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

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:
Topic Summary - Displaying 6 post(s).
Posted by: George W. Maschke
Posted on: Nov 8th, 2023 at 7:40am
  Mark & Quote
Former CIA officer Brian Jeffrey Raymond, who evidently beat the polygraph during his CIA employment, has again pleaded guilty to federal sex abuse charges. (He had previously withdrawn his guilty plea.)

Fu Ting, Jim Mustian, and Joshua Goodman report for the Associated Press. Excerpt:


Ex-CIA officer accused of sexually abusing dozens of women pleads guilty to federal charges

Updated 2:29 AM GMT+1, November 8, 2023

WASHINGTON (AP) — A former CIA officer accused of drugging and sexually assaulting at least two dozen women during various overseas postings pleaded guilty Tuesday in Washington to federal sex abuse charges that could land him behind bars for up to 30 years.

Brian Jeffrey Raymond kept nearly 500 videos and photographs he took of naked, unconscious women, including many in which he can be seen opening their eyelids, groping or straddling them, prosecutors say. The images date to 2006 and track much of Raymond’s career, with victims in Mexico, Peru and other countries.


The San Diego native, who is fluent in Spanish and Mandarin, was only discovered in 2020 after a naked woman Raymond met on Tinder screamed for help from his balcony, prompting a worried neighbor to call the authorities. U.S. officials scoured Raymond’s electronic devices and began identifying the victims, all of whom described experiencing some form of memory loss during their time with him. Prosecutors had intended to call as many as 14 alleged victims during trial.

Raymond withdrew a previous guilty plea in the case last year as he successfully challenged the admissibility of certain photos that the judge ruled were illegally seized from his mobile phones after agents compelled him to give up his passcode. Other images stored on Raymond’s iCloud account were admitted however.

Raymond pleaded guilty to four of 25 criminal counts including sexual abuse, coercion and transportation of obscene material. As part of the agreement announced Tuesday, he faces between 24 and 30 years in prison when he is sentenced in September.
Posted by: troll_of_truth
Posted on: Nov 17th, 2021 at 3:05pm
  Mark & QuoteQuote
On October 25, 2021, the FBI confirmed that Brian Jeffrey Raymond was in fact, a CIA officer.
Posted by: John M.
Posted on: Aug 2nd, 2021 at 9:18pm
  Mark & Quote

The policy you referred to in DoDI 5210.91 is on page 11, paragraph g. It also goes on to say, "except as provided in sections 6 and 7 of Enclosure 4," which is on page 22.

Section 6 addresses personnel who refuse to take or complete a polygraph examination and are in positions designated as requiring a PSS polygraph examination as part of determining initial eligibility for access, assignment, or detail. In other words, if they refuse to comply, they "may be denied access, assignment, or detail."

Section 7 deals with DoD-affiliated personnel who are unable to resolve all relevant questions. This is what happened to me. According to the regulation, "if, after reviewing the examination results, the requesting agency determines that they raise a significant question relevant to the individual’s eligibility for a security clearance or continued access, the individual shall be given an opportunity to undergo additional examination." It goes on to say that they may initiate a Counter-Intelligence Investigation – which in my case they did – twice. Additionally, it says that the Head of the relevant DoD Component may temporarily suspend and individual’s access to controlled information and deny the individual assignment or detail that is contingent on such access, based upon a written finding that, considering the results of the examination and the extreme sensitivity of the classified information involved, access under the circumstances poses an unacceptable risk to the national security. Such temporary suspension of access may not form the part of any basis for an adverse administrative action or an adverse personnel action. There never was any written finding of any wrongdoing. Both investigations were summarily closed due to lack of any evidence of wrongdoing on my part.

As you've probably already read in my thread, I was interrogated with the polygraph FOUR times from March 2011 to June 2012. As I said before, I was never accused of any wrongdoing, nor was I ever accused of using countermeasures.

I have also spoken to many people in the IC, and no one has ever heard of anyone losing their access, employment, assignment, or detail based solely on their inability to "successfully complete" the polygraph. One close friend of mine has a coworker who's "failed" nine times!

So, in a sense, you are correct that once you’re in, you’re in. No one ever gets punished for failing the polygraph – at least that’s the way it’s supposed to happen. Apparently, they skirt the rules whenever they want to, and no one can, or will, do anything about it. My goal is to expose this type of abuse. I spent 34 years with a TS/SCI working in the Air Force Electronic Security Command, Air Intelligence Agency, US Central Command, US Special Operations Command, and Defense Intelligence Agency. I never had a single security related incident. Not one. If they can do it to me, they can do it to anyone.

Interestingly, during the investigation of my EEOC complaint, DIA provided a list of 12 DIA employees who had been subjected to unfavorable administrative actions solely as a result of their inability to successfully complete the PCA.

Then in discovery for my hearing, I asked for a complete list of DIA employees who had been subjected to unfavorable administrative actions as a result of not being able to successfully complete the PCA. Their answer? “No DIA employee has ever been subjected to adverse administrative actions solely as a result…” They changed the wording. Then they provided a list of 21 other employees who had been subjected to unfavorable administrative actions for seemingly not “passing” the PCA.

The bottom line is that the polygraph requirement is fraught with fraud, abuse, and corruption. If you can’t be punished for “failing” it, why do they make tens of thousands of employees submit to it every year?
Posted by: troll_of_truth
Posted on: Jul 30th, 2021 at 2:23am
  Mark & Quote
Hey John M.  I delete my post after reading your reply.  As you posted here, I was referring to a few official policies and word of mouth.  I did not read your entire thread, just a few posts. From the Department of Defense Instruction (DODI) 5210.91 policy, you quoted that the policy states that "No unfavorable administrative action (to include access, employment, assignment, and detail determinations) shall be taken solely on the basis of the results of the polygraph examination."  I could not find that statement in this copy of DODI 5210.91.  I did find a similar quote in an older 1984 versions of a DODD 5210.48 policy, but I'm not sure if that policy is antiquated and has changed or not.

I'm sure you have read this story.  It is similar to yours only "Logan (obvious alias)" was FBI and you were DIA. 

Then there was John Dullahan who was fired from the DIA after failing three polygraphs, similar to your story.

I have spoken to many people in the IC that say once you are in, you are in, unless you do something egregious which is usually a felony conviction.  If you are under suspicion or arrested, you will get your clearance suspended but you still get full pay for unclassified work and you are not fired until you are convicted.  The IC employees that usually "fail" their periodic paragraphs suffer no disciplinary action.  I guess your story and others that make the news are a few of the cases where the employee does get severely penalized.  

Does anyone have any data on how many other IC employees are fired or severely disciplined solely on the basis of deceptive polygraph charts?

Posted by: John M.
Posted on: Jul 29th, 2021 at 8:31pm
  Mark & QuoteQuote
troll_of_truth wrote on Jul 28th, 2021 at 12:14am:
Once you are hired by the IC, a failed polygraph alone will not result in disciplinary action.

Wanna make a bet?

troll_of_truth wrote on Jul 28th, 2021 at 12:14am:
I would not be surprised if Brian Jeffrey Raymond and other IC employees are anonymous members or visitors of this site and learned how to beat the polygraph from reading TLBTLD and the posts in this forum.

Why would they need to learn to beat the polygraph if "failing" it wouldn't result in disciplinary action?
Posted by: George W. Maschke
Posted on: Jul 27th, 2021 at 5:00am
  Mark & Quote

Brian Jeffrey Raymond

On Friday, 23 July 2021, Brian Jeffrey Raymond, who, as previously reported on the blog, was until last year all but certainly a career CIA intelligence officer, pleaded guilty to two counts of sexual abuse and one count of transportation of obscene material in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. He awaits sentencing and will be required to register as a sex offender for the rest of his life.

In connection with his plea agreement, Raymond also signed a 9-page Statement of Offense detailing criminal sexual abuse committed over a period dating back to 2006.

Since CIA employees are required to submit to regular polygraph screening, which includes questioning about crime, the question arises, how was Raymond, who was reportedly polygraphed ten times during his career, able to get away with a 14-year sex crime spree?