I still maintain that Charlie and his band of pseudo-scientists are playing Gary and his lawyers like weakling fools.  Let me expand.  When Charlie got his "victory" over no-show Dektor, he immediately demanded that no more derogatory information be spread about NITV or Charlie himself.  Dang, he even threatened the IT consultant of Dektor and Anti-Polygraph.   
Also, when Crowe's parents threated to take NITV to court, Charlie settled in a heart beat.  He knew the Crowe family wasn't playing.
I can only imagine the nick names that the Doc Humble liar crew are calling Gary.  One that comes to mind is "Not so scary Gary the fairy."
Granted, I don't have the whole story of this long running litigation, but maybe there is a code of dishonor among faux Ph.Ds.

Anthony,

The mediation session held on 20 July ended in impasse.

Also, when I step back from all the Charlie and Gary drama, I cannot stop thinking how this ongoing legal action would make one heck of a news story.
We got to principals, without principles, preaching the fake gospel of truth and therefore integrity.  But wait, both these actors have fake Ph.D's to dishonestly boast their reputations.  Both Gary and Charlie have even posted on Anti-Polygraph by referring to themselves as doctorate level individuals.  Gary evidently emailed this site personally, whereas Charlie had his lawyer sent a letter to AP and said letter referred to Charlie as Dr. Humble two times.
When Charlie "won" his case against no show pro se Dektor, he immediately gave a short deadline of, if I remember right,  four days for the opposing IT consultant to cough up the software.  Even AP was given a short deadline to "comply."  Although it has been over two years since that infamous cease and desist letter, I am still scratching my head wondering why a presumed competent attorney would send such a dumb ass letter.  Maybe a quick and dirty immediate payoff of a few hundred dollars?   
The Brian Ross Charles Humble interview on YouTube would be a good starting point for a reporter, throw in the Charlie/Gary legal drama, maybe interview some of the bureaucrats that contracted with either Charlie and Gary on why they did not do due diligence on VSA's or at least do some cursory research on Google to see how VSAs and polygraphs are pseudoscience nonsense before wasting thousands of taxpayer dollars and then maybe interview some of us that have been wronged by this pseudoscience.

Thanks for the update.  I read as much of the article by Marc Freeman as I could before getting popped out since it is a pay for view piece.  I could only briefly read parts of the article so please forgive me if I am missing some points.
That said, Mr. Freeman would be well served to study AP for an incredible amount of information on the on-going rumble between Baker and Humble.  Also, the Brian Ross ABC interview of "Dr," Humble, especially the longer version should be viewed by Mr. Freeman.
Here are a few points that need to be further examined:
*  If NITV/Humble cannot pay the judgement against them, they probably need to declare bankruptcy.  Gary's lawyers really need to start leaning on Charlie & Co.  Charlie bragged to Brian Ross that NITV "has had a remarkable level of success."  Really Charlie, don't blame your foe faux doc for your failure to pay a settlement.
*  Charlie and Gary need to show their research on VSAs "work" and furnish some empirical data, not a phony baloney Ukraine published article.  Charlie's attempt to explain his "science" to Brian Ross appeared to have backfired.
*  Just because polygraphs are bogus does not mean VSAs are legit.  The research I have found shows they are both 50/50.  The CVSA given to me was, however, 100% inaccurate.
*   Finally, like the purpose of AP, all forms of polygraphs, VSAs and even e-meters need to be gone now.  A bogus CVSA dented my career, but we have former Afghanistan allies that may be murdered by the Taliban because of various charlatans more interested in making money than the welfare of their fellow humans.
I hope Marc Freeman does a series of articles about the fallacy of so-called lie detection.   

Thank you and your kind reader for the PDF.  Well, it looks like the war between the foe faux docs will be on-going.  Good.   
Charlie is really a piece of work claiming that Gary is too aggressive and greedy, especially after Charlie threatened to destroy the livelihood of Matt Vanderhoff, an IT consultant that wrote some software for Dektor, as well as threatened "sanctions" against AP.  Karma does exist at least in Charlie's case.  Really, Charlie could lose everything, and I would not be surprised to even see his 4th wife (whom appears young enough to be his grand daughter) jump ship.  I have zero mercy for someone that Charlie that has destroyed probably thousands or lives and has dented, or prevented so many criminal justice careers.
I'm thinking that Charlie may realize the gig is up, and he is going down, and wants to take Gary down to Hell with him by continuing to run up litigation expenses.
This comment should probably be in another heading, but one thing I find interesting is that in the VSA side of so-called lie detection, it is the manufacturers that attack each other (CVSA, DVSA, Dektor).  But on the polygraph side, it is the operators that attack each other, for example, the Dr. Phil polygraphists.

