Batman,

I have noted over the months, that others in the poly camp (as did you) have doubted the independent existences of George, Gino, Drew, Beech and other regular contributors to this site.  Is this because no polygrapher has ever seen 3 or 4 educated articulate people in the same room at the same time?? 

I HAVE NEVER, EVER, TOUCHED MY NEIGHBOR'S BREASTS!!!

Batman,

I hope that statement puts to rest any lingering doubts you might have that I have not denied fondling my neighbor in my previous posts.

Anyway, here are my responses to the questions you asked me. You asked:

"Now Joseph, how naive were you at age 22 and having been a reserve police officer from 1990 to 1993?"  I think I was pretty naive then.  I had lead a sheltered life.  In fact, I was still living at home with my mother and my sister in 1993 when this incident happened.  I was hired by LAPD when I was just 19, practically right out of high school.  You know how xenophobic police officers can be.  I did not socialize with people outside of law enforcement, and I was a shy person to begin with.

You asked: "Did you really think that by confessing you would put yourself in a better position to remain in law enforcement or maintain the respect of your fellow officers?"  Yes, Batman, I really did.  I know better now, with the benefit of 9 years of hindsight.  As I said in my previous posts, I suffered from a major lack of judgement back then.

In an effort to keep my post short and readable, I will lay out her entire allegations and my proof she was lying about the entire thing in my next post.  That will answer most of the other questions you asked me.

You said: "Joseph, you consciously left out details on both posts which in and of itself is very telling."  As I explained in my first post, I was leaving out a lot of detail in that post to keep it short.  Most people (me included) do not like to read a lengthly post.  I want as many people as possible to read my post and give me their opinion as to why I failed a polygraph and a CVSA when I told the truth.  I also said that I would gladly fill in those missing details in subsequent posts, and that is exactly what I am doing right now.

Finally, you said: "but to his credit, he did not specify as to what issue he actually failed that particular test on, even though I suspect it pertained to the neighbor's allegation."  I asked the CVSA examiner what questions he claimed I was deceptive on.  He refused to tell me!  He actually said, "I am not at liberty to discuss that."  Like you, I think it was at least one of the questions he asked about my neighbor's allegations.  He told me that the chart showed "something is bothering you about touching XXXX's breasts."  In another post, I think I will list all the relevant questions he asked me. I would be interested in your opinion. 

Joseph,

Guilty and innocent visit this website alike. Several contributors are open and honest about their culpability, others are just as honest in claiming their innocence.

Rest assured, we will treat your posts at face value. Regardless of a person's guilt or innocence in the face of sex offense charges, one fact remains constant: The polygraph is a pseudo-scientific fraud with absolutely no validity whatsoever.

Bear in mind you play right into the hands of your tormentors on this site when you launch into explanations. To them, the more detailed the explanation, the more you appear guilty. The fact that you directly ask 'the opposition' to comment upon the lack of accuracy on both your polygraph and cvsa, but they instead focus like a laserbeam upon the lascivious nature of the charges against you, should be evidence enough as to the reliability of their opinions. You made it easy for them to go into ad hominem mode, because the inflammatory nature of sex offense charges (especially where it concerns a juvenile) quickly obfuscates any other matter, the scientific validity of the polygraph being no exception.

Dave

Batman,

Quote:


The others you questioned will no doubt speak for themselves, but I thought I would share the following anecdote with you.  In the recent past in connection with my current work an individual representing a close relative approached me.  That individual told of me a story that included his belief that this family member was innocent of the sex crime allegations that had been made (irrelevant to the point I will make although I should say that I was contacted in order to evaluate whether I could help these people establish truth not circumvent it).  

This individual further advised me that the relative had been charged and was awaiting trial but had been offered the following two alternatives to taking the matter to trial: (1) offering a plea and accepting a substantially reduced sentence followed by parole or (2) becoming a part of that state's registered sex offender program.  The alleged sexual criminal had been advised by a nationally known and respected attorney to avoid taking the matter to trial (not because he believed there existed a scintilla of evidence to convict), but that in this particular jurisdiction, and, in particular with regard to sex crimes, he felt the burden rested with the accused to show that he/she was innocent (as opposed to the statutory requirements for the state to show beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused was guilty).  Although no decision had been made regarding the alternative choices and more information was being sought at the time of my last contact, based on the attorney's recommendation, one of the latter two options was then the likely route that would be chosen by the accused.


The point of all this is exactly this--it should be quite easy to see that under circumstances such as these and upon the advice of highly respected counsel, that a client might well be led to plead guilty to a crime that he/she did not commit.  Of course, on a lesser scale of false statement against one's interest, we have all read about various alleged false confession(s) following a polygraph examination(s).  Regards,

Drew Richardson

As promised, here is the rest of the story.  Beech, I appreciate you looking out for me with your warning.  But I don't feel tormented by Batman.  I appreciate his input.  He has shown me that the way I explain the incident makes me look guilty, even though I am not guilty.  I am sure that this impression contributed to a poly examiner and a CVSA examiner determining that I was being deceptive when I was not.

