Shoot -'em-up, lying nets former lawmen jail time 

Fair use quote:

Quote:


Stevens County Sheriff's Department apparently uses the polygraph as part of their application screening process.

Why didn't the polygraph catch their deputy?

Batman wrote on Sep 1^st, 2002 at 10:50pm:


You mean like this one?

Assistant DA Fired After Allegedly Plotting To Kill Wife

Quote:


You mean like this one?

FBI Polygrapher helps coerce false confession

Quote:


Or perhaps their spirits were broken by unscrupulous polygraph interrogators-- that's possible, isn't it batman? Or do you deny your fellow LEO is guilty of coercion?

Quote:


Beech Trees,

I have to agree with Batman here. I don't see any indication in the article that either of the two law enforcement officers involved was subjected to pre-employment polygraph screening, or that the crimes to which they have pled guilty occurred before any such polygraph screening. I don't see how any inferences about polygraphy can be drawn based on this article.

In a fit of pique I posted the first message in this thread, no doubt irked by the repetitive trumpeting of certain law enforcement agents on this board about their sterling ethics and higher morals than we who stand opposed to the use of polygraphs in counter-espionage, employment, and other types of screening, as well as its use in certain criminal investigations.

The point I was trying to make is that law enforcement agents, many of whom passed a pre-employment polygraph in order to gain their position of power, are no more moral or ethical than any other demographic of society, and are certainly not 'better' than those who are not involved in law enforcement. Daily readers of newspapers can clearly see that police officers (and prosecutors and judges) are routinely arrested and convicted for crimes such as drunk driving, drugged driving, hit and run, rape, drug dealing, arson, car theft, burglery, armed robbery, assault and murder-- including cop-killings. Did the polygraph, as a pre-emplyment screening tool, catch any of them? 

Any detective worth his salt knows and will tell you that when a person is caught commiting a crime, the chances of it being the very first time said person commited that crime are slim indeed.

Batman wrote on Sep 30^th, 2002 at 9:14pm:


Do you always speak with such authority on topics about which you obviously know so little?

You need to learn your political positions, Batman.  Beech's positions put him solidly in the "libertarian" category.

Skeptic

To follow up witht he original content of this post, I cannot absolutely confirm that the above-cited LEO's were polygraphed as a condition of employment. The Stevens County Sheriff's Department DOES use the polygraph as part of their pre employment screening process, however they refuse to confirm or deny that Deputy Clark was administered a polygraph.

The_Breeze wrote on Oct 2^nd, 2002 at 9:27pm:


Not distaste for 'law enforcement' per se. But, you raise an interesting observation. What, in your opinion, should I feel about you after you posted this?

Should I hold batman's opinion in anything but low regard after he finally admits his seething hatred of civilians? If so, why?

The_Breeze wrote on Oct 3^rd, 2002 at 10:53pm:


I invite you to refute any assertions I have made here, The_Breeze. Until then, your insinuations that I lack independent thought are dismissed as baseless, ad hominem attacks. Don't like what I have to say? Here's a tip: Telling me I lack independent thought is worthless. Argue the facts.

Quote:


That was mocking? I call it juvenile, retarded and pig-ignorant.

Quote:


Invitation #326: Tell me where my assertions are wrong. Tell me where my lack of knowledge on the subject of polygraphy has resulted in an erroneous assertion. You've aptly demonstrated that you wallow in delight in attacking the man. Do you have knowledge enough to refute the man's words?

Quote:


But 23 posts will??