Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 10 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 125951 times)
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 #45 - May 1st, 2008 at 3:51pm
Print Post  
LieGuyToo wrote on May 1st, 2008 at 3:41pm:
again, tell everyone about the firing of your wife, the firing of you and the fact your co-instructor at Skyhawk Poly Institute wanted NOT to graduate you...


Perhaps it was because they realized that Joe was too honest to be a polygrapher.  Grin
  

"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
 
LieGuyToo
New User
*
Offline



Posts: 9
Joined: Apr 30th, 2008
Re: Unlawful Referral Scheme Alleged in Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex Post-Conviction Sex Offender Polygraph Testing
Reply #46 - May 1st, 2008 at 5:25pm
Print Post  
Perhaps so..are they taking applications at your place of work? maybe you would like to put up with his whinning...
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
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 #47 - May 1st, 2008 at 9:05pm
Print Post  
Before addressing ole Baby Huey on my next post, I just wanted to give everyone an idea about what is at stake here which will make someone lie and try to drive a wedge between friends. I want everyone to see what may motivate someone to defame my character. Just follow the greed.

The “good ole boys” system in Tarrant County Texas must give way to a system where this profession’s integrity is first and foremost. We must put forth a professional public appearance that will demonstrate that we can all truly work together rather than bicker amongst ourselves.
We must be a profession where we can address all issues fairly and resolve them before they get out of hand. We must be a profession where entrepreneurship, healthy competition, and a fair market place benefit the public rather than figuring out a way to smother the basic principles of the American economy to unjustifiably enrich the few.

There are only about 240 licensed polygraph examiners in the state of Texas. Texas is a big ass state. For those who have never been here, I can tell you the DFW area is big enough that it could take over an hour to drive from one end of the DFW area to the other easily. In the time it would take to drive through Texas from north to south, I could drive through the states of Maine, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York and into New Jersey. Trust me. There is more than enough business to go around for everyone.

What I find hard to believe is the math. Let’s do some math for a minute. I am ONE polygraph examiner. My office can only fit ONE examiner and I have no plans to taking anyone on as another examiner. I am a one man show and that is the way I like it. The other offices have four to seven examiners.

I plan on catering to only PCSOT, pre-indictment, and the occasional infidelity test. I will not touch EPPA and have no desire to go after law enforcement/public safety contracts at this time. It is recommended that an examiner run no more than five examinations a day. At my last place of employment, five a day was not out of the norm. I got burned out fast. I cannot see how people do it consistently without affecting the tests long term. If you are running EPPA tests, then five is maximum number of test that you can conduct. So let’s just use the number 5 as a baseline.

There are five slots a day per examiner in a five day work week. This adds up to twenty five spots per examiner per week. Let’s multiply that by four examiners, which would equal 100 polygraph examinations for that office in one week. Then multiply that by four weeks and that is 400 examinations per month. Of course, these are average numbers. It is my understanding that Holden’s office and the Woodies office have about a two to four week time period before appointments are available.

My office has one examiner. I plan on running no more than three slots a day. Multiply that by five days which equals fifteen examinations per week. Multiply that by four weeks and that would equal sixty examinations a month. Of course, this is an average figure and I have no waiting period. Even if I were to run five tests a day, then we would be looking at one hundred tests a month.

OK. They have 400 slots a month and a two to four week waiting period. I only have sixty to one hundred slots a month with no waiting time. Wow. It sounds like I would be robbing the other companies by putting a huge dent in the market. That is what it would seem.
Approximately fifty to sixty percent of their 400 tests per month are pre-employment examinations. The remainder is EPPA, domestic, criminal specific for law enforcement, pre-indictment tests for lawyers, and PCSOT.

Why is a company that is running this many examinations from a wide and established customer base so afraid of little ole me? Someone who would be whistling zippidy do da out of his ass if he could get five tests in a week right now. Someone who plans on running about fifteen to twenty tests a week. Why are they so afraid of one examiner who is not as experienced as most of them, other than Baby Wood? Why are they so afraid of competing with someone who is not well established in this area? If their prices were fair then why are they so scared? If they treat their examinees with dignity, why are they so scared of me? If they were on time for most of their polygraphs and did not leave examinees sitting in a waiting room for an hour or two then why are they so scared of me? If their charts were clear enough that they had a low inconclusive rate, why are they so scared of, you guessed it, ME?

Let’s dissect this. It is time to do some math.

Let’s say that each one of their four examiners runs two sex offenders a day at the $200.00 going rate during a five day work week. That is $8,000.00 a week. Multiply that by four weeks and you get $32,000.00 a month.

Let’s say that each examiner runs one pre-indictment exam a week at $700.00, which is what I heard Holden still charges. That is $2,800 a week and $11, 200.00 a month.

Let’s say that each examiner runs one infidelity test a week at $400.00 for each test. That is $1,600.00 per week and $6,400.00 per month.

