The Polygraph Place

Thanks for stopping by our bulletin board.
Please take just a moment to register so you can post your own questions
and reply to topics. It is free and takes only a minute to register. Just click on the register link


††Polygraph Place Bulletin Board
††Professional Issues - Private Forum for Examiners ONLY
††Drew Richardson a Phony FBI Examiner?

Post New Topic††Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq | search

next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:†† Drew Richardson a Phony FBI Examiner?
stat
Member
posted 09-25-2007 11:02 AM ††† Click Here to See the Profile for stat † ††Edit/Delete Message
Paradiddle has posted the following declaration as both an attachment and a cut and paste which declares that Drew Richardson was never an official FBI polygraph Examiner.The following is a paste of the anti site's version.

Regards, Statadiddle

Hi Anti and Pro folks alike. This is a document/Affidavit which is public domain that swears before a judge that Antipolygraph's own Drew Richardson is a phony FBI Polygraph Examiner. Interestingly, Mr. Richardson has long boasted his FBI Examiner credentials and wealth of expertise and experience as a launch pad for his activism against polygraph. If the document and it's contents are true, than Mr. Richardson owes the people of this site both an explanation and an apology for committing such fraud. Have you no honor sir? Bellow is a cut and paste version of the attached file.
Yours, Paradiddle

CHARLES ELIAS, C.F.L.S.
Attorney at Law
4030 Palos Verdes Drive North, Suite 108
Rolling Hills Estates, California 90274-2526
Telephone: (310) 541-4141
Facsimile: (310) 544-3971
E-mail: ce@alum.mit.edu
State Bar Number 046686

Attorney for Petitioner

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

In re the Marriage of:
ANTHONY MICHAEL MAYFIELD,
Petitioner,
and,
KAREN AIKO MAYFIELD,
Respondent.
CASE NO. YD 045 663
(Transferred for all purposes to the Central District, Dept 22, The Honorable Michael Linfield, Judge)


REPLY DECLARATION of mark johnson to RESPONSIVE DECLARATION of drew richardson

DATE: August 10, 2005
TIME: 8:45 A.M.
DEPT.: CE 22

I, mark johnson, declare as follows:
1.I am a former FBI agent. From 1990 to 1995 I was a field agent in the FBIís Washington Field Office. From 1995 to 1998 I was a Supervising Special Agent in the Polygraph Unit at FBI Headquarters, Washington, D.C.
2.From 1990-1998, in order to become certified as a FBI polygraph examiner an agent had to first complete the 3 to 4 month introductory program at the Department of Defense Polygraph Institute in Aniston, Alabama. During this time, the Department of Defense Polygraph Institute gave training to future polygraph examiners for the FBI, NSA, DOD, Postal Service, Border Patrol, Army, Navy and Marines. Sometime after 1995, the CIA also sent examiner candidates to this school.
3.In the FBI, after completing the introductory program at the Department of Defense Polygraph Institute, a candidate for certification was required to conduct at least twenty (20) polygraph examinations under the supervision of a FBI certified polygraph examiner. After the requisite examinations were concluded, a Supervising Special Agent at the Polygraph Unit, FBI Headquarters reviewed the paperwork generated by the examinations. Additionally, the FBI certified polygraph examiner who supervised the candidateís examinations made a written recommendation to the FBI Polygraph Unit Chief as to whether the candidate should become certified as a FBI certified polygraph examiner. This process generally took six months to a year to complete.
4.During this time, I reported to the FBI Polygraph Unit Chief, James K. Murphy. Mr. Murphy assigned me to supervise Mr. Drew Richardsonís required twenty (20) polygraph examinations after Mr. Richardson had completed the introductory program at the Department of Defense Polygraph Institute so that he could become certified.
5.I am not exactly sure as to when Mr. Murphy assigned me to supervise Mr. Richardsonís required twenty (20) polygraph examinations. My best estimate is that it was sometime between 1991 to 1994.
6.I remember Mr. Richardson very well because he conducted the worst polygraph examination I have ever witnessed. After his first polygraph examination was completed I told him that his test was so poorly done that it was difficult to know where to start a critique. I spent at least two hours reviewing the entire examination process with Mr. Richardson. I later made from between five to seven further appointments for Mr. Richardson to administer additional polygraph examinations under my supervision. Mr. Richardson cancelled each test.
7.As a Field agent, I did not have the authority to decide whether Mr. Richardson would receive a FBI polygraph examiner certification. This authority was vested with the Unit Chief, Mr. Murphy.
8.I wrote an internal memorandum to Mr. Murphy advising Mr. Murphy that Mr. Richardson was, in my opinion, unqualified, incompetent, and ill-suited to conduct polygraph examinations for the FBI. I cannot recall all of the details of my memorandum. I do recall that I specifically stated in the memorandum that Mr. Richardson was unable to construct a fair and satisfactory polygraph test and that he could not correctly interpret polygraph charts.
9.Mr. Murphy adopted my assessment of Mr. Richardson. Drew Richardson never received a certification as an FBI Polygraph Examiner and was never authorized by the FBI to conduct polygraph examinations.
10.Dated this ________________at Leesburg, Virginia, I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.


