Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10 ReplyAdd Poll Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Unlawful Referral Scheme Alleged in Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex Post-Conviction Sex Offender Polygraph Testing (Read 109398 times)
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box Joe McCarthy
God Member
*****
Offline


Tiocfaidh ár lá

Posts: 525
Location: The Shroud of The Foggy Dew
Joined: Mar 25th, 2008
Gender: Male
Re: Unlawful Referral Scheme Alleged in Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex Post-Conviction Sex Offender Polygraph Testing
Reply #15 - Apr 22nd, 2008 at 11:54pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
nopolycop wrote on Apr 20th, 2008 at 12:45pm:
Joe:  Two comments/questions regarding your comments quoted below:

First one, are you admitting here on anti-polygraph.org" that a polygraph test can be manipulated?  

Secondly, I predict "0" polygraph examiners will take you up on your offer.  Afterall, they know the "truth."



Joe McCarthy wrote on Apr 20th, 2008 at 12:27am:
The test format will have to be an R&I because if there is anyone that could get around a control question test, it’s a polygraph examiner.

It should be interesting to see how many step forward.



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?




« Last Edit: Apr 23rd, 2008 at 12:32am by Joe McCarthy »  

Updated_MOU.pdf ( 3811 KB | Downloads )

Joe
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box T.M. Cullen
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 858
Location: Hawaii
Joined: Dec 5th, 2007
Gender: Male
Re: Unlawful Referral Scheme Alleged in Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex Post-Conviction Sex Offender Polygraph Testing
Reply #16 - Apr 23rd, 2008 at 1:03am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Quote:
Most people do not have an understanding of the psycho physiological workings of the body when in a fearful state.


If you are referring to the F3 response, then it's just not "fear", also "fight" and "freeze".

Those who produced the NAS Report, do know all about it.  They seemed to conclude that a "reaction" does not uniquely indicate deception.

Those here who've tested false positive can attest to that.  Being REPEATED told by  polygrapher that they are being deceptive when truthfully answering "no" to a test question is very likely to cause a person's ANS to "put up it's dukes" when hearing that question (no matter how many times it has been permutated).

I remember when taking PSYCH 101 watching a tape with Dr. Phil Zimbardo at Stanford where he explained this.  Of course, he's not a polygrapher, so.....

TC
  

"There is no direct and unequivocal connection between lying and these physiological states of arousal...(referring to polygraph)."

Dr. Phil Zimbardo, Phd, Standford University
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box Donna.Taylor
User
**
Offline



Posts: 37
Joined: Oct 23rd, 2007
Re: Unlawful Referral Scheme Alleged in Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex Post-Conviction Sex Offender Polygraph Testing
Reply #17 - Apr 23rd, 2008 at 1:55am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
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.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box Joe McCarthy
God Member
*****
Offline


Tiocfaidh ár lá

Posts: 525
Location: The Shroud of The Foggy Dew
Joined: Mar 25th, 2008
Gender: Male
Re: Unlawful Referral Scheme Alleged in Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex Post-Conviction Sex Offender Polygraph Testing
Reply #18 - Apr 23rd, 2008 at 4:43am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
T.M. Cullen wrote on Apr 23rd, 2008 at 1:03am:
Quote:
Most people do not have an understanding of the psycho physiological workings of the body when in a fearful state.


If you are referring to the F3 response, then it's just not "fear", also "fight" and "freeze".

Those who produced the NAS Report, do know all about it.  They seemed to conclude that a "reaction" does not uniquely indicate deception.

Those here who've tested false positive can attest to that.  Being REPEATED told by  polygrapher that they are being deceptive when truthfully answering "no" to a test question is very likely to cause a person's ANS to "put up it's dukes" when hearing that question (no matter how many times it has been permutated).

I remember when taking PSYCH 101 watching a tape with Dr. Phil Zimbardo at Stanford where he explained this.  Of course, he's not a polygrapher, so.....

TC

Ok, Now I am going to be a wee bit of a jerk. So, I ask everyones forgivness in advance, but, I hate it when some one has not read the entier post. Yet, they still try to take a jab at something that they can not control at this moment. Let me make this as clear as possable and this is not a theory, or an opinion. It is what it is, so at the risk of pissing someone off, here it is.