Let’s move on to The Texas Board of Nurses Examiners. This test is about $300.00. Let’s say that each examiner runs two of those a week. That is $2,400.00 per week and $9,600.00 a month.

Let’s say that each examiner runs one EEPA test a week at $400.00. That is $1,600.00 a week and $6,400.00 per month.

All of this fills up fifteen spots per examiner leaving ten spots for pre-employment per week per examiner. Pre-employment tests are about $100.00. If each of the four examiners runs ten pre-employments per week, then this adds up to $4,000.00 per week and $16,000.00 a month.

Of course, this is all an average. But, keep in mind that Holden and the Woodies are filled two to four weeks in advance. That is why I do a four week projection.

Each office makes $20,400.00 a week. Multiply this by 4 and you get $81,600.00 a month. DAMN. I have never made that in a year in my life! I wonder what that would be per year. I will let my fingers do the walking on my trusty calculator. All this adds up to approximately $979,200.00 per year. I bet that is bigger than some third world countries yearly budgets.

The average cut for the examiner is fifty percent. That is $489,600.00 for the examiners. Divide that by four and you get $122,400.00 per year per examiner. Of course, this is running the maximum number of tests. The maximum is probably a fair estimate due to their calendars.

This means that the company makes on average of $489,600.00. For the sake of argument, let’s say that $200,000.00 per year is spent on office and business expenses. That still leaves $289,600.00 for the company. Uncle Sam takes his portion, which leaves approximately $150,000.00 of profit.

These are all hypothetical figures. But holy bat crap batman!

And the Woodies complain about legal fees. I gave them a way out last week with no harm and no foul. It would have only cost him a few cents for paper, $5.00 for a notary stamp, and one hourly fee from his attorney.

Let’s go over my math.

Let’s say I use the maximum slots. Right now, I charge $125.00 per sex offender test. I used to charge $175.00, but I had to lower my prices to get people in the door.

Let’s say that I do five PCSOT tests a day at $125.00 each. That would be $625.00 a day, $3,125.00 per week, and $12,500.00 a month. Oooooo yea baby. That would be freaking sweet. It would be approximately $150,000.00 annually

Let’s look at my expected reality. I ran five tests a day for a while at the last place I worked. I do not want to do that again.

I plan on maxing out at three tests a day five days a week for now. That is $375.00 per day, $1,875.00 per week, $7,500.00 per month, and approximately $90,000.00 a year. That would be pretty sweet too.

Let’s subtract the expenses, which are approximately $20,000.00. This will leave me with a profit of approximately $130,000.00 per year maximum and approximately $70,000.00 per year if I were to keep my desired numbers daily.

Once Uncle Sam gets his share, then I make a profit of approximately $65,000.00 per year maximum and $35,000.00 per year on the low end.

OK. I am looking at the numbers here and I fail to see where I make a dent in the market. I fail to see where I am such a threat. Why is there the fear of fairly competing with me?

Well I guess that price does have something to do with it. I have heard nightmare stories from examinees about services in general and almost all stories match up from unrelated people. I doubt there is a conspiracy of examinees that are secretly meeting to match up their stories. I can get someone into a test tomorrow if that is what is needed. I have a low inconclusive rate compared to my competitors. I am basing this on what I have heard from CSCD, examinees, and therapists. Even when I worked for my former employer, we averaged a 2% inconclusive rate.

Wow. I offer a more affordable cost, respectful customer service, clear results, and timely appointments. I guess I can see where I would be a little bit of a threat. But I still only have so many spots a week open. If they are filled, then the offenders still have no choice but to go to the other guys.

Huh… I still don’t see the threat. So therefore I only see a few possibilities.
1. Power
2. Control
3. Greed

In my next posting I will explain the basics of Texas Licensing and JPCOT. My lawyer is also preparing a full explanation of the current litigation and why we feel we have a case so that I may present it to anyone who cares to listen.

As for my detractors, you will not scare me. I have looked into the mouth of hell itself by being divorced two times. Trust me. Nothing scares me anymore. I plan on taking this to the highest court allowable by law. This is something I do not want to do, but I will if I am forced.

Till then remember

Where ever you go there you are.


  

Joe
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
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 #48 - May 1st, 2008 at 10:02pm
Print Post  
LieGuyToo wrote on May 1st, 2008 at 3:41pm:
Fat-ing Irish wrote:

I can give you reasons why the suit will survive. Can you give me reasons why it will be dismissed?

By the way you need to look up fraudulent you pinhead. I have clear causes of action which your desperation proves you're afraid of.

This could all be done in a few hours; you are the one that wants to stretch this for months.


Please give us the reason it will be dismissed? You appear to seem entitled to business and because you hang your shingle out you feel as if you DESERVE business. Now, kicking and screaming  Cry you are trying to force people to have a business relationship with you... All can see throuh your transparent suit

you have distanced yourself from those you desire to be next to...