__________________________________
Mark Johnson

[This message has been edited by stat (edited 09-25-2007).]

IP: Logged

Gordon H. Barland
Member
posted 09-25-2007 11:39 AM ††† Click Here to See the Profile for Gordon H. Barland † ††Edit/Delete Message
There's another interesting, but little publicized fact about Drew Richardson. When he was attending the polygraph examiner course at DoDPI, he was openly contemptuous of the CQT. To graduate from DoDPI, one had to have a 70% average or better on the exams. Being very intelligent, Drew maxed the tests. When he had completed 70% of the course, he decided he no longer needed to attend the remainder of the course, as he now had a sufficient GPA to graduate even with zeros on the remaining tests. He felt his time would be better spent (and more enjoyably) assisting Dr. Barbara Carlton in the research division.

DoDPI notified the Bureau of his non-attendance, whereupon the Bureau ordered him to be in the classroom for the remainder of the course, as that was his TDY assignment. If he didn't, he would be considered in dereliction of his duty. He decided to remain in the classroom. He was graduated. And the rest is history.

Peace,

Gordon

------------------

IP: Logged

stat
Member
posted 09-25-2007 12:44 PM ††† Click Here to See the Profile for stat † ††Edit/Delete Message
I was told by the documenteur that it was a public document. Does anyone believe that such a document being posted is illegal, due to there being a lack of stamps and or signatures? I need a an answer pretty quick folks (Barry.)

IP: Logged

stat
Member
posted 09-25-2007 02:06 PM ††† Click Here to See the Profile for stat † ††Edit/Delete Message
It's getting kinda heated over there. Drew chimed in with a very smokey reply to the doc. Paradiddle is finally in a position to use the same evil circular logic and high-horse credibility ridicule that George cloaks himself in.
Today has been more fun that running actual tests. The question of libel is still in the back of Paradiddle's mind though.

[This message has been edited by stat (edited 09-25-2007).]

IP: Logged

Barry C
Member
posted 09-25-2007 04:40 PM ††† Click Here to See the Profile for Barry C ††Click Here to Email Barry C†† ††Edit/Delete Message
Stat,

I don't know what your question means exactly. I'm going to have to go catch up on that site - it's been a few hours.

Posting a public document isn't illegal as far as I know. It's not possible to post an attested copy - you could only post a copy of an attested copy (since it's hard to put a raised seal on all our computers). Do you know that the original is an actual or attested copy of a legally filed public document?

Maybe thiw will make more sense when I get a chance to read it all. Sorry.

