The most important way I won though.   

I have offered, clear and convincing evidence, that the leadership and establishment of The Texas Polygraph Industry, including the current President and Vice President of TAPE, Maria Hubbard and Clayton Wood, are afraid of the very product that they sell and promote.

They either know they will be caught in their lies, or they don't believe in the accuracy and reliability of polygraph enough to trust their own lives to the result of a polygraph.

To think, they expect others to pay them top dollar, and trust their lives to them and the test is repugnant to my sensibilities.  Talk about misplaced trust. Wow, anyone who takes a test with these examiners are fools.   

The Texas consumer has won too.  Because they now know about the biggest embarrassment, or what should be the biggest embarrassment of the Texas Polygraph Industry and Establishment.   

I speak here of the *45% inconclusive rate of Richard Wood and Associates. A firm that the current President of TAPE has worked for since he has been licensed. He is also partial owner of the above mentioned, 45% inconclusive rate.   

Think about that for a minute.  That means almost half the time, the examiners at Richard Wood and Associates  couldn't tell if someone was deceptive or non deceptive.   

What did you say at that one TAPE meeting in Fort Worth Richard?  "I did nothing worng."  Wasn't that what you said?  Well, you got 90% of the business, almost half the time you and your people couldn't tell the truth from a lie, and to put icing on the cake, a sex offender was beating more than one your tests.  I know this, because I caught what you missed.   

In any other industry, you'd be out of business with piss poor results like that.

To think you people are the preferred polygraph examiner in Tarrant County?  Wow, Tarrant County could do better.  They did once, but they ran their best examiner in the county off because you couldn't handle the competition. 

I would say that, if you put my product up against the product of Richard Wood and Associates, I am clearly the better choice; but the fact that I have never had an inconclusive rate of 45%, makes my case kinda obvious.   

Am I lying? Sue me.  I saved all the discovery, and can prove that 45% number.   

The people of Tarrant County should ask themselves a question.  Was corrective action taken by the county to make sure the poor performance in polygraphing the county's convicted sex offenders 's at Richard Wood and Associates?  To the best of my knowledge, no.   

In fact, no one, including TAPE seemed very disturbed by this number at all.  Is there still a chance that there is still a large inconclusive rate at Richard Wood and Associates, I guess we will never know.   

The State of Texas does not require polygraph examiners to report inconclusive rates.  In fact, while the State of Texas does regulate polygraph, it does not regulate the Sex Offender polygraph Industry. 

So anyone who has any issues of tests being run outside of standard, or in a way that is unethical, you have no one to complain to.  This is the way they like it in the State of Texas.   

With no licensing authority looking over their shoulders in the sex offender testing industry, examiners can do as they wish; and they will get way with it. Because the foxes are watching the hen house.   

Consumers also need to know that, no one is checking behind us independently in Texas.  In most, if not all, cases, QC is done by other examiners in TAPE.  Sometimes QC is done by another examiner, in the same office.  Given the documented history of the ,good ole boy system,  what are the chances those reviews will be independent and unbiased? 

The Texas Polygraph Establishment is corrupted at its highest levels.  The Texas Sex Offender Polygraph Industry is broken at a fundamental level, and has been since 2008.  It is unregulated, and examiners can frankly do as they please, with no regulatory accountability or consequence.   

My advice to every polygraph consumer paying for his or her own test.  At the end of the test, demand the charts.  You paid for the test, you have a right to those charts, and it only takes a minute to print them.  If you go to Richard Wood and Associates, or are forced to go there, and you fail or come up inconclusive, DON'T LEAVE WITHOUT YOUR CHARTS AND QUESTION LIST.   

Do have your charts reviewed by an independent examiner of your choice.  Do demand the ability to retest with an independent examiner of your choice.  If polygraph is so standardized, an examiner who is properly licensed should be able to handle the test, so long as they follow the standards.   

Do get a lawyer.   

If you are being charged with a crime, do not take the DA's test or the police test, without the advice of an attorney.   

If you think your husband of wife is cheating, take that money and get a family therapist or a divorce attorney.  Polygraph is not going to save your marriage.  Pass or fail, it will only create more distrust.   

