nopolycop wrote on Apr 20^th, 2008 at 12:45pm:


Mr. Polycop

OK.  Sorry that it took so long to answer your question.  I wanted to be sure that everything was worded in such a way that I get my point across while retaining the witty sarcasm that everyone in my life finds so lovable and cute.

I am not here to be anti polygraph or pro polygraph.  I am here to be pro business, pro free market, and pro holding people to a policy that was clearly in place.  I feel that polygraph is a very important tool in regards to convicted sex offender management.  Depending on self report has proven to be useless.  This is also common sense.  Denial is a big factor in their crimes and in their thinking errors.  I am not going to get into long and useless arguments on this because nothing will get solved.  It will only end in everyone not having or wanting to agree to disagree. 

I will not engage in conversations that will not solve the issue being argued.  I will say that I respect your feelings and understand the anger in regards to the polygraph industry. I hope you will understand how I feel about what I do and my anger that I am being blocked from making a living because I give a fair and independent polygraph.  I offer my services at an affordable price and treat my examinees like a people rather than a dollar sign.

I work for myself.  I do not work for probation or the therapist.  I have no dog in the fight regarding that examinee’s future.  What I do have is an ethical and moral obligation to be fair both in my treatment of the examinee and my desire to make a positive difference in my community.  If someone is going to fail a polygraph, they will do that all by themselves.  They do not need my help to fail a polygraph.  It is my job to help the truthful person PASS their polygraph.  I do not set untruthful people up for failure.  I set the truthful person up for success.  I feel that is why some people do not want me around.  I do not give results that will keep one therapist over the other using my services.  My results are given based on my chats, not a gut feeling.  I do not run “utility tests”.  I run fair tests.

This brings me to address one of your issues.  Any child knows that physiological changes can occur at will the first time any child holds their breath and mommy and daddy freak out because “Oh my God, their face is turning red or blue.” The child learns that they can manipulate mommy or daddy by making their face change color by holding their breath. Wow this is genius.  Maybe that is the answer for our leaders in Washington DC.  Who ever can hold their breath longest wins.  When someone intentionally holds their breath, in most cases, it will look different that someone who has gone into apnea naturally.  There is normal physiology and abnormal physiology. In most cases what is abnormal will noticeably stand out. 

Am I saying that it is impossible to beat a polygraph by intentionally changing physiology at one moment or the other? To say that would just show me to be foolish.

Because I am not that, I will say that is possible.  It is obvious fact that any test can be beat from a drug test to the SAT.  Although the enemy of my enemy is my friend, this does not mean I am going to be in lockstep with the anti-polygraph rank and file. Therefore, I will expand on my observation.  In my opinion, while it is possible to beat a polygraph, it is not probable in the vast majority of cases. 

Most people do not have an understanding of the psycho physiological workings of the body when in a fearful state.  Most people do not have an understanding of the testing formats used along with the parameters of said format.  Lastly, very, very few people have a polygraph instrument which can be used to practice what one has learned. It has been my experience that most that try to beat a test make one out of two mistakes.

1.      They try too hard and make their attempts obvious.

2.      They do not try hard enough, making their efforts not only fruitless. 

Their efforts are self delusional in that they are somehow smarter than the examiner that reviewed the same book you have and understands the book better.

The rest of the people are really that smart and that good.  Those people will get away with it until they make a mistake.  The odds are that they eventually will.

Only a moron would say that polygraph, as a whole, is unbeatable.

I hope that is a clear enough answer for you.  But, on that note, tell me of one test that cannot be beat. 

Now, because the practice of directing probationers to one or the other polygraph examiner rather than handing a probationer the current approved list and telling them to choose, without any outside influence, I have taken matters into my own hands by letting probationers know that I am here.  I am more affordable, independent, properly certified by the State of Texas and JPCOT, fair, and independent.  In the beginning, there was nothingness. Then I said “Let there be mail” and behold, direct mailings were sent forth. What happened? Well, the calls are trickling in and people are telling me their stories. The calls and the appointments made with me have threatened four groups in different ways. 

Polygraph examiners are threatened because now I am taking money out of their pockets. What pisses them off more I am doing it fairly and ethically by using the capitalism that they have done everything they can to smother.

I am offering probationers a fair test at a fair price in an environment where they at least feel they are getting a fair shot, which they are.  If I find out the probationer that I am questioning is doing something that they should not be doing, then I will report them just as any other examiner would to be sure that they are held accountable and responsible.  If there is no wrong doings on the probationer’s part, than that is that.  I collect my fee and off they go to continue working at whatever job they could find, contributing to the economy, and supporting their dependents.  If they are living up to their conditions of probation, going to and advancing in therapy, and showing some consistency in their polygraphs, then they get to continue their probation status.  Should one get out of line, then it just might be time to review their status. 

