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
                       
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 25 post(s).
Posted by: don
Posted on: Sep 2nd, 2006 at 7:17am
  Mark & Quote
I appreciate the replies, better late than never.  Anyway since my last posting I took another test about a month later (at no cost) allowed one makeup test. Again I got an inconclusive.  Took the test again five months later and once again another inconclusive.  The polygrapher was a little upset with me and said this result affects her percentages and recommended I wait as long as possible before retaking.                                       
I took the test at the end of June and nobody (PO) has  said anything about it since.  One person that responded said time was added for inconclusive. I'm curious if that is a case by case thing.  And as far as my not being familiar with the polygraph, I wouldn't be here if I was.
  For what its worth I take wellbutrin-sr 150mg. and lexapro 20mg.
   I'm not going to bother again until my next six month is up.   
  Thanks again for all the replies   Cheesy
Posted by: retcopper
Posted on: Aug 15th, 2006 at 3:57pm
  Mark & QuoteQuote
Underlyingtruth:

Thanx for the info.

Have a grea day.
Posted by: underlyingtruth
Posted on: Aug 14th, 2006 at 11:01pm
  Mark & QuoteQuote
retcopper wrote on Aug 14th, 2006 at 8:51pm:
Underlyingtruth:

I have stated here a couple of times that I am very much for vdieo/audio taping the enitre polygraph exam.

P.S. Are you sure your State allows the audio taping of another  without that person's  knowledge? I am from Pa. and that is not allowed. Just curious.


Yes, in my state it is legal.  I also verified this with my attny before I did it.

According to the Penal Code: So long as a wire, oral or electronic communication — including the radio portion of any cordless telephone call — is not recorded for a criminal or tortious purpose, anyone who is a party to the communication, or who has the consent of a party, can lawfully record the communication and disclose its contents.

A compiled list of the states that do and do not allow this can be found at: http://www.pimall.com/nais/n.recordlaw.html

Posted by: underlyingtruth
Posted on: Aug 14th, 2006 at 9:36pm
  Mark & QuoteQuote
retcopper wrote on Aug 14th, 2006 at 8:51pm:
Cesium:
Underlyingtruth:

I have stated here a couple of times that I am very much for vdieo/audio taping the enitre polygraph exam.

P.S. Are you sure your State allows the audio taping of another  without that person's  knowledge? I am from Pa. and that is not allowed. Just curious.


I am certain.  I will try to find some sources.

Posted by: retcopper
Posted on: Aug 14th, 2006 at 8:56pm
  Mark & QuoteQuote
Cesium:

Other than the fact you are comparing the results of a polygrpah exam  to a finding of guilt or innocence in a court room I agree with your basic premise.
Posted by: retcopper
Posted on: Aug 14th, 2006 at 8:51pm
  Mark & QuoteQuote
Cesium:

You metion a poygrapher lying unde oath.  What to hell are you talking about?

Jeffery:

I dont get the conneciton between a polygrapher giving an exam and lying under oath. Please clarify.

Underlyingtruth:

I have stated here a couple of times that I am very much for vdieo/audio taping the enitre polygraph exam.

P.S. Are you sure your State allows the audio taping of another  without that person's  knowledge? I am from Pa. and that is not allowed. Just curious.
Posted by: cesium_133
Posted on: Aug 14th, 2006 at 7:55am
  Mark & Quote
nonombre wrote on Aug 13th, 2006 at 7:36pm:
I am a polygrapher.  I have never lied under oath.. Undecided  Oh, I get it.  That was one of those "ad hominum" attacks... Shocked


Ad hominem, retcopper.  I am especially nitpicky on my Latin, and hominum is a genitive plural; it would make the phrase "toward of the men", rather than "toward the man", as ad hominem is.

With that, there was no such attack here.  A rhetorical question was asked, and a good one:

-Is it worse to record a conversation illegally...
-or be victimized by a polygrapher who lies under oath?

Unless the insinuation is obviously directed at you, nonombre, that's a values question.

