posted 05-19-2013 03:25 PM         

The owner, manager and 8 employees of Discontent in Bismarck are charged with felony crimes related to the delivery of synthetic drugs.

Authorities say products containing illegal substances were being sold at Discontent.

Today, Judge Benny Graff heard arguments on whether or not to allow polygraph examinations at trial.

If he approves the motion, it would be the first criminal case in North Dakota where polygraph evidence is allowed.

Dr. John Palmatier of Florida is an expert witness on polygraphs.

He examined the data collected from the defendants polygraph tests.

Palmatier says the defendants were asked about their knowledge of selling illegal substances, and he says they were telling the truth when they answered the questions...

"Between March 1st and March 20th of last year, did you know that MAM-2201 was in the product "Diablo" and his response was "no". And his probability of deception was 2/10 of 1%. About the questions they were asked, I would opine they were absolutely being truthful," says Dr. Palmatier.

Palmatier says polygraph examinations are another tool that can be considered to help jurors or judges determine if a defendant is truthful.

Judge Graff has taken the motion under consideration and will have a ruling at a later time.

North Dakota has banned unknown substances that cause similar effects as known illegal substances.

posted 05-20-2013 01:37 AM            

I located an article in The Bismarck Tribune dated 12-27-12(Bismarck Discontent owner, manager and employees face drug charges). This article reported charges were filed after a nearly year long investigation. Illegal synthetic drugs identified as "Pure Evil" & "Diablo" were reportedly purchased at Discontent. "King Kong," another controlled substance was located at the business during the execution of a search warrant on June 15.

Bismarck Detective Stein's affidavit of " - business records seized from Discontent show 1,401 packages of [King Kong] were sold from January 1 to June 14," location of sales not specified. Not clear in the article but it appears 6,697 packages of "Diablo" were also sold during this time period. Additional illegal substances identified as "TKO" & "White Rabbit" were also located at Discontent, no indication in the article these were being sold at Discontent.

It appears Palmatier only asked about MAM-2201 which I presume is the controlled substance in "Diablo." Ashley Holden suffered a seizure after using "Diablo" reportedly purchased at Discontent on March 2. I'd like to see all questions asked. I'm not comfortable with the MAM-2201 question and learning more facts would be beneficial.

What other questions did Palmatier ask the defendants in which he opined "they were absolutely being truthful?"

END.....

posted 05-20-2013 04:04 PM            

The truth is in this case I was called as a consultant to review a series of nine polygraph examinations that addressed very specific questions. I never asked anyone anything. However, based upon a lot of background information that unfortunately law enforcement more and more tends to selectively access rather than be completely forthcoming with, many issues were not discussed nor printed by the local newspaper.

It is unfortunate that the bulletin board is going away as I would be more than willing to discuss this at greater length but I will be presenting a talk at the APA regarding the construct validity for polygraph testing, which unfortunately is still absent and being used to beat us up as a profession. Stop by in Orlando in September and say hi!

posted 05-20-2013 06:31 PM            

While I respect your level of education, based on my experiences and observing behavior of some other highly educated people, I no longer accept at face value that an upper level degree confirms the intelligence of an individual. Obama is a fine example but that is another subject for another board.

If the Discontent is an ongoing court issue I suspect you will be limited in the information you can provide. Is this accurate? I definitely do not accept as fact anything printed in a newspaper, but it does give a starting point for a discussion/comments.

I don't understand your comment about background information that law enforcement tends to selectively access rather than be forthcoming with. What do you mean by this comment; and, if you can say, did this affect the examinations or your chart evaluation?

I'm not an APA member and won't be Orlando, but I would be interested in reading your presentation if it will be available. How do you define "the construct validity for polygraph testing?"

Is this board being discontinued?

END.....

posted 05-22-2013 03:32 PM            

Dr. Palmatier, I don't understand your comment about background information that law enforcement tends to selectively access rather than be forthcoming with. What do you mean by this comment; and, if you can say, did this affect the examinations or your chart evaluation?