Anyway, Mary did not go to the police with her allegations.  She told a classmate that she came over to my house, that she began to kiss me, and then I fondled her breasts over her clothing.  The classmate told a teacher.  As required by law, the teacher called the police.  A patrol deputy responded to the high school and tried to speak with Mary.  She refused to talk with the deputy, but she did say I never touched her.  The deputy wrote a sexual battery report naming me as the suspect.  I think that Mary made up the story to impress her classmate with the fact that she was so hot and desirable that an older man wanted her.  She did not think that her classmate would take her story at face value and report it to a teacher.  That is why she did not cooperate with the patrol deputy.  This development took her by surprise.

The detectives got a hold of the report, and they also tried to interview Mary.  Once again, she told the detectives that no sexual contact took place between us.  A few days later, the detectives spoke with Mary again.  This time, her story changed.  Now Mary said that she came over to my house because she wanted my help with her homework.  We talked for a while, then she began to kiss me.  While she was kissing me, I fondled her breasts over her clothing.  She claimed that she tried to push me away, but was not able to.  She said that I stopped fondling her when my pager went off.  When I got up to answer the page, she ran out of the house.  Once outside on the sidewalk, she encountered another neighbor.  She told this neighbor about what happened, and this neighbor came into my house and beat me up.  Every single thing Mary alleged is false!  The reason I think she repeated her lies to the detectives is because she liked the attention she was getting.  If you remember from a previous post, Mary used to complain that she had no friends and had no one else to talk to other than me.  Now, all of a sudden, she is the center of attention.  I think that Mary liked this attention and would have said anything in order to keep it.  Including telling a whopping lie.

When the detectives interviewed me, I told them the same things that I have said in my previous posts.  I never touched Mary's breasts, nor have I ever touched her in any sexual manner whatsoever.  On the day and time in question, Mary did not come over to my house at all.  In fact, it had been at least a month since Mary was last over.  Even though I did not want to hurt Mary's feelings by telling her directly to get lost, her visits were annoying and uncomfortable, and I was finding more and more excuses to not invite her in when she came knocking.

I had two pieces of evidence to prove that Mary was lying about the entire thing.  First was the other neighbor.  The other neighbor told the detectives that Mary never told him that I sexually assualted her, and that he never came into my house, and that he never fought with me.  He also said that on the day and time in question, he was at work, not at home.  He told the detectives (and IAD) that Mary was lying.  So a completely independent witness confirmed my verson of events.

The second piece of evidence was my pager.  I had paperwork that proved I cancelled my pager service about two to three months before Mary made these allegations.  Thus, it was impossible for my pager to go off on the date and time Mary said it did.  This also proved that Mary was lying.  This is why the LASD detectives believed me and not Mary.  Unfortunely, IAD pretty much ignored this evidence and concentrated solely on the polygraph.  Even if I did not falsely confess, failing the poly was enough for them to fire me.  As a reseve, I did not have the same rights and protections that full-time officers enjoy.  I was not entitled to a hearing, nor did I have the right to appeal the Chief's decision.  The only thing I was allowed to do was write a response to the investigation, known as a Skelley Response.  My Skelley Response says pretty much the same things that I am saying in these posts.

Batman, does this answer your questions?

Batman,

You write in part:

Quote:


I think my answer to your question speaks for itself. Don't expect a simple "yes" or "no" answer to a question that demands a more complex answer. In any event, what I might or might not have done in similar circumstances has no bearing on Joseph's credibility.

Batman,

You have asked a question of several well-educated people all of who have demonstrated a willingness to take on the federal government if necessary to bring about changes they believe justified and important.  As George said in his last reply to you, our decision making given Joseph's situation may or may not have been his, might not be expected to have been his, but most assuredly has no bearing on his believability with regard to either his decision-making or his story in general.  The real world situation related by Drew Richardson likely has more bearing on the nature of the difficult decision Joseph may have been confronted with and the plausibility of the ultimate decision he claims to have made.

I’m sorry Batman.  I apologize for my psychological analysis of your person.  I had no idea.  See, I work in federal law enforcement, like you do, but the difference is that I am one person, whereas you constitute an entire office.  Probably Bureau, maybe a NSC offshoot.   

Conducting criminal investigations is very time consuming, so I have little time to participate in chat rooms like Antipolygraph.com.  I only read the ‘sexual molestation/Joseph-Mary’ thread and responded to that, but as I currently enjoy my cakewalk TDY, I researched other messages that you have submitted to this board.  All I can say is that your cover is blown.  Back to the drawing-board, ladies and gentlemen. 

Tell the boys in SFFO/SSG and LAFO/HRT that I said “Hello.”

I’ll see you at the next JTTF meeting. Take care, Rick.