P-O-L-Y-G-R-A-P-H IS H-E-A-R TO S-T-A-Y IN REGARDS TO SEX OFFENDER TESTING........ DEAL WITH IT!!!!!!!

If the state of New York is approving sex offender polygraph testing, than it is clear that some of the antipolygraph industry may feel that polygraphing sex offenders is ok. Maybe these bleeding heard Democrats feel that sex offenders are less worthy of the same right of the rest of the self ritchous, self important ameriacans that care only about their own agenda and care nothing for the general good in a tough situation. Wow, you must work for the Texas Attorny Generals Office.

These people HAVE to take polygraphs because they entered into a contract with they state of texas that stipulated that they would submit to periodic polygraph examinations in exchange for not going to prision. They are told that they have a choice of certified polygraph examiners, then are told that the people that expect the offender not to lie has, infact lied to the offender. When the probationer asks for an independant polygraph examination that is not a "yes man" to probation or the therapist, that probationers request for an independant examination is mett with accusations of being uncooperatve and is threatened with revocation. If the probationer still insists for an independant polygraph examination from an indepandant polygraph examiner, hurdles are intentionall put into place to make sure that test doesn't happen. If my results of the independant polygraph are contrary to that of the "choosen polygraph examiner", the independant polygraph is deemed to be flawed by people that don't know jack about polygraph. Therefore the probationer, telling the truth or lying, is screwed either way and probation still gets what they want.

Hey Bruno,  'naaaaarrrroooo".

The offender is sent to a polygraph examiner, who could care less if the offender is telling the truth or lying. As far as the examiner, therapist, and probation officer is conserned in many of these cases, the offender is lying and they will continue to polygraph shop untill they find the result that they want. When the desired result is obtained, the polygraph examination is then utilized to revoke the probationers probation. A probationer that may have been telling the truth. so stop your stomping on the floor, whining, and gnawing of your teeth at a polygrah examiner that wants to give these guy's a FAIR polygraph examination.

If you don't want to be part of the solution, then STOP contributing to the problem. Your being a selfish twit, who could care less about anything more or anything less then your own agenda. That is what you look like.

Be cause you have clearly were unable or unwilling to read such a big and complicated posting, ley me REPEAT a part of the post you have missed, intentionally or otherwise.

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 AM NOT HEAR TO ARGUE WITH YOU.

I am here to make sure that the state or Texas and Tarrant County lives up to arrements that were made to people in exchage for their guilty plea. Just because they are criminals, does not mean that the people how don't want the sex offenders to lie to them, can lie to the sex offenders. Then Lie to the theripists that are there to get into the sex offenders heads, and finally lie to the polygraph examiners who are there to help the therapists and the probation officers in their efforts to manage the sex offender.

You are right, we are just talking about unimportand rights, unkept promisess and maybe even a corrupt system.  But your personal agenda is much more important. It's all about you. The stage is yours. Send in the clowns.

Congratulations.  You have just shown yourself to be the egotistical, self-centered, selfish thing that some people already knew you were.  You also put yourself forward as a person that is incapable or unwilling to read a document or posting completely before tapping aimlessly on your commodore 64 computer like a clueless nail clipping collector.

There are people that walk into a polygraph room that just may be set up for failure. These people are told by their therapists and probation officers that they "will fail that polygraph" and that the polygraph examiner will ask the exact questions that the probation officers write.  Do you know what happens the vast majority of the time?  The probationer magically fails that test and pays $200.00 for the pleasure.  At best, the probationer has to take another polygraph examination and pay another $200.00.  The magic happens again and then the probationer is sent for another polygraph examination, paying yet another $200.00.   It ends when the probationer is broke and almost wants to go to jail because at least there he knows where he stands.

Yet you want to be an ass to a polygraph examiner who is charging $125.00 to administer a fair polygraph.  An examiner that would like nothing more than to give only one examination and solve the problem, but has no problem to say there is an issue with the tracings.  An examiner who will stay in the room to work through the issue to be sure that outside issues didn't bleed into the test.

Take your agenda to the polygraph procedure message board where a lot of talk happens, but nothing gets solved or no one can find some common understanding.  I am trying to help save my business, the businesses of others, and the asses of some people that just want the fair shot that they were promised.

