Ex Member wrote on Jan 7^th, 2016 at 7:07pm:


You spoke to every victim of both types of crimes, of every age, socioeconomic standing, in every region, where the crimes were commited under all types of different circumstances by offenders of every age, socioeconomic standing, in every region (so forth and so on), and made a comparison based on statistical analysis , or even common sense?

Your statement is pure hyperbole. Hyperbole has no place in a logical argument, and only feeds the witch-hunt mentality.

We can go by what victims report, not what the media machine tells us what to believe. Even victims of the same crime, committed at the very same time, report different reactions or feelings about their experience. Victims of violent rape report less impact on their lives than victims of inappropriate touch do, at times. Personal experience is subjective. In my scenario, if the 'butt touch' victim had nightmares and such, it would have an impact on the perpetrator's sentence - that is why they take victim impact statements, and use them for sentencing purposes. If a violent rape victim refused to make a statement, didn't need counseling, and just wanted to put the crime behind him/her, it would make it's way into the sentencing hearing - as a mitigating factor for the defense, and the perpetrator could/would receive a lighter sentence. These are the realities of american jurisprudence.

And Mr. Polygraph, I apologize. Kudos to you for your honesty to your clients... but if you feel the way you do, why choose to administer polygraphs? Curiosity gets the best of me, sometimes.

Ex Member wrote on Jan 7^th, 2016 at 8:39pm:


I am not an offender. That is hardly the point at this point. I have, and do, work with offenders.

I offered up a scenario that has elements of bits and parts of various offenders I have encountered and worked with. I can't use anyone's complete case; to do so would be unethical. I wanted feedback on a specific issue, basically trying to double-check a premise with a group of people that I typically find to be knowledgeable on polygraph issues. Instead, I got extremist ramblings, hyperbole, cynicism, ridicule, and opinion instead of fact.

When someone feels backed into a corner, they lash out. I get that, as I understand the psychology behind it. No one has done anything to refute my statements of truth, however... interesting, when you look at everything said in this thread in its proper context. Because you thought/think I was/am an offender, you attacked me, instead of trying to use logic and facts to argue a logical point.Question yourself as to why that is, and why you instantaneously think negative of people who have committed sex offenses. In my professional opinion (and I occupy a position in which I offer up professional, licensed opinions), you need to do some soul-searching, and figure out why you have such a negative opinion of offenders. Someone close to you a victim, perhaps? Or, maybe even yourself? You latched on to the victim impact aspect like a rabid dog, and quickly formed a hard and fast response to that, and one that defies common sense and logic. Psychologically, that is very telling.

Also, nowhere in my scenario did the offender try to circumvent or 'beat' the polygraph. A misstatement by you. The scenario offender was truthful, and was merely avoiding a false-positive by using mental stimulation. How is that deemed nefarious? I guess everyone who peruses this site are doing so with ill intent, then... or is that just limited to people with sex offenses on their records? What's good for the goose, and all that...

Please respond, if you are going to, with the logical portion of your brain, instead of the 'emotional' you. 

And Mr. Polygraph, I apologize. Kudos to you for your honesty to your clients... but if you feel the way you do, why choose to administer polygraphs? Curiosity gets the best of me, sometimes.

I do what I do because there is a clear need for what I call open-book polygraph "testing."

The open-book model refers not only to my dealings with the test subjects themselves, but with secondary consumers of polygraph "testing" such as therapists, probation/parole officers, chiefs of police, and, of course, suspicious spouses or significant others.

That said, a considerable (and expanding) part of my practice is pure consulting, as opposed to simply administering examinations. 

I hope to eventually transition to an all-consulting polygraph business model.

I exit the conversation because you are a liar and a troll.

Ex Member wrote on Jan 7^th, 2016 at 10:33pm:


I have lied about nothing, though I admit I did present myself as an offender in the beginning, for purely legitimate logistical  reasons. Other than that, I was - and am - seeking validation and/or information on a pet theory I have that pertains to a situation I came across in the course of my duties. If you have anything to add to that, please, use your knowledge base to assist me. You are a long-standing member of these boards, and a respected one, at that. If you have nothing to add, then peace be with you.

Quote:


"I used to be extremely indecisive, but now I'm not quite so sure."

Dan Mangan wrote on Jan 7^th, 2016 at 10:58pm:


I know this is off topic, but when I saw the word 'heavyweights', I thought of WWE - type wrestlers... who perpetuate falsehood. The comparison to polygraph examiners, and their chosen profession, is accurate. I don't believe it gets anymore 'fake' than polygraphs and the people who administer them.

I don't believe that PCSOT examiners - or any examiner, save Mr. Mangan - would chime in. Whatever they have to say probably wouldn't be very relevant, considering they have to hold on dearly to one point of view. They are pretty invested in the lie. Hard to have civil discourse when you hold a rigid point of view.

Don't give up hope, MagicSteve. Over the years this site has enjoyed many spirited and meaningful discussions with members of the polygraph indu$try. Maybe word will get out about this thread and we'll be pleasantly surprised...