The title of the article in the link above that quickfix posted is misleading. It says down the page that Doug pled guilty to mail fraud and witness tampering. There is no crime against teaching how to beat the poly. Thats good news. I'm going to start telling people how to beat it too.  Put polygraphers out of business, like that asshole quickfix.

Quickfix,

How do you suppose Hal Martin, who reportedly had been collecting classified documents at his home since 1999, was able to pass a polygraph screening test?

Can someone tell me what exactly did Doug do that constitutes witness tampering and mail fraud?  What do those chargea have to do with teaching people how to pass a poly?  It seems that if teaching how to pass a poly was a crime, Doug would have been charged with that.  Hence, teaching poly beating is not a crime, correct?

Aunty Agony wrote on Oct 8^th, 2016 at 7:00pm:

quickfix wrote on Oct 8^th, 2016 at 7:30pm:

Aunty Agony wrote on Oct 8^th, 2016 at 9:12pm:

quickfix wrote on Oct 10^th, 2016 at 11:50am:

So you agree with me, then. 

As I said, Aunty just likes to keep the public record accurate. 

I cannot help wondering how much overlap there is between the security violations of Harold T. Martin III and the similar security violations of Hilary R. Clinton. 

As far as we know, neither miscreant harbored treasonous intent nor expected to profit from the activity; and in neither case is the breach known to have caused significant harm to the United States nor given aid or comfort to its enemies. 

George W. Maschke wrote on Oct 10^th, 2016 at 5:45am:

All references to Hal Martin describe him as independently curious, and deeply interested in detecting pathologies such as PTSD via direct histological examination of a patient's behavior -- the same techniques used by military and police interrogators, and so crudely mechanized by the polygraph. 

Martin's ex-wife Elizabeth is a formidible person who served in military and civilian police, and in 1996 became a highly trained and thoroughly certified polygrapher.  I can't find when they were divorced but she evidently had at least some contact with him until 1999. 

This means he had roughly three years to pump her about how the polygraph works. 

If they were on speaking terms, and as she had no reason to suspect he might someday so spectacularly shatter government security protocols, she probably shared so much information with him that he could have written another How To Sting The Polygraph or even The Lie Behind the Lie Detector. 

So -- he had no need for his own Doug Williams or Dan Mangan -- just pillow talk.

Aunty Agony wrote on Oct 11^th, 2016 at 4:53am:


Aunty, let me be clear: I do not teach, coach or provide advice on countermeasures.

As a full member of the American Polygraph Association, I serve primarily as a polygraph consultant and examiner who strives to preemptively reduce victimization by educating consumers -- both primary and secondary -- about the risks, realities and limitations of the polygraph "test."

I continue to administer polygraph "tests" in select cases, and conduct QA reviews of polygraph exams. 

Perhaps you had me confused with Chad Dixon?

Aunty, in your world model, are the APA's home-grown researchers and statisticians legitimate scientists?