You are the only one that appears "Desperate"

again, tell everyone about the firing of your wife, the firing of you and the fact your co-instructor at Skyhawk Poly Institute wanted NOT to graduate you...


OK.  Let's dance.

My wife was let go because of her connection with this action.  I feel
the idea that she believes in what we are doing more than her former
employer is a credit to the term "stand by your man".  She took a stand and her boss did not like it.  You are just pissed because you do not have anyone in your life that believed in you that much.  You need to stop kicking and screaming because you were and are unloved both as a child and as an adult.

Let's move to the next issue.  It is funny but I just spoke with Don.
It seems the incompetent issue is now officially laid to rest.  My
departure from Dalhousie Polygraph Services was because we had
different directions that we both wished to take.  Don said that I run great  tests and charts and that he has never said that I was incompetent to anyone.

Therefore, either you are lying or he is lying.  I would venture to say
that it is you.  I hope that you can prove that he called me
incompetent.  Otherwise, we can add libel to the laundry list of
actions against you.  Prove Don said that!  You cannot because he did not.  I was just in his office speaking with him.  Are you calling Don Ramsey a liar?

You seem too chicken shit to tell these half truths and lies and not
identify yourself, but I have a very good idea who you are.  A wee bit
of investigation will nail that down.

There are lots of instances when co-instructors do not want to graduate
a student. Mostly it is because of personal issues.  Someone did not
like me.  But I did not like him until now.  He was a hard ass to try
to prepare me for an industry that is cut throat.  I did not see that
then, but I see it now.  I bare no ill will to any instructor at Skyhawk.  It was an outstanding school which left no stone unturned regarding
polygraph procedure and technique.  Was there an instructor that did
not want to graduate me?  I was unaware of one.  But if that is what he is telling you, then there are some massive breaches in privacy which will clearly need to be addressed with the school and instructor alike.  My attorney will be on that right away.  Thank you for making me aware of that.

In any event, I did graduate, completed my internship with good
reviews, and passed my oral and written state exams on the same day.  I took my PCSOT training at what is arguably the best private polygraph school in the country.  I passed that course as well.

I continued to work for Don for a few years after that.  I got burned
out on PE tests and wished to go into a different direction so I did.
In speaking with Don this morning, he does not know who would write
what is clearly a lie to discredit me and denies that he has ever called me or my work incompetent.  So unless you can prove otherwise, you should check your facts before putting pen to paper.

Don has also made very clear that he wishes to stay out of this.  Who
ever wrote this should stop writing lies just to try to intimidate me.
I plan on respecting Don's wishes.  If you had any class, then you
would too.

Now I am going to address the last issue and your accusations of
"entitlement" and "deserving".

I will present to every one Exhibits A, B, and D.  Now follow along with me Baby Huey.  I can understand how you have some difficulty in grasping complicated issues and engaging in basic problem solving skills.

Documents attached

First, I will point out at the top of the approved polygraph examiners
list, which is public record.  These are the instructions to the
probationer.

Quote
"Your conditions to supervision require you to complete CLINICAL POLYGRAPH EXAMS."  Now here comes the hard part Baby Huey so pay attention. "Select the provider of YOUR CHOICE from the list below."Wow. "Your choice" hummmm..... I am just trying to see if there is any other way to interpret this.  Well you are so smart. Why don't you tell me how you interpret that?  I am sure the world would love to here your cognitive thought distortions on this.

Let's move on. "You are expected to attend appointments as scheduled and complete testing in a timely manner. You are responsible for full payment of fees."

OK. Now let's pick this apart.

"Select the provider of YOUR CHOICE from the list below."

Maybe this is just written in a special form of English, but I don't
think it said "Select a provider or your therapist's choice".  Ah Ha.
I know.  It is written in invisible ink that only some polygraph
examiners and therapists can see, but no one else can.  Maybe all one needs is a special decoder ring that you can only get if you send in 50 box tops of Froot Loops and learn a secret hand shake.

Now let's move on to Exhibit B.

When I found out that the above directions were being usurped (you can find the meaning of the word usurped in what is called a "dictionary".)

My attorney emailed Mr. David Kilpatrick with Tarrant County CSCD. For those of you who don't know who Mr. Kilpatrick is, he is the number two guy in the department.  As one can clearly see, the issue is addressed clearly.

Mr. Kilpatrick's response was clear and definitive. "Please give me the name of the probationer involved. We've just dealt with one of the providers on this issue and I need to know if it's the same one, same issue, or a new one".  Holy bat crap Batman! This needed to be addressed once before?   Well, I am very sure that whichever providers and the documentation of the incident will be clarified during discovery.

Let's continue with this exhibit.  It continues "Yes the P (clearly referring to probationer) gets to choose, and both the treatment provider nor the officer can insist on one over the other." This is pretty clear language too.  Are you reading something different into this? If so, please share your thoughts with us.  I am very sure that we would love to hear excuses as well.