Again, thanks for the excellent job you do keeping this information about this on-going litigation supplied on a timely basis.  Most everyone I have read on this thread figured out that Charlie & Co. would be engaging in hiding assets and if opposing counsel keeps digging, I betcha they will find two sets of books aside from the multiple LLCs.  Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if criminal charges eventually arise and maybe even a RICO action.
Charlie really screwed himself by flaunting a "highly successful renaissance man lifestyle" while having at least one helicopter, collector guitars, expensive photography equipment, etc.  But now he is claiming to be broke.
I've seen so many Charlie like characters in my life generally, and specifically in my criminal justice career.  Basically, Charlie is a one trick pony.  He can bullshit, and I will give credit where credit is due,  exceptionally well.  However, he apparently cannot reason abstractly, a faith that eventually befalls most bullshit artists.  Which means the gig will end eventually.
The number one danger to criminals for instance, is other criminals.  AP has done an exceptionally job exposing the lie industry charlatans, but the lie industry derail each other better than us people whom seek honesty in the CJ system could ever do.  I believe that the fake Ukraine study NITV promotes was debunked by APA, and Gary appears to be putting a major ass whuppin' on Charlie & Co.   Even if Charlie wins, he will still be out of a heap of money from having to pay his attorneys.  Mr. Fleck appears to be good at hiding, but he will reappear when his payday arrives.
Back when I was a newly minted PO, I got very upset on a case I prepared went south at trial.  A more experienced PO told me that not to worry, that the "street" will take care of that criminal.  Interesting that we see another charlatan taking out Charlie.

I'm getting a little off topic, but I find the psychological makeup of Charlie pretty interesting and how this psychological makeup is leading to Charlie's apparent downfall.
First off, let's examine his need to humiliate the Dektor, a minor player in the bogus VSA game that was so small time that the proprietor had to go pro se.  As I mentioned before, Charlie "won" the lawsuit but this "victory" resulted in what appears to be a permanent, and seemingly accurate mirrored website that points out such factors as his fake doctorate, fake "scientific" study and all sorts of embarrassing tidbits.  Also, threatening the web consultant was way overboard. This legal victory probably resulted in Charlie spending way more in legal fees than any business he may have lost to Dektor.
Now, let us look at the ongoing litigation between Gary and Charlie.  From what information I could find online, Gary was also a small time player in the VSA charade.  The sources I found said Gary made between $25,000 to maybe $40,000 a year, and some years Gary didn't even bother to file a tax return.  Strictly small potatoes.   
The point I am trying to make is if Charlie would have swallowed his immense ego, and settled with Gary several years ago, he could have saved himself from his probable business ruin.  I bet Charlie could have settled with Gary for around the $25,000 mark, which is a chunk of change for someone used to making that kind of money per annum. 
But, Charlie can never admit to being wrong and I believe he clearly thinks he has the kind of IQ that a doctorate holder possesses.  Now, Charlie's CVSA clearly failed in the Michael Crowe case to be point he had to settle with the Crowe family.  Even though his LLC said in court that the CVSA cannot determine truth, Charlie still doubled down on his BS.  Also, although the CVSA was wrong on the case of the probation officer that was falsely accused in court, Charlie still said his machine was right and the PO was lying.
I think, like most BS artists, that Charlie thought he could BS, anyone, which backfired during that infamous Brian Ross interview.  Charlie tried to wow Mr. Ross by flying into work in a helicopter and having a Ph.D. prominently displayed on his office wall.  Don't need to rehash hear, but Charlie came across as a two bit conman. 
Charlie's lack of intellectual horsepower to go further than the Associate's degree level is clearly embarrassing to him, to the point he had to get a strip mall doctorate.   
Charlie's façade is crumbling and he is in full blown panic mode.  Charlie does not like anyone chipping away at his façade as also evidenced by the threat letter to AP in 2019.
Now, what gives me the right to make a psychological assessment on Charlie?  I would answer that my years of interviewing probationers and parolees and submitting written reports to the courts and court room testimony under oath.
What give's Charlie the right to claim to hold a Ph.D.?  Not a damn thing.