Dan Mangan wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 6:36pm:


Any polygrapher who has ruined someone's life or career based solely on interpretation of polygraph results or some bogus interrogation summary like the one featured on Penn & Teller's show "Bullshit" must have absolutely no conscience.  The APA needs to move towards emphasizing the polygraph as an investigative tool and stand against "witch-hunts" that ruin innocent people.  This means that people of real integrity must emerge to put principle over profit.  This 21st century McCarthyism must stop.  The Nazi's claimed they were conservatives, the polygraph establishment claims they are people of integrity.

Dan Mangan wrote on Jul 15^th, 2015 at 8:16pm:


1.  Bill of Rights for Polygraph Test Subjects

I do not know what the rules for polygraph examiners are in your State.  In my State, and in several other states that I have looked at, there are Licensing Guidelines or Rules which apply to polygraph examiners.  They must be licensed by the State.  There are specific rules, one of which is actually called a Bill of Rights, paraphrased as follows:

*      Must be voluntarily taken
*      Has the right to know the nature of the examination
*      May terminate the exam at any time
*      Questions must be reviewed with the examinee and cannot be changed during the test
*      The examinee must have a reasonable opportunity to explain reactions to pertinent questions
*      The examinee is entitled to a thorough explanation of what to expect in the exam
*      Minimum number of charts must be rendered
*      No questions regarding the examinee’s sexual orientation, religion, race, political beliefs or affiliations
*      Right to know the results of the examination in a timely manner if requested

Therefore, I believe you mean that the APA should have such a policy.  If there are states which do not include such things in their licensing rules or if they do not have licensing rules, I wholeheartedly agree that the APA should have a Bill of Rights for Polygraph Test Subjects.

2.      Countermeasures – I understand what countermeasures are but as I said before, I am not a polygraph examiner.  Therefore, I would certainly agree that training polygraph examiners to recognize countermeasures would be a necessity.  As far as “real-world” accuracy goes, I have a strong belief that accuracy cannot be determined by comparing one examiner’s testing outcome on a general level to another examiner’s testing outcome unless they are testing the same person.  How can you accurately compare examiners’ outcomes outside of a control group?  The examiner has no control over who he going to test and certainly not over whether they WILL or WILL NOT be telling the truth or whether they WILL or WILL NOT be using countermeasures. And then there is that “variation in examiner competence.”  In my research I have discovered that there are polygraph examiners who falsified their credentials in order to become licensed.  They were not qualified but were allowed to attend polygraph school, go through the licensing process, and are now licensed polygraph examiners.  And, there is no way to get their licenses revoked based on this information.  So, therein lies the “variation in examiner competence.”

3.      Equality for all APA members.  I am very much in favor of a balance between equality and liberty.  But as far as that concerns the APA, I have no opinion.

Finally, what do I find objectionable about your election platform ... Well, it was not so much that I found it objectionable, I just questioned your choice of forums.  However, I have considered your answer that “Nothing else in cyberspace even comes close.”  And I must agree that George Maschke certainly does have a large following.

First, thank you for the compliment.

I have read EPPA and I agree that your guidelines are not without merit.  I feel that items 4-7 may be a little over the head of a large number of people who are required to take polygraphs (and possibly even some polygraph examiners) -- not to disparage polygraph examiners or anyone who finds themselves in the position of being required to take a polygraph.  

And the part you underlined on number 3 -- examiner's own accuracy rates -- I'm not sure how you would determine that or how you could be confident in that information being received from the polygraph examiner.  Although, maybe you could require the polygraph examiner to take a polygraph on his accuracy rates.  HAHAHAHA!!  Still ridiculous!!!

Number 10 is problematic in my view because from what I understand charts could possibly be studied by the individual to help them "perfect" their countermeasure attempts and I believe the providing those items to the examinee might cause additional unforeseen problems -- not necessarily for the polygraph examiner, but for the entire probation/pre-employment system that relies on polygraph.  However, I certainly believe that such items should be provided to competent legal counsel if requested.