Now, back on thread, I hope:

If anything, one should score an inconclusive as a pass. As long as this polybox is around, rules of fairness and evidence should still apply.  If there exist a reasonable doubt in court as to guilt, the accused is not guilty; they get the benefit of the doubt.

With an INC, if you can't say the person is being deceptive according to the rules of the APA or whatever (not that one can divine the truth from all this, anyhow), then you have an "NDI".  How else to reason it?  Deception was not indicated (you don't have a "DI" result), as it could not be found.  This fact by definition says that No Deception was Indicated.  Pretty easy, in my book.  Otherwise, you're making the questionee prove his truthfulness, and that is not how things are supposed to work here.  He should walk in under the assumption that he is honest...

But then, polygraphers don't seem to see it that way...
Posted by: nonombre
Posted on: Aug 14th, 2006 at 5:07am
  Mark & QuoteQuote
DippityShurff wrote on Aug 14th, 2006 at 3:00am:
Nonombre,

I guess I must ask you as a polygrapher.  What do you think of this Ed Gelb business.  If true, it sure seems slimy


If Mr. Gelb's Ph.d is not from an accredited university, he should not advertise himself as such.  I hold a M.S. degree from a fully accredited state university and I have several good friends who have worked very hard to earn doctorate degrees from properly accredited schools.  In short, I resent anyone who holds themselves out to be something they are not...

Regards,

Nonombre
Posted by: Dippityshurff - Ex Member
Posted on: Aug 14th, 2006 at 3:00am
  Mark & QuoteQuote
Nonombre,

I guess I must ask you as a polygrapher.  What do you think of this Ed Gelb business.  If true, it sure seems slimy
Posted by: nonombre
Posted on: Aug 13th, 2006 at 7:36pm
  Mark & QuoteQuote
Jeffery wrote on Aug 12th, 2006 at 1:54pm:
In your state, what is worse - a citizen recording a conversation to protect their rights or a polygrapher lieing under oath to infringe the citizens rights?
  I am a polygrapher.  I have never lied under oath.. Undecided

Oh, I get it.  That was one of those "ad hominum" attacks... Shocked
Posted by: Jeffery
Posted on: Aug 12th, 2006 at 1:54pm
  Mark & QuoteQuote
retcopper wrote on Aug 11th, 2006 at 9:19pm:
Freedom:

Don't listen to underminingtruth.  Ask him why he takes so many polygraphs. Get an attorney and do what he says.  In my state it is a violation of  the wire tap laws to tape record someone's  voice without their knowledge.


In your state, what is worse - a citizen recording a conversation to protect their rights or a polygrapher lieing under oath to infringe the citizens rights?
Posted by: underlyingtruth
Posted on: Aug 11th, 2006 at 11:30pm
  Mark & QuoteQuote
Uh, yeah... that's what I said to do, "1. Get a good attorney and file a motion with the court to be released from probation.  This will be your best course or action. "

In my state, it is perfectly legal to record a conversation, as long as one of the parties involved is aware.  I know the thought of having somebody record your polygraph sessions scares you... it should!
(And if you're Bush, you can do it regardless of what the law says).


Posted by: retcopper
Posted on: Aug 11th, 2006 at 9:19pm
  Mark & QuoteQuote
Freedom:

Don't listen to underminingtruth.  Ask him why he takes so many polygraphs. Get an attorney and do what he says.  In my state it is a violation of  the wire tap laws to tape record someone's  voice without their knowledge.
Posted by: underlyingtruth
Posted on: Aug 11th, 2006 at 8:03pm
  Mark & Quote
freedom777 wrote on Aug 11th, 2006 at 11:07am:
I immediately asked him to test me again and he refused.  ?


Polygraphers will refuse to retest you unless some factor of the test changes.  They are unwilling to test against themselves, which is exactly what they would do if all circumstances were unchanged.  Running the same test under the same conditions might render different results and that would show the fallacy of the polygraph machine.  True scientists do this on purpose in order to prove and verify the validity of results.  Polygraphers never will.  In fact, I have yet to find a polygraph that actually has a REAL science degree.

