posted 07-29-2008 04:16 PM            

based on facts I ask:

IS MEMBERSHIP IN, OR PARTCIPATION IN PEOA'S / JOHN L. GROGAN'S REFERAL PROGRAM FOR POLYGRAPH TESTS AN ETHICAL VIOLATION ?

FOR ME: I'm at a point where we have reached level of evidence about this guy that no real examiner would be any part of his organization(s) given his own fraud background as a P.I., and overt actions as an Imposter in our field; that APA should put in writing that it does our profession harm for APA members to associate themselves with this con artist and porn star. He has done no less than great damage to our profession in the macro sense, and his mail order instant Grogan-ites who pop up do so to APA members in the micro sense in undermining the marketplace for them as a profession, and for the general public being cheated.

While F. Lee Bailey may be a zit on the legal community's face as has been mentioned here on this site; When will the rest of the legitimate members of this profession come to understand that Grogan is the Gangrene of our profession, and we must amputate any infected bad meat he has touched, which can not otherwise be cured ? ------- and that ANY participation with him or PEOA is a detrement to us all. ?
While I may be preaching to the choir here, the rest of our flock needs to hear this messege loud and clear; and from the APA classroom to the bar !!!

[This message has been edited by thenolieguy4u (edited 07-29-2008).]

posted 07-29-2008 06:15 PM            

thenolieguy4u Let me ask you this.
If a well trained, conscientious, ethical examiner accepts a refferal from John Grogan or one of his killer clones, wouldn't the ultimate result be that the client was well served?

I don't think APA could find Grogan guilty of violating its ethics because Grogan isn't a member.

I think APA would be stretching it about as far as they could by posting a disclaimer stating that his polygraph school is not accredited by APA and that APA is not associated in any way with PEOA.

I have wondered if the reason that Grogans examiners aren't listed by name on his site has as much to do with protecting his consulting fee as it does with allowing the examiners to avoid the embarrassment by remaining anonymous.

What about it guys and gals. Anybody here on JG's referral list? Tell us about your experiences.

Why someone hasn't thrown this bottom feeder to and his polyschool in a box to GM is beyond my understanding.

------------------
Ex scientia veritas

posted 07-29-2008 06:50 PM            

I believe APA and our profession in the greater body has an interest in "Excluding" unethical behavior among APA members as it relates to polygraph. To date, other than the TruthAboutGrogan.org website which Ralph has handled as a webmaster, and my funding of same; nobody has even taken up this issue to point out PEOA's contaminating factor. Grogan has attempted to turn your / our skills into a Sally Strothers commercial where folks can have instant credentials they do not have for a price to him. He is neither fully trained in our field from anyone's point of view, even the school he said he attended says so.

Regardless if Grogan is not an APA member, APA has an interest in who it's members associate with when it props up an Imposter of our profession, and a con man such as Grogan financially from which we all lose out. Its bad enough we have to deal with the treasonous Maschke, or the traitor in Doug Williams of Oklahoma, or even this rediculous Fox TV show; but when someone acts as our Imposter and tries to create more imposters like him, it very much reminds me of "Invasion of the Body Snatchers", and Grogan is the head of the Pod People in it.

Each of us has benefitted greatly from the computerized systems available, but yet owning such equipment in and of itself does not make one an "Examiner" ; Rather, your education, experience in running real charts using validated methods for real tests makes you that, and where you are held to some professional standards. Grogan offers none of the above. He is a Chameleon who is parked on our professional space who should be chased, forced, or encouraged out of this camoflauged status, and into selling used cars or pimping where he belongs. So the answer is YES, there is guilt by association, or any One of us becomming fruit of the poison tree.

As a professional in my 21st year in this career, I simply want this era in polygraph of "anything goes" to be over. If a guy like John Grogan or his defrauding little group of pretenders is ever given a license, then that is the day I will know it is time to get out. Participating in his little program is putting money in the hands of a con man.