Remember, Fenian Polygraph Services is always happy to take a look at charts, at no cost.  Just know, no matter what my issues are with one examiner or the other, if they did it right, I'll defend them.   

If any of the examiners has a problem with anything I said or anything I said was libelous or slanderous, sue me.  I'll bring the donuts and coffee.   

So yea, while they win because they have DA's, some of the CSCD's, and other authorities duped. The Texas Polygraph Industry has leaders of questionable integrity and possibly questionable skills.   

Also the leadership in the Texas Polygraph Industry has a credibility problem, when they talk about accuracy and reliably of the test.  Their credibility should also be in question with the consumer.  Why should someone by a product from someone who refuses to use the product themselves.

But yes, I have lost in regard to revenue.  Having said that, if the Texas market were I level playing field, i would be making a lot more money, and some examiners would be put out to pasture, where as others would just be out.   

Given a choice, I'll take my integrity over money any day of the week, and never look back.  I worry about the integrity of the test, the consumer, and then the integrity of the industry.  I only wish that TAPE and it's leadership did the same.

As God as my witness, I will fix what is wrong in Texas,  because silence and capitulation has not worked.  If I'm going to be continuously attacked, I might as well give them a reason to do it.

Saddle up buckaroos
   

Because couples are petty and distrustful.

If the accused passes, they often feel resentful of having to take the test.   

If the accused fails, well, self explanatory, shit hits the fan.

Someone is wrong, and someone is right, and neither side will ever let the other forget it.  You been married long enough to know at least that.   

I never said it's not accurate or less accurate. I feel the test was accurate enough to bet my future on; unlike some of my competition in Texas.   

I just feel that a therapist is a more useful tool to resolve those issues than a polygraph.  If it has gone too far for a therapist to help, how does one think a polygraph will be any better?

Clearly something is not good enough for someone, and lets face it, people are, by nature horrible.   

A person is kind, rational and reasonable; but people; are horrible, hateful, vindictive, and mistrustful; and you know it.

Come on Dan, you've been married and have seen enough people get divorce to know this.  It's life 101.

Nice try though bro in putting words in my mouth, better luck next time.   

I'll say it again, in case you missed it.  Polygraph is accurate and reliable enough, that I offered to sit, for my own test, publicly, and bet my license and future on the result.  You don't get more of a product endorsement than that.

I said polygraph wouldn't fix a marriage, when people already hate and are mistrustful of one another.  (I stand by that)  What I didn't say, was that infidelity was inaccurate or unreliable.

Got to brush up on your reading comprehension bro.

If you want someone to join your inaccurate and unreliable bandwagon, go to the next TAPE meeting.  You'll find lots of people there who are petrified of the test.  Start with Maria Hubbard.

Hey, she would know a lot about the infidelity thing too....... Ya know, being a "specialist" in infidelity and all...... I mean she has it all over her website.

Please see previous answer.  While I hate polygraph examiners here in Texas, and hate the corruption that is allowed to occur down here, as people turn a blind eye to some of the  PCSOT examiners down here being no better than pre EPPA examiners, (they know who they are) I do not hate what I do for a living.  

And again the communications process has broken down.  I am not one of those examiners who touts an accuracy rate and then don't follow it up with action.  To this day, I'm the only examiner to have publicly offed to not only sit for the very test I sell, but I also bet my entire career on the results of that polygraph.  

If that makes me an idiot, it makes me an idiot with integrity; and I will wear that as a badge of honor on my sleeve.  

If you are looking to attack the integrity, reliably, and accuracy of the test, lets call on Maria Hubbard, Richard Wood, Clayton Wood, Andy Sheppard, Stuart Ervin, Jack St John, and others involved with the 2008 lawsuit and 2009 TAPE ethics committee and Board of Directors.  

They are the ones who seem to possibly have a problem with the accuracy and reliability of the test.  Either that, or they believe in the test like I do, and they don't want to get caught in their lies.  There really is no third option.  

As for your very interesting and misguided belief that I said or implied that infidelity testing is somehow less accurate and reliable, please look at what I really said.

I was not faulting the test, I was faulting the idiots who think it will somehow fix their marriage.  Polygraph will do more damage than good, because someone will either, not accept the results, or resent the other person for making the test necessary.  

