about the polygraphic interrogation of sex offenders who are juveniles, not sex offenses in which a child is the victim.

If you're referring to the post just prior to yours, please note not all sex offenses are child molestation, thus not all sex offenders are child molesters. Engaging the services of a prostitute, for example, is a sex offense. Urinating outdoors=indecent exposure, another sex offense. If a hired stripper goes to your place of employment and earns their money, what they do is a sex offense. In many states consensual sodomy between husband and wife is a sex offense.

The point I'm trying to make is NOT that sex offenders are good people 'done wrong' by the judicial system. What I'm saying is that engaging in ad hominem attacks with the incredibly inflammatory 'child molester' brush stroke does absolutely nothing to further the real topic of discussion here-- uses and abuses of the polygraph.

Sex offenders, and child molesters specifically, need both punishment and in many cases psychiatric treatment as well. Nowhere in either venue is the use of polygraphic interrogation useful except as an interrogation prop that robs one of their inalienable rights. No matter what phase of the judicial process-- investigation, evidentiary, sentencing, post-conviction 'monitoring', or mental evaluation, the simple fact that polygraphy is pseudo-science, with no more accuracy than entrail-reading or crystal ball gazing, negates any seeming positive effect. Yes, terrified examinees are sometimes tricked into confessing further crimes, and yes that's no doubt a good thing in that the victims can be approached and counseled if needed. I posit that a good stiff beating with a short truncheon or length of chain would do just as well in that regard-- and be just as accurate. Of course, a certain percentage of those accused of any crime are innocent, but those citizens could be considered 'acceptable losses' for the greater good of society.

If the notion that polygraph interrogation is an abuse of the judicial or fact finding process, then that statement by default must include everyone, even sex offenders and those accused of sex offenses.

In conclusion, you've been sold an erroneous bill of goods if you think that a polygrapher can magically divine what's in the heart and mind of anyone, sex offenders included. Polygraphers are truly the bottom feeders of our society in that regard, even below those who commit such heinous crimes as sex offenses, because polygraphers profit from them by lying to both the examinee and the entity who hired said polygraphers. Polygraphers cloak themselves in an aura of respectability and have with cool, deliberate calculation set themselves up as a crucial component of the process surrounding sex offenders-- fooling all parties involved in the process. Who is more loathsome? Child molesters are mentally ill, driven by compulsive paraphilias quite beyond their power to control and are often victims of outrageous abuse themselves. While I have no pity for sexual predators, I also have zero respect for those who would of their own free will profit monetarily from 'divining the truth' from these same predators and those innocents accused of sex offenses.

Let me get this right...you molest children and you are angry that you have to take a polygraph exam to stay out of jail?  You are lucky some pissed-off parent hasn't decided to take the law into their own hands.  You complain that you have to sign YOUR confession?  You confessed to molesting children didn't you?  I don't care if the polygraph works or not if it forces guys like you to give up your victims so that we can try to help them.

I saw someone get on the old sex offender bandwagon to justify polygraphs again. Well I am a sex offender, but I am also a citizen like it or not. There is a constitution and it is not supposed to be written in pencil. Polygraphs are lies and mabye some truth compounded with the personel bias of the examiner/interogator when the examiner is allowed to send his report to the parole officer who can forward it to the states attorniy, about how many drinks you had over the past four months and how many times you pleasure yourself and how many fantisies you had about sexual thoughts how many victums you had that were not reported ,and how old they were and he does this under the guise of protecting the public so he won't be sued and forces you to sign the release to permitt him to do so, or he won't give you the test and if you don't take the test you will be thrown out of theripy and he knows if he gets you thrown out of theripy it will violate your probation which will send you to prision, he then holds quite a good hand and you are powerless. Of course he then askes you to sign the confession you just gave. So much for the fith amendment on self incrimination. Add to this the fact that the entire test is vodoo electronics and I have to pay for the test every four months at 160.00  and an additional sexualy history test at 260.00 with a possible victom specfic test about the one victiom that brought me to this condition at 260.00 add the 100.00 a month for theribpy pluss my probation fee's of 80.00 a month for the next fifteen years add that up it seems more like a blatent atempt at extortion rather than any attempt to give me the tools to simply not offend again. So there you have it from a totaly new point of view I am sure. Polygraphs are useless in my case and I would not mind taking one if I did not have to sign the damn thing or pay for the hocas pocas. If someone else wants to pay for it I'll take one a week because it is fun to play with the examiner and listen as he trys blatenty and latetly to deceive the very person he expects the truth from. Oh let me add I am takeing another one tommorrow.

saddened,

I think you should see a lawyer about your legal options. Polygraphy is voodoo science, and such decisions should not be made based on it.

