Dan

Ray does not need my help and I am not an APA member.  I just don't understand why you refuse to answer about a study you put your name on.

The trend I see is a self promoter full of challenges but short on answers.

Dan there is a big difference between my challenge and the countermeasures challenge.

My challenge is about the truth and vindication.  It is about exposing these Texas examiners as the charlatans they are.  

All I wanted to do was solve this once and for all, using the test we insist other people buy. 

The AAPP, have a bylaw in their Constitution that make provisions for such a solution, as does the Arizona Polygraph Examiners Association; so Ray and say this was not a good solution or unnecessary all he wants, fact is it is in the bylaws of two recognized polygraph associations.  So, I guess it was not such an outlandish request after all. I do also believe that Ray is a member of AAPP, so I doubt he would say it is a bad bylaw, so why would he say that using polygraph to solve my situations was a bad idea?  

Sadly, there are examiners in Texas, who belong to AAPP, who clearly think that a bylaw within AAPP is BS and would refuse to follow said bylaw if the president of the AAPP demanded it of them.  But then again, Jon Rios, Holden, Hubbard, Sheppard, Parker, Wood, Ervin, St. John, et al. seem to have disregard for TAPE's bylaws; why would they respect the bylaws of AAPP, APA, or NPA.  

Then again, none of these people can be counted on to act honorably or do the honorable thing, if one were to go off their history, which I can DOCUMENT through their own emails, documentation, and recordings.

But back on point.

What I proposed has actual utility.  It solves a problem; well the way I proposed it, it would have solved the problem.

The polygraph CM challenge, no matter who won, would only create a circus and more questions than answers.  It would be like deflate gate; all it would do is cause further divide and one side would point fingers and accuse the other of shenanigans.  

Neither side would admit defeat

Moreover, there is no existing provisions for any test to happen under those circumstances in any association bylaw.  Dan, things work out much better when you can throw their own bylaws in their face.  Then they have no argument in the eyes of the public.

This is why TAPE has been so quiet, because they can't justify not rolling their bylaws, and they are either unable or incapable of admitting they were wrong.  Cowards and charlatans often have a problem with admitting fault.

Anyway, let me close it with this.  I can prove that what I proposed was not a left field idea; there associations have provisions for what I proposed.  These leaves only one of two possibilities;

1, Holden, Hubbard (or as Jay Holden likes to call her COCONUT), et al. are afraid of being caught in their lies and their failure of a polygraph they insist have a 90 - 93% accuracy rate (by their own websites and documents), would end their careers and their easy money.

2, They don't believe in the accuracy of the test like they say they do; and they are too afraid of putting their careers on the line with a test they don't believe in, but insist other people buy

# 2 falls into your theory, personally, I think the issue falls with #1

My test proposed a final solution.  The liar walks and the truthful party stays.  Simple, easy, and direct.

Once I get my issue resolved, then I will worry about other issues.  My issue is dealing with industry integrity; or in Texas, lack thereof  

Dan, 


Dan Mangan wrote on Aug 29^th, 2015 at 3:36pm:


Your statement is confusing.  You say you will not use a technique if you don't believe in it, then make a statement about letting the client choose a technique.  You either believe in all techniques or are presenting a false argument.  You have stated several times you do not trust many techniques.  Please explain.

Ex Member wrote on Aug 29^th, 2015 at 6:34pm:


Lay out all the alleged "libelous" and slanderous" Statements they they accusse me of making.  For instance

I have been accused by bill parker in stating that the Emails from lieguytoo came from behavioral measures in TAPE.  Wood states that there was no monopoly and I stated that there was.(facts and discovery speak for it self).  These are just a few examples as I don't have the file next to me.  Between the TAPE complaint and the NPA complaint, I have been caused of slander many times.  Yet not one Slander suit has of yet been filed to date.  

Lay them all out. Get my denials to each statement

1 DID YOU LIE IN ANY OF THOSE STATEMENTS WE REVIEWED TODAY?

2 DID YOU INTENTIONALLY MAKE ANY MATERIAL MISSTATEMENT TO DAMAGE OF DESTROY THE REPUTATIONS ANY OF THE EXAMINERS WE DISCUSSED TODAY?

