posted 07-10-2008 01:59 PM            

Mom and daughter are sleeping in bed together. Mom is passed out drunk. Somehow it was accused the roommate masturbated over daughter and ejaculated on her while she was sleeping. Neither Mom nor daughter awoke during alleged incident.

It was brought up by daughter that she woke up with "gooey stuff on her" that night. Daughter was bathed and clothes were washed prior to allegation. Not sure why she wouldn't wake up.

Male suspect to be tested tomorrow. Detective is wary of Mom's story. I asked what the motivation would be for the allegation. He was not sure. That is a big question I would want answered.

I won't meet with Detective again for further facts until 1/2 hour before test.

Just preliminary thoughts....

DY ejaculate on Jennifer?
DY ejaculate on Jennifer last (Thursday)?
Are you telling me the truth about not ejaculating on Jennifer?(Gordon)

or

EC- Was your semen on Jennifer last Thursday?

(That EC question doesn't sound right to me)
Or we could use exposure or masturbate rather then ejaculate.
and;

UPTAO ## DYE lie about a sexual matter?
IYEL DYE masturbate to porn?
UPTAO ## DYE engage in an unnatural sex act?

Suspect only has a history of CDS, no sex crimes.

Any thoughts?

Edit: Suspect was not offered a polygraph yet, they will offer it to him when he arrives. They like to do it that way.

posted 07-10-2008 03:59 PM            

yes, I have some thoughts. DO NOT set your questions until you know all the case facts!

What is the suspects statement? Was he even in the house or have access to the house (bedroom), at the time? Did he admit to entering the bedroom, if so, why? If not, does he deny entering the bedroom... etc, etc.

Based on your posting, the suspect may not have been interviewed yet. Furthermore, for you to assume the suspect masturbated or that "the liquid" was semen is very dangerous. No-one knows, not even the alleged victims.

I don't understand why you can't have answers to these questions well before the examination. The det's can fax you all statements or at least e-mail a synopsis. 30 minutes may not be enough time to review all the case facts (report docs, statement, etc) in order for you to properly administer the examination.

Jim

posted 07-10-2008 04:35 PM            

Beleive it or not, it is very common for me to do tests on short notice. A day before is odd. Usually its, "Hey this happened, we are going to need you to come in." or "Oh good you are in today, We are going to offer this guy a polygraph."

I talked about this before in another thread. It's Jersey. That's not an excuse, just a fact.

I am just brainstorming because its different then the usaul he touched my groin case. They are subject to change. So are the CQ's.

Thanx for your quick reply, Jim. I am still learning for sure.

posted 07-10-2008 05:38 PM            

I definately wouldn't go the direction of 'was your semen on Jennifer' or DY ejaculate ON....I mean was that his target? (sorry don't mean to be crude). I would stay with masturbating over her.

if they have 'gooey' stuff - why don't they do a DNA test. There is a lot of leg work needed - does the room mate have access to the moms room? - is the room mate sleeping with mom?

BTW, kids sleep hard - its completely possible that she would have slept through this. If you get an admission you may want to find out if he was fondling her while masturbating!

So guys, he is thinking about using the name Jennifer - if the dude did masturbate over this girl - what questions would you ask?

posted 07-10-2008 06:57 PM            

Jim, In the future will have guys fax me a report or put one in the box rather then just try and get a quick rundown via cellphone. Point well taken.

Taylor, UPTAO---Up to the age of. Just the way I was trained. I read the discussion about names in the greens and reds. I am still digesting it. I copied your timebars in my notes.

Probably all for nothing...everyone refuses my tests and some even lawyer up. It's just a bad string I have going.

posted 07-10-2008 07:13 PM            

Wise examiners always say never test on things that are NOT illegal. Whereabouts and whatnots are usually wasted when you can get to the heart of the crime---Buster you probably know this stuff. But an examiner can easily get micro-confessions that add up to alot in increments. Of course that challenge is when to go for the full confession (bolder confrontation) and when to instead use the outwitting manuevers and play a good game of chess for the micro-confessions.

posted 07-10-2008 09:23 PM            

I would usually prefer not to use a CQ about masturbation if there was other material avaialable, but, If you feel the need to use a masturbation CQ, My favorite is "Did you ever masturbate excessively?" using whatever time or or frame of reference bars you wish.

set it like this
Your examinee will probably ask. "How much is excessive?" turn it back on him with "Well how much do you think is excessive? Whether he responds with once a week or 100 times a day agree with him. give him a positive statement of your confidence that he would never do it excessively, repeat the question and get his denial. Another good one for John Q citizen (Don't use it on treatment experienced sex offenders) is Have you ever fantasized about comitting an unnatural sex act.

I agree, your investigators need some polygraph orientation. They need to know that if this guy fails the test it may very well be the last chance anyone ever gets to interrogate the guy. If you don't stick to your guns and require they give you good info, who do you think they will blame if the case tanks.