What the polygraph illuminati do not know, until now, is that I plan to continue lowering my prices until this action is settled.  Heck, a month before the trial, I may choose to offer polygraphs below fifty dollars.  I wonder how any examinees will come then and see that there is a better choice when needing their polygraph.  They will have to find a way to compete with $125.00 or lower until the end of the year or until further notice. I wish them good luck.  

I can understand that this will chap the asses of the other examiners in the area, but in the free market, affordably priced packages and free deals are given away all the time to introduce a new product or business.  It is called capitalism.  Maybe they have heard of it. It is one of the foundations of our country. 

The therapists have had, what they feel, is their total authority questioned.  Some of these therapists have become accustomed to controlling almost every aspect of a probationer’s life. A few examinees have complained about therapists trying to influence religious practices. Normally I would put these complaints into the “whining file.” But, over the past few months, too many stories from too many people match. 

The therapists have done their best to put themselves forward at polygraph experts by saying that one examiner is somehow better than the other. This would be acceptable if they had formal polygraph training, completed an internship and specialized training in regards to sex offender polygraph testing, and run over 100 sex offender polygraph examinations on examinees that are not under their care as therapists. 

The fact is that they do not have that experience.  I am willing to bet that they do not know the difference between a Backster Zone and an Army Zone.  In many cases, they have never been through a polygraph examination or even watched.  Yet they can tell probationers that one examiner is better than another. If the probationer does not go to the examiner of the therapist’s choice, the therapists can say that the probationer is not cooperating with the therapist and discharge the probationer from care. This would result in the probationer getting revoked.  Even then when the probationer chooses an examiner of their, the therapist, in many cases, has put up road blocks to the examinee to jump just to get a fair and independent polygraph that the probationer has to pay for.  Here is an example.

A probationer wanted to take an examination within twenty four to forty eight hours because he had a deadline or he would have his probation revoked.  I was able to get him in at any time he wished within that time period.  The probationer signed the proper releases the day after the initial phone call to me was made. 

Because the therapist is on the defendant’s list, my attorney contacted the therapist’s attorney to obtain the documentation necessary to perform the examination. The therapist and their attorney took almost a week to get me the proper paperwork to help this examinee meet his deadline, which he missed because the words due diligence don’t seem apply to all attorneys. 

When I finally received the documentation that I needed, it was almost a week later.  I was able to get this probationer in for his examination.  While in the pretest, the examinee saw the document that I was reviewing with him.  The examinee said that it was not the current document because he did not see the changes that he had made during his last test.  Another road block.  Not only do I receive a document days after this examinee’s deadline, but I was sent that is no longer valid because it was changed during the polygraph before me.  Is anyone seeing a pattern here or am I the only one who is not wearing a blindfold?  In my opinion, the actions that led up to his polygraph made it difficult to give this man a fair polygraph.  The perception that everyone wanted him to fail was clear.  His therapist and his lawyer did not make it easy for me to convince this guy otherwise.   This is a man that has taken twelve or more polygraphs, failing all but a few.  All polygraphs, but two or three, were with one polygraph firm.  The two or three other polygraph examinations were with one other examiner. 

Another probationer called and chose me because of price.  I asked him to sign the proper releases with his therapist and call me to make an appointment.  I have yet to hear back from this probationer.  I wonder if the therapist convinced the probationer that things would go easier for him if he just went with the program.  It would not surprise me.  One probationer told me this therapist told his group "You will go the examiners I chose because this is the way probation wants it."

Other therapists have been known to collect money from probationer on top of their therapy fees as a “polygraph fund.”  When the probationer is ready to take their polygraph, the therapist makes the appointment and pays the examiner out of this “fund”, keeping a small piece of as a “pre polygraph interview fee.”  Probationers were not informed how much was going to the polygraph examiner and how much was going to the therapist.  From what I understand, there was no accounting of these funds and if anyone asked for an accounting, they were threatened with dismissal from treatment. 

It has also come to my attention that the therapist group with the most probationers is a former probation officer with Tarrant County CSCD and may still have ties within the department.  Well, isn’t that convenient? 

