Add Poll
 
Options: Text Color Split Pie
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
days and minutes. Leave it blank if you don't want to set it now.

Please type the characters that appear in the image. The characters must be typed in the same order, and they are case-sensitive.
Open Preview Preview

You can resize the textbox by dragging the right or bottom border.
Insert Hyperlink Insert FTP Link Insert Image Insert E-mail Insert Media Insert Table Insert Table Row Insert Table Column Insert Horizontal Rule Insert Teletype Insert Code Insert Quote Edited Superscript Subscript Insert List /me - my name Insert Marquee Insert Timestamp No Parse
Bold Italicized Underline Insert Strikethrough Highlight
                       
Change Text Color
Insert Preformatted Text Left Align Centered Right Align
resize_wb
resize_hb







Max 200000 characters. Remaining characters:
Text size: pt
More Smilies
View All Smilies
Collapse additional features Collapse/Expand additional features Smiley Wink Cheesy Grin Angry Sad Shocked Cool Huh Roll Eyes Tongue Embarrassed Lips Sealed Undecided Kiss Cry
Attachments More Attachments Allowed file types: txt doc docx ics psd pdf bmp jpe jpg jpeg gif png swf zip rar tar gz 7z odt ods mp3 mp4 wav avi mov 3gp html maff pgp gpg
Maximum Attachment size: 500000 KB
Attachment 1:
X
Topic Summary - Displaying 4 post(s).
Posted by: Mark Mallah
Posted on: Apr 5th, 2001 at 7:26am
  Mark & QuoteQuote
It is outrageous, and there needs to be accountability.  Based on what I read, it seems that several people involved in that case should be criminally prosecuted.
Posted by: False +
Posted on: Apr 5th, 2001 at 5:13am
  Mark & QuoteQuote
Based on my own personal polygraph experience at the hands of the CIA, experiences relayed on this board, and based on The Lie Behind The Lie Detector book, it's blatantly obvious that far too many examiners have an ego to feed. If a polygraph is inconclusive or "failed", they see it as a personal mission to get some sort of confession or additional salient piece of information from the "subject". If they don't get this extra bit, their ego takes a hit.

Moreover, in cases of an inconclusive polygraphs, the examiner's report often contains supposed reasons why the subject is showing reactions. But of course, these are based on nothing but conjecture. So why do they put conjecture in reports? Again, it's ego. Examiners apparently have this need to appear to always be right and especially, to appear always to know what they're doing and what's going on. It's nothing more, unfortunately, than a huge act -- at the great cost of national security.
Posted by: anon
Posted on: Apr 5th, 2001 at 2:56am
  Mark & QuoteQuote
I am continually astounded at the means with
which the polygraph examiners will get their
confessions. (up to 19 hour sessions ??? For a man
who proudly served his country ??)
This is nothing less than a willful and capricious
effort to run a person's life for reasons that remain unclear.
In my opinion, every examiner who
willfully forces a confession is committing a serious dereliction of duty and has violated the
public trust. I honestly cannot believe it.
Posted by: George W. Maschke
Posted on: Apr 5th, 2001 at 12:13am
  Mark & QuoteQuote
On 3 April 2001, the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence held a hearing on the Navy's handling of the case of Petty Officer 1st Class Daniel M. King. Statements prepared by King's attorneys for the Committee are available on the Federation of American Scientists website at:

http://www.fas.org/irp/ops/ci/king/index.html#ssci

Para. II.A of the statement of LT Matthew S. Freedus, USN provides the most detailed publicly available account of the polygraph interrogation of CTR1 King by Special Agent Robert Hyter of the Naval Criminal Investigative Service:

http://www.fas.org/irp/ops/ci/king/ssci_freedus.html#13

I am at a loss for words to describe my revulsion by the Navy's conduct in this case.
 
  Top