When it comes to infidelity testing, the problem is not the test.  The problem is people want a quick fix to a bigger problem that is better solved with the help of a trained therapist, a priest, or, if it's gone too far, a good divorce attorney.  

You say to take personality out of it, when you deal with this kind of testing, you're going to be dealing with difficult personalities.  

You and I have agreed on many things; but one thing we will not see eye to eye on, is the issue of accuracy and reliability.  And you can't accuse me of being one of the good ole boys, or a part of the establishment.  Because, I'm so on the out side of any "in crowd," you're probably liked by the establishment more than I am.

Hell, if all the sudden the polygraph establishment were to embrace me into the in crowd I would lose the business I have.  One of the reasons some of my lawyers use me, is because I am anti establishment.  

I have an idea, 

I know some of the people I am talking about is watching this string.  I also have little doubt that people who thought my polygraph solution, was a, and I quote, "stupid idea" and "thats just not the way things are done."

They are the ones with problems with accuracy and reliability rates, or they wanted to keep the truth hidden.  Lets ask them to chime in.

Hey Maria, is it you didn't want to get caught in your lies, or is it that you are afraid of the accuracy and reliability of the test?  I'm just wondering, because if you are so convinced that you've been tell the truth, and Ive been lying, the polygraph solution would have achieved what you wanted.   

If I failed and you passed, I would have kept my word and left the industry.  Having said that, when you failed and I passed, I would have expected you and others to your end of the bargain.  I suspect you were more afraid of getting caught in your lies, but only you know for sure.

So which is it?  Were you more afraid of getting caught in a lie, or do you thing the test is not accurate and reliable enough to gamble on?

Dan, they are the ones with a problem with the test.  Why don't you call them out?  You might get the backup you want from them about the lack of accuracy argument.  Just saying.   

 

Joe, clearly an experienced polygraph professional of your stature can attribute a rate of accuracy -- or at least a range of  accuracy -- that both TXDOC personnel and the average consumer can understand.

So, in your estimation, how accurate is the "test"? 

Please tell us, Joe. 

Is the "test" at least 90% accurate? 

Is it at least 80% accurate? 

Is it at least 70% accurate?

Joe, please state for the record how accurate you think the polygraph "test" is.

As for my study showing 100% accuracy under certain circumstances, it is true -- under certain circumstances.. 

In my study, those circumstances may have included -- but are not limited to -- the influence of outside information providers, such as case detectives.

In any event, my study is an outlier. The results are not to be generalized.

But you work day to day in the trenches.

Given that, Joe, how accurate is your own polygraph "testing"? What proof do you have that your calls were correct? Confessions and admissions?

Now, let's get real.

For some fifteen (15) years, the American Polygraph Association endorsed -- and peddled (for $25.00) --  a report of a half-assed meta-analysis that claimed polygraph is 98% accurate.

The APA-endorsed report cited multiple studies claiming 100% accuracy.

Has the APA disavowed those studies? No.

In any event, my study came many years later.

The takeaway message is this: Be wary of polygraph studies that are indu$try friendly.

As for Ray Nelson, I suggest you look deeply into his own polygraph indu$try connection$ before putting too much stock into his claims.

But if we are going to accuracy and reliability.

Again, you should be talking to examiners who refuse to take a polygraph examination to resolve an ongoing dispute.  A test that would have ended this whole issue, once and for all, within two hours, a long time ago.

Instead, they opted to take the long way around and go with a prolonged libel and slander campaign which has lasted for ten years, and has only strengthened my resolve.  

Maria Hubbard claims that, "Correctly administered, a lie detector test utilizing the polygraph examination, can be 87% to 94% accurate when a trained polygraph examiner uses a reliable and validated testing format."  Her actions say different.  

She is also, according to her website

"Full Member of the American Polygraph Association; Currently a Member of the Texas Membership Committee; Awarded Certification of Advanced Training and Specialization/Post-Conviction Sex Offender Testing"

Why would a Committee Member of the APA, with advanced training, run from a polygraph when she knows it to be so accurate and reliable?  

Hmmmmm I don't know.

Call her and ask her.  Don't be shy everyone, I'm sure she would love to talk to and educate people on the accuracy and reliability of the test she sells, but wouldn't dare take herself.  