Quote:
(funny that the medical interpretation was conveniently dropped from all paperwork)


It is very typical for polygraphers to exclude information from their reports that might call into question the validity of their testing.  I have had them flat-out lie about statements they made to me.  That is why I now secretly record my polygraph sessions and I have caught them in a bald-faced lie.  If I ever have to take it to court, they are screwed.


Posted by: underlyingtruth
Posted on: Aug 11th, 2006 at 7:43pm
  Mark & QuoteQuote
don wrote on Dec 15th, 2005 at 6:52am:
I took an annual maint. poly. today.  I pass every time. (no need for cms).   However today my test came up as inconclusive. I told the absolute truth but the test showed no prominate reaction i guess. 


Everytime I read someone stating "(no need for CMs)" I realize that they have no idea how the polygraph works.
Posted by: underlyingtruth
Posted on: Aug 11th, 2006 at 7:39pm
  Mark & QuoteQuote
Polygraphs are not accurate. 

1. Get a good attorney and file a motion with the court to be released from probation.  This will be your best course or action.
2. Download and read the free book from this site, "The Lie Behind the Lie Detector" and READ it.
3. As a last resort, take another polygraph and use CMs. If it comes to this, try to negotiate with the court to be released upon a "Pass" result.
Posted by: freedom777
Posted on: Aug 11th, 2006 at 11:07am
  Mark & Quote
Greetings!   
I am posting tonight in hopes of gaining insight into the world of inconclusives.  I have been on probation for 10 1/2 years now with the last 1 1/2 added on for having 3 consecutive inconclusive tests after having past 18.  A year or so prior to my first inconclusive test I was in an auto accident the result of another driver.  I continued to experience massive neck pain and migraines which I managed with Aleve and Caffiene.  I was tested by a Poly guy who was using a motion detector and he concluded it was inconclusive as I was cheating.  I immeadiately asked him to test me again and he refused.  I reported to my PO and requested another test from another couple who did Polygraph's.  This time I was told it was inconclusive and that I should seek medical attention immediately for heart issue's which turned out to be validated by physician.  I found out a month later that both he and his wife were practicing under the first guy who accused me of cheating and now I was being accused again (funny that the medical interpretation was conveniently dropped from all paperwork) of cheating the poly.  I then was "allowed to take a third test with a Polygrapher out of town who determined I was inconclusive but could not speak to past accusations of cheating , only that there was no evidence of cheating on this one. Probations just days before my release told me I had less than 6 hours to either sign a 5 year extension or they would arrest me, and take me into court requesting I be revoked and sent to prison for as long as possible. 
Does anyone have any thoughts, feedback and recommendations I could take under advisement?
I recently contacted the ACLU and they are asking for a detailed written accoount to determine if they would get involved....any thoughts here?
Posted by: Twoblock
Posted on: Mar 6th, 2006 at 8:03pm
  Mark & QuoteQuote
retcopper

I forgot to thank you for answering my question and it's good to know that you wouldn't poly a subject that's on mind altering meds. This tells me that you know they have an effect on the results. Too many think they can test around these meds. Also, I don't know of a doctor that would discontinue these meds long enough not to be a factor in the poly results. If this would ever happen to me, I assure you I would have another doctor that same day.
Posted by: Twoblock
Posted on: Mar 6th, 2006 at 6:40pm
  Mark & QuoteQuote
retcopper

I have stated many times on these boards that I am not an attorney. I only handle cases, pro se, for me and my family.

I am a gold miner and have been for about 30 years. Hence the study of federal mining law. I am 75 years young. Hence the study of federal ADA law. This was brought on when my oldest sister entered a nursing home and a by-polar friend was abused in a mental institution. I have gone against a top mining lawyer and won.

I do not give legal advice. I do tell people to sue when I think they have an actionable case. I do enjoy researching Constitutional Case Law.