For me it is like the comparison of a Drug Dealer and a Pharmacist. One is a low life who does not care about the effect of the drugs they put out there in the hands of the public, and may even create a down line of sub-dealers who don't care either. The other is a more regulated and ethical body who has standards to live up to and a reputation for quality, dependability, and accuracy in the filling of the carefully ordered prescription. Can Pharmacists have an ethical relationship with a street level drug dealer ?

posted 07-29-2008 07:19 PM            

I would suggest that if today one were not a member of the American Medical Association,that they were not taken seriously by anybody or insurance company as a Doctor. I am certain that anyone in their profession who associated with someone calling themselves as such and who only did back alley abortions would be disciplined for bringing down the good name of medicine. The same would hold true for Dentistry. I know of no other organization which might be called our resume organization than the APA in the last 42 years.

posted 07-29-2008 07:22 PM            

You cannot impose ethical standards upon someone who refuses to accept them. Likewise you cannot impose sanctions for violating codes and standards if the alleged violator isn't a member. It is unlikely he will ever hold a license because he would probably have trouble passing an exam and his initial training probably wouldn't pass muster.

Why is it APA's job to do something about him. If the left coast wanted to run charlatans out of polygraph, they would require licenses like more civilized states (Oklahoma and Texas)

In the meantime I will continue to use Grogan and his spiel to justify to my state's sunset commitee the need for polygraph licensure and statutory oversight of examiners. He makes an excellent bad example.

What exactly do you think APA should do about him?

FYI the AMA has absolutely NO STROKE where licenses to practice aren't required.
------------------
Ex scientia veritas

posted 07-29-2008 08:25 PM            

Exposing Grogan as a charlatan is a good thing, but how many people (attorneys included) like to go to Grogan to get what they want? The consumer drives the bus, and sometimes charlatans are a precious commodity. Don't get me wrong, I don't like him any more than you do, and I wouldn't support him in any fashion. I'm not ready to tell those who read his stuff (to know the enemy) that they are unethical for doing so.

posted 07-29-2008 11:45 PM            

You deserve that contract ! Your fine education, professional investment, and skills will NEVER be replaced by someone who merely is a pretender and creates Imposters for us all for a price in sending out 40 pound boxes of material those folks either can't or don't absorb anyway. As previously stated, they merely own the equipment, but don't possess the actual training or ethics.

I guess it is just too damn much to ask for the dues I pay for any of my organizations to discipline those who would get in bed with this son of a bitch Grogan. I've been 21 years in this profession and survived EPPA, Doug Williams, Maschke, flawed TV shows like Fox's Moment of Truth, and this bastard. I really just don't know how much more I can take !!! We have all heard of people going Postal (Post Office workers flipping out), and I just wonder what it would take for one of us to lose it and go "POLYGRAPH" on this guy Grogan; as I often feel not far from it !! This profession today is not the one I entered into in 1987, and we have much to overcome. My faith in all of you and your capabilities is all I have left to believe in here.

posted 07-30-2008 05:31 AM            

I have sent a request to use the "Don't be his next victim" graphic as a link from my website to TRUTHABOUTGROGAN.ORG

Wouldn't it be wonderful to see that graphic on the APA, AAPP, and NPA hompages and dozens or hundreds of polygraph examiner websites?

posted 07-30-2008 09:55 AM            

By the way... Does anyone have an update about the status of JG's Defamation suit??

------------------
Ex scientia veritas

posted 07-30-2008 12:32 PM            

Something he said in his original post is very important. Patrick said "we have reached a level of evidence". That is a very important thing as not everyone, even though they don't like him, has really reached that level.

I have been so immersed in Groganology now that I too see the level of evidence. What I also see is that Grogan is a Sociopath and I'm not saying that to be dramatic. My point is that he is not going to stop unless he is stopped. At first, my hopes was that we could expose him and he would change or go away, but he does not have the sense of shame that you and I would have and he has continually increased his efforts to mass market polygraph to the world for his own benefit.

I honestly have no problem with his marketing...I have learned a thing or two from him. It is the lies in the marketing and the lies behind the marketing that are destructive.

I find it very difficult to explain that this yeast IS spreading throughout the entire batch of dough. I can tell you this for sure. You can deal with Grogan now, or you can wait until it blows up in your face, because it will. I don't care if you are private, law enforcement or government, Grogan's diseased yeast is spreading through the entire profession and will eventually effect everyone.