Talk about a true leader.  Leading by example.  Such an inspiration.   

Call John Rios, current past president of TAPE, and member of the APA.  Ask him why Maria and other ranking members of TAPE are afraid of polygraph.  

Opppppps I forgot, we already have the good New Braunfels, TX, Detective Rios, on video regarding this matter.  What did he say?  An examiner who's afraid of taking a polygraph, is someone who, "has something to hide."  

So clearly Mr. Rios believes in polygraph,  Having said that,  one can safely assume from his statement, that if he couldnt convince Maria or anyone else to take the test, maybe they have something to hide.  

Who else can we ask?

OOOOOOOOOOO Clayton Wood, the Current President of TAPE and member of the APA.  He is the president of a polygraph association.  Let's see if he will comment on the accuracy and reliability of polygraph.  Surely he will be in defense of the 93% accuracy rate.  Of course, then he will have to explain why he refused to take a test. Yea, I doubt he'd answer questions.  

OOOOOOO Here is a good person to ask.  Andy Sheppard..... Yea, he would be awesome.  I bet you can find his number in the APA Directory.

Anyway, he's an APA polygraph instructor, former Texas DPS polygraph examiner and instructor, former JPCOT Committee Chairman, former Presiding Officer of the Texas Polygraph Examiners Board, former Chairman of the TAPE Ethics Committee, Member of the APA.  

Wow I bet he would be able to tell you anything you want to know about the accuracy and reliability of polygraph Dan. I bet he will defend the accuracy rates; but again, problematic. Given that he too ran and hid from the polygraph challenge.  

Not good Andy, not good.  Doesn't exactly, inspire confidence that even you, are afraid of the test you sell.

Gosh, there are so many examiners, who scream about the accuracy and reliability of polygraph, but yet, recently ran from it like one would run from a train wreck.  

Yet, these people, who would no doubt defend the 93% accuracy rate, you might even find a chucklehead who will defend the 98% number, won't back up their confidence with action.

Hmmmmm maybe they know something I don't.  You know Dan, maybe the test might not be as accurate and reliable as they say.  I mean wow, some of the names involved are respected people in the field, and if they don't trust polygraph, why should anyone else?  

They can continue to lead by hypocrisy, by telling people, "hey look how accurate and reliable this test is.  Now give me money."  All along thinking "I wouldn't take this test no matter what the cost."

I'll lead by example.  I don't expect any of my examinees to take a test, that I haven't offered to sit for myself; and trusted my life with the results.  

What is wrong with that picture?

Yes Dan, asking me about my belief in the accuracy and reliability of polygraph is like asking if the Holy Father believes in the Trinity.  Its, like asking if Tom Brady is the greatest quarterback ever.  It's like asking if there are any bodies in Boston Harbor, or the Charles River.  Is the sky blue? Is the grass green?  Did Bill Clinton have sexual relations, with that girl, Monica Lewinsky? Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, YES.  

(NOTE: It's a common joke in Boston about people wearing cement shoes in the Harbor or in the Charles River.  So anyone who wants to make silly phone calls, tell them I know where Jimmy Hoffa is too..... ugh.... )

I would never gamble my future on something that I feel won't save me or sustain me.

When you ask me about the accuracy and reliability of polygraph, you become the dog that caught the car; chew on the tires all you want, in the end, all you'll have to show for it is a broken tooth. 

Now let's explore the implications of countermeasures with this also.  

One would think, if there is anyone who would be good at countermeasures, it would be a polygraph examiner, right?  Espically polygraph examiners who are soooooooo smaht and educated; like Maria, Andy, Claton, Richard Wood, etc etc.

Solution would be simple, pull countermeasures, everyone passes, then I look like an idiot because there is no final and conclusive outcome. I would be forced to shut up, because they passed.  

If countermeasures work, and work so consistently, why did they not take that route?  Would it not have truly been the path of least resistance?  

Hell, lets look how far back they could have ended this. On April 20th 2008, I posted the first offer to test.

They could have ended this years ago.  

If countermeasures worked so well, why did they not just end it then and there? It would have been over, I wouldn't have lasted a year in this business after that kind of an embarrassment; because that would have dogged me until I gave up and quit.  