As I told you, I am an armchair lawyer. I haven't done too bad of a job from my rocker.
Posted by: retcopper
Posted on: Mar 6th, 2006 at 6:03pm
  Mark & QuoteQuote
Polyfool:

There is a myriad of reasons behind an inconclusive test, one of which might be the fault of the examiner.  In my opininon the poster tried to imply that the only reason was because the examiner was at fault. In any event some reasons might be lack of psychological set, fauulty equipment and or environment, counter measures and the wrong type of test given, and MY biggest reason for calling inconlusives is to give the subject the benefit of the doubt.
Posted by: retcopper
Posted on: Mar 6th, 2006 at 5:43pm
  Mark & QuoteQuote
Twoblock:

Mea culpa.  If you are an attorney,"archair lawyer" was not directed to you. And, I aree with you.  I woud not  give a test to someone who was taking anxiety medicine.

Good luck in you law practice.
Posted by: detector1012000
Posted on: Mar 4th, 2006 at 5:52am
  Mark & QuoteQuote
Drew Richardson

Again, it would be the physician, not an examiner, that would determine if the prescribed drug on the selected individual would cause any trouble with polygraph examinations.  Polygraph examiners are not physicians and should consult with a physician prior to making a decision to test or not test for pharmalogical reasons.  You last statement in the text is your true statement.

"these tests have precious little to no diagnostic validity in the absence of any drug effects. "
Posted by: polyfool
Posted on: Mar 4th, 2006 at 3:59am
  Mark & QuoteQuote
retcopper wrote on Mar 3rd, 2006 at 10:31pm:
Twoblock:

I backed up my comment  regarding inconclusives but  I'll rephrase it  just for you, AN INCONCLUSIVE IS ARRIVED AT WHEN THE CHART IS NOT INDICATIVE OF DECEPTION OR TRUTH, NOT BECSUE THE EXAMINER MADE AN ERROR AS PHOENIX ASSERTED.

I have a question for you.  How many armchair lawyers and polygraphers in here?  This is why polygrah examiners don't want to debate the merits of polygraphy with you because your minds are already made up.   


retcopper,

No one is debating that an inconclusive result is determined when the examiner cannot score the charts to form an opinion as to  DI or NDI.  But, how are such results EXPLAINED by the polygraph community? 
Posted by: Drew Richardson
Posted on: Mar 4th, 2006 at 3:19am
  Mark & Quote
Detector1012000,

You write:
Quote:
The proper term is Psycotrophic Drugs.  Dependant upon the drug, how long it has been used, and the affect of the drug on the individual determines if use of that particular drug would effect the outcome of a polygraph.  There are numerous studies on this which you can access I am sure.  Broad sweeping statements are generally incorrect.
.

Although psychotropic drugs can have a variety of effects (usually secondary to the central nervous effects for which they are known) on the autonomic nervous system, there are drugs that would theoretically be of more concern in a polygraph situation, i.e., those that have a more pure autonomic influence.  An example would be the antimuscurinic drug scopolamine that would likely completely shut down the electrodermal (sweating) channel.  Although this drug can be readily obtained (present in anti-motion medications) and although the electrodermal channel is heavily weighted in the minds and scoring algorithms of most polygraphers, its (the drug’s) effect, if and when used in isolation (not in conjunction with other countermeasures), would likely be less than totally effective because it would affect relevant and control question responses alike, theoretically making an inconclusive (not a non-deceptive) result more likely. And although there are several drug/polygraph studies in the literature (and if memory serves correctly an early one suggesting a negative effect for meprobamate on polygraph accuracy) the same considerations (making pharmacological countermeasures ineffective in isolation) would likely come into play for most if not all chosen drugs.

And again although the same considerations hold true for any unintended autonomic effects stemming from properly prescribed medications, and although one in theory might delay a polygraph examination if such effects were suspected or known to likely be in play, before one gets lost in the machinations of such considerations, that same one should take time to take a reality test and realize that these tests have precious little to no diagnostic validity in the absence of any drug effects.
Posted by: detector1012000
Posted on: Mar 4th, 2006 at 1:04am
  Mark & QuoteQuote
The proper term is Psycotrophic Drugs.  Dependant upon the drug, how long it has been used, and the affect of the drug on the individual determines if use of that particular drug would effect the outcome of a polygraph.  There are numerous studies on this which you can access I am sure.  Broad sweeping statements are generally incorrect.
 
  Top