OK, Joe, you want input on behavior?

By all means, let's talk about the behavior of "certified forensic psycho-physiologists."

In the past 24 hours alone, I've been contacted by two self-proclaimed victims of polygraph fidelity "testing."

In both cases, as a result of a polygraph "test, their marital homes -- which include young confused heartbroken children -- are now shattered, perhaps irrevocably.

In both cases, the "certified forensic psycho-physiologist" refuses to release the raw data (including video) for review by an independent consultant. This is in spite of the vehement protestations of the accused spouses, who adamantly maintain they are innocent.

The only thing the aggrieved spouses seek is an independent review; a second opinion.

Is that too much to ask?

Evidently it is.

BTW, Joe, one of the aforementioned "certified forensic psycho-physiologists" practices in the great state of Texas. You probably know him.

But there's more... 

I spoke with one of these polygraph operators last night. When I informed the "certified forensic psycho-physiologist" that his subject demanded he release the PF file (including video) for my review, the "certified forensic psycho-physiologist" hung up on me.

Yes, Joe, behavior speaks volumes.

In any event, these two "certified forensic psycho-physiologists," by virtue of their unsupported opinions, busted up two families with absolutely no research on their fidelity-specific "testing" to back up their findings.

Incredibly, both of these "certified forensic psycho-physiologists" flatly refuse to release their files.

As we say in the army, that's FUBAR.

So, Joe...in your opinion, is polygraph "testing" a pseudo-scientific fraud?

If not, please explain the actions of the "certified forensic psycho-physiologists" to which I refer.

As for the other examiner you speak of, I don't know who it is, I haven't seen any charts, so I can offer no opinion in regard to that examiners character or testing ability.

I'll say this much, I am glad someone is handling infidelity issues, because I won't touch infidelity cases, unless there is a shrink involved.   

Once someone gets to a point in a relationship where you have to get polygraph involved, it's done, and there is little to no chance of saving it.  Whenever I get calls about infidelity testing, I always tell them their money is better spent on a therapist or lawyers.  In my personal opinion, no one comes out of those tests a winner, regardless of the outcome.  So, I'm glad someone is taking them, because id rather stick an ice pick in my eye, before I do one of those tests again.  Too much emotion and drama, and dealing with the crap I have to deal with down here, i'm all filled up.

Fact is, those relationships were done before they even walked into that polygraph room.   

In regard to getting charts... and i say this with all due respect, you give off the impression here like you have a dog in the race to find anything that can be tossed in the examiners face.  Things is, if you look at anything hard enough, anyone can find anything.   

You give off the impression that you lack objectivity.  And I get it, you are on a mission and part of that mission is to discredit as much as you can or at least that is the impression you sometimes set.   

I am very careful not to do that.  I have had to swallow my pride a couple times and tell people, that examiners I hate did nothing wrong, and my results confirm their findings.  Ugh, the bitter taste of pride when I have to do that.   

While I have the ability, and believe it or not, self control to remain independent and unbid, others in Texas do NOT.

Example, I have stood up for maria, and her procedure on at least two occasions.  My love for what i do for a living is greater than the deep disdain I have for H&R Puff and Stuff.  Honestly, if she called m, asking for my charts, the only sound she would hear is, GFY and then a dial tone.   

Now if someone wants to grow some balls and come to my office to view charts, different ball game.  Come on in, look at the charts, I'll even buy lunch, truce will be called, but nothing is leaving this office, no copies made, and no pictures.   

With the files full of charts I have that the other examiner I have run, they stay in those files, under lock and key.  I will never put my agenda ahead of that of a persons charts; no matter how bad they are.  Trust me, some are total crap; and while it would give be great pleasure to expose their crap work, there is a line I would never cross and that is one of them.   

Sometimes dan, the impression you give, is that is a line you would cross.  I am not saying you are that guy, it's just the impression you give people.

On the other hand, to be fair, I don't know about the conversation, mane the guy was being a wold class douche.   

I guess what I am saying, I lack the data to give you an opinion on the said Forensic Psycho Physiologists in question. Not sure I want to know. Because CEU time is coming up and fighting with these people to get the hours to renew my license makes me want to vomit in my mouth.  While I have done my best in 2014 to make peace with them and to act in good faith, the new power dynamic in TAPE does not ale me hopeful about an in and out, don't crappity smack with me, I won't crappity smack with you, truce that occurred last time with Jon Rios; even if he did go back in his word.   

The situation that these examines had was FUBAR, long before they made the call to make the appointment for the test.  Trust me, whomever these examiners are, those marriages were done.  They probably didn't help, but I doubt they did anymore damage than that of what was already done.   

George, I predict Joe would never surrender  -- that's how polygraph apologists look at it -- the raw data including video -- directly to the customer.