To answer another post about why Maschke is not involved, that is easy. Grogan is Maschke's best friend. Grogan is the examiner Maschke has been waiting for to do the damage he has not been able to attain on his own. If Maschke is completely ignoring Grogan, shouldn't that tell everyone something?

What I am asking and hoping for from the APA is not anything that would cost time or resources, except for a meeting and a vote. All I'm asking from APA and from every legitimate examiner and assocation is a statement of support, an endorsement. Something that shows with all our differences, we can at least come together in some form of unity to stop the damage that is being done by Grogan.

Of course, to do that you first have to believe that he is actually doing damage and that is the part I'm not sure everyone sees. What I mean is that I'm not sure everyone can see the writing on the wall that I see because I'm so immersed in it.

On another note, I want to agree with Barry that the AAPP has been very open and helpful within their organization to spread the word and for that I am very grateful. People like Don Imbordino have the kahonas and the fortitude to make those sorts of things happen. What I perceive, right or wrong is that the APA tends to be fear based first (how will that effect us). It just seems to me that APA can't take a piss without permission from Vaughn. How afraid can we really be and still be effective?

Now I realize this is an association of the polygraph people and unilateral decision cannot be made. What I'm asking for is someone in the APA leadership to have the balls to bring the intiative to the membership for a vote. Yes, I do believe in the long run, it is that important to the profession as a whole. And all I'm asking for in that vote is to answer the question. "As an organization, can we endorse truthabougrogan, put a banner on our website, put out some literature to all the members...anything that would show support. If the membership says 'no', then fine.

Either way, the members of this profession will end up getting what they deserve. In the end, I want to be able to say I did all I could. I'm one guy with six kids and a business to run. I can only do so much. But the collective profession would benefit greatly by a show of unity. Sometimes a common enemy can bring people together in a way nothing else can. But they first have to realize that there really is an enemy...not just an annoyance.

------------------
Ralph Hilliard
PolygraphPlace Owner & Operator

Be sure to visit our new store for all things Polygraph Related
http://store.polygraphplace.com

posted 08-03-2008 11:40 AM            

Rather than just say they should do something, why don't you state the APA's rule or position and then argue the facts to see if you can demonstrate a violation? Right now, you're simply saying you don't like it and they should do something, but you want somebody else to do the leg work.

Before I arrest somebody for a crime, I know I can write a report that state facts that demonstrate the defendant violated a certain law. The DA will then argue those facts and apply the law to convince a judge or jury there was a violation.

posted 08-03-2008 04:16 PM            

The argument that John Grogan's referals to APA members is perhaps better than his own pseudo-examiners getting such a test just does not stand up. That's about like calling a drug dealer a pharmacist and saying that since the drug dealer is refering addicts to a legitimate pharmacist that somehow the drug dealer has done some good. The drug dealer's very existance is in fact the problem !

It is a prima facie case that John L. Grogan has a legally documented background in fraud downloadable to any examiner who would take the time to check him out, or simply check his lack of representation in any organization that would in fact lend him credibility. Further, Grogan's overt acts of supposed testing are as easily accessable as going to YouTube.com which speak for themselves as examples that just don't pass the sight or smell test, if not his assistance to Maschke on that website. I can not imagine that among our legimate peers that one could go beyond a second or third other examiner peer now prior to learning the truth about this person, or his pseudo organization. Therefore, any cooperation at this point with Grogan / PEOA is not consistent with the goals of the APA for it's members or the image of this profession.

Mr. Grogan has envoked the status of being a "Preceptor Trained" Examiner, and further the right to be a paid mail order preceptor trainer to anyone (Regardless of Background) to be in an avocational profession, whereas I can assure you some of us in the know have documented that the public has been dooped in what is nothing less than a pyramid scheme here by him / them. The historical status of preceptor training died a long time ago, perhaps in the 70's, after APA established a list of accreditted schools, which did not exist prior to that era beyond three primary schools in Chicago, New York, and San Diego.

Here is an example of one such Groganite who claims to have been CIA trained, but who in reality is nothing more than a failed mortgage broker who sent away for a 40 pound box. http://www.modernpolygraph.com This individual personally told me that he regards PEOA as the "Minor Leagues" of polygraph. I wasn't aware we had a minor league or vouched for second rate tests.

