A report of yesterday's proceedings in U.S. v. Doug Williams is available here:

https://antipolygraph.org/blog/2015/05/14/u-s-v-doug-williams-day-2-doug-william...

This is wonderful news.  Now all we need is a nice long prison term for this cockroach to send a message to all the countermeasure wannabees that justice will be served.  Maybe George and Drew will send Doug an occasional care package of cigarettes, candy bars, and socks, the currency of choice in prison.  And to those of you fools who threw good money away buying his junk or taking his personal training, we will ferret you out and deal with you appropriately.

Don't drop the soap in the shower, Dougy!

Are you going to contribute to Doug's prison commissary account?  As a GS-11 I can't afford to!

Doug Williams is no G. Gordon Liddy, as Dan Qualye was no Jack Kennedy, and remember what happened to him!  Book deal my ass!  In a month, he'll be forgotten.  The only income he might see is from whatever pennies he gets from his Amazon.com sales, and the G will take that, too.

Quote:


I truly hope this assclown is not an examiner.  making light of and even insinuating that one would take pleasure in seeing someone kill themselves, especially someone they don't even know or has done nothing to them, is one sick and sad human being.

Dropping the soap, bubba in a cell, orange being the new black; these are all fair game as they are snipes that are to be expected.

But making light of someone talking their own life, while this doesn't shook me if it came from an examiner, it is none the less a sign of a sad, insecure, sick, sick mind.  I hope this person doesn't own a gun, because he clearly has no value for human life. 

quickfix wrote on May 14^th, 2015 at 6:52pm:

Sorry, I neglected to Mark & Quote Quickfix's anti-Constitution statement in my previous email.  Imagine....buying certain books should be a crime according to this guy. 

Quote:



Ok, back the truck up a wee bit.

Again, A quick reminder that I am unbid in all of this; after all, being independent, fair and unbiased are the hallmarks of a TRUE polygraph examiner.  I see both sides of your argument.

George and Drew have never been "crude" that I have ever seen, and although we differ on many aspects of the polygraph debate, they have always been dignified to me, which is far better than I deserve.  Because I will admit, I am crude, rude and socially unacceptable.  Having said that, I am honest about it and don't hide behind screen names.  

So sometimes crude is a good thing.  Sometimes the straight forward approach is better than sugar coating.  

I will agree, his book and his videos are protected by the first amendment.  I am a Libertarian and a huge believer in the Constitution.  But this wasn't a first amendment case.  It had nothing to do with the book or his videos.  If his book or videos were the problem, this would have happened years ago.  

The problem was his behavior around actually teaching and coaching the test in such a way as to hide people that told him, according to the evidence presented, that  they were trying to hide.  His crime wasn't teaching the classes or the book or his video.  It was, according to the charges, teaching the classes in an effort to obstruct whatever it is they said he was trying to obstruct.  I think I have that right.  Anyway, I don't know, I wasn't there, I didn't see the evidence and I was not a trier of fact.  With all due respect, neither were you.

Polygraph is here, and people practice polygraph.  As such there are people who are going to be against it.  As a polygraph examiner, I embrace this only because it creates balance.  There needs to be check and balances in all aspects of life that creates balance.  This is a universal fact.

Anti polygraph advocates are really friends to polygraph in a weird way.  1, it keeps us, or should keep us honest.  If we know, or this is the way it should be, that people are watching, then it should encourage us to avoid appearances of impropriety.  2, it keeps us on our toes and always striving with ways to keep up the opposition.  In a way, this is a general business model.  Competition is not a bad thing. It keeps people innovative and creative.  It encourages everyone to always do better, or sell better, or have better integrity than the guy down the street.   

If polygraph weren't here, you guys would just have something else to flip over.  This is the human condition.

I will agree that 9 times out of 10 he is an examiner, but then you are under a guest name too and I don't know who you are, so maybe you are one too just playing a game? We don't know.  

If he is an examiner, I wish I could look into his eyes and tell him what a bottom feeder he is that would make light of someone killing himself.  I also believe that is he is an examiner, he is a coward because he won't stand by what he said and own it.

Everything I say, I own, I don't hide.  SO not all examiners are without honor my friend.  And what you consider witchcraft, I consider a calling; and I put my future on the table a few times believing in that calling.

That is what makes me better than them.  I stand by what I see and I am the ONLY polygraph examiner in the world who can truly say that.

The government's successful prosecutions of Williams and Dixon, in my view as a polygraph examiner (and member of the APA), serve to both validate the effectiveness of countermeasures and condemn the notion of polygraph as sound science. 

Therefore, it seems to me that those flattering accuracy claims (i.e., validity) touted by pro-polygraph organizations should be regarded as null and void.

The polygraph apologists have long resisted any form of a countermeasure challenge. Now we have proof why that has been the case, and remains so.