You seem to be somewhat disillusioned in polygraph and seem concerned that it is just about the money.  But isn't / shouldn't all business in this country be based on a free enterprise system -- which translates to money?

I realize, of course, that sex offenders and people wanting to be in certain types of employment do not have a choice when it comes to taking polygraphs.  But it is frightening that many of the potential law enforcement applicants who post here seem to be grossly unqualified for such a job.  One just needs to read or watch the news to know that we have a problem with the quality of law enforcement in this county.  I don't believe that polygraph is the be-all and end-all for determining the fitness of a law enforcement applicant, but it is one tool that can be used.  Further, PCSOT testing is also a necessary tool in the treatment of sex offenders.  I very strongly believe that sex offenders should be treated with consideration and respect and I also believe that the vast majority don't have issues with polygraph in general.  If they are being honest with themselves, their POs and therapists, they shouldn't be punished for treatment issues that might come up on a polygraph, but the polygraph also helps to keep them in check so that they don't re-offend.  Obviously, there are some people who will re-offend regardless of considerate and respectful treatment by therapists, polygraph examiners, and probation officers.  I'm sorry, I just don't have much sympathy for those who re-offend.

Dan Mangan wrote on Jul 17^th, 2015 at 12:58am:

Amen !  This is a vital statement because no one can B.S. their way around it.  This statement speaks volumes for why this test should be used at most as a tool and never, ever a panacea of truth.  To ruin someone's life strictly based on a chart is a crime.  To use the instrument to focus on an area of possible investigative interest makes sense.  Right now the polygraph represents corruption and greed.  The APA, polygraph manufacturers, most polygraph examiners, and corrupt bureaucrats and politicians are abusing their authority to make careers/money off of "the box" and their greed explains the abuse.  They are people with absolutely no conscience.  Just like our problem of having too many lawyers, we have too many polygraph examiners and they must have a daily body count in order to survive.  Thank God for guys like Dan in the APA.  Keep working it Dan, this system has to break sooner or later.  The Salem Witch trials and McCarthyism were eventually ended.

No sweat, december, it'll keep.

As for my SWAG (Scientific Wild-Ass Guess) comment, that comes from retired CIA polygrapher John Sullivan, author of Gatekeeper: Memoirs of a CIA Polygraph Examiner.

In that most telling book, Sullivan characterizes polygraph as being about 92 percent art and eight percent science. I agree.

I also agree with NAS in that incident-specific polygraphs can have accuracy roughly somewhere between chance and perfection. Where that exact point is remains unknown. Why? Because accuracy depends on a host of variables so complex that the claim itself means almost nothing.


Of course, all bets are off when countermeasures are in play.

Yet, polygraph indu$trialists hawk flattering accuracy rates like a high-tech commodity of sorts, aided by cheerleading "scientists" who have a knack for statistical alchemy.

In that heady mix I see obvious parallels between the polygraph purveyors and the climate-change cuckoos. 

In either case, one should look at their data with extreme caution.

In spite of all that, I generally agree that specific-issue polygraph "works" -- with countermeasure-ignorant subjects -- but the error rate is huge. 

False results -- be they by design or just normal [ahem] "variation" as the pro-polygraph propagandists like to say -- happen far more often than the industry wants consumers to believe.

Thus, the "test" is very much a crapshoot.

Of course, this is just my opinion as a lowly polygraph operator.

LOL, I have seen this before.  Someone trying to piss me off anonymously to get my gander up.  Sadly this stunt of their worked in 2008.

TAPE and Holden sent their little minions and sycophants to make me lose my temper and draw me into hostile debate; and these people did their jobs well back then.  Not this time. 

I have laid out fact after fact on other strings.  I have offered Documented Evidence in each fact I have laid out, some of which was their own emails, documents, certified court documents, and evidence gathered under subpoena.

I find it odd that this person didn't challenge any of those facts or that documentation laid out in those posts. Avoided them totally.   All this person had was the crap that went down with my ex.   

