Thought I'd start a thread in which we can chronicle the illegal exploits of FBI employees who somehow managed to pass Dr. Marston's "lie detector" test.


Quote:

FBI Agent in Kentucky Fined $250 in False Testimony Case, No Jail Time for Lying By Murray Evans Associated Press Writer Published: Jun 17, 2003 LEXINGTON, Ky. (AP) - An FBI scientist pleaded guilty Tuesday to giving false testimony in a pretrial hearing involving a man convicted of killing a college football player. Through her lawyer, Kathleen Lundy, who did not attend the hearing, pleaded guilty to false swearing and was fined $250. At the urging of the prosecutor, Lundy was spared the maximum 90-day jail sentence. "She's already lost her job and paid severely, through the loss of her job and her reputation," Prosecutor Tom Smith said. "In my mind, that was sufficient." Lundy testified in about 80 other cases across the nation. Smith said it would be "rank speculation" to say whether or not Lundy's guilty plea would bring those other cases into question. Lundy served as an expert witness who used chemical comparisons to link lead bullets to suspects. She testified against Shane Ragland, who was convicted last year of gunning down Kentucky football player Trent DiGiuro in 1994. During a pretrial hearing, Lundy said a company melted its own bullet lead until 1996, when the company actually had stopped in 1986. She corrected her testimony during the trial and told her supervisors in Washington that she had lied. In January, Circuit Judge Thomas Clark said Lundy's false testimony would not have altered the course of the case. Federal authorities decided not to prosecute her, but Kentucky prosecutors brought a charge of false swearing. In a sworn affidavit to Justice Department officials, Lundy wrote: "I cannot explain why I made the original error in my testimony ... nor why, knowing that the testimony was false, I failed to correct it at the time. I was stressed out by this case and work in general." FBI spokesman Ed Cogswell said he couldn't confirm if Lundy had lost her job at the agency, as Smith had said. AP-ES-06-17-03 1445EDT

http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGAN2P192HD.html

Now, is this alone evidence polygraph screening doesn't "work"?  No, because to show that you would have to present evidence that the number of "bad agents" allowed into the FBI would be greater without the polygraph.  Still, to the extent that the polygraph instills a false sense of security about the integrity of employees, it certainly enables bad behavior.

Nevertheless, this is interesting, and stories like this are understandably bothersome to those of us whose FBI polygraph results weren't within acceptable parameters.

Human Subject,

Although I am somewhere near the last person on earth who would defend the use of polygraph screening, I think it unfair to expect something of it that its proponents and users would not likely claim, i.e., that it is a predictor of future behavior.  Where these propenents badly err though, is in using it as a fishing net for or a diagnostic gauge of past prohibited behavior.  It is most assuredly neither...

Human Subject,

She could still get a job as a polygrapher!

They encourage lying- she might as well get paid to lie!

You guys are really grasping for material.  This agents illegal behavior has nothing to do with your little website.  However, I did note she is an FBI scientist.  Drew, aren't you a former FBI scientist? :)

Saidme,

You write:


Quote:

...Drew, aren't you a former FBI scientist?...

Yes...and the significance of that fact for this thread is?

wrote on Jun 18^th, 2003 at 12:53am:

I think it unfair to expect something of it that its proponents and users would not likely claim, i.e., that it is a predictor of future behavior.

I agree (somewhat), but the pre-employment screening isn't the last polygraph you take is it?

Isn't it likely she's taken a polygraph more recently?  Maybe even after her false testimony?  She lied in a pre-trial hearing for a murder case that was decided last year.  The date is not in the article, but her testimony could have been a few years ago (at least).

Of course, the polygraph might have "uncovered" her lie and let to her admission.  That's not mentioned in the article though.  From the article is seems that she was caught in the lie when someone checked the facts about when the company in question stopped melting its own bullet lead.

My intention for this thread was to discuss incidents that occured while trangressors were still passing scheduled polygraph exams.  My example might prove to be a bad one, but it's not obviously so.

I've got a question for Mr Richardson:  Aren't you the so-called "polygraph expert" at the Bureau?  What are your poly credentials?  I had heard you washed out of their program for incompetence.

Gentlemen and Ladies,

No reasonable person on this website has ever believed that any scientific test at this point is an indicator of future behavior.  When someone can actually read minds will be an earthquake in the scientific community.

I was accused by an individual who never met me but for three hours of his life and my whole character was assasinated and my integrity left in the mud.

He was wrong.  I have fought a long and hard battle.  It was far from easy.  Final results, the polygraph was incorrect and I have always been willing to protect the Constitution with my life.  There is not one person who will speak ill will of me or my life.  I have tried to always treat others like I would be wanted to be treated, plain and simple.

The polygraph used in pre-screening is a prop.  It is a method to weed out the people who are not wanted without videotape or audiotape.  The charts are not encrypted or coded to ensure accuracy.  The whole process is kept under the cloak of ignorance.
I do not  attack the people of the FBI for they are doing what they are told to do the best they can.  You need to get to Congress or the Supreme Court if you are going to get real results.

Regards.