You know, and are aware, of my finding Grogan's use of the Lafayette LX-4000 in a porno film produced in 10/07 which Ralph has a copy of and covered in a fine news piece. Remember, these are only the outrageous examples that we know of, and by no means cover the full extent of this individual's and cronie's negative effect on this profession.

I suppose there are individual tolerances for what some will put up with in their professional presence before they will speak up. I, along with several others, have risked much, and drawn a line in the sand where we have stood up to this Grogan Son of a Bitch !!!, and will not stand by and pretend that others doing business with him is just Okay !!! Rather, for the dues I / We pay; it is our expectation that the leadership of our legitimate organizations use every means internally and externally to expose and discipline those among us who would falter to such a corrupting force. I / We / You, can no longer operate as if John L. Grogan / Grogan-ites/ or PEOA is somehow a coequal variable in the polygraph professional equation. His mere existance does not translate to legitimacy from which others should / can benefit.

We have much to overcome as a profession. Treasonous cowardly bastards like Maschke, Traitors like Doug Williams, Imposters like John L. Grogan and his demented offspring and assorted mutants, and those who now run polygraph parties in Bars, Nightclubs, Birthdays, ect. -- in immitation of Fox's "Moment of Truth".

Ask yourself this question: Is this profession better off than the day you / we started in it ? I don't mean technologically ! I mean in regard to the respect we get for a job well done ! I for one have have tried to make it so; despite all of the above detracting persons, and in fact have had successes in the field of U.S. Federal Immigration Court WITH TESTIMONY under 702 !!!! What did I get for my efforts in trying to improve this profession ? Being called a "CLOWN" among some of you here in this website by some who barely knew me. So you will ofcourse forgive me if I take the posture of not being very tolerant of those among our numbers who would be short sighted sons of bitches themselves who would cooperate with the likes of John Grogan, or short sighted instrument manufacturers who would sell the tools of our trade to him or PEOA members who are known to them as YOUR IMPOSTERS !!!

In closing, I had a wonderful mentor in one Richard Hickman who was a living legend in the polygraph community prior to his passing on the last evening of 2006. He taught in a polygraph school even at age 87, and up to three weeks before his death. He is missed, but I have the peace of knowing that I have at least professionally lived up to the example path he laid out for me in our special field and task. I wonder how many of us, after running their last exam, will be able to say the same, particularly those who contracted the avoidable condition of Groganitus.

I know that APA is fully aware of the Grogan issue as I have emailed them (Members of the Board & Counsel) over the last year or so about it. No decision on their part is in fact a decision, just as ignoring a cancer is not in and of itself an actual treatment. I somehow still believe though that such a collection of good and fine men and women will in the end come to the logical conclusion and see the threat at our doorstep.

posted 08-03-2008 04:40 PM            

quote:

---

The argument that John Grogan's referals to APA members is perhaps better than his own pseudo-examiners getting such a test just does not stand up. That's about like calling a drug dealer a pharmacist and saying that since the drug dealer is refering addicts to a legitimate pharmacist that somehow the drug dealer has done some good.

---

This makes little sense, and maybe makes my point. If a drug dealer refers a person to a legitimate pharmacist has he done some good? The answer is obvious: yes, he has. He's still a drug dealer, but that's irrelevant. He's referred somebody to a person who can legitimately help him.

Let's now run with your argument. Is the pharmacist now unethical for having "worked with" the drug dealer? Should he be sanctioned? Of course not.

posted 08-03-2008 05:18 PM            

Here is my question that went unanswered in another thread, maybe its too stupid of a question. If you crack down on Grogan and his "peoples" would they really care? Would that stop them? If you required licensing on the guy in Florida, would he stop throwing polygraph parties, or just ignore the rule? Are they really going to lock him up? Does APA have more power then I think? Or am I missing the point.

posted 08-03-2008 06:35 PM            

quote:

---

Okay, I admit that I once signed up for Grogan.

---

I think that shows we all can be fleeced at times. Now you know to investigate all such offers. Did he deliver what he promised? You might have a good testimonial / warning for others to hear. That might just be one more nail in Grogan's to-be-built coffin.

quote:

---

Here is my question that went unanswered in another thread, maybe its too stupid of a question. If you crack down on Grogan and his "peoples" would they really care? Would that stop them?