I am sorry that some people here may have had jerks as polygraph examiners.  I am sorry that some people in here "failed a polygraph when they were telling the truth".  I am sorry that one of these things has happened to you.  But, after your little attitude, I can tell you this from the bottom of my heart.  If you want sympathy from me, you will find it in the dictionary.  It's right in between the words sex and syphilis

I will respect people’s opinion when they say that polygraph is a "flip of the coin" or a "50/50 chance.”  But doing some common sense math here, if polygraph is 50/50 that would mean that 25 to 50 % of the people who say they failed a polygraph when they were telling the truth are lying to you.  Yet you could care less about that because it because it doesn't fit it doesn't fit the agenda that you want everyone to pay attention to instead of an issue that affects real people, real families, and real livelihoods.

Try, just try, to empathize or sympathize with the plight of others instead of being a cheap attention hound.  You may find that it will make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

I could care less that you saw some video tape featuring some shrink that I don't know of and could care less about.  I don't care that he was ranting on and on about how bad polygraph is and how it should be never used again.  I doubt that this shrink has seen a polygraph instrument; much less ran even one test.   If he has, I doubt that he's run a test on a real person in a real situation that was a matter of freedom or incarceration.

I don't care that you took PSYCH 101.  It means you didn't make it to PSYCH 201.  If someone had a PSYCH degree, they would be bragging about their doctoral dissertation, not PSYCH 101.

If you have a PhD, it doesn’t make you smarter than me.  It just makes you more educated that me.  There are many people in the world that are more educated that I am, yet they can’t cook a meal, tie their shoes, or hold down a job in an environment where real competition exists.

I am not impressed.

Adults are trying to solve a problem that is solvable here.  Go play in traffic.  Your rantings just degrade yourself and insult others that could care less about Dr. Phil who you had a crush on while taking PSYCH 101.

I am done with you now. I will no longer respond to you until you have something to contribute to THIS situation.

You should be ashamed of yourself.  Your lack of caring for others as to how they are being totally screwed makes me sick to my stomach.

I am sorry everyone.  It’s just insulting to me when I pretty much lay it on the line about polygraph being “unbeatable” and this twit still isn’t happy.  So he’ll gladly take the attention off the subject being addressed, just to make everyone think he so very much more intelligent than everyone else because he took PSYCH 101 in his first year in collage.

Well there is good news and bad new for ole T.C.

Good news? Jesus loves him.

Bad news? Jesus has no choice to love him, God ordered him to.
  

Joe
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box T.M. Cullen
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 858
Location: Hawaii
Joined: Dec 5th, 2007
Gender: Male
Re: Unlawful Referral Scheme Alleged in Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex Post-Conviction Sex Offender Polygraph Testing
Reply #19 - Apr 23rd, 2008 at 6:16am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Quote:
If you don't want to be part of the solution, then STOP contributing to the problem. Your being a selfish twit, who could care less about anything more or anything less then your own agenda. That is what you look like.


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
« Last Edit: Apr 23rd, 2008 at 8:14am by T.M. Cullen »  

"There is no direct and unequivocal connection between lying and these physiological states of arousal...(referring to polygraph)."

Dr. Phil Zimbardo, Phd, Standford University
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box Joe McCarthy
God Member
*****
Offline


Tiocfaidh ár lá

Posts: 525
Location: The Shroud of The Foggy Dew
Joined: Mar 25th, 2008
Gender: Male
Re: Unlawful Referral Scheme Alleged in Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex Post-Conviction Sex Offender Polygraph Testing
Reply #20 - Apr 23rd, 2008 at 1:24pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
T.M. Cullen wrote on Apr 23rd, 2008 at 6:16am:
Quote:
If you don't want to be part of the solution, then STOP contributing to the problem. Your being a selfish twit, who could care less about anything more or anything less then your own agenda. That is what you look like.


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

Two out of three TC. A am arrogant, good luck finding a a polygraph examiner who isn't. I think it is writtend somewhere in our S.O.P. I am a pontificating jerk. I have no shame over this, but jerk is hardly a would I would use to describe myself whan I'm pissed.

