Andy Balmer wrote on Aug 24^th, 2017 at 10:50am:

 
Thank you Andy and please accept my apology for the curt response earlier.  I asked you about more specific information about transcripts because I wanted to make certain I understood you.  Speaking as a former law enforcement officer who was both a victim of the polygraph, and one who witnessed many other people become apparent victims of this witchcraft, I believe there are no transcripts.  I can not speak as an absolute authority because I was never a polygraph examiner nor was I a security official affiliated with the polygraph.  

Results of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests which yielded polygraph examiner reports and findings in my case revealed that the polygraph report was inaccurate and contained lies and omissions.  Based on the results of my FOIA information I believe that the polygraph examiner is unimpeded  from writing a totally subjective, inaccurate summary to justify the conclusions in the chart interpretation.  A polygraph examiner is sanctioned to write a false official statement with no oversight whatsoever.  These people function with the same impunity as the repressive regimes of the Soviet Union. 

Hey Wandersmann,

I do have some transcripts already, but you're right that in most exams they are not produced, and in many audio/video is not recorded. I agree there is a deception inherent to the implementation of polygraph exams. In the book I explore how uncertainties in the science and in law are used by examiners to further manipulate subjects, with sometimes tragic consequences. The responses I've had from my post so far suggest a possible article to write after the book: I might conduct interviews with current and former examiners and with people who have taken a test. Would make for an interesting paper and help showcase some of the experiences people have had with the machine. 

Cheers,
Andy

Hey Andy

Can we expect a chapter exploring the individual rights violations when subjects "fail" the "test" and are unjustly judged to be untrustworthy based solely on those "results"?

Also, can we expect a chapter explaining that subjecting someone to the polygraph "test" five times in three years is abusive?

pailryder wrote on Aug 26^th, 2017 at 7:18pm:


Sure Pailryder, let's do it.  If you don't mind occasionally ruining innocent people's lives, let's go for it.  If we can't solve a bank robbery but have 5 suspects, if we just put all 5 in prison without separating the innocent and the guilty we would undoubtedly punish the real culrpit. 

[quote author=557E64764E46787D7D78707C62110 link=1502890620/20#20 date=1503783001][quote author=6170787D6368757463110 link=1502890620/18#18 date=1503775096]Andy

In fact it is the best psychological billy club ever devised to coerce a person into  giving a confession. 

I was wondering, Doug, how your confession was obtained? 

Were you coerced?

pailryder wrote on Aug 28^th, 2017 at 4:49pm:

So why even administer it?

pailryder wrote on Aug 28^th, 2017 at 6:38pm:

Pail-O-Shit -  that is pure unadulterated bullshit and you know it. You thugs administer polygraph tests for one reason and one reason only – to unjustly enrich yourselves.