Now I will draw your attention to Exhibit D.

In this email transmission, my attorney made a simple request. "Is there any way Tarrant County can send a letter to the sex offender therapists to reiterate to them that the polygraph examiner is the choice of the probationer and no one else?"
I think this is a very clear request.  Is there any one in the forum
that finds one of those requests unclear?

Mr. Kilpatrick's response was once again clear and immediate.  A
response was received seven minutes from the request being sent.

"Great. Yeah, we can do that. We just sent one such letter to one provider. It's a warning letter stating that continuing to do this will lead to the suspension of referrals to them."

Wow, apparently some are "entitled" to receive a timely response from Tarrant County CSCD but I am not.  You are right.  Here I am with this sense of "entitlement" to have a governmental agency enforce their rules that are set up for everyone to be on a level playing field.  I am "entitled" to ask them to send a letter that they had to send out once before because someone else was being trampled.  You are right.  I should not be "entitled" to equal treatment.  After all, I am but a humble business man who wants the level playing field that he was told he would get.  Oh wait, there's more!

"The strange symbiotic relationship between sex offender providers and polygraphists hasn't been addressed to clarify this doctrine with them, but it is way over due."

OK.  Let's dissect this shall we?

"Strange symbiotic relationship between sex offender providers and polygrahers"

This would imply that Mr. Kilpatrick has knowledge that this behavior
has been going on for sometime.  I bet that I am the first examiner
that has called Tarrant County CSCD to the plate on this and stood his
ground.  I dare say that is the reason that everyone is so angry with
me about filing this lawsuit.  After all, that is what the Chairman of the
Executive Committee of TAPE said when he ambushed me at the TAPE
convention by saying "Joe you're the one who started all of this."

That was the wrong forum and the wrong venue.  He was strongly admonished after the fact.

I informed him that I merely took steps to resolve the issue and did
not start this.  I then told him what a peice of crap he is and how that was a chicken S thing to do. This was not even my idea at first.  Do I have proof of that?  Well, let's move on with this exhibit.

At the end of the email Mr. Kilpatrick clearly informs me "This will ultimately have to be resolved by the department and/or the courts".

Whose idea was this? Our survey says................. Mr. David
Kilpatrick of Tarrant County CSCD. Ding, ding, ding, ding, and ding.

And tell us what we have for Mr. Kilpatrick today Bob. "Joe, what we
have is the correct finger of blame! This finger of blame has been all
elusive until now. But, because now one seems to want to read the court documents, we at the game show "What is the Truth" feel that this is an appropriate prize for his valiant efforts to keep Tarrant County CSCD free of corruption.  There may be more prizes coming down the pike. These are not the only emails that prove this case.  So tell the audience to stay tuned."

Want to blame all this on someone Baby Huey?  Call David Kilpatrick.  I did not even have it in my mind to file an action until I saw that
email.  Even then I did my best to clear all this up with Tarrant
County CSCD.  I have the emails to prove that as well. What proof, other than the discovery I feel you are trying to hide, do you have that you were not engaging in these special relationships that were unauthorized and subject to disciplinary action?  I am looking forward to seeing it.

For everyone else who hates my guts for expecting nothing more than
what I was told I would get, which was A FAIR SHAKE, I think you need to put yourself in my shoes for a minute because someday this could be you.

I was entitled to get what I was told existed, which was a fair, open,
and free market place.  I deserved to have issues addressed and fixed
the same way others in the past have.  You are the ones that seem to
have a problem being treated like everyone else. Clearly, there are
some ethics and morals which you have not ....... adopted...... over the
years.  So go back to mommy and daddy and kick, scream and cry. Go put on your; what did you call it? Oh yea MANPON! And get over yourself!

If you are trying to get me to drop the suit, threats and intimidation
do not work.  It is also my understanding that for your counterclaims
to be awarded, you have the burden of proof in proving that I filed this
in bad faith.  Given that the suggestion was made by Tarrant County CSCD, I doubt you can do that.

There is just one more thing.  You are on notice not to make direct
contact with me again. If you have something to say to me, then send it through my lawyer and I will get back to you.

Lieguy.  This is an email address that I have heard of before but I
just can not put my finger on it.

Lieguytoo.  Could this imply that you are lieguy's son?  Only time will
tell.  

I will be around for at least a year.  The rent here is paid.  The only
thing I have to worry about now is overhead, which I figured I can
cover at about $50.00 to $75.00 a FAIR TEST.  Maybe I will win and maybe I will not.  One thing is for sure.  I am around for at least a year competing with you.  I may just give them away for free for a small time to see if that generates getting some people in the door.  No one can turn away that price. This has only begun.

My attorney will be contacting Mr. Webster to inform you that Judges do not like intimidation tactics.  I am pretty sure there is a rule about
that kind of thing.  Maybe we will drag everyone in to the next date do
he can explain it to everyone.

You do really show yourself to be a coward though. I hide behind no
one. You hide behind an alias and not an original one.

F3 baby, the reason that he is trying so hard to discredit me is fear. I must have hit a nerve in my last few posts or in documents filed with the court last week.

Thank you Baby Huey for letting me know I'm hitting that nerve.

Don't worry someday some one will love you, other than you loving yourself. Or maybe you love yourself too much? Better be careful I hear you can go blind like that.
  

attached_05_01_08_001.pdf ( 2595 KB | Downloads )

Joe
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
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 #49 - May 1st, 2008 at 10:42pm
Print Post  
LieGuyToo wrote on May 1st, 2008 at 5:25pm:
Perhaps so..are they taking applications at your place of work? maybe you would like to put up with his whinning...


Since you are new here, you don't realize that I don't work for an agency full-time, and my agency already has a polygrapher anyway.  But, I do own a business, and if I were in the need of a polygrapher, Joe is about the only one, in fact he is the only one that I would consider hiring.  He seems like an honest person, who will answer questions honestly.  I wish him well in his legal action against his detractors.  It will be fun to watch.
  

"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
 
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 #50 - May 1st, 2008 at 11:30pm
Print Post  
nopolycop wrote on May 1st, 2008 at 10:42pm:
LieGuyToo wrote on May 1st, 2008 at 5:25pm:
Perhaps so..are they taking applications at your place of work? maybe you would like to put up with his whinning...


Since you are new here, you don't realize that I don't work for an agency full-time, and my agency already has a polygrapher anyway.  But, I do own a business, and if I were in the need of a polygrapher, Joe is about the only one, in fact he is the only one that I would consider hiring.  He seems like an honest person, who will answer questions honestly.  I wish him well in his legal action against his detractors.  It will be fun to watch.


Thank you for your kind words. I do hope I have laid out the basic issue well enough for all to understand.

  

Joe
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
LieGuyToo
New User
*
Offline



Posts: 9
Joined: Apr 30th, 2008
Re: Unlawful Referral Scheme Alleged in Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex Post-Conviction Sex Offender Polygraph Testing
Reply #51 - May 2nd, 2008 at 4:46pm
Print Post  
How sweet..see we can all get along. Polygraph people and Anti Polygraph people in harmony, even employent possibilities for Mr. McCarthy.

I understand that his lovely wife may also be looking for a job. Maybe you can get two for one (actually those two more resemble four) since McCarthy is now the Big Lots of Polygraph and his bride is "standing by her man".

Good luck in all your efforts!
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
LieGuyToo
New User
*
Offline



Posts: 9
Joined: Apr 30th, 2008
Re: Unlawful Referral Scheme Alleged in Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex Post-Conviction Sex Offender Polygraph Testing
Reply #52 - May 2nd, 2008 at 6:57pm
Print Post  
Figiting Irish Wrote:

For everyone else who hates my guts for expecting nothing more  than what I was told I would get, which was A FAIR SHAKE, I think you need to put yourself in my shoes for a minute because someday this could be you.

Who told you what you would get? What is a FAIR SHAKE?

Wouldnt the whole world want what thier grandma's promised them for Christmas. But we dont congest the system with transparent suits "kicking and screaming" and crying with your pigeon eyes...
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
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 #53 - May 2nd, 2008 at 7:59pm
Print Post  
LieGuyToo wrote on May 2nd, 2008 at 6:57pm:
Figiting Irish Wrote:

For everyone else who hates my guts for expecting nothing more  than what I was told I would get, which was A FAIR SHAKE, I think you need to put yourself in my shoes for a minute because someday this could be you.

Who told you what you would get? What is a FAIR SHAKE?

Wouldnt the whole world want what thier grandma's promised them for Christmas. But we dont congest the system with transparent suits "kicking and screaming" and crying with your pigeon eyes...


I am still waiting for some intelligent answer about what is so transparent about my suit. I laid the basic foundation out and proved it with documentation.  Does he have anything other than insults and lies?

Are you saying you acknowledge that these documents are true and correct and that because you have been around for such a long time, that I should just roll over and accept it?  Are you saying that you support restricting business and trade practices, especially to me, and that it is intentional? And that now this restriction applies directly to me?

You want all the business don’t you, even if it means backroom deals?

Only one kicking and screaming, is him.
  

Joe
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
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 #54 - May 2nd, 2008 at 8:24pm
Print Post  
LieGuyToo wrote on May 2nd, 2008 at 6:57pm:
Figiting Irish Wrote:

For everyone else who hates my guts for expecting nothing more  than what I was told I would get, which was A FAIR SHAKE, I think you need to put yourself in my shoes for a minute because someday this could be you.

Who told you what you would get? What is a FAIR SHAKE?

Wouldnt the whole world want what thier grandma's promised them for Christmas. But we dont congest the system with transparent suits "kicking and screaming" and crying with your pigeon eyes...


This must be the first case where Ned Webster has been his attorney.  He is going to have to do better than that.