There is a recent article in Polygraph, the journal of the American Polygraph Association, titled "Integration of Polygraph Testing with Sexual Offenders in the Colorado Department of Corrections" by Peggy Heil, Sean Ahlmeyer, Burl McCullar, and Bonita McKee (Vol. 29 [2000], No. 1, pp. 26-35) which will be of interest to you. Based on this article, it seems the threat that you will be told to move out of your residence may well be a bluff. The above-cited article notes:

Quote:


The above-cited Colorado Dept. of Corrections Polygraph Sanctions Grid Form is used to encourage admissions by duping subjects into believing that they will be subject to increased sanctions if their polygraph test is scored as "deception indicated" and they make no post-test admissions.

I am a sex offender subject to polygraph testing in Colorado.  Convicted of a class three misdemenor, one step above a petty offense, has thrown me in the same group as child molestors and rapists.  Because i failed a maintenance polygraph i may be told to move out of my residence with my wife of three years and one year old son.  That is the consequence of a false positive.

"Holden Supporter," 

I don't know if you read the article that Mr. Maschke linked in his post, but if you did, you must have noticed that it described one case where attempts were being made to use a "truthful" polygraph chart to exonerate a convicted sex offender.

It appears that you subscribe to the widely mistaken notion that those who oppose the polygraph do so out of a desire to see criminals protected from the law.  In reality, nothing can be further from the truth.  Many of us oppose polygraphy for the simple fact that it is extremely unreliable.  Furthermore, both the examiner and the examinee can easily manipulate the results.   

Because of its unreliability and susceptibility to being defeated by countermeasures, the polygraph is one more tool that dangerous felons can use to cover up their dishonesty and perhaps get back on the streets.

Lastly, it seems that you are making the argument that the polygraph should be used because it produces confessions.  This same logic can be applied to justify physical beatings as well.  The two techniques actually have a great deal in common.  John A. Larson, a police officer who helped to develop the polygraph once said:  “I originally hoped that instrumental lie detection would become a legitimate part of professional police science.  It is little more than a racket.  The lie detector, as used in many places, is nothing more than a psychological third-degree aimed at extorting confessions as the old physical beatings were.  At times I’m sorry I ever had any part in its development.” (p.29, “A Tremor in the Blood” by Dr. David Lykken).  The simple fact that a technique can produce confessions does not make it automatically justifiable in my book.

As an aside, did anyone else notice the conspicuous “laboratory” sign on the door to the polygraph interrogation room in the article that Mr. Maschke cited?  Although polygraphers may make feeble and deceptive attempts to convince examinees otherwise, polygraphy is NOT science.  An overwhelming majority of disinterested scientific groups including the Federation of American Scientists, the American Medical Association and the American Psychological Association oppose polygraph “testing” due to concerns with its lack of accuracy.  In the words of Dr. John Furedy of the University of Toronto, “polygraphs are not standardized ‘tests.’  They are actually unstandardizable interrogatory interviews.” 

  Holden Supporter, 

You are right! Sex offenders have a very high rate of recidivism. However to make a decision of probation terms simply on polygraph results is stupid. Sex offenders, especially child molesters, have a much higher degree of criminal sophistication. They will use any means necessary to continue their rampage of terror (Rampage of terror, for second there I thought I was talking about polygraph examiners, anyways, back to the posting).

Child molesters communicate with each other through the internet (chat rooms) and even have clubs like the National Man Boy Association where they have face-to-face meetings. Through these venues they share tricks to continue their victimization of innocent children. This would include, but not be limited to: How to “dupe” psychiatrists and psychologists.   

The ability to dupe the polygraph is exceptionally easy and I have no doubt child molesters routinely manipulate the polygraph results, get certified as being compliant with their probation terms, and then victimize another innocent child. 

