uiop,

To what studies do you refer? The peer-reviewed literature (see studies by Honts and others, abstracts provided in the bibliography of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector) showed that even experienced examiners were unable to detect countermeasures at better-than-chance levels of accuracy.

Twoblock wrote on Sep 5^th, 2005 at 12:07am:


Twoblock,

If I may, please allow me to jump into the discussion and make a couple of points:

#1.  I never "bragged" that I will catch anyone using countermeasures.  In fact, I am sure that I have probably been "beat" more than once.  I will tell you this however.  I have caught a good number of people attempting the countermeasures taught on this site and when I catch them, they lose the very thing they were attempting to gain (job, plea agreement, etc).  Sooo, my message to anyone in my testing room who might be looking to attempt the measures taught on this site is best put in the words of one of my favorite movie stars..."You feel lucky....Punk?"

#2.  I have no information about anybody  (government or private) getting ready to sue this site.  I know what I was trying to put across (and I think uiop as well) is that in this country, anybody can sue anyone at any time over anything and stand a good chance of winning.

Remember the old lady who sued McDonald's because the coffee was to hot and scalded her?  How about the NYC mugger who sued because he had been shot by a prostate NYC transit policeman he (the mugger) was literally beating the crap out of?  The civil court ruled he should have been allowed to finish the beating and leave without having to fear being shot by the victim he was beating senseless. 

Fact is, court records are literally STUFFED with examples of people who sued and won over some of the most insane things.

Now consider this:  The mother of a dead 12 year old girl who sues Anti-polygraph.org because the perpetrator (a convicted sex offender) learned how to "beat" his post conviction exam with the material downloaded from this site.

Ah, but "Wait" says the lawyer representing Maschke and company.  If the local government had not relied on this "pseudo science," this perp would have never been given a test he could "beat" so easily.

The government puts Mr. Polygraph examiner on the stand who promptly produces reams of information gleaned from other sex offenders who apparently did not discover this "public service" website.  They did not learn how to "beat" a polygraph so easily.  In their cases, they appropriately failed their exams, confessed to all the ugly stuff they were doing, and were promptly stuffed back into jail cells where they belonged (and before they could hurt anyone else).

All but one it seems.  The animal that raped and murdered this poor 12-year-old girl...He was "educated."  He learned well.  Mr sex offender was a good 'poster child" for this "public service" website.

Now the question I have is a simple one.  If an old lady can sue McDonalds for millions of dollars over hot coffee?  I mean, McDonalds never "intentionally" planned on hurting the old woman.  they had no prior knowledge, no plan of action.  They just served her hot coffee, the way everyone wants it.

Oh, but Anti-polygraph.org is a very different story indeed. The actions they take, the material they provide, is quite intentional indeed.  They know EXACTLY what they are doing.  They have even admitted many, many, times that they are FULLY AWARE this material may and in fact HAS fallen into the wrong hands.  But that is "okay," for they are performing (in their eyes) a public service for the greater good.  They are simply exercising their "freedom of speech."

Tell that to the mother of a dead little girl...

Yes my friends, this lawsuit is most definately coming.  I feel it in my bones.  Maybe the fact that Mr. Maschke resides out of the country will provide him some protection.  Maybe not...

Regards,

Nonombre

nonombre

# 1. Maybe "bragged" was a tiny bit strong in your case but, in your posts you were rather "upbeat" about your ability to detect countermeasures. Others have openly bragged.

#2. I didn't include you in this statement. It was uiop that made the statement. I agree that lawsuits may be brought against anyone for far almost anything, but why wouldn't you and uiop include Doug Williams since his for profit website was offering this info years before this site was in existance? There are other websites also. This and other reasons is why I maintain that legal action against this site wouldn't make it to the discovery stage.

As re: to what I would say to your example woman whos 12 yr. old daughter was raped and murdered by a scumbag pervert who beat the machine and its operator, "sue the hell out of the state parole office, the PO and the poly operator for stupidly putting so much faith in a machine that can be easily beaten.

The polygraph community would be illadvised to get involved in such a lawsuit. I can "feel it in my bones" that would be the death of the polygraph.

You haven't responded to an important question. That is what percentage accuracy you would put on detecting countermeasures; 50, 70, 80, 90 %? Surely you wouldn't say 100%. If you say 80% or above, wouldn't that make the info on this site useless?

If I have missed responding to anything, please call me on it.

Twoblock wrote on Sep 5^th, 2005 at 3:57am:


Twoblock,

Thank you for responding.  I much prefer debating you over the mindless likes of EosJupiter and others of his caliber.

I guess I should get right to your question.  My answer is I truly don't know the percentage of success in detecting countermeasures.  I am not sure how anyone would know.  I am willing to admit it is probably not 100%.  I do believe very strongly based on my personal experience that we catch a large percentage, even the vast majority.  Truth is though, I really don't know...

So I guess that based on a motivational standpoint, this reality probably serves to separate our population back into two groups.  The guilty will probably feel they have nothing to lose by attempting countermeasures...

The innocent will wonder if they should "throw the dice."

I would advise them not to.

'nough said...

Nonombre

   

Twoblock wrote on Sep 5^th, 2005 at 5:21am:


Good night Twoblock and sweet dreams.  More debate tomorrow, I'm sure...

Nonombre

Dear All,

Uiop and Nonombre are hardly the first polygraph supporters to publicly fantasize about a lawsuit being filed against AntiPolygraph.org. But perhaps our pro-polygraph friends should be careful what they wish for. Because of the significant 1st Amendment issues involved, any such lawsuit could very well result in the spotlight of national media attention being focused on some very dark corners of polygraph practice.

In the meantime, as of today, Dr. Richardson's challenge has gone 1,316 days without takers...

uiop wrote on Sep 5^th, 2005 at 5:03pm:


So sue me.