The probation department, which says that they do not refer to one provider over the other, does not refer more probationers to former probation officers that are now therapists than to any of the other therapists.  Well, at least not officially, from what they say.  Honestly, they are telling the truth.  The fact that the former probation officers have the majority of the probationers is only a coincidence. (NOTE THE SARCASM)

Tarrant County CSCD has also made it very clear that they will not tolerate anyone questioning them.  Tarrant County CSCD decided to release a new document for therapists and polygraph examiners that will take the place of the current contract that Tarrant County CSCD seems to feel that they can change when the mood fits them. Examiners and therapists are to review, sign, and return it by May 2, 2008 "if you wish to continue providing offender services from CSCD referrals." 

This is strange because they insist that they do not refer to one person over the other.  But, if you want to continue to receive the referrals that do not really exist, then you will see things their way or not at all.  That is what the document that they want to replace the current MOU with basically states.  It is our way or the highway.  I will try to upload the new document so everyone can see for themselves.   This document allows Tarrant County CSCD to put out of business anyone who would disagree with them or tell them that they are wrong.  A polygraph examiner better ask the exact questions that Tarrant County CSCD wants asked or Tarrant County CSCD can take the examiner of the approved list, essentially putting that examiner out of business.  If the examiner tells Tarrant County CSCD that a probationer is NDI and a probation officer insists that the probationer is not telling the truth, then the polygraph examiner better change that NDI into a DI and call it a “utility test” or the examiner is history.  Essentially it gives Tarrant County CSCD the ability to hijack the polygraph room. Additionally, if a therapist uses a polygraph examiner that Tarrant County CSCD does not like, even if the polygraph examiner is on the approved list, then Tarrant County CSCD can tell that therapist to stop using that examiner.  If the therapist continues to accept polygraph reports from that examiner, then Tarrant County CSCD will say that the therapist is being uncooperative. By taking that person of their approved list and forbidding them to offer services to probationers from Tarrant County until the therapist is out of business or walks in lockstep with Tarrant County CSCD. Even if Tarrant County CSCD is wrong.  Apparently, not only does Tarrant County CSCD feel that they cannot be called to the plate when they break a contract because they have “sovereign immunity.” they also feel that they are polygraph examiners and therapists too.  I guess they know it all. Why even have a containment approach? Let’s just let the probation department handle it all.  Or, at the very least, license only the people that will agree with whatever the probation officer or department wants. 

Oh, wait, they cannot license people to do anything.  Tarrant County CSCD is not a licensing agency with rule making authority.  Would everyone like to know what is really scary? You do not even need a license to be a probation officer.  In some cases, probation officers can carry a gun as long as they take a class.  Here is a person who has total control over another person under their supervision and they do not even have to have any specialized training other than a college diploma. 

Police officers and firefighters have to have specialized training, take a physical, submit to psychological assessment, and have a background polygraph examination.  Probation officers just have to have a college education and a background check done on them.  Am I the only person in Texas to find that a wee bit strange?  How do we know that the officers working for probation are not as bad as the people they are supervising? I polygraphed a police applicant once who admitted that he was looking at child porn.  It does happen. 

You have to have a license to be a security guard, real estate agent, truck driver, nurse, or cut hair.  I cannot believe that someone who has total control over another person’s life does not have to have a license or be assessed in any manner to ensure that they have the physical or mental abilities to handle such a job.  There are no regulations that they have to follow that are public record.  There is no criterion that is public information for what would get a probation officer suspended or terminated.  There is no licensing fee or occupations tax that has to be paid by them on a yearly basis, like a police officer, lawyer, polygraph examiner, or even a barber.  There is not even a code of ethics that is public information on any website that dictates what unacceptable behavior to them is.  We are still trying to figure out who these people are answerable to.

Apparently, according to the Texas Attorney Generals Office, CSCD’s in the State of Texas are “hybrid forms of government.” This shocked me.  I did not know that there was a fourth form of government.  I am not sure what everyone else learned when they were kids but I was under the understanding that there were three branches of government and they were all separated to act with checks and balances. There was a legistative, executive, and judicial branch of government. I guess Congress did not get the memo that there was a fourth form of government, according to Texas Assistant Attorney General David Harris.

