Quote:


Good. If the polygraph is useless save as a coercive tool used by The State to elicit confessions, then the CVSA is that coercive tool's bastard stepchild. You were correct to fire your worthless defense attorney.

Quote:


These are a series of bad ideas. If the DA truly believes that enough credible evidence has been collected to charge and convict you, then you would be better off preparing your defense to create reasonable doubt and/or plea bargaining. If the DA is still weighing whether or not such evidence exists, a failed polygraph certainly won't help your case, and a passed polygraph won't necessarily convince the DA as he plays both sides of the polygraph argument to his benefit.

Not knowing the facts of the case, generally speaking asserting your rights and making The State prove its case is best. I think it would be foolish to presume a DA would believe the results of a polygraph over the assertions of his law enforcement investigators, people with whom he most likely has great trust and rapore.

The only possible way I could see a polygraph helping is if you get the DA to somehow stipulate that you won't be prosecuted of you pass a poly. If it were me I would then become expert at countermeasures and pass the sham of a test, Goodnight Irene.

Thats a good idea just plead guilty and get it other with.

Quote:


Don't forget "disgusted" and "akkkmed".

Skeptic

Remember, as Seeker stated, you can be traced, and undoubtedly are being traced, so when your polygrapher asks you, "have you researched polygraph" think very carefully about your answer.  

Whatever you say in here is being monitored from all sides.  Concerned?  Stay away from antipolygraph.org.

http://stopcarnivore.org/

Ratpatrol,

Another consideration is that anyone hoping to discover who's been researching polygraphy by monitoring websites would have to check the logs of the National Academy of Sciences, the Federation of American Scientists, and numerous others: a hopeless task.

But you raise an interesting question. Let's say you, the polygrapher ask a subject, "Have you researched polygraph?" and the subject, heeding your wise counsel posted here, thinks very carefully and replies, "Yes, I have. I've been to AntiPolygraph.org and have read The Lie Behind the Lie Detector as well as the NAS report. I understand that polygraphy is junk science, and I am well familiar with polygraph procedure and countermeasures."

How do you, the polygrapher, procede?

Quote:


So basically, you know nothing of the polygraph or the subject matter we're discussing.  You're just here to play games and spew racist crap.

Are you telling us that we can't even get dumb polygraphers to visit us now?  We're reduced to incursions from the KKK?

I'm almost hurt.
Skeptic

Quote:


When you copied George's post and slightly altered it you forget to proofread.  Thanks for the laugh.

George, do you have any estimate of the reasons visitors come to this site? I'm curious if you have seen a change in the ratio of pre-poly and post-poly visitors.  Of course there are also the poly people themselves. Some are active FUD spreaders. Then there are the terminally curious that get fascinated in the way such a thing is used and abused by society.

-Marty