If he's guilty He already knows the FULL story. If your investigators short change you on facts because they are looking for a quick end to their investigation, your guilty guy will take your lack of knowledge and use it to avoid admissions and quickly turn your interrogation into a fishing expedition to find out how much the police really know.

Every single error of fact you make due to lack of information will strengthen his resolve.

You might still get the admission, but their failure to work their case and provide you with the facts you need before polygraph might mean the difference between a one hour interrogation and six hours without a pee break.

The most consistent reason I have heard investigators use for what I call "Ambush Polygraph" is their fear that if they don't run the exam as soon as they ask him to take it the subject will never come back in.

The way I suggest investigators deal with that issue is kind of double edged challenge question.

I tell the to ask the subject" Would you be willing to take a Polygraph" and before they give him an opportunity to answer follow it with "Now if you did this crime, You should probably say NO right now"

This puts the suspect in a corner. If he doesn't agree to take the test he will feel like he is confessing to the crime. I have seen it work more times than I care to count.

but remember all of this is Just one man's opinion

btw

posted 07-10-2008 09:23 PM            

You mentioned some Q Form, but what Reds would you like?

posted 07-11-2008 06:25 AM            

It can be frustrating at times. You might want to get with your training staff and try to get some podium time with the detectives. I do this about once a year and explain to them what it is I am looking for and need, and why I need it (WHY is the most important part). That generally will take care of the problem over time. Detectives, like many people, will try to take a short cut if they can get away with it. As examiners, we have an obligation to train people who are going to use the polygraph. That way, once we do the test, we have something we can support, but more importantly defend if we have to do so. I can send you a powerpoint that I recently used for the detectives with my agency. Maybe it'll help. Trainig the command staff may be a thought, also. How many of them REALLY know what we can do, can not do, or should not try to do.

posted 07-11-2008 07:58 AM            

Taylor

posted 07-11-2008 09:41 AM            

speaking of cell phones; since you are testing on very short notice (relatively speaking, (as there is no such thing as an emergency polygraph) you may want to get the cell phone#'s for a few examiners you feel comfortable with so as to call them in times like these.

Posting questions and waiting for responses will most likely not be suitable for your "normal" timeframes.

Jim

P.S. Just as a reminder; when developing your test questions, stick to the "facts" of the case, not assumptions or presumtpions of either the victims or detectives (i.e. mastubration, semen presence, etc). If your suspect denies entering the bedroom that night, that would be just as powerful a RQ as anything else. Assuming he mastubated, when perhaps he simply entered the bedroom and sprayed liquid starch on the sleeping parties in order to get a rise out of them (pardon the pun) you will miss the target... Something to keep in mind. Good luck!

posted 07-11-2008 10:15 AM            

He fucking lawyered up.

For the record...here is what happened.

The mother and the 23 year old suspect are caretakers for a rich pro wreslter that is paralyzed.

The mothers one son is 15. We'll call him John. John and the suspect are friends. A little weird 23 and 15.

On the night in question the suspect called Mom and was at a local bar. He asked her to come. They drank together and he ended up at her condo. I think suspect and John were playing xbox together or something when they arrived back at the condo. They are NOT roommates.

Mom went to bed very intoxicated with her 6 year old SON snuggled up next to her. We will call him Josh.

The next morning when they were walking Josh said he woke up with white gooey stuff on him the night before.

Mom said she also noticed when she woke up that her jeanshorts were tampered with. I think unbuttoned and moved down a little.
She claimed that she didn't think much of it right away. She did say she is a heavy drinker and heavy sleeper.

The older son said he confronted suspect via telephone. Supposedly suspect said something to the effect of "Get a rape kit then if you think something happened."

Suspect was very enthusiastic to come in last evening when I was there, but then said that 0900 today was better. He showed up on time and then waited a couple in the lobby. I was to test him right after Det Mirandized and took a statement. When Det brought him back, I was just watching on the closed circuit. As soon as he was mirandized, he lawyered up.

Obviously an argument ensued over if he should have been Mirandized or not. Thats a different story. He would have probably refused the test even if I offered him in a eloquent manner.

---Mom stated they are not sleeping together--

posted 07-11-2008 10:21 AM            

and stat is a walking emporium of interrogation themes.

quote:

---

Just preliminary thoughts....

DY ejaculate on Jennifer?
DY ejaculate on Jennifer last (Thursday)?
Are you telling me the truth about not ejaculating on Jennifer?(Gordon)

---

The first two look good to me. The third is a "yes" answer test. Changes in expected answer introduce a novelty effect, which adds additional noise variance to the data. I'd go with "no" answered questions throughout the test.

You might also consider "masturbate to ejaculation" its longer and chunkier, and he'll have to listen to it. However, the goal here is to shake the tree hard enough for something to fall out.

consider:

• On or about (that date), did you masturbate to ejaculation to Jennifer?

• On or about (that date), did you masturbate to ejaculation to Jennifer while she was asleep?

• On or about (that date), did you masturbate to ejaculation while in that bedroom with Jennifer?