I wonder if his company has worked with Webster before or if someone referred Webster to him.
« Last Edit: May 2nd, 2008 at 8:50pm by Joe McCarthy »  

Joe
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
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 #55 - May 2nd, 2008 at 8:29pm
Print Post  
LieGuyToo wrote on May 2nd, 2008 at 4:46pm:
How sweet..see we can all get along. Polygraph people and Anti Polygraph people in harmony, even employent possibilities for Mr. McCarthy.

I understand that his lovely wife may also be looking for a job. Maybe you can get two for one (actually those two more resemble four) since McCarthy is now the Big Lots of Polygraph and his bride is "standing by her man".

Good luck in all your efforts!



See everyone?  He is happy to resort to personal insults but can back
up his case with no facts.

He said my lawsuit was fraudulent, yet he cannot tell you why it is
fraudulent.   He said that I was described by a former employer as
"incompetent".  When I exposed his lie, he resorts to personally
insulting my wife, who is gainfully employed by the way.  Huey got
caught in a lie.

Take note everyone.  I have responded with facts and have not hidden
behind an alias.  I have been up front and honest.  He has been far
less than truthful and vague.  I have identified myself by my phone number and email address.  He hides behind his lies and uses personal insults as a tool of distraction.

It is sad to say that people like him are running the polygraph
industry for the most part.  These are the men that have people's future in their hands.  I wonder if they just look into a magic eight ball to make a decision ND, DI, or their personal favorite INC.  

Just think.  The APA protects these people.  These people ask me to lay it all out and give details of why I am doing this.  Then when I do lay it out and back it up with documentation, all I get in response is
insults.  They are so desperate that they insult my wife. Well isn't
that classy.

I hope they keep making my case for me.  I hope they keep letting me
know when they are becoming afraid of me because I am getting close.  I wonder how loud they will squeal when the IRS is knocking on their doors because a lot of the sex offender money comes in cash.  

I wonder how Mr. Holden will respond on a witness stand to being kicked out of the DPS School for sexual harassment.  I wonder how credible he will be.  What I am still curious about is why Mr. Holden still holding himself out to be a PhD in California?  He is also referred to as psychologist Eric Holden on some articles and publications on the net. All of these documents are from reliable sources.  Does anyone know where this PhD comes from because he doesn't mention it on his website? Can anyone tell me what his PhD is in and where he obtained it?

I bet that will get answered with more insults and personal digs.

Is this the best that Holden has? Shocked They have to send Baby Huey after me. Not a very good plan to... adopt..., is it?
  

Joe
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
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 #56 - May 2nd, 2008 at 9:30pm
Print Post  
Someone pull his string, he's not talking. Roll Eyes
  

Joe
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
LieGuyToo
New User
*
Offline



Posts: 9
Joined: Apr 30th, 2008
Re: Unlawful Referral Scheme Alleged in Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex Post-Conviction Sex Offender Polygraph Testing
Reply #57 - May 2nd, 2008 at 10:02pm
Print Post  
i do not represent Holden, Woods or anyone else... i am not even in your silly suit... it is just funny to see how you obsess...not even AP people are sooo defensive.

You should have entered the maket at a lower price to begin with. you would'nt have time to write so much or engage in BS law suits - you would have been busy and hanging out with your colleauges. but you probably wouldnt have friends anyway...enjoy your chat rooms

u really need help!
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
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 #58 - May 9th, 2008 at 6:13pm
Print Post  
http://www.abajournal.com/news/probationer_polygraphs_increasingly_used_to_find_...

"Eric Holden, a psychologist and Dallas polygraph examiner, told the newspaper that he thinks polygraph tests "will become a standard for supervising probationers of all kinds.”

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120612863077155601.html?mod=hps_us_pageone

Eric Holden, a psychologist and Dallas polygraph examiner, says that as courts become familiar with how lie detectors are used with sex offenders, the tests will be increasingly applied to other offenders. Polygraph testing "will become a standard for supervising probationers of all kinds," says Mr. Holden, who was one of the first to use polygraphy with sex offenders in the early 1980s.



Ok all,

Just curious, is there anyone who knows where he received a psychology PhD from?

Lat time I checked the Occupations and Administrative code of Texas, One can not hold him/her self out as a psychologist unless he or she has a PhD.

If he has a PhD, why does he not list this on his website?

If he does not have a PhD; he is lying to the Wall Street Journal and to the American Bar Association Journal. If he's holding himself out as a psychologist and does not have a PhD, he just may be breaking Texas Law.

Wow! If this is true, is there anyone other than me that finds it concerning that the APA has him on any committee?

Just a thought.
Shocked
  

Joe
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
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 #59 - May 15th, 2008 at 4:25am
Print Post  
Hello all.  Sorry I have not posted any update with some real substance and meat recently.   Things are on hold temporally until the Judge rules on a hearing from last Thursday.   As of the time of this post, we are still waiting on word from the Court.