If countermeasures work, consistently, both when you want to prevent a false positive, and when you want to outright beat the test, undetected, why wouldn't the very people, who know more about the actual practice and administration of polygraph not use that to their benefit? Thereby shutting up a whistle blower who is rocking the boat and ruining a good scam.  

These people claim to be true experts on polygraph, some of them even wrote the JPCOT and APA guidelines. Yet they wouldn't risk a test performing countermeasures. What does that say about the true effectiveness of countermeasures, and that they can be performed consistently, and without detection?

Wow, I just made the best case on why countermeasures may not work as consistently and without detection as anyone ever has.  EVEN THE POLYGRAPH EXPERTS WON'T TRY IT.  Because believe me, if they knew they could do it and get away with it undetected, with everyone watching, this group would have done it.   

Wow, still don't want to ask the tough questions on accuracy and reliability to the examiners who tout it loudly, but their actions are contrary to their claims.   

One would think this would be important to your claims.   

Having said that, when you claim a 100% accuracy rate, it seems odd coming here and then claiming it does work at all and is "religion."  Claiming a 100% accuracy rate on one hand and claiming it doesn't work on the other and is, religion, is as confusing as someone starting an organization called, Christians Against Christ.

You're biggest and most documented chink in the armor, is Texas, because of the well documented abuses, restriction of trade, the intimidation and silencing of anyone who dare expose some of your points as true.   

Dan Mangan wrote on Dec 6^th, 2016 at 12:04pm:


Ok and this one just about made me laugh.  Are you crappity smacking kidding me?  Did you read any of what I wrote, or are you so wrapped up in hating the industry in which you make some of your living, that you have to make up facts.  Documented facts.

The most prominent polygraph examiners, in the State of Texas, some of the examiners which are partly  responsible, or the claim to be, for CSOT testing as a whole, are the examiners who are running from the test.  I promise you, they are making all the money.  The one guy, in the entire country, who is so confident in polygraph, that he literally bet his life on it, and I can say this with 200% certainty; IS MORE BROKE THAN GARRY COLEMAN AFTER HE BECOME AN ADULT.   

So, unless you know something I don't know, there is no way, that Dan Mangan wrote on Dec 6^th, 2016 at 12:04pm:
.  Sorry, but that is one claim you can't back up.  Even if we go outside the state of Texas, many polygraph examiners called my idea, "foolish" and "thats not how we do things."

Given those two statements, we can only come to one of two conclusions.  Either they think it's a stupid idea, because the results would force them to suddenly acknowledge the elephant in the room, or they don't believe in the accuracy and reliability to let our own examiners be held to the test.  Good luck getting a straight answer on that one, I been trying for a couple years.   

If you were to use actions to gauge who is the biggest supporter of polygraph in the industry, that would be me.  So by your reasoning, I should be damn freaking successful.  NEWS FLASH............ I'm not.

In fact, the biggest believer in polygraph, is the one polygraph examiner, these people want gone.  Wow, talk about some messed up priorities.  The people who either, don't believe in the accuracy, or doesn't want to be exposed for being people you don't want testing anyones integrity, are the examiners making the most money, and making the rules.   

I will reiterate my argument on countermeasures.  Because frankly, the Texas Examiners, and their actions, do make for some interesting though in this area.

If charts can be manipulated, undetected, and consistently enough to render polygraph totally useless, why didn't the polygraph experts do it to get rid of me years ago?  You would think if that could be done, they would have jumped all over that to get rid of me, within a day; never to return.   

Gotta admit, this is food for thought.  I assure you, if maria hubbard thought she could get away with it she would have done it in a NY minute.  She has made it pretty clear, she hates me enough to take some amazing risks to get me kicked out, or to make me leave.  If she could do it in two hours and not risk getting caught, she would have put that blood pressure off on, so fast, you'd swear you smelt something burning.

So yea, your theory that it can be manipulated easily and consistently by the examinee, even the real experts didn't want to chance it.   

This also tosses out the idea of the examiner manipulating the charts, Because, if that could happen undetected, they defiantly would have done that.  How would an examiner manipulate the charts now a days, given the instrumentation we now have?

I would be very entertained to hear this one.