---

It hasn't stopped him yet. I think the best that can be done is to educate the public who make the effort to be educated. A search of Grogan should land you on the Truth about site, and that's good.

quote:

---

If you required licensing on the guy in Florida, would he stop throwing polygraph parties, or just ignore the rule? Are they really going to lock him up?

---

posted 08-03-2008 06:38 PM            

quote:

---

IS MEMBERSHIP IN, OR PARTCIPATION IN PEOA'S / JOHN L. GROGAN'S REFERAL PROGRAM FOR POLYGRAPH TESTS AN ETHICAL VIOLATION ?

---

posted 08-03-2008 07:28 PM            

You go to the website and it sounds like a great gig. You email the administrator. He returns it and says that you are automatically a member. Then, you start getting poly offers to your email with only a subject line. Eg. Polygraph needed Philadelphia, Employee theft.

I never bit on any and received TONS of emails. He is doing something right with ads. This part is going off memory....I think you contact the admin email and then bid and if you get the job you send a $75.00 finders fee.

posted 08-04-2008 01:47 PM            

Here is my argument based on the stated mission of the APA.

Encouraging and supporting research, training and education to benefit members of the Association as well as those who support its purpose and by providing a forum for the presentation and exchange of information derived from such research, training and education

** Based on this statement as part of the mission statement of the APA, I believe it should not be hard to argue that educating members of what Grogan is up to falls within the stated mission. That is all I'm asking for.

------------------
Ralph Hilliard
PolygraphPlace Owner & Operator

Be sure to visit our new store for all things Polygraph Related
http://store.polygraphplace.com

posted 08-04-2008 03:09 PM            

I understand that. I suppose I should have started my 'perspective' post in a different topic. I think I included it here to show that I am asking for something different and very reasonable in my opinion.

------------------
Ralph Hilliard
PolygraphPlace Owner & Operator

Be sure to visit our new store for all things Polygraph Related
http://store.polygraphplace.com

posted 08-07-2008 09:22 PM            

I had no idea who he was, but said "sure, have them give me a call." It's not the first time I've gotten emails like this from examiners as I am sure most examiners have.

He requested a $95 dollar finders fee after I was paid by the client. I added his fee to the cost. The test was conducted and I was paid. I mailed him his fee.

Soon, I started getting bombarded with emails from PEOA!! After a few months, I started blocking them as spam and several months later learned what he was all about. I emailed him and told him to take me off of his email list. I continued getting the emails for months. Though they have finally stopped.

So, should I be sanctioned for doing an exam. Should I check the validity of every examiner who contacts me? Granted now that I know what he's all about I would not even return the call or email.

I think that the more examiners who learn about him the better, but do not think anyone should be sanctioned, unless they are practicing his unethical ways.

posted 08-07-2008 10:21 PM         

I did the test and collected the fee. Am I unethical because I took a referal from a prostitute? I think not.

OK, I made up this scenario but I think you see my point.

posted 08-07-2008 11:17 PM            

I see your point and I too do not think that Pete’s specific scenario is blatantly unethical.

What if the scenario you gave had additional elements relative to Pete’s along with others that might arise?

posted 08-08-2008 12:01 AM            

I understand what you have said which indicates that you did not have a full knowledge base of Grogan / PEOA being the imposters they are / were at the time.

posted 08-08-2008 09:42 AM            

If I knew of someone who was accepting referrals from this guy, I would try to educate them regarding Mr. Grogan. Once done, their response and further actions might tilt my personal opinion regarding their moral compass.

I hereby propose the terms "Box Boy" and "Box Girl" as unofficial and derogatory, but generally accepted descriptive names for graduates from the Grogan Polygraph Academy and "45 Pounder with GEEEZ" as the descriptive name for the above mentioned academy

------------------
Ex scientia veritas

posted 08-09-2008 01:58 AM            

Personally, now that I know what he's all about, I don't want any of his referrals.

I would like to see other examiners also not take his referrals. It seems to me that it may give him an "air" of legitimacy when he can list APA examiners on his website and continue to promote his farce of a business. If we stood together and denied him this, just maybe he's eventaually go away.

We can hope anyways,