I am not normally long-winded and I actually much younger than most of my fellow examiners at 38. Most of them have a foot on the ground and the other in the grave. And right now there is only one person that I would waste my time giving CPR to. As for the rest of them, I am in the current mood of "don't go away mad, just go away".

On that note I have to say I 100% agree with you in regards to pre-employment testsing. I hate doing them, thay are a huge pain in the ass, and I am glad not to be doing them right now.

Please forgive me if I jumped down your throat a wee too much. It's just that these fart collectors that have a problem with me pointing out an injustice. So they think making threats is somehow giong to make me shut up.

I think that they will find that it makes me dig in further. As for whats her face that posted last night, I'll get to your posting a wee bit latter in the day.

So, stay tuned, watch what happens next. I plan to exposes what I "nice guy" Eric holden is. I am going to do this my sharing snips of a transcript that I have ontained from someone who was at an apa seminar.

Mr. Holden agrees with the coing argument, and laments on a story where he seems very happy with himself for sending someone to prision for 40 year in a test that was NDI.

Stick around.
  

Joe
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box nopolycop
Especially Senior User
*****
Offline



Posts: 383
Joined: Oct 20th, 2007
Re: Unlawful Referral Scheme Alleged in Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex Post-Conviction Sex Offender Polygraph Testing
Reply #21 - Apr 23rd, 2008 at 1:28pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Donna.Taylor wrote on Apr 23rd, 2008 at 1:55am:
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.


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?
  

"Although the degree of reliability of polygraph evidence may depend upon a variety of identifiable factors, there is simply no way to know in a particular case whether a polygraph examiner's Conclusion is accurate, because certain doubts and uncertainties plague even the best polygraph exams."  (Justice Clarence Thomas writing in United States v. Scheffer, 523 U.S. 303, 118 S.Ct. 1261, 140 L.Ed.2d 413, 1998.)
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box nopolycop
Especially Senior User
*****
Offline



Posts: 383
Joined: Oct 20th, 2007
Re: Unlawful Referral Scheme Alleged in Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex Post-Conviction Sex Offender Polygraph Testing
Reply #22 - Apr 23rd, 2008 at 1:36pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Joe McCarthy wrote on Apr 23rd, 2008 at 1:24pm:
  It's just that these fart collectors that have a problem with me pointing out an injustice.


That comment sir, belongs in the "anti-polygraph HALL OF FAME." 

BTW, you are about to become polygraph's "Public Enemy No. 1." I hope  you are ready.
  

"Although the degree of reliability of polygraph evidence may depend upon a variety of identifiable factors, there is simply no way to know in a particular case whether a polygraph examiner's Conclusion is accurate, because certain doubts and uncertainties plague even the best polygraph exams."  (Justice Clarence Thomas writing in United States v. Scheffer, 523 U.S. 303, 118 S.Ct. 1261, 140 L.Ed.2d 413, 1998.)
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box nopolycop
Especially Senior User
*****
Offline



Posts: 383
Joined: Oct 20th, 2007
Re: Unlawful Referral Scheme Alleged in Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex Post-Conviction Sex Offender Polygraph Testing
Reply #23 - Apr 23rd, 2008 at 1:59pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Joe McCarthy wrote on Apr 22nd, 2008 at 11:54pm:
 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.  


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?
  

"Although the degree of reliability of polygraph evidence may depend upon a variety of identifiable factors, there is simply no way to know in a particular case whether a polygraph examiner's Conclusion is accurate, because certain doubts and uncertainties plague even the best polygraph exams."  (Justice Clarence Thomas writing in United States v. Scheffer, 523 U.S. 303, 118 S.Ct. 1261, 140 L.Ed.2d 413, 1998.)
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box Joe McCarthy
God Member
*****
Offline


Tiocfaidh ár lá

Posts: 525
Location: The Shroud of The Foggy Dew
Joined: Mar 25th, 2008
Gender: Male
Re: Unlawful Referral Scheme Alleged in Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex Post-Conviction Sex Offender Polygraph Testing
Reply #24 - Apr 23rd, 2008 at 2:59pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
nopolycop wrote on Apr 23rd, 2008 at 1:59pm:
Joe McCarthy wrote on Apr 22nd, 2008 at 11:54pm:
 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.  


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?