This brings me to the Texas Attorney Generals Office. Yes I am going there.  Let’s see if anyone has the sand to stop my constitutional right to free speech.  I filed an application for temporary injunction to block this new document that Tarrant County CSCD wants to replace the current MOU with from taking effect. The Attorney General’s office is trying to block this hearing until after May 2 so the new document can become effective.  He has also threatened me with sanctions for filing a document that I feel is unfair to commerce, fair trade, good faith, small business, and the people of Texas.  I expected this of Assistant Attorney General David Harris because ever since I started this action, his only tool has been intimidation, threats, and fear tactics.  This representative has threatened me monetarily at every turn, even telling me, because he couldn’t get in touch with my attorney, who was in Court, that I had no right to file this action and he would go after me monetarily if I continued this action.  He even threatened to file a complaint against my attorney.  The threats continue from the Attorney General’s Office but only on paper and on the phone. I guess when he sees me in person this small little man, doesn't feel so big and bad.  He feels like he can threaten me for standing up for my right to be heard in Court.  I feel that he wants to extend this injunction hearing until after May 2nd because he feels the Judge will be less likely to grant the injunction after it takes effect.  If granted, the injunction would place this new document on hold.  This new document that was meant to replace the current MOU that all therapists and polygraph examiners are protected under, which is currently under litigation. Sounds real ethical, huh?  In my opinion, David Harris is a threat to small businesses all over Texas

It amazes me that an Attorney General’s Office that has this hard stance on sex offenders in the past does not want a larger market of polygraph examiners to keep the "evil sexual predator" in check.  T he Attorney General’s Office has a good talk every election when it comes to sex offenders and keeping them from re offending.  What is not said is that he wants them to be kept in check as long as it is convenient for the wallets of the sex offender therapists, the polygraph examiners, and others who know how to "work the system".  I still find it strange that the therapist with the biggest offender case load is a former probation officer from the same department that they receive most of their referrals from.  The same referrals that do not really exist, but no one can get unless they play ball with Tarrant County CSCD allowing them to take control over your business.  No one has any right to any referral that really does not exist, but you can get unless you sign this new document that says that no one is entitled to referrals that do not exist, but are given to the select few that were once probation officers in this department.  Yeah, that’s it.  That’s the ticket.

There are two big polygraph companies in the area.  It can sometimes take two to four weeks to get a sex offender, who may be suspected of re-offending, into a polygraph room.  If that offender is re-offending, this two to four week wait allows that offender two to four more weeks to have a good time and maybe go out with a bang. Sure it won’t happen to your kid.  We all say that, until it happens to little Jimmy or Jane down the street.  Then when it does happen, people start complaining, “Why didn’t someone TRY to stop this from happening?”  Well, the answer is simple.  The Attorney Generals Office, the county, a few sex offender therapists, and a few polygraph examiners wanted to keep all the offenders from going to people that had more time and resources to handle the “evil sexual predator.” It was felt that it would be in public’s best interest that an offender, who may be high risk, should wait two to four weeks to get into a polygraph examination rather than get them in within a day and maybe even the same day. Your government wants to protect the bank accounts of a few people.  After all, the probationer that may be reoffending isn’t diddling the children of anyone working for the Attorney General’s Office, the Governor, a Senator, or a Representative.  Not their kids.  Just yours. But that is OK.  They will catch the guy in two to four weeks. It can wait.  It is not a huge priority. After all money, is what is important, right?

Wake Up Texas!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Just because they are not doing this to your business does not mean they will not when they want to.  Just because it would not be your kid in danger does not mean that it will not be someone you know and love.  If it ever does happen to you, then might be because a state agency that is accountable to no one, not even the tax paying Texan, dropped the ball.  An agency that can change the rules with one cross eyed look. Go ahead and try to hold them accountable in Court. You will get a happy call from the Texas Attorney General’s Office saying that if you try to press your rights, they will punish you monetarily, and tell you that your lawyer is wrong and they will file a complaint with the State Bar. 

A government that says they are committed to keeping sex offenders from re-offending, but yet will not use all resources available because one of their current resources wants to be able to afford their commutes to and from Van Zandt County or Louisiana.  

I have a great idea!  Let’s just drop the sex offender treatment model and just get that guy from Dateline NBC to come back to Texas once and a while.  He will be better than the system in place and everyone will see what is being done.  Everyone is happy to see their pictures on a database, but no one asks what is being done to rehabilitate or manage them. 

NOTE: The new contact, document, MOU, or whatever the hell these.....um..... kind people in tarrant county probation wana call this thing is attached to this posting.

Now, play lawyer (in your mind) for just a second. Would you tell anyone that this was a fair document to sing?

It appears to me, and probably other readers, that there are a few established businesses in TX and you are having a hard time getting started.  Welcome to the real world.   It takes time and energy to building your business.  Why do you think that just because you entered the arena you should be able to take business away from an entity that has the confidence and professionalism that some therapists have depended upon?

To read your statement you would think the entire state of Texas is corrupt.  That’s crazy!  The polygraph examiner is on the take, the PO is on the take, the therapist is on the take….then there you are – off to save the world by offering $50 PCSOT exams and airing your dirty laundry at the very place that offers sex offenders advice on how to ‘try’ and beat the polygraph and advises them not to cooperate with therapy.  Wow, you are really doing some justice.

