Hot Topic (More than 15 Replies) DNA v. Polygraph (Read 7346 times)
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box sackett
Especially Senior User
*****
Offline



Posts: 347
Joined: Jan 31st, 2008
Re: DNA v. Polygraph
Reply #15 - Apr 4th, 2008 at 4:57pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
nopolycop wrote on Apr 4th, 2008 at 3:53pm:
sackett wrote on Apr 4th, 2008 at 4:09am:
"†Or maybe, just maybe, Gallego used the techniques outlined in TLBTLD to "beat" the examiner?! †It suprises me that no-one has made that particular claim. †You see, that is exactly what this board is all about, now isn't it? †Helping criminals, sex offenders and applicants "beat" the process...
Sackett



I'll go ahead and address your hyperbole too.

I don't see this board as existing to help anyone "beat" the process. †the board exists, as I understand it, to †serve as a catalyst to get the polygraph process removed from the screening process for LE and National Security employment. †Please correct me if I am wrong, GM...



Now whose rationalizing???
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box nopolycop
Especially Senior User
*****
Offline



Posts: 383
Joined: Oct 20th, 2007
Re: DNA v. Polygraph
Reply #16 - Apr 4th, 2008 at 5:40pm
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
sackett wrote on Apr 4th, 2008 at 4:57pm:
nopolycop wrote on Apr 4th, 2008 at 3:53pm:
sackett wrote on Apr 4th, 2008 at 4:09am:
"†Or maybe, just maybe, Gallego used the techniques outlined in TLBTLD to "beat" the examiner?! †It suprises me that no-one has made that particular claim. †You see, that is exactly what this board is all about, now isn't it? †Helping criminals, sex offenders and applicants "beat" the process...
Sackett



I'll go ahead and address your hyperbole too.

I don't see this board as existing to help anyone "beat" the process. †the board exists, as I understand it, to †serve as a catalyst to get the polygraph process removed from the screening process for LE and National Security employment. †Please correct me if I am wrong, GM...



Now whose rationalizing???


Here is the official statement from the following link, which a good investigator should have read a long time ago:

"AntiPolygraph.org seeks the complete abolishment of polygraph "testing" from the American workplace. Now that the National Academy of Sciences has conducted an exhaustive study and found polygraph screening to be invalid, and even dangerous to national security, Congress should extend the protections of the 1988 Employee Polygraph Protection Act to all Americans."

http://antipolygraph.org/ceppa.shtml


  

"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 Sergeant1107
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 730
Location: Connecticut, USA
Joined: May 21st, 2005
Gender: Male
Re: DNA v. Polygraph
Reply #17 - Apr 5th, 2008 at 1:31am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
sackett wrote on Apr 4th, 2008 at 4:55pm:
What makes you think those tests administered that day were not done properly? †Simple and repetitive whining on this board does not make what you support true in every circumstance. †

Mistakes are made. †Even in DNA, drug, polygraph testing, etc. †Nothing is absolute when humans are involved. †But to suggest that everything is all "a-whack" because you think so, or because of one recent example, doesn't hold water.

Sackett


I don't know if the other 4,000 tests done that day were done improperly and I have not claimed that they were.  You are the one making the claim that they were all done properly, so I am curious as to the basis for that claim.

Clearly, you have no reasonable or logical basis for your assertion.  If you did you likely would not have responded with the phrase "simple and repetetive whining."
  

Lorsque vous utilisez un argumentum ad hominem, tout le monde sait que vous Ítes intellectuellement faillite.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
DNA v. Polygraph

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 ics 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