Thank you for your kind post. You are one of the people on this message board that I look forward to reading a post from.

I understand you don't have a dog in this fight, but also feel that we all have a dog in the fight. They can do this to one class of person, and no one stands up because they are not in that class. This will make some people in our government more bold, so they do the same thing to another class of people. No one stand up because they are not in that class. Then for "security sake" they do this to a class of people that you belong to, there is no one how will stand up. Because there are none left other than the people who make the rules.

This could happen to anyone.

All of that was meant with all due respect.

On the next note, I feel, the use of the word opinion in polygraph is stupid and self defeatist. The Polygraph Illuminaniti keeps coming up with the words and phrases that almost beg to be challenged.

Either the charts show significant response or they do not. The word "opinion", implies that I am being subjective in my scoring. While there is a great deal of subjectivity in the 7 point scale, there is no subjectivity in 3 three point scale or ROSS.

Reaction is there or it is not there. I hate saying "ok this reaction is twice the amplitude from duration to relief in the control question. On the other hand the relevant question has a complex reaction that looks really neat. I would normally say that this reaction in relation to the control question would be a +2 but because of the complex reaction in the relevant question. So I will give this zone a +1".

On the seven point scale an examiner is being objective to allow them to be subjective. Some people just hear blah blah blah blah. I am happy to explain it but it would take a bit of time and further piss off my colleagues who don't seem to want to know what ever it is that they are not hiding. Because they insist that there is a free market that they have almost squeezed me out of because they are just that much better than I am and don't feel at all threatened by the presence of a polygraph examiner that gives a fair and honest polygraph examine.

The 3 point scale is in my personal opinion more objective rather than subjective using -0+. Either the reaction is there or it is now or it's hard to tell the difference between one over the other.

ROSS is a rank order form of scoring. Giving a numerical value to each relevant question and the highest reacting control. for instance if it is a 4 question air force MGQT I will give the highest reacting question a 4 and then the following downward reactions 3 2 1 0. I add the totals work it all out on a bell curve and make a mathematical decision from there. The reason I like this system, is because I have found it to be a system that is in line with the term Psyhset.

I am compariring the largest reacting control over all the others. I want to base my decision off the control question that causes the most concern.

Also there is a lower rate on inconclusive. I hate inconclusive tests.
  

Joe
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box Joe McCarthy
God Member
*****
Offline


Tiocfaidh ár lá

Posts: 525
Location: The Shroud of The Foggy Dew
Joined: Mar 25th, 2008
Gender: Male
Re: Unlawful Referral Scheme Alleged in Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex Post-Conviction Sex Offender Polygraph Testing
Reply #25 - Apr 23rd, 2008 at 3:08pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
nopolycop wrote on Apr 23rd, 2008 at 1:36pm:
Joe McCarthy wrote on Apr 23rd, 2008 at 1:24pm:
 It's just that these fart collectors that have a problem with me pointing out an injustice.


That comment sir, belongs in the "anti-polygraph HALL OF FAME."  

BTW, you are about to become polygraph's "Public Enemy No. 1." I hope  you are ready.

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
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box Joe McCarthy
God Member
*****
Offline


Tiocfaidh ár lá

Posts: 525
Location: The Shroud of The Foggy Dew
Joined: Mar 25th, 2008
Gender: Male
Re: Unlawful Referral Scheme Alleged in Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex Post-Conviction Sex Offender Polygraph Testing
Reply #26 - Apr 23rd, 2008 at 3:25pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
nopolycop wrote on Apr 23rd, 2008 at 1:28pm:
Donna.Taylor wrote on Apr 23rd, 2008 at 1:55am:
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.


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?


wow I thought I cleared up the countermeasures issues pertty well.
  

Joe
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box nopolycop
Especially Senior User
*****
Offline



Posts: 383
Joined: Oct 20th, 2007
Re: Unlawful Referral Scheme Alleged in Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex Post-Conviction Sex Offender Polygraph Testing
Reply #27 - Apr 23rd, 2008 at 3:25pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Joe McCarthy wrote on Apr 23rd, 2008 at 2:59pm:
[
Either the charts show significant response or they do not. The word "opinion", implies that I am being subjective in my scoring. While there is a great deal of subjectivity in the 7 point scale, there is no subjectivity in 3 three point scale or ROSS.


