|
Author
|
Topic: Countermeasures - Obstruction of Justice?
|
detector
Administrator
|
posted 03-01-2004 03:34 PM
  
What are the possibilities of an examinee being successfully charged with Obstruction of Justice for using countermeasures in a criminal case?Please understand I do not know the law nor the ramifications of what I'm asking so be gentle. My point would be what if we could get this type of charge into the books and use it to scare off some potential countermeasure users. This was actually the idea of another student in the polygraph school and it sounded intriguing enough to stir up some discussion over the possibilities... ------------------
Ralph Hilliard
PolygraphPlace Owner & Operator
http://www.polygraphplace.com
IP: Logged |
sackett
Moderator
|
posted 03-01-2004 07:42 PM
About the same likelihood of a citizen being prosecuted for filing a false police report, for what "they" perceived as police misconduct, when NOT caught on camera, and not really happening the way they reported it did. In a perfect world perhaps, but not ours... Jim P.S. On a serious note, we would have to have them on tape/camera admitting they went on the I-net and learned the CM's, then attempted to beat the exam by using George's techniques, then confess to the overall issue. Not likely, especially if they take all the warnings to heart. IP: Logged |
Barry C
Member
|
posted 03-02-2004 09:46 AM
The charge of "Obstruction of Justice" usually refers to the federal crime, which would not apply to the situation you pose.Each state might have its own version of the offense, but my guess is they would all require force, violence, or some type of fraud, which is a far reach for one employing CMs. In addition, even if there were such a crime, it would be difficult to prove without a confession. You can argue all day how a reaction(s) looks like a CM, but you'd be hard pressed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt the reaction(s) was in fact an intentional CM. Just to make this a little more interesting I'll polute the waters with this: Before a confession gets in, the state must prove a prima facie case. A good lawyