AntiPolygraph.org Message Board - I've always wanted to be in law enforcement...

(UTC)

Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register

You can enhance your privacy when browsing and posting to this forum by using the free and open source Tor Browser and posting as a guest (using a fake e-mail address such as nobody@nowhere.com) or registering with a free, anonymous ProtonMail e-mail account. Registered users can exchange private messages with other registered users and receive notifications.

In addition, check out our live chat server.

AntiPolygraph.org Message Board › Polygraph and CVSA Forums › Polygraph Policy › I've always wanted to be in law enforcement...

(Moderator: Administrator)

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4

Add Poll

Send Topic

I've always wanted to be in law enforcement... (Read 45432 times)

notguilty1 Especially Senior User Offline Posts: 300 Joined: Feb 2^nd, 2008	Re: I've always wanted to be in law enforcement... Reply #15 - Apr 25^th, 2008 at 3:48pm	Mark & Quote Quote Print Post
	sackett wrote on Apr 22^nd, 2008 at 5:12pm: T.M. Cullen wrote on Apr 22^nd, 2008 at 2:12am: Quote: But when they ask me that question, isnt that little tidbit being on my mind going to mess up the polygraph? Dude. That violates one of the guidelines for passing a polygraph. DO NOT MAKE ADMISSIONS CONCERNING A RELEVANT QUESTION, no matter how minor it may be. From what you've admitted to here, doesn't sound like you were involved in child porn........but If "engaging in child porn" is one of the relevant questions, and you "react" to that question on their magic box, then admit what you've admitted here, they may very well blow it out of all proportion and use it to fail you. You'd probably be better off, assuming you react and you probably won't, Then telling them you know somebody who was molested as a child. So the topic of child porn, molestation...etc. is sensitive for you. You have the same problem most of us "false positives" HAD. We actually believed the test was accurate. That, and making minor admissions is what got us failed. Read the "Lie Behind the Lie Detector". TC speed204, firstly, this is a bit premature since most PD's require you to be 21 years old to apply. But for others reading this board I submit the following: Mr Cullen's advice is just enough to keep you from ever being a police officer, EVER! Any rationalization that looking at child porn (regardless of your age) is not involved in child porn is just that, rationalizing and minimizing and cause for failing the polygraph test. There seems to be an aggressive effort on this board to recruit more members of the false positive club by providing bad information, get you to be stupid in your pre-employment test, then fail, not get the job and join the disgruntled throngs of folks here (estimated at about five or six) who whine and bitch about not passing their test. For my real answer; yes, it will be on your mind. Solution: tell them what you saw, when and estimate how many times and as stated (truthfully), they will qualify the question. This way, you should have no problems in your test. Sackett P.S. Oh yeah! Reading TLBTLD will not cause any problems on your test. Using and trying to employ what you read will! For those intelligent people that come here for information and read posts like this one. Please know that NO, your not crazy and YES, you where a victim of a false positive! YOU TOLD THE TRUTH AND FAILED Examiners like Sackett need to minimize the impact of your claims of failure in spite of your truthfulness. If he does he perpetuates the myth that Polygraphs are 95-98% accurate. This LIE, even though unfortunatly considered accecpted by most of the public is in no way proven by any scientific testing. Sackett must make the public believe that your false postive was another case of a "whinning, disgruntled lier" and that there are so few of us. Which leads us to the obvious..... Why would Sackett and his ilk be on here DAILY posting if false postives where so few, Polygraphs were accualy accurate and we "anti's" were here in so few numbers! I do believe that even..... Sackett would have better things to do with his time.


	IP Logged

pailryder Especially Senior User Offline Posts: 441 Joined: Jun 5^th, 2006	Re: I've always wanted to be in law enforcement... Reply #16 - Apr 25^th, 2008 at 8:16pm	Mark & Quote Quote Print Post
	ng1 We visit and post here because we hold our friends close and our enemies closer, but our time may have come now that Lethe has outed the polygraph industrtial complex for all the world to see.

	No good social purpose can be served by inventing ways of beating the lie detector or deceiving polygraphers. David Thoreson Lykken
	IP Logged

pailryder Especially Senior User Offline Posts: 441 Joined: Jun 5^th, 2006	Re: I've always wanted to be in law enforcement... Reply #17 - Apr 25^th, 2008 at 9:12pm	Mark & Quote Quote Print Post
	Sergeant That may be the wisest post I have read on this board.

	No good social purpose can be served by inventing ways of beating the lie detector or deceiving polygraphers. David Thoreson Lykken
	IP Logged

T.M. Cullen God Member Offline Posts: 858 Location: Hawaii Joined: Dec 5^th, 2007 Gender:	Re: I've always wanted to be in law enforcement... Reply #18 - Apr 26^th, 2008 at 6:13am	Mark & Quote Quote Print Post
	Quote: We visit and post here because we hold our friends close and our enemies closer,... The truth is your enemy. 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
	IP Logged

sackett Especially Senior User Offline Posts: 347 Joined: Jan 31^st, 2008	Re: I've always wanted to be in law enforcement... Reply #19 - Apr 28^th, 2008 at 7:36pm	Mark & Quote Quote Print Post
	"notguilty1", you wrote: "Why would Sackett and his ilk be on here DAILY posting if false postives where so few, Polygraphs were accualy accurate and we "anti's" were here in so few numbers!" Com'mon! There's five of you here! Probably 2 are the same person... I'm here to add balance to your diatribe. Yes, intelligent people do come here to get information, not out of intellectual concern or prowess, but ignorance. Some anti-posts here are actually well presented and articulate; albeit ignorant and misleading. Even smart people can be mislead. Also, "I do believe that even..... Sackett would have better things to do with his time." Nope, I'd have more time to spend on Polygraphplace.com and in testing... Sackett


	IP Logged

T.M. Cullen God Member Offline Posts: 858 Location: Hawaii Joined: Dec 5^th, 2007 Gender:	Re: I've always wanted to be in law enforcement... Reply #20 - Apr 29^th, 2008 at 2:08am	Mark & Quote Quote Print Post
	Quote: Com'mon! There's five of you here! Probably 2 are the same person... I'm here to add balance to your diatribe Lot's of people post here. There are "newbees" recently tested, like Ohio99, Speed204..etc who come here on a steady basis, looking for answers as to why they failed the polygraph while telling the truth. We answer their questions, then they leave. Then there are the 5 or so, "regulars" who post on a long term basis. It is probably no different at "Polygraphplace", minus the "snowjob" answers, of course. Then there are the "lurkers". Note this thread has had 328 views, but only 20 posts. TC
	« Last Edit: Apr 29^th, 2008 at 2:24am 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
	IP Logged

notguilty1 Especially Senior User Offline Posts: 300 Joined: Feb 2^nd, 2008	Re: I've always wanted to be in law enforcement... Reply #21 - Apr 29^th, 2008 at 3:25pm	Mark & Quote Quote Print Post
	T.M. Cullen wrote on Apr 29^th, 2008 at 2:08am: Quote: Com'mon! There's five of you here! Probably 2 are the same person... I'm here to add balance to your diatribe Lot's of people post here. There are "newbees" recently tested, like Ohio99, Speed204..etc who come here on a steady basis, looking for answers as to why they failed the polygraph while telling the truth. We answer their questions, then they leave. Then there are the 5 or so, "regulars" who post on a long term basis. It is probably no different at "Polygraphplace", minus the "snowjob" answers, of course. Then there are the "lurkers". Note this thread has had 328 views, but only 20 posts. TC Hey TC we can talk to Sackett till we are blue in the face. He has NO answers to the questions that show that polygraphs do not work! His days in this are numbered thanks to the internet and George. There are other sources on the net that expose this lie. His mantra should be "DON'T BOTHER ME WITH FACTS JUST STOP THIS SO I CAN GO ON AND MAKE MY LIVING CAUSE.......... I CAN'T DO ANYTHING ELSE". I have heard people swear by tarot cards, tea leaves, astrology, talking to the dead ect. The lack of information is what Sackett and the Polygraph industry rely on that has been evidenced by the posts regarding the use of hand-helds against terrorisim. The compliant was not "what are you talking about this is proven technology? " instead it was " We know that this does not work but if you point that out it aids the enemy" Like the people we would use this on are stupid and can't find this out on their own. Sackett would still have me believe dispite my telling the truth in my Polygraph and failing, some how I must be lying and not know it cause the "machine" said so and of course his "analisis" . The people that have false negs and come on here for explaination then stop coming STILL have the info NOW and will go and tell others. Of course this doesn't sit well with Sackett or he wouldn't be here on a daily basis.


	IP Logged

sackett Especially Senior User Offline Posts: 347 Joined: Jan 31^st, 2008	Re: I've always wanted to be in law enforcement... Reply #22 - Apr 29^th, 2008 at 5:54pm	Mark & Quote Quote Print Post
	notguilty1 wrote on Apr 29^th, 2008 at 3:25pm: T.M. Cullen wrote on Apr 29^th, 2008 at 2:08am: Quote: Com'mon! There's five of you here! Probably 2 are the same person... I'm here to add balance to your diatribe Lot's of people post here. There are "newbees" recently tested, like Ohio99, Speed204..etc who come here on a steady basis, looking for answers as to why they failed the polygraph while telling the truth. We answer their questions, then they leave. Then there are the 5 or so, "regulars" who post on a long term basis. It is probably no different at "Polygraphplace", minus the "snowjob" answers, of course. Then there are the "lurkers". Note this thread has had 328 views, but only 20 posts. TC Hey TC we can talk to Sackett till we are blue in the face. He has NO answers to the questions that show that polygraphs do not work! His days in this are numbered thanks to the internet and George. There are other sources on the net that expose this lie. His mantra should be "DON'T BOTHER ME WITH FACTS JUST STOP THIS SO I CAN GO ON AND MAKE MY LIVING CAUSE.......... I CAN'T DO ANYTHING ELSE". I have heard people swear by tarot cards, tea leaves, astrology, talking to the dead ect. The lack of information is what Sackett and the Polygraph industry rely on that has been evidenced by the posts regarding the use of hand-helds against terrorisim. The compliant was not "what are you talking about this is proven technology? " instead it was " We know that this does not work but if you point that out it aids the enemy" Like the people we would use this on are stupid and can't find this out on their own. Sackett would still have me believe dispite my telling the truth in my Polygraph and failing, some how I must be lying and not know it cause the "machine" said so and of course his "analisis" . The people that have false negs and come on here for explaination then stop coming STILL have the info NOW and will go and tell others. Of course this doesn't sit well with Sackett or he wouldn't be here on a daily basis. Interestingly, you have no answers to the questions that polygraph does work; only your diatribe of misguided disinformation all provided by the "prophet" george. Keep your religion of anti-polygraph and I'll keep my belief in mine. You'r right, though. I will not change my opinion about my profession. Why? Because I do it everyday (not just talk about it) and know that it works just fine. It is not perfect, but nothing is. A failed test years ago hardly makes you qualified to make informed opinions about anything. You can read a book about flying a plane, but I wouldn't trust you to fly me anywhere if that's all you had. George has NEVER utilized his prophecy or methods to pass a test, nor proven conclusively that any of them work by the readers of this forum. What little research exists he promotes to establish that a test "can be" manipulated. But that does not mean the methods work in real life. I can prevent a doctor from determining I have a blood disease, all I have to do is keep moving my arm when they try to take the blood. Does that mean the doctor doesn't know what he's doing or the flobotomist is untrained or unprofessional? You can talk a good game, but you can't do it. Keep talking... Polygraph is viable and provides utility in a place in our society which has yet to be replaced. Until then, and much to your anxiety and frustration, there is nothing you can do about it. Keep your dream alive that polygraph will go away. Not yet anyway and certainly not anytime soon. It's been around a long time and has yet to be proven invalid! But, when and if it does go away, it will be because we developed somethiing better; not hardly due to anything occurring or said on this board or at your hands. BTW, what this board does is what I want it to. It makes reluctant, ignorant and lazy examiners better informed and thus, better at our profession. Otherwise, my days might me spent looking into books on polygraph at the local library and finding the chapters on "how to beat it" torn out...no doubt by the likes of you! Sackett


	IP Logged

T.M. Cullen God Member Offline Posts: 858 Location: Hawaii Joined: Dec 5^th, 2007 Gender:	Re: I've always wanted to be in law enforcement... Reply #23 - Apr 29^th, 2008 at 6:00pm	Mark & Quote Quote Print Post
	Quote: Hey TC we can talk to Sackett till we are blue in the face. He has NO answers to the questions that show that polygraphs do not work! His days in this are numbered thanks to the internet and George. There are other sources on the net that expose this lie. I realize this. But when I talk to him, I am really talking to the many lurkers here. The more he talks, the better. Most people who follow his posts will see him for what he is. TC
	« Last Edit: Apr 29^th, 2008 at 6:21pm 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
	IP Logged

nopolycop Especially Senior User Offline Posts: 383 Joined: Oct 20^th, 2007	Re: I've always wanted to be in law enforcement... Reply #24 - Apr 29^th, 2008 at 7:41pm	Mark & Quote Quote Print Post
	T.M. Cullen wrote on Apr 29^th, 2008 at 6:00pm: Quote: Hey TC we can talk to Sackett till we are blue in the face. He has NO answers to the questions that show that polygraphs do not work! His days in this are numbered thanks to the internet and George. There are other sources on the net that expose this lie. I realize this. But when I talk to him, I am really talking to the many lurkers here. Ding, Ding, Ding, we have a winner folks...

	"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.)
	IP Logged

sackett Especially Senior User Offline Posts: 347 Joined: Jan 31^st, 2008	Re: I've always wanted to be in law enforcement... Reply #25 - Apr 29^th, 2008 at 10:02pm	Mark & Quote Quote Print Post
	If by being losers, you really are winners.... then you are correct! Sackett


	IP Logged

sackett Especially Senior User Offline Posts: 347 Joined: Jan 31^st, 2008	Re: I've always wanted to be in law enforcement... Reply #26 - Apr 29^th, 2008 at 10:06pm	Mark & Quote Quote Print Post
	T.M. Cullen wrote on Apr 29^th, 2008 at 6:00pm: Quote: Hey TC we can talk to Sackett till we are blue in the face. He has NO answers to the questions that show that polygraphs do not work! His days in this are numbered thanks to the internet and George. There are other sources on the net that expose this lie. I realize this. But when I talk to him, I am really talking to the many lurkers here. The more he talks, the better. Most people who follow his posts will see him for what he is. TC You are so right! They will see a committed, professional polygraph examiner consistently trying desperately to spread the positive aspects and utility of polygraph, all the while being savagely attacked with inuendo based hyperbole and rhetoric. see me for what I am?! Yes, TC, and remember, tracers work both ways... Sackett


	IP Logged

notguilty1 Especially Senior User Offline Posts: 300 Joined: Feb 2^nd, 2008	Re: I've always wanted to be in law enforcement... Reply #27 - Apr 29^th, 2008 at 11:45pm	Mark & Quote Quote Print Post
	T.M. Cullen wrote on Apr 29^th, 2008 at 6:00pm: Quote: Hey TC we can talk to Sackett till we are blue in the face. He has NO answers to the questions that show that polygraphs do not work! His days in this are numbered thanks to the internet and George. There are other sources on the net that expose this lie. I realize this. But when I talk to him, I am really talking to the many lurkers here. The more he talks, the better. Most people who follow his posts will see him for what he is. TC Hey TC, Yes the "lurkers" are the ones, the ones that he needs so desperatly to convince that his "science" works. That somehow their looking for the answer to the big question..... "WHY DID I FAIL SINCE I TOLD THE TRUTH? "is ...... YOU DON'T KNOW IT, BUT YOU ACCUALLY LIED. The machine said so and it doesn't lie!! I have never met anyone that had to defend their profession so vigerously as he and the examiners here do. Certainly not the doctors that he chooses to continually conpare himself and his "science" to I am sure that must make a few doc's skin crawl. Well, I guess self preservation is at the root of his obsession to come here several times a day to recite the examiners creed If he looses this gig he has ............. nothing but a broken machine!


	IP Logged

sackett Especially Senior User Offline Posts: 347 Joined: Jan 31^st, 2008	Re: I've always wanted to be in law enforcement... Reply #28 - Apr 30^th, 2008 at 1:09am	Mark & Quote Quote Print Post
	notguilty1 wrote on Apr 29^th, 2008 at 11:45pm: T.M. Cullen wrote on Apr 29^th, 2008 at 6:00pm: Quote: Hey TC we can talk to Sackett till we are blue in the face. He has NO answers to the questions that show that polygraphs do not work! His days in this are numbered thanks to the internet and George. There are other sources on the net that expose this lie. I realize this. But when I talk to him, I am really talking to the many lurkers here. The more he talks, the better. Most people who follow his posts will see him for what he is. TC Hey TC, Yes the "lurkers" are the ones, the ones that he needs so desperatly to convince that his "science" works. That somehow their looking for the answer to the big question..... "WHY DID I FAIL SINCE I TOLD THE TRUTH? "is ...... YOU DON'T KNOW IT, BUT YOU ACCUALLY LIED. The machine said so and it doesn't lie!! I have never met anyone that had to defend their profession so vigerously as he and the examiners here do. Certainly not the doctors that he chooses to continually conpare himself and his "science" to I am sure that must make a few doc's skin crawl. Well, I guess self preservation is at the root of his obsession to come here several times a day to recite the examiners creed If he looses this gig he has ............. nothing but a broken machine! Yes, yes "notguiltyone", this IS all for the lurkers. This is a "ANTI" polygraph board. I am here to add a polite and respectful opposition to the crap being espoused here. Don't like it? Please feel free to find another forum to "play" in. I am getting rather comfortable here and enjoy the banter/discussions (when of substance). I'm sure it has not passed your wise and informed observation that I do not repond to ignorance or stupidity in which my input would be of little use to those who are "lurking." I don't need to point out your foolishness or ignorance when you make it that easy for me. I only compare myself to the medical profession as a passing gesture because it can resonate with most readers. I certainly am not going to compare myself to something below my station or profession. Besides, doctors generally make more incorrect diagnoses than polygraph examiners, so why not use the analogy? If you think I am here out of any sense of self preservation, you flatter yourself and very undeservingly. You and the rest the rest have very little impact on my profession overall. I'm simply trying to reach some of those who would be otherwise misguided by your diatribes. BTW, I come here several times a day because I have just enough spare time in my busy schedule to address the propaganda being promoted here. Are you suggesting I shouldn't come here as often? Sackett


	IP Logged

yankeedog Senior User Offline Posts: 68 Joined: Jul 25^th, 2002	Re: I've always wanted to be in law enforcement... Reply #29 - Apr 30^th, 2008 at 1:23am	Mark & Quote Quote Print Post
	[You’re absolutely correct NG1! These polygraph people should not compare themselves to doctors. Why, just last week we had a MURDER in which the medical doctor informed us that our victim had TWO gunshot wounds to the head. In fact, annotated such on his medical charts. Only a few problems with the medical “opinion” (There’s that nasty word opinion). The evidence at the scene didn’t suggest MURDER, and then, the autopsy showed only one gunshot wound to the head. Oh my God! It was actually a suicide. Well, that settles it. We now have proof positive that the medical profession is quackery. The sky is falling! The sky is falling! Come on guys. Is that the best you can do. I know, you hate to concede, but as you are well aware the polygraph has been effective (not perfect) for decades. Polygraph use is on the increase. And the polygraph is going to continue to increase. And there will be, on that very rare occasion, a wrong call made and an opinion will be rendered that is “wrong,” just like the good doctor did to us. But, you don’t see us running around and accusing the doctor of being a quack. He made a decision based upon the information that was before him. It happens because it isn’t a perfect world.


	IP Logged

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4

Add Poll

Send Topic

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

I've always wanted to be in law enforcement...

Name:
E-mail:
Your Verification Code is:	Please type the characters that appear in the image. The characters must be typed in the same order, and they are case-sensitive.
Verification Code:
Preview

Message Icon:

Subject:

Message:
You can resize the textbox by dragging the right or bottom border.

Max 200000 characters. Remaining characters:

Text size: pt

More Smilies

View All Smilies

Collapse/Expand additional features

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:

Attachment 2:

Attachment 3:

Attachment 4:

Attachment 5:

Attachment 6:

Attachment 7:

Attachment 8:

Attachment 9:

Attachment 10:

Disable UBBC and Smilies:

Check this if you wish to disable parsing of ubbc tags and smilies.