Polygraph operators are loathe to subject their work product to a second opinion. They only do so within the polygraph-operator "buddy system," i.e., other like-minded polygraph advocates.

Medical patients have a right to their records, including test results. Polygraph should be no different.

The buddy system...............  LMAO

Dan, name one person.... ONE PERSON, who is my "buddy" that would protect me, or I him.  I am the most despised person in the industry.  Whats funny is, I am the most despised because of the truth and documented facts, I continue to call the polygraph establishment on.  This is why I am actually a bigger threat to these people than you are, because I have document ion backing me up; in most cases, their own documentation.   

Yes, sometimes you make some good points with the information you have, some times.  What I have, that frankly you lack, is documentation of establishment examiner's acts and behavior.

I have proof, though years of documented behavior, that the establishment polygraph examiners, in the state of Texas, either doesn't believe the 93% accuracy rate, and in fact will avoid being subject to their own, "accurate and reliable" tests; or, they know polygraph works, and they are avoiding being subject to their own test, knowing their lies and unethical behaviors will be exposed. 

I can prove there is corruption in the industry, this is why they try so hard to silence and ostracize me.   

The one thing that is consistent is, the examiners say that countermeasures are detectable.  If they weren't, why would they have not taken the test and employed the undetectable countermeasures?  Toy still haven't answered hat question.

You want to have a discussion about polygraph accuracy, I think the questions I put out there, surrounding the behaviors of those within and part of the polygraph establishment, having an aversion to being subject to their own test, is not only legitimate, but the sudden silence is both telling and concerning

You are right about one thing, I will not surrender until the issues are addressed and put to rest.  Every time I am quiet, and try to move on, someone inside of TAPE reminds me, that they won't let go.

They will say of course that I am not capable, but they know that is not true.  A peace an agreements were made between myself and another vary, and I have 110% backed off that party and kept my word.  To that Party's credit, so have they.

Bottom line, you don't like it when I make it a point to be fair and unbiased to a system for which you seem to have a lot of bias.  On the other hand, the industry and the party still involved hate it when I use their own behavior and documentation to expose what is wrong in the industry within the state of Texas.

You want to to give opinion over a case in which I don't have some basic information and data.   

In any case, I assure you, I have no, buddies; and no one is my buddies, for me to even start playing the buddy system.   

Buddy system..... LMAO..... Dan, you're so cute

Joe, don't take me quite so literally.

Set aside, for a moment, your self-inflicted OCD bondage with TAPE and look at things in a more general sense.

By "buddy system," I simply mean like-minded polygraph advocates who are seen as qualified examiners within the industry-- not politically reliable cronies. In other words, polygraph operators with whom you are on the same page, philosophically speaking. True believers in the "test."

Certainly, you'd allow your raw data to be reviewed by the likes of, say, Gary Davis, Ray Nelson, and your polygraph mentor of whom you speak so glowingly. I'm sure there are others.

By contrast, you would never allow your complete polygraph file to be reviewed by an adversarial polygraph realist such as myself.

The reason: Fear of having your work product shown to be so deficient that it warrants nullification of your "test."

Virtually any polygraph "test" can be nullified. In my consulting practice, I've assisted many a victim of a proclaimed false result by reviewing their polygraph "test" and documenting a lengthy list of fatal flaws. 

My polygraph nullification service is both affordable and effective. It provides victims with much-needed relief, and helps remedy the damage done by the often pernicious false result of a polygraph "test."

Anyone who wishes to learn more about my polygraph nullification services is welcome to contact me via www.polygraphman.com.

Dan Mangan wrote on Oct 5^th, 2016 at 8:24pm:


Not true and I'll give you an example.  Pleae understand, details are intentionally vague to comply with the law and protect privilege.

Recently I perfumed a polygraph where the request was made for the county to have their "expert" to review my charts.  I have no issue with their "expert" reviewing my charts, knowing that 9 times out of ten, that "expert" will be an examiner from a company with a spotty history; you do the math.  The one thing I won't do is surrender my charts, so they can sit in their file cabinet, do with as this unethical examiner pleases.  If they want to review my work, they will do so in my presence and they will not be allowed to take care, control or management of any data.

If someone wants to look at my data, and they are authorized by the examine or lawyer of the examinee, I will allow them to look at the data.  I do nothing wrong, I run good charts, a fair test, I have nothing to hide.   

On another occasion, during the lawsuit, I was asked to let a county DA's office "expert" to review my charts.  I was told it was going to happen at the courthouse and that I would be there for the review.  When I got there, the charts were snatched from my hands by the DA's investigator, they walked away, and I never saw them again.  I know those chard were being sent to Holden's office, as they were that county's golden boys at the time.  I didn't fuss about it because I knew those charts, and the rest of the data were spotless.  It's important to note, that my charts were still included in the Grand Jury packet, and my examine was acquitted , partly due to his passed test.  If anything was wrong with those charts or the data, and I am sure, given the hostility at the time, they looked hard, my test would have been tossed and the GJ would not have seen the test.   

