Uiop wrote:
Quote:


Get out the microscope and put me on a slide.    

Ahh, George.  Degrading yourself to such a level rather than defend your position?   

Brandon.  No meaningful input from you either?  I'm surprised.   

Eos.  Try a grammar class.  You may find it useful.   

Nonombre:  Why waste anymore time?   

OK Uiop, you dragged me in, even if for only a moment.  For myself personally, I have nothing to hide.  Thus my willingness to use my real name and post experiences which can easily identify me, at least to those who practice polygraphy.  You are addressing a portion of the information available on this site as if it was chapter 12 of the Anarchist's Cookbook.  This site does not provide information which diagrams bomb-building, etc.  That clearly is not the case.  Would you be hopeful for legal action against sites which publish information about ammunition re-loading.  Surely that information could be viewed and implemented by persons of an unsavory nature.  It would seem that the large argument is that information which places polygraphy under scrutiny is available and that is just fine.  Until it is condensed so as to eliminate the vast research time necessary by individuals.

Such a lawsuit against this site would be quickly quashed.  Seems I remember some little something about FREEDOM OF SPEECH.  It is not as if we are in a crowded theatre yelling fire or an airplane yelling bomb.  If you so much prefer totalitarian rule perhaps you would be better suited in a country such as North Korea.  There are plenty of things I do not like that are protected by freedom of speech.  But you cannot have it both ways.

I like the example Nonombre provided of the killed twelve year old girl.  The scum bag got away because he employed counter measures learned on the internet, more specifically Antipolygraph.org (as I would assume was the meaning).  Well, maybe if you looked into his past the trigger that brought out and awakened this behavior was pornography.  But wait that is protected also.  So by that the mother would also be entitled to sue anyone who has ever purchased smut because they are supporters.

So you see, while there is the possiblity of a lawsuit your point is leaning heavily toward ridiculous nonsense.

I think that a civil trial would cast far too much light on the polygraph for it to survive.  If the essence of the lawsuit would be that this site is liable for providing information on how to “beat” a polygraph it would logically raise certain questions which would have to be answered before a verdict could be rendered:

1.      How accurate is the polygraph to begin with?

2.      How effective are the countermeasures listed on the web site?  How effectively can their use be detected?

3.      Do guilty people ever pass the polygraph without using countermeasures (false negatives)?

4.      Do innocent people ever fail the polygraph (false positives)?

5.      Is there any other source for the information listed on this site?

I believe that in any trial where the above questions are brought up, the house of cards that is the polygraph would have a difficult time surviving.  

A trial would not permit polygraph examiners the kind of control they have over other public appearances, such as when Ed Gelb appears on various TV shows to utilize the polygraph in an atmosphere where it is presumed to be 100% accurate.  There would be hard questions that would have to be answered.

I think one of the most convincing arguments this site could present, and one that the jury would absolutely love, would be people like me on the witness stand, telling about the three false positives I experienced while applying to be a police officer.  Three polygraphs I failed despite telling the complete truth on each one and despite not even knowing what a countermeasure was at the time, much less attempt to use one.  Three polygraph tests in which the examiner solemnly told me that they, and not the machine, were the true “lie detectors” and that there was no hope of getting away with telling a lie in their presence. 

At the end of my testimony I’m sure I would be asked if, in my experience, the polygraph is accurate.  I would be able to sit there as a experienced and decorated police sergeant and Army veteran and swear under oath that I was telling the complete truth in all four of my polygraphs, but the examiners apparently couldn’t discern that so I failed my first three.  Not only do I not believe the polygraph is accurate, I know from personal experience it is not.  I am experienced in courtroom testimony.  The jury would believe me.

I’m sure George could find many, many others much more qualified than I who would also be eager to give their side of the story to the jury.

Yes,

I was falsely accused of using countermeasures.   Even the "countermeasure" countermeasures are unreliable.

Quote:

What kind of sedatives are helpful in producing a truthful chart?

What amounts of those sedatives should be taken?

How long prior to the exam should those be taken?

What affect will those sedatives have?

Will the polygrapher know that sedatives have been taken?

Last, is it true that a Florida examiner has to rule either "pass" or "fail".  I was told that "inconclusives" don't exist there. 

Thank you!

Trooper wrote on Dec 17^th, 2005 at 6:21pm:


Trooper,

Because the most commonly used polygraph technique, the so-called "Control Question Test," is scored by comparing the examinee's reactions to relevant questions to his/her reactions to "control" questions, and not on the basis of the examinee's overall level of reactivity, it is doubtful that sedatives would do much to help one to pass it. See Chapter 3 of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector for an explanation of polygraph procedure, and Chapter 4 for an explanation of how to pass.

For future reference, note that it would have been more appropriate to have started a new message thread to post your question, rather than posting it in an unrelated message thread. You can do so by clicking on the "Start new topic" link near the top of message lists.