IP: Logged

stat
Member
posted 09-25-2007 07:00 PM ††† Click Here to See the Profile for stat † ††Edit/Delete Message
OK, so it isn't the pentagon papers, but it is fun to have dirty things on dirt slingers.
Our glass house has many broken windows already, so I believe we can throw a few stones.

IP: Logged

Taylor
Member
posted 09-25-2007 09:47 PM ††† Click Here to See the Profile for Taylor ††Click Here to Email Taylor†† ††Edit/Delete Message
That was a great find. I really enjoy your posts...keep up the good work. Taylor

IP: Logged

Barry C
Member
posted 09-26-2007 05:31 PM ††† Click Here to See the Profile for Barry C ††Click Here to Email Barry C†† ††Edit/Delete Message
As painful as it is to read that site at times, I got a couple good laughs out of it.

He's still thinking about the CM study. Serious methodological flaws to be cited later - right. Translation: I don't like what it says, so I have to figure something out. Perhaps the editors will print his critique next. Don't hold your breath.

Don't forget though: you can never win with George. His hate of polygraph blinds him from reason at times.

It is fun to see their heads spinning in several directions at once.

IP: Logged

stat
Member
posted 09-26-2007 08:37 PM ††† Click Here to See the Profile for stat † ††Edit/Delete Message
I am running out of steam over there folks. Could some of you sharp-barbed professionals get a proxy server and join the frey? I told another fellow combatant that if 12 Examiners posted over there regularly, we would run the place----demanding at every turn with circular logic that George and gang must prove in peer reviewed research that their CM's are effective. He would fold as I sense from his last few posts that he is becoming very frustrated with the onslaught--an emotion rarely seen in him-----and we only have 5 pro-poly posters there now. Our true numbers are far too great to ignore, and it's time we do some pro-bono volunteering for our profession. If we had 20, we would crush them with white noise alone.

my 2 cents

IP: Logged

stat
Member
posted 09-27-2007 12:41 PM ††† Click Here to See the Profile for stat † ††Edit/Delete Message
OK, I have alot of things I have to do, and the antisite isn't on the list. I NEED HELP! Those misfits over there might think I am running away. Please, someone take the ball for the afternoon and evening. FYI, George was very upset in a private message with me this morning over alleging that he (TLBTLD) encourages sex offender "wriggling" and "disengaging from sex offender treatment and respite from criminal behavior." He really hated that remark---and I explained it thoroughly---and was met with his deafening silence.
Eos abhores the notion of helping sex offenders. Sarge has a soft spot/weakness for his patriotism---and refuses to believe that polygraph is useful in that arena. These are easy shots people---I need your help. Don't be afraid of those clowns. Remember, when the public does a google on polygraph----antipolygraph.org is the front bay window to our profession---and why the F we have let 6 or 7 idiots decorate that front window is a crime. A relative small number of us can overwhelm that site with just 15 minutes a day each. I implore you to consider doing a little charitable work on our tragic but true front bay window.

yours,
Stat

IP: Logged

stat
Member
posted 09-28-2007 04:02 PM ††† Click Here to See the Profile for stat † ††Edit/Delete Message
nuked sarcasm

[This message has been edited by stat (edited 09-28-2007).]

IP: Logged

stat
Member
posted 09-29-2007 09:07 AM ††† Click Here to See the Profile for stat † ††Edit/Delete Message
bok bok bok bok bok
bokaaawww!

IP: Logged

stat
Member
posted 09-29-2007 09:28 PM ††† Click Here to See the Profile for stat † ††Edit/Delete Message
ok, now I am getting inspired.We need more examiners over there. That site could be ours. George is going to S his pants if this keeps up. His private messages are beginning to get angry with Paradiddle. We CAN have the last word----always. Polygraph IS our field you know.

IP: Logged

Ted Todd
Member
posted 09-29-2007 09:47 PM ††† Click Here to See the Profile for Ted Todd † ††Edit/Delete Message
Stat

Don't give up. We are getting there. George only has about five or six regular posters right now. I think "Beachtrees" may have eaten his gun because he has not been heard from in a while.