Be that as it may, while thumbing my way through the file, I came across issues where the defense clearly feels they can intimidate me into silence.  It is my intent on this post to clear some things up.  I am sure that the individual who addressed these issues is reading this, as he made it very clear that he is hanging on every word.  Therefore let me start with these words.  I WILL NOT BE SILENCED BY THE LIKES OF YOU.

Secrecy is the best weapon for these people.  They do not want you to see how they manipulate the market.  Should anyone bring it to the public’s attention, these people will lie, intimidate, slander, and libel the person speaking out until that person is silenced.  I will address certain issues in an effort to make the public aware of the restriction of fair trade, development of monopolies and the attempted restriction of free speech. 

In one of our first documents, I asked the Judge to restrain the defendants from libeling or slandering my attorney and me.  The Judge rejected that request and stating that he was not going to restrict free speech.   I feel this is a clear indication that the Judge supports free speech.  Clearly this man feels that his clients can practice intimidation tactics without repercussions, but I make factual statements which I can back up and I am somehow the jerk.  Apparently his clients can do no wrong.

Apparently this individual had been around for a while.  He is not aware that the internet is a tool which is frequently used to shine a light into the dark corners in which greed and corruption have had a safe haven before the advent of Mr. Gore’s incredible invention.  The internet is a great tool in getting one’s position out there quickly to a very large audience.  It seems that this guy and others don’t like the idea I am posting on this web site.  I can understand this point of view. I will be rectifying the issue soon. Stay tuned for more information.

While it is true that a place for the presentation of facts is in a courtroom, people are not aware that anything will be presented in a courtroom unless there is a dissemination of information about the action.  If the examiners and therapists had their way, the community in which they all claim they want to protect would be kept in the dark about any appearance of impropriety, possible unethical or even illegal actions which just may be committed everyday by the very people who are entrusted and counted on to rehabilitate those who have been found guilty of crimes. 

One of the reasons they want to silence me is because they have been getting away with hypocrisy, bullying, intimidation tactics, and manipulation for years.  They have been getting away with it because who is going to complain.  No one will believe a sex offender. No one will care about the hypocrisy and which has infiltrated the containment approach to sex offender management.  Now, on that note, let me make one thing clear.  I am very pro polygraph regarding sex offender management.  I am pro sex offender management.  I am pro using any tool at our disposal we have to help insure what everyone says is their goal “no more victims”.   I am not in favor of cutting convicted sex offenders a break.  I am not in favor of empowering them to commit more crimes.  Having said that, I am not in favor of throwing away or otherwise discounting people who are capable, educated, trained, and certified to help in achieving the goal of no more victims in favor of squeezing out any real competition because they are afraid of competing in what was clearly a free market.  I am not in favor of monopolies or restricting someone from plying their trade through the use of good ole boy networks, cliques, libel, slander, intimidation, or out right lies.  I am not in favor of excessive billable hours.  I think they don’t want to resolve the issue because they have to try to talk with my attorney in good faith other than threatening us with countersuits and reprisals.  They make far more money through harboring hostility, anger and resentment.

If I had done what Michael Chimarys did at the TAPE conference, my attorney would have chewed me out major and then tell the other side that the issue was addressed. Apparently, my coming out in a public forum with the documented truth is somehow “reprehensible”, but when their clients try to corner, confront and intimidate me in an inappropriate forum, it is OK.  Clearly the rules of what this individual thinks is “proper” applies only to me and not to his clients. 

This individual would love nothing more than to have my attorney shut me up.  Here is what is funny about this. If he feels that my “veritable litany of rants” were so damaging to me, why try to stop me?   That doesn’t seem strategically smart.  I let lieguytoo continue to send private messages because I know the information buried in emails and messages for security reasons would lead me to the source of the private messages. If my enemy was hurting himself, then I would let him continue to do so.  His indignation only tells me that I am on the right track.  I am getting too close to what his clients are trying so hard to hide through their attempts at silencing me through intimidation and scare tactics.

This individual has also said that my postings have “been libelous to his clients”.  I was always told that the best defense for libel was the truth, which is something his clients don’t have.  It will be interesting at deposition to see what his clients say about lieguytoo.  If he lies about it I’ll be interesting to see how he is going to wiggle out of it when we expose him, and we will.  I would love to see this individual try to prove that I intentional libeled any of his clients.  That would most definitely get the attention of the mainstream press. 

He has also stated “this entire lawsuit was brought in bad faith and for the purpose of harassment”.   Now this will be interesting to prove.  First, the suit wasn’t even my idea.  It was a suggestion made by David Kilpatrick who is one of the two people in authority with Tarrant County CSCD.  I took his suggestion and ran with it, and had his blessings to do so.  So, I suggest that once again you rest the finger of blame here squarely on the shoulders of the appropriate person who is to blame.  Or maybe I should post the email where he told me to go ahead and file?  He has the burden of proving that I filed this action in bad faith before any of the other attorneys can collect legal fees from me.  This falls into my theory from earlier that they have no intention on even trying to resolve this in good faith.  The longer they keep this going the more money they think they will make.  Here is an interesting question.  What if I win?  Then they pay you and me.  Even if I should lose, they would have to prove I filed for harassment purposes and in bad faith, which they will not be able to prove.  I went through the proper channels to fix the issue.  A person in authority at Tarrant County CSCD, David Kilpatrick, told me that this was an issue that may need to be settled by the Courts.  Lastly, both my attorney and I have been available to talk about resolving this. 

There were other issues in which he tried to assault my character and that of my attorney.  He knows that if this case continues his clients will be forced to answer some hard questions.  He knows the light will be shed into the dark corners of secrecy and lies in which his clients have enjoyed safe harbor for years.  He knows that I just might expose how I am not the only polygraph examiner hurt by this restriction of trade.

If other examiners found out what I now know, they would probably feel like there is one group of examiners taking food off their plates.  That there is one group of examiners who is taking presents out from under their kids or grandkids Christmas trees.  I am sure the other examiners have no clue about the massive difference in the numbers which separate one group of examiners from the rest in Tarrant County, Texas.  Tarrant County CSCD knew this was happening and condoned it through their silence.  And of course they would be silent because CSCD is giving the majority of the clients to a group of therapists which consist of former Tarrant County CSCD officers.  Isn’t that convenient?   I guess exclusivity begets exclusivity, which breeds monopoly.

The numbers involved with this one group of polygraph examiners will shock you.  This one group of examiners has received 80 to 90 percent of the polygraphs intentionally over the past ten months.   The rest of the polygraph examiners are left with the remaining 20% with no chance to compete, period.  For those who don’t understand the significance of 80 percent, I will illustrate.

Let’s say for the sake of argument that we are talking about 1,000 polygraph examinations.  Each polygraph examination is worth $200.00 per exam.  There are two groups of polygraph examiners.  The first group we will call group X.  There are fifteen examiners in this group.  The second group of examiners we will call group Y.  There are five examiners in this group.

Let’s say for the sake of this argument that group X has received 80 percent of the polygraph examinations intentionally and against the written rules and policy of the Tarrant County CSCD.  Group X performs 800 polygraph examinations.  This adds up to $160,000.00 for this one group of examiners. If you were to divide that up by 15, that would be $10,666.66 per examiner.  The number says it all… when compared to group Y.

Group Y will run 200 polygraph examinations at $200.00 per examination. This adds up to $40,000.00 for group Y.   If you were to divide that up by five, that would be $8,000.00 per examiner. 

Note that I am not the only person in group Y.  There are examiners in group Y that have just as much experience and, in at least one case, more experience that anyone in group X.  They have been established in the area and they are quality examiners.  Some of them have held offices or currently hold office in trusted polygraph associations.  This is no longer an issue of experience or unreasonable expectations of a new person “hanging out their shingle”.   This is now an issue of one group of polygraph examiners taking money out of the pockets of another group of polygraph examiners.

What is sad about this, up until now, is that everyone in group Y was unaware of how skewed the system has been.   No matter how much they advertise or put themselves out there, it wouldn’t matter.   Offenders go to the group of examiners that CSCD wants.  A therapist has been quoted saying, “You’ll go to who I want you to go to because that is the way probation wants it”.  So, if you do not belong to this one group, it doesn’t matter how experienced you are, how long you have been around, or how good of an examiner you are.

My fifth grade teacher told me something that I feel is very prophetic.  “The best thing about numbers is… numbers never lie”.

When looking at the numbers which were provided to me recently, all I can say is that she was right.  Numbers do not lie.  Here is another number seventy five percent.  I will let you guys figure out what that means.

I am not here to bring polygraph down.  I am here to bring it to a place where we should be by virtue of what we do for living, the straight and narrow.  Sadly it is in the lair of our enemy that will allow me to defend my actions and explain why I feel I needed to do this.

I have sent in my request for access to the examiner discussion to polygraph place more than a week ago.  Clearly, they have no wish to defend any of the negative things someone has to say about me, but I openly defend what I say and back it up with documentation.

I do not hide behind walls because I intentionally work in a fish bowl.  I have intentionally set up my business around the belief that when you operate in a fishbowl, you will almost always make damn well sure that you are right and defend it.  But if you turn up being wrong, be a man and step up to the plate. Admit it, apologize, acknowledge and move on.

Have to go all.  It is getting late and I have a long day of researching past cases my defendants have been involved in.  After all, I have nothing but time to do it.  By the way did anyone know that Holden tried to sue someone because he hung out his shingle?  It takes three to make a pattern.  Either that or Mr. Holden is a perfect example of a bastardized famous Shakespearean quote “methinks Holden doth protest too much” 
Grin
  

Joe
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 10
Send TopicPrint