I'm also the kinda guy that would be open to suggestion.  i am not closed mined to any question as long as they meet the rules and standards of what is taught in APA accredited schools and the kindness is retuned on their tests.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oxrJsrsmFd8

For Maria, I would have actually taken a social test

DID YOU LIE IN THE STATEMENTS WE REVIEWED FROM THAT LINKED IN MESSAGE BOARD?

DID YOU STEAL ANY OF THAT DIGITAL MEDIA?

DID YOU USE THE TERM COCONUT AS A RACIAL SLUR?

Again, I would have been open to suggestion, and in hub bards case, we would have had the tests done at NPA.  That would have solved the NPA issues once and for all, and fairly and in an fair and unbiased manner to both parties.   

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c69bttNR7Eg
I wonder why she didn't take me up on it?

the other examiners would be tested in the same manner, two question test regarding my issue with that person.  The questions my be clearly polygraph able and will not cover intent or opinion.  only what happened or didn't happen.  I would bend over backwards to be more fair with them as they have been with me during the course of this law suit; as I have always been after the suit ended.

Regardless, that ship has sailed.  I made this offer and put it on the table no less than three times; each time rejected.  The last time I made this offer, I made it clear it would be the last time, and I put a deadline on it.  Now it's time for them to live with their cowardly decision.

If they want me to revisit it, my response will be simple.  You had your chance.

This six year conflict is easlally solvable, they choose not to put it behind them and their actions in April of 2014 and beyond have made it clear that they want this to be a war of attrition of mutually assured career destruction.  

Well except for the physical threats made to my life and saftey by an officer of the Texas Association of Polygraph Examiners.  

Regardless, I have seen to my security at APA to assure my safety

Joe McCarthy wrote on Aug 29^th, 2015 at 6:09pm:


Joe, my idea of the CM challenge is not a one-shot Rumble in the Jungle. I have been calling for a countermeasure challenge series -- a continuum of events that would take place over a period of years, in conjunction with APA seminars.

The CM series would require strict independent oversight, as from the psychology department of a major university.

Polygraph operators would be chosen at random. However, there would be categories based on years of experience.

I predict that the CM ringers would beat the box at least half of the time, maybe more.

It would not surprise me if professional liability insurance carriers would soon take great interest in those polygraph operators who were beaten. The hoodwinked operators, would, in time, be likely to face an insurance surcharge, forfeit their insurance altogether, or be placed in an assigned risk pool with much higher premiums.

But in the grand scheme of things, the CM challenge series would in fact answer many questions -- and that, I contend, is what the indu$try is so fearful of.

But let that go.

After, say, 36  months, we'd know more about countermeasures than we've learned in the past 50 years.

Yes, there would be much wailing and gnashing of teeth.

That's why, in my opinion, the pro-polygraph industrialists prefer to keep whistling past the graveyard.

Kinda anticlimactic Joe..

Gosh, would never hope for that.... I guess I was getting enthralled in the juiciness...

I can understand where that would be anticlimactic to people.   

But I think in F Lee Bailey's words, I found a degree of peace and vindication that demanding a polygraph from my detractors and offering to take one in return was Nita's crazy as other examiners say it was. I did the right thing and I feel that I sent a clear message that I believe in what I do enough to hold myself tommy own test.  I also feel now that I have shown the people that have not made peace are afraid of stepping up to the test they sell.   

I think to keep going at this point is beating a dead horse at this point.  I still have a lot of information in the pipe, but now that peace has happened with Holden, I am hoping this will cause a momentum. 

6 years of fighting is a long time.  I have had two days in a row of peace and no hostility, even if I am in what I considered "enemy territory". This is significant to me and makes me think and hope that momentum may be going in the right direction for a change.   


Now, does that mean I will never release the really juicy stuff?  That depends on the others.  This dog is going to the corner to sleep, so to speak.  I know one person who has a hard time with leaving me alone, in my opinion, this person is a big liability to others and I hope they recognize that.  If history were to be the judge, I would say, others have no intent on letting this end, but that is their decision.  If they o make the decision to not let this end and make peace, well, that is the decision they will make and I will respond to that decision accordingly.

I can say if they do continue this, it will be a war of attrition that really, no one will win in the end.

What I do know, I have made peace with Holden, and I do feel he is being genuine.  Everyone knows I fight hard and I try to fight to win.  Having said that, I try to put the same energy into peace.  As long as the peace makers work toward peace, I will work just as hard toward it. 

I leave this decision up to them. 

I will answer any reasonable questions