The sad part is....while a few people do battle on George's site, hundreds of people look at his site and buy into his bullshit. I DQed a kid today for CMs with a total admission that he had been to George's site and felt he needed to do the CMs in order to pass. In reality, he had nothing to hide.

It is just more proof that George is only hurting the very people he professes to want to help.

I say that George is not the enemy, at least not to us. I think we should get Ralph to add a new section to this site to specifically address countermeasures. At least that way, we could point the confused wannabees in the right direction and give them the truth about what we do. The best defense is always a good offense.

Ralph, waddauthink?

Peace, regards, niters, bwook, etc,

Ted

IP: Logged

stat
Member
posted 09-30-2007 09:50 AM ††† Click Here to See the Profile for stat † ††Edit/Delete Message
Ladies and Germs;


Here are some thoughts I have on how polygraph examiners can volunteer to make the front window of polygraph, well, our winow rather than the anti window. What we have at present is a antipolygraph web site that has a greater search priority than any other polygraph website----bar none. I am pleased with the new pro-poly bloggers such as Wonder Woman, Mystery Meat, and Ludovico. that have joined the frey. George has expressed frustration over the influx of pro-poly bloggers. This is a good thing, as curious onlookers read statements that provide them with counter-points to using countermeasures. Any doubts in such a person's mind is a good thing----and if one CIA applicant with a chinese national mistress with a "student visa" or a sex offender who has a special young friend next door decides to abondon hope of defeating the test----well, it's worth it, isn't it?

Let's look at the current group of the more active anti-polygraph bloggers, and maybe shed some light on their strengths and weaknesses.
George Maschke---The Padre of the movement. This is a steely eyed debater who has little bluster--except when his site is being overrun by pro-poly folk. He is a man who must always have the last word, and he spends nearly every hour on his board---only breaking every hour for 10 minutes or so (remember, I have been on vacation and essentially spending most of my time on the site casing the joint.) As we all know, for people who have to have the last word, doing such is the only way to satisfy their need for relevance----and to deny a person like him the last word is like giving a food addict one rice cake after another---to their bottomeless and unfulfilled desire. This brand of torture is easy enough, hell a child can continue to deny a man like him the last word. As a fellow poster once confided to me...it's fun too.

Sergeant--aka "Sarge"--This is a man who is allegedly a physical science technologist who recreates auto accidents (my mother-in-law would be good at that job as she has had every conceivable car accident.) Sarge claims to have had 3 false positives with 3 different examiners early in his LE career---and states such with an aire of credibility. His logic, while simple, is quite powerful---but easy to debate because it is so simplistic. Sarge's character on anti is well regarded and is known as a heartfelt cop with integrity. His argument is against applicant screening polygraph tests only---rather than polygraph as a whole.

Digithead----I call him "D-Head" (he can't possibly like being called that [tee hee]) Dhead is a ruthless poster and claims to be a criminology expert who works in facilities with various criminal elemants. He has a mastery of social sciences and testing, and he is a wicked hater of all things polygraph. His greatest nemisis was palerider as this guy more than other typifies the challenge of an honest debate----as he will fall back on the "reading of entrails pseudo-science" concept over and over and over again. The only weapon against Dhead is sarcasm and pure science. Palerider never was so hot with science, and Dhead requires a " BarryC/Ray type of Scientific Studies Geek" or merely a Don Rickles type for dispatch.