This would make a nice tidy Utah Zone, which, as you know, offers rather good sensitivity to deception and specificity to truthfulness.

quote:

---

or

EC- Was your semen on Jennifer last Thursday?

(That EC question doesn't sound right to me)
Or we could use exposure or masturbate rather then ejaculate.
and;

---

Asking about the state, condition, or location of his semen seems much weaker and flakier than asking about his behavior.

quote:

---

UPTAO ## DYE lie about a sexual matter?
IYEL DYE masturbate to porn?
UPTAO ## DYE engage in an unnatural sex act?

Suspect only has a history of CDS, no sex crimes.

Any thoughts?

---

Yeah. Most people don't wake up in the middle of their adult lives and decide to become sex offenders. If he did this, then it is NOT the first transgression. The behavior itself speaks to a massive absence of boundaries and judgement, and a massive potential for distorted and self-centered thinking about sex behavior.

I'd stay away from sex comparison topic. Masturbation is far too specific.

If it were me, I'd use basic - lie to authority, lie to get out of trouble or hide shame and embarassment, and betraying the trust of people who depended on him. I might use "deviance" as that is not a specific behavior, is judgemental and value laden, and is broad beyond sex behavior. You can always ratchet someone up on deviancy and lying. You can even have some fun double-binding him on masturbation topics and pornography during the pretest. I just wouldn't use those specific topc, or sex behaviors, in the comparisons on a case like this.

quote:

---

Edit: Suspect was not offered a polygraph yet, they will offer it to him when he arrives. They like to do it that way.

---

As discussed before - not ideal, but...

If we say that it is unethical, then it is is unethical - declaratively. There may or may not be anything for our profession to gain from sniping at our own work. It is probably worth remaining thoughtful about what we mean, and what are the defining factors, when we discuss matters of professional ethics and professional policy.

.02

r

------------------
"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here. This is the war room."
--(Stanley Kubrick/Peter Sellers - Dr. Strangelove, 1964)

posted 07-11-2008 10:56 AM            

The reason I liked the "masturbate to porn" is I got a great reaction to that last sex assault. The guy said he did...I said what...he said real scared, "Just once."

Nelson they feel that in serious cases we (the police) only get one oppurtunity to speak with the suspect. They think if we bring them in once, they will never come back again. They feel if they tell them they will be tested-- there isn't a shot in hell they show up. Its been my experience too (in my one year) that mostly only the innocent show up to be tested if it is scheduled. From what I hear, most examiners have better success with no shows then me.

Your question help is appreciated. The questions would change now that I have the whole story as RC suggested.

RC:

The Det/Sgt spent hours with me, and I did put out a form with poly facts, and everyone got a copy of Barry's article. One problem is that they rotate guys in and out for 6 month trial times in CID. I am supposed to sit with each of them, but that gets neglected. Oh well, I left that department for 2 years. if I would have stayed I would have had rank, then more pull to straiten that out.

and;

The pajamas were sent to State Police. Supposedly, they can get semen off them even if they were washed.

Edit: Nelson, why don't you like Masturbate? I know you said too specific, but isn't it just a reaction we are looking for? One of my friends works sex crimes in MD and she said she gets great reactions on all masurbate questions.

posted 07-13-2008 05:39 PM            

Why in the world are your detectives mirandizing the suspect prior to the polygraph when I assume it is a non-custodial interview?

This mistake on the part of the detectives may have very well cost you a chance at the suspect.

posted 07-13-2008 08:28 PM            

We talk to people several times. Some people will only talk once, sure, but that's not the norm. With very limited info, it sounds like the investigators' approach is probably a little too aggressive. If the investigators push too hard (out of fear that they'll lose the guy), they'll telegraph that they have nothing and need him to come back to build their case. We've had murder suspects come in a number of times without a problem. If you're doing tests immediately, then you ought to be running a lot of CITs. Why are they asking about polygraph on the first interview? This may sound harsh, but if you are nothing more than a prop to rescue their interviews, then they can't have much in the interrogation department - the bulk of their jobs.

posted 07-13-2008 08:40 PM            

RC:

We talked about this at length in another one of my threads.Most guys will remember. They were not going to interrogate him.

Not to start more trouble but a nameless high-ranking examiner told me--you are a cop first and an examiner second. If someone has been interrogated and it's a serious case, go run the test, and get the confession.

I completely understand that this mindset is not good for our profession trying to gain scientific acceptance, but on the other hand convictions are set that way.

But, RC I no longer do that and have it in writing to my guys.

posted 07-13-2008 08:49 PM            

Some are young to the unit, but they try to send them to alot of schools. They are trained, some have been to several including Mr. Reid.

They want the confession. I thought that would be what they want worldwide. State Police poly guys have a great rep...why? for their confessions-period.

I only was offered one murder. They have been working a missing person for a while that may be one.The first didnt take the test.For the most part the DA's office takes them and handles the invest themselves--they have an examiner.

posted 07-16-2008 06:20 AM            

Cheers,

Liedoctor