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.
  

"Although the degree of reliability of polygraph evidence may depend upon a variety of identifiable factors, there is simply no way to know in a particular case whether a polygraph examiner's Conclusion is accurate, because certain doubts and uncertainties plague even the best polygraph exams."  (Justice Clarence Thomas writing in United States v. Scheffer, 523 U.S. 303, 118 S.Ct. 1261, 140 L.Ed.2d 413, 1998.)
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box Joe McCarthy
God Member
*****
Offline


Tiocfaidh ár lá

Posts: 525
Location: The Shroud of The Foggy Dew
Joined: Mar 25th, 2008
Gender: Male
Re: Unlawful Referral Scheme Alleged in Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex Post-Conviction Sex Offender Polygraph Testing
Reply #28 - Apr 23rd, 2008 at 3:43pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
nopolycop wrote on Apr 23rd, 2008 at 3:25pm:
Joe McCarthy wrote on Apr 23rd, 2008 at 2:59pm:
[
Either the charts show significant response or they do not. The word "opinion", implies that I am being subjective in my scoring. While there is a great deal of subjectivity in the 7 point scale, there is no subjectivity in 3 three point scale or ROSS.


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.


LOL ok first off, I wish I could explain what a "blip" is. The Examiner in question must have been a "twit". I would think that a "blip" is what I like to call the "oh sh&^ here comes the question reaction". I expect to see this, and when this reaction happens I am happy that the examinee not only understands the questions, but he is thinking about them. I get this impression because the "oh sh$^" usually happens between the start of the question and the answer. Therefore the reaction must be timely. I am lalso looking for the "oh fu@&" reaction. Then I look for consistency.

I do my best to be sure I set my controls well enough to help the truthful person to "pass" for the lack of a shorter term.

I will clarify this. No one ever passes a polygraph. Because in order to "pass" a polygraph you have to lie .

I know it sounds wacky, but, it is what it is.
  

Joe
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box nopolycop
Especially Senior User
*****
Offline



Posts: 383
Joined: Oct 20th, 2007
Re: Unlawful Referral Scheme Alleged in Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex Post-Conviction Sex Offender Polygraph Testing
Reply #29 - Apr 23rd, 2008 at 5:49pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Joe McCarthy wrote on Apr 23rd, 2008 at 3:25pm:
wow I thought I cleared up the countermeasures issues pertty well.


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?
  

"Although the degree of reliability of polygraph evidence may depend upon a variety of identifiable factors, there is simply no way to know in a particular case whether a polygraph examiner's Conclusion is accurate, because certain doubts and uncertainties plague even the best polygraph exams."  (Justice Clarence Thomas writing in United States v. Scheffer, 523 U.S. 303, 118 S.Ct. 1261, 140 L.Ed.2d 413, 1998.)
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10
ReplyAdd Poll Send TopicPrint
Unlawful Referral Scheme Alleged in Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex Post-Conviction Sex Offender Polygraph Testing

Please type the characters that appear in the image. The characters must be typed in the same order, and they are case-sensitive.
Open Preview Preview

You can resize the textbox by dragging the right or bottom border.
Insert Hyperlink Insert FTP Link Insert Image Insert E-mail Insert Media Insert Table Insert Table Row Insert Table Column Insert Horizontal Rule Insert Teletype Insert Code Insert Quote Edited Superscript Subscript Insert List /me - my name Insert Marquee Insert Timestamp No Parse
Bold Italicized Underline Insert Strikethrough Highlight
                       
Insert Preformatted Text Left Align Centered Right Align
resize_wb
resize_hb







Max 200000 characters. Remaining characters:
Text size: pt
More Smilies
View All Smilies
Collapse additional features Collapse/Expand additional features Smiley Wink Cheesy Grin Angry Sad Shocked Cool Huh Roll Eyes Tongue Embarrassed Lips Sealed Undecided Kiss Cry
Attachments More Attachments Allowed file types: txt doc docx psd pdf bmp jpe jpg jpeg gif png swf zip rar tar gz 7z odt ods mp3 mp4 wav avi mov 3gp html maff pgp gpg
Maximum Attachment size: 500000 KB
Attachment 1:
X