EosJupitor. Eos is a scientist with a federal contractor---I've long suspected the Department of Energy ora Lockheed Martin/ MacDonald Douglas type of engineer. He claims to have trained others to beat poly tests (applicant screening). Eos is the most rational of all posters. His logic is clear, and he has admitted in private to Palerider that he wants sex offenders to suffer polygraph---havig become very upset at the notion that above all else regarding devils advocate---the notion of helping sex offenders turns his stomach. Eos has been alleged to attend polgraph seminars in secret, and once claimed to have met Dr. Barland in person while either posing as an examiner, or perhaps he is an examiner (in a former life.) Eos' claims are exaggerated, and at times he engages in paranoia inducing blather---so this guy could possibly be completely full of bologna regarding his activities. This guy intrigues me above all others. He typically remains civil if not annoyingly rational---but we all know his "hobby" could be very dangerous to the country and community. Eos disclosed having interest in sociological Heuristicism (the handing down of fables and demonstrations of logic through story telling---among other things.)

TwoBlock--A real idiot. This guy claims to be poly tested on a regular basis---but his penmanship is so poor that one can only deduce that he is a sex offender, as any intel worker/ defense contractor this GD dumb scares me. He is the easiest to dispatch as he (again) is so dumb that he can only engage in ad hom (personal) attacks and empty braggs about "beating the test" with his super human powers. I love F'ing with this moron more than any of the others. He recently lost his temper completely after Wonder Woman took great shots at his idiocy and he called her a "whore." That was the most satisfying thing as it showed that he is most certainly a sexist, masogynist sex offender. goods times. George had to do some damage control after Twoblocks moronism.

Lethe Lethe is on a crusade to get an examiner to admit (among other things) that knowlege of CQT diminishes accuracy. This guy is a real pain in the butt. He has a particular venom for LieBabyCryBaby--and has pursued him relentlessly. I have long suspected that Lethe is either Gino or is Georges alter-ego---as he writes like Gino, but I have yet to see Lethe and George on the site at the same time. Lethe is a cold, yet civil broken record. If I were a master of the existing Polygraph studies, I would bury him in homework and analysis. Sarcasm falls flat on this very annoying, repetitive jerk. Incidently, Lethe has not once disclosed any sort of clue about himself as to just what he does for a living or really anything---further reinforcing my notion that he is really an administrator's alter-ego.

1904 This man is the most deft debater of them all. He is and was an examiner for many years---as well as an expert on statement analysis and LVA/CVSA. He is the most sardonic, sarcastic, and artistic poster. His opinions are all over the place. You cannot predict this man, other than he has no tolerance for for imperfection, and has privately stated to Palerider that he merely posts to "take the piss out of people" (he is a foreigner from South Africa.) He usually only posts sarcasm and has been kicked off of the site and warned of his attacks by George on several occasions. 1904 is an equal opportunity provocateer. 1904's weakness is that he will melt from placated flattery as he takes pride in his witicisms.


Every one of these posters is the face of polygraph. When a person does simple google searches for polygraph, these are the cats doing the talking, not Sackett's or Barry's or Jack's advice to "just tell the truth." I prefer this realm here by a mile, but I volunteer at the "anti-clinic." Again, please volunteer as Wonder Woman, MysteryMeat, Ludovico have. One of them confided to me yesterday saying [paraphrased]"I am addicted to posting over there already."

Regards, Stat

[This message has been edited by stat (edited 09-30-2007).]

IP: Logged

rnelson
Member
posted 09-30-2007 01:22 PM ††† Click Here to See the Profile for rnelson ††Click Here to Email rnelson†† ††Edit/Delete Message
stat,

Lethe is from mythology. Its the river of forgetfulness surrounding hades - or something like that.

r

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


IP: Logged

rnelson
Member
posted 09-30-2007 07:58 PM ††† Click Here to See the Profile for rnelson ††Click Here to Email rnelson†† ††Edit/Delete Message
A new record at the anti site.

7 registered users online at once. If I am correct, most of those were polygraph examiners, and two of the others may have been the same person.

What a show.

r

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


IP: Logged

All times are PT (US)

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic††Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Us | The Polygraph Place

copyright 1999-2003. WordNet Solutions. All Rights Reserved

Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Version 5.39c
© Infopop Corporation (formerly Madrona Park, Inc.), 1998 - 1999.