I know Mr. Holden and respect him.  He has put in time and effort into making the PCSOT program more regulated (and fair to the sex offender) as well as assisting the polygraph profession as a whole.   

By the way, a therapist does not need to know a specific polygraph format.  If they have a competent examiner, the examiner will run the appropriate exam format based upon the information presented to them.   In your ‘case’ it even states that Ms. Moore was not familiar with ‘Fenian’ and would like to see examples of the types of tests they ran before she would refer them business.  I believe that is a fair statement.  Did you provide her with some examples of your tests?

I am curious, what professional organizations do you belong to?   

On another note: NPC, you know a polygraph can be manipulated, you use to run them mate!    Anyone can screw up a polygraph chart but not many can actually ‘beat’ them.

Quote:


You sound like an arrogant, long-winded, pontificating old jerk.   

But I could be wrong.

My agenda is to expose the preemployment polygraph for what it is, a pseudo-scientific fishing expedition.

TC

Donna.Taylor wrote on Apr 23^rd, 2008 at 1:55am:


Well, hello Donna.  I am SO HAPPY you are paying attention to me again.  I have missed you!   

I guess you just confirmed that polygraph countermeasures do work, thank-you.  Now, we are getting somewhere.  BTW, do you have any idea regarding the percentage of polygraph exams are purposely manipulated?

Joe McCarthy wrote on Apr 22^nd, 2008 at 11:54pm:


To properly address the bulk of your post would take days of research and hours of time composing a cogent response, and since I have no dog in your fight, I'll pass.  But, I do want to point out the language you use "above" is inaccurate, beecause"

How can one PASS an opinion?  Isn't the result of a poly exam simply the opinion of the examiner, that the squiggly lines were made in response to questions asked?

nopolycop wrote on Apr 23^rd, 2008 at 1:36pm:

I already am. I have been receiving threats. I actually don't even bother turning on one of my cell phones anymore.  I have gotten to a point that I am even arming myself. Yes things are getting that bad. 

I can't trust anyone. It's a very lonely feeling standing up for the write thing.

But, ole Whitey James Buldger has been public enemy #1 for the FBI for years.  Never underestimate a Mick that is backed into a corner. One may not like the end result.

If they want me that bad, come and get me. As we say in Southie "Do Somin"

Joe McCarthy wrote on Apr 23^rd, 2008 at 2:59pm:


I left in the above simply as a reference to the discussion.  Regardless of what Donna says about me, (I think she DOES like me though) I am not, nor ever have been a polygrapher, so I am not conversant in the secret language of polygraph.

But, my point is, that first, a polygrapher makes the assumption that any physiological signal one emmits is due to the question asked, and not some other reason.  Which of course, can lead to the use of countermeasures, (if someone understands this).  Secondly, in each polygraph I have taken, (three of them) I was asked by the polygrapher to explain "blips."  Then, whether or not the polygrapher believed me as to the truthfulness of my explanation, resulted in whether or not I PASSED the polygraph.

In other words, he formed an opinion as to my truthfulness, and based my "pass", (or "fail" in one case) upon his opinion of my truthfulness.

Because the polygraph is not a subjective test, one cannot pass or fail it, in the classicial, scientific sense.  If a person takes a test in mathematics, there is one right answer, only.  If a person gets enough answers right, he passes.

So, I respectfully suggest the term "opinion" is the better choice, and I have no problems with the result of a polygraph being something along the lines of "In my opinion, the subject was being truthful" as that would be an  honest statement.  But to say one "passed" a polygraph is innaccurate and dishonest, as one cannot "pass" an opinion.

Joe McCarthy wrote on Apr 23^rd, 2008 at 3:25pm:


A couple problems with your line of reasoning here.  First off, polygraphers tend to contradict each other.  Heck, one notable polygrapher here states that a polygraph isn't actually a lie detector, and the polygraph isn't designed to detect deception or verify the truth!  So, even though you may have answered correctly and honestly, please forgive me for not falling all over myself to take what you, or any other polygrapher says for the truth.

Secondly, you must realize that Donna Taylor and myself have a long history of her sniping at me, (along with accusing me of being a sex offender and/or a polygrapher) and then refusing to answer my questions when I challenge something she  has said.  (Like she will do here, if history repeats itself).

You see, the point that I am trying to clarify is that because the polygraph CAN be manipulated, but no-one knows to what extent the polygraph is routinely manipulated by the examinees, then to rely upon the results of a polygraph for anything really important is pretty foolish.  Wouldn't you agree?