Therefore, one could argue that the polygraph, and the arrogance and/or  ignorance of its supporters of polygraph are unknowingly assisting molesters victimize children.  (Not meant as a slam of intelligence, but just being forthright as to reality) 

As for those confessions of sex offenders during the polygraph, well, whatever works. Whether the examiner is hooking them into the polygraph, putting their hand on a copy machine, or playing best of three of hearts, anything is worth a shot for a confession or admission, but to make a decision based solely on polygraph results is reckless. 

Quote:


It's not so fantastic when you consider that polygraph "testing" has no scientific basis and that it is easily defeated through countermeasures (See Chapter Four of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector). To place any confidence in this voodoo science is a big mistake.

Lie detector testing is useful, as you indicate, in obtaining admissions from naive and gullible subjects. The polygraph is essentially a prop for an interrogation, and this raises important civil rights issues. Subjects submit to polygraph "testing" under the false assumption that they are submitting to a test. They are lied to and deceived about the nature of polygraph "testing," (polygraphy depends on trickery, which is exposed at length in Chapter 3 of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector) and thus can give no informed consent.

Examiner bias is also a significant factor in polygraph chart reading, and can lead to major abuse. A polygrapher can arbitrarily decide to "fail" anyone he chooses.

Polygraphy is voodoo science. It should be no more relied upon than astrology.

"...breaking the law by these abuses?" Give me a break! Convicted sex offenders have a high recidivism rate, particularly if they deny their crimes. States throughout the US are adopting polygraph testing as a means to monitor sex offenders. Fantastic! Talk to the many psychiatrists and psychologists who have been "duped" by their "clients" and only learned this hard lesson from confessions / admissions obtained during a polygraph examination. The polygraph is one more tool that can be successfully utilized to help keep these dangerous felons honest and perhaps off the streets.

Great job exposing the abuses of presumed juvenile offenders. These methods can effectively scare the hell out kids and into making false confessions. It scares some adults into making false confessions. Aren't the Holdens of this country breaking the law by these abuses? Shouldn,t they and judges ordering it be put in prison for child abuse?

In an article entitled, "Polygraphs monitor young sex offenders," Ed Housewright of the Dallas Morning News reports on Dallas County, Texas' polygraph "testing" requirement for juvenile sex offenders:

http://www.dallasnews.com/metro/174626_youngliars_21m.html

The program is sponsored by the Dallas County Juvenile Division. While its stated objective, preventing juvenile offenders from repeating their crimes as adults, is worthy enough, Juvenile Division employees like psychologist Dr. Allison Krauth, should know better than to rely on unreliable polygraphy 

Dr. Krauth and others in the Dallas County Juvenile Department seem to have been duped by polygraph promoters like former American Polygraph Association president Eric Holden of Richardson, Texas, who now conducts polygraph "tests" for the Department.

Reporter Ed Housewright of the Morning News seems also to have been taken in, reporting without critical comment Holden's false assertion that polygraph "tests" have an accuracy rate of 95%:

"...If a qualified person properly administers the tests, they are at least 95 percent accurate, said Eric Holden of Richardson, past president of the American Polygraph Association.

'Ninety-five percent is considered scientifically credible and acceptable for any test,' said Mr. Holden, who administers polygraphs for the juvenile department. 'No test is perfect.'"

As you know if you've read The Lie Behind the Lie Detector (http://antipolygraph.org/pubs.shtml), polygraphic interrogation is not a standardized (or standardizable) "test" has no scientific validity whatsoever. Polygraphy also has a built-in bias against the truthful and can be (and has been) easily defeated by deceptive persons (see Chapter 4 of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector to find out how).

As Mr. Housewright does report, some in Texas have taken a principled (and perhaps unpopular) stand against polygraph "testing" of juvenile sex offenders:

"'I think it violates the Constitution,' said Jim Harrington, director of the Austin-based Texas Civil Rights Project, which has fought polygraphs for adults. 'The danger with kids is their vulnerability. They end up plugged into a machine that's notoriously inaccurate.

'It's about like flipping a coin.'"

The Texas Civil Rights Project has a website at:

http://www.igc.org/tcrp/

and can also be reached by e-mail to tcrp@igc.org. I encourage all to lend support to Mr. Housewright and the Texas Civil Rights Project in opposing polygraph "testing" of juvenile sex offenders. In such important matters of criminal justice, unreliable polygraphy is not to be relied upon.