posted 12-04-2012 10:04 AM         

A totally preventable screw-up. One would think an "expert" would know better.

The judge was not happy.

Further reading:
http://www.poconorecord.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20120308/NEWS/203080319

Here's a snippet from the second linked article:

"The polygraph will know if you lie," he [the same expert] said.

(yawn) The usual pre-test bluster.

Reminds me...An ignorant test-taker is a good test-taker.

By the way, the audience was a bunch of kids in junior college.

Yeah, I'd say that 10 years from now we'll be right where we were in the NAS (2002) and OTA (1983) eras.

Even the best of exams are fraught with uncertainties. (Not to mention the worst.)

posted 12-04-2012 12:22 PM         

From the article:

Tevald "appeared for what he believed would be a polygraph examination, but no polygraph examination was administered," Baratta wrote. "Instead, Mr. Patton, after misstating the law relating to consensual sexual relations, subjected the defendant to an aggressive interrogation regarding the details of his sexual encounter with the victim."

So, once again, the cops used the polygraph "test" as a ruse to get the suspect in a controlled situation, without counsel, and then grill the guy.

In my initial post, I made no mention of accuracy. I cited the NAS and OTA studies merely as time markers relative to how public perception of the polygraph can be measured.

The main function of the polygraph in the hands of the cops is that of interrogation prop. It was true then (OTA era) and it's true now.

Irrespective of advances in polygraph "science," I don't see much change in public perception. I don't see any hope for change either -- especially in the Information Age -- even in light of the industry's meta-analysis.

Some thirty years after OTA, in this case and with this examiner, we have:

o The polygraph "test" being used as a ruse to grill suspects

o Clear presence of examiner bias

o Clear indication of examiner incompetence (failure to record the session)

o Perpetuating of myths such as "The polygraph knows when you lie" by a polygraph expert lecturing college kids during his little dog-and-pony show.

o More ammo for GM and the A-P crowd

posted 12-05-2012 06:24 AM            

Had he conducted and exam, and had he obtained a recorded and accountable confession, there would very likely be a conviction on this.

So, the trust-me-I'm-an-expert model, without recording, seems to be failing.

People want to use the polygraph. They want the polygraph to be accountable in the usual ways. I think we can do that quite easily.

.02

r

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

posted 12-05-2012 09:32 AM         

The polygraph will know if you lie.

I'd wager the expert in this case gave the same cocky warning to every chump who ever sat for his polygraph "test."

Sure, the polygraph knows when you've been lying. Just like Santa Claus knows who has been naughty or nice.

And given that this expert said those very words to a college audience within the last year, he probably isn't keeping up with polygraph "science." Or unicorns.

Remember, kids: An ignorant polygraph test-taker is a good polygraph test-taker.

Evidently, the same applies to polygraph show-and-tell audiences.

posted 12-06-2012 09:25 AM            

Maybe the anti-polygraph.org folks would enjoy your satire more than the folks here????