SO yea, the idea of me not wanting to have anyone other than the above listed names looking at my charts, my history, says your assertion is bullshit.

Also, if Garry, Ray, or Don Ramsey saw my charts and something was wrong, I am 110% confident that they would toss me under the bus, after a long and unpleasant ass chewing.   

Lastly, I have no cronies or minions.  I know that I have no "friends" in this industry, in the same regard as they may have "friends."  Whenever I would away from any examiner, I always check for a knife in my back after that meeting or discussion; and I am always suspect of everyone and their true intentions.  The situation of Maria betraying me like a rat, made me realize that I should trust no one; EVER.  In my eyes, everyone is a potential rat.   

Thats a shame, because there are people in the NPA and APA, that I have great respect for.  There are some, that if they called me at three in the morning, I would get out of bed and come running to help them in a heartbeat; but trust died inside of me in 2009.  The rat did her job well.   

SO yea, making me sound as if I am a part of any, inside good ole boys club, you are climbing up the wrong tree there; you will find no fruit.   

Dan Mangan wrote on Oct 5^th, 2016 at 8:24pm:


You assume too much.  I will say this, before I handed you charts, I would make damn sure everything was copyright protected to assure no unauthorized publication of my work.  But as long as that protection were there, yea, I would let you look at charts and data.  Good luck finding anything, because other than me talking like a sailor in pre and post test (F bombs, I am from Boston and all), you will find nothing that will nullify the test.  Best of luck.   

I do everything on the up and up, and I have no shame in regard to my work product.   

My only concern would be your ability to be unbiased in your review.  Sometimes Dan, I honestly believe that you lack objectivity and it is possible, you would let your agenda cloud objectivity.  I don't think you do this for nefarious reasons, I believe that your intentions are well meant, just not totally objective; but we've had friendly debates about that before.

I think you need to put away your OCD in attacking reliability with your interpretations of studies and numbers that can be easily argued and dismissed, and focus on behavior, which is far more telling in regard to the real problem in this industry.   

Because that is the true test of a product.  If the product is that good, and that reliable, why is it that the people selling that product, or providing that service, avoiding using that product?  Now there is an interesting question.   

If I owned a restaurant, and I refused to eat the food doing out of my own kitchen, what does that say about my confidence in the product, and service I sell?  Maybe my customers should call the health department, don't you think?  I'll say this, I wouldn't be in business long.

It is easy to argue statistics and subjective interoperation of study data.  It's behavior that tells the real story over the product sold or consumed.   

have you noticed that Ray was engaging you, and waxing poetic on the subject when the argument consisted of interpretation of studies and rhetoric; but when I call to the plate actual behaviors of examiners, how those examiners fear their own test, and other examiners being critical of me for expecting us to use the product we sell to verify or refute the credibility of accusations made which are completely testable?

He can't defend their behavior and lack of willingness to submit to the very product we say is accurate and reliable. So the conversation ends, rather than him admitting, that their at ions might send a poor message to the public, that examiners feel that the test is good for everyone else, but not good enough for us.

The message I sent was, I believe so strongly in the product I sell, that I don't expect anyone to sit in a chair, i wouldn't sit in myself.  Now that generates consumer confidence.  That promotes polygraph, and promote ethical integrity within the industry.

The only message that the examiners involved in my situation send, confirm much of what you say.   

Now I am gong to re ask this question.

If countermeasures are so good, and so undetectable, why didn't Maria et al just jump all over my offer, cheat the test, and get rid of me?  If countermeasures work that well and are tat undetectable, you would think an examiner would know how to perform better than anyone.   

Hmmmmmm I guess they don't really believe countermeasures are as effective as some believes.  So I guess everyone is wrong.  I guess that makes us all content.   

You and I agree on so much, but have different end goals.  I want to make polygraph better by cleaning up what is dirty, so what is left with is the real mission of who we should be.   

Joe McCarthy wrote on Oct 5^th, 2016 at 11:00pm:


Joe, the polygraph-indu$try termites are laughing all the way to the bank.

The "test" is all a big con.

There is overwhelming evidence that shows polygraph is a pseudo-scientific fraud.

The legal, medical and scientific communities have condemned polygraph "testing" since the 1920s -- nearly 100 years!

George Maschke is right, Doug Williams is right, and the late great Drew Richardson was right.

"Polygraph science" is a sick joke.

I suggest you cut back on the APA/NPA Kool-Aid.

It ain't healthy.

Joe McCarthy wrote on Oct 6^th, 2016 at 12:12am:


That's where we differ, Joe.

Polygraph is junk science.

It's all about money.