Ok, I will explain this to everyone, and it has never been a secret.  My ex did some things that even shocked me when I found out about them.  Some of these actions were criminal in nature and she faced the justice system for her actions.  Those are issues that are not my place to discuss.  Hollie can speak for herself if she wishes.

In regard to my ex, she has moved on with her life; leave her be.   

As to my current wife, I wouldn't draw her into this.  No good will come of that from their end.  Keep her out of it.

ya see everyone, this is their MO.

Holden Hubbard and TAPE use character assassins with nothing more than finger pointing, smoke, and mirrors.  Thsy also love doing this before they know I will be at a conference in an effort to defame me with hyperbole and irrelevant information.   

What they are hoping to achieve here is to fabricate their only weapon as seen in the video poster earlier.  That weapon is "mob mentality"   

This is the only way they win.  They simply distract like a cheap vegas street magician who just learned slight of hand.  They use inflammatory statements they have no proof of and avoid addressing the clear evidence.   

The only way they can fight is to do everything to avoid the documented evidence.  If they can, they will do everything in their power to avoid the presentation of such evidence; just like Hubbard and her boyfriend Holden did in 2009.   

The facts are out there, Hubbard and Holden's very own emails.    Of course, that has to be a lie right? Even though Ms. Hubbard has all but admitted that those emails and text messages belonged to her.  Funny how December avoids that totally.

Also funny how she avoids Maria's many lies from last year that I have clearly exposed with facts and documented evidence.

I think I have clearly established that avoidance is one of their most powerful weapons.  This mixed with hyperbole, manipulation and intimidation is it for them.  Next, if they follow their pattern will be threats of violence as they have done on no less than two occasions in the past.

Watch, the examiners will send December again because they want to avoid the issues.  Just like Jon Rios did last year at TAPE...... "I had nothing do do with that"  Meaning the TAPE ethics complaint.  Only to find out he was on the Board of Directors to which the ethics complaint was presented 

Avoid the subject, deny everything, or blame someone else.

Even more cowardly, not a one of them is willing to look me in the eye to refute what I am saying.

Instead they count of kangaroo courts that violate their own bylaws, or mob mentality by ambush.

Oh and about the anti incompetent polygraph examiner comment December; you can sling all the mud you want in that area, i never has a confirmed sexual harassment complaint that kicked me out of a school, i never has any racist and threatening anonymous emails come out of my office to intimidate a party in a lawsuit (aka witnesses intimidation), i was never restained from being away from children like father and son Holden, and i never has a 45% INCONCLUSIVE RATE like Holden's buddys in Tarrant County. 

If you want to talk about incompetentcy, lets talk about wood'ss 45% inconclusive rate. Mine BTW, has never gone above 9% 

Ill put my tests up against theirs any day of the week and never look back. 

Oh and i hope everyone's charts are clear, you may notice more lawyers demanding charts and questioning some scores. 

Hey, are we having any fun yet
P.S

Sorry for the guest name, i am on my cell. 


Oxox to december and the rest of the chart rolling impostors 

Travel light

Joe, do you really think december's cheap shots are yet another Dallas-based salvo?

Say it ain't so, Joe. Say it ain't so!

If that turns out to be the case -- and I know you'll find out -- I, for one, will be shocked, appalled and dismayed.

Meanwhile, where are the industry's leading self-described polygraph scientists?

This venue is the largest -- and most authoritative -- polygraph forum in the entire world.

Strangely, the cutting-edge polygraph scientists are reluctant to participate.

Why is that?

My theory: They have nothing substantive to show, everything to fear, and too much to lose.

Here's another possibility... Polygraph is a "secret" science. That would explain why the industry's researchers choose to remain cloistered in their well-guarded comfort zone, where appreciative audiences swoon and nary a critic is found.

But what do I know... I'm just a lowly polygraph operator.

Maybe they'll step up to the plate and prove me wrong. But I doubt it.

In the meantime, polygraph appears to be much more of an insider cult than a legitimate forensic science.