Quote:

Audiotape has a funny way of making a professional out of anyone (obviously           excluding applicant situations where the examiner knows that there will be no           chance of the tape ever getting into the hands of the person being "tested").

You scream that all polygraphs should be taped because examiners are often times "cruel" to examinees.  Then, when an exam is taped and the examiner is found to have acted in a professional manner you attribute his or her behavior to the presence of a recording device in the room.  Are you basing your opinion that most examiners act unprofessionally when conducting an exam on statements provided by individuals who have FAILED a polygraph?  What evidence of examiner misconduct do you have other than what bitter examinees have told you?  I think the polygraph community has offered proof in the form of these tapes that even when faced with a child murderer, professional conduct is the norm.    


Quote:

That Westerfield failed the "test" is not indicative of any validity for polygraphy --           a sample size of one is statistically meaningless. In addition, while polygrapher           Paul Redden told Westerfield that all others polygraphed about the disappearance           of Danielle Van Dam "passed," it is not clear that such is actually the case.

Actually, the SDPD administered a total of seven polygraphs in the course of this investigation.  Both parents and four family friends passed exams.  Only Westerfield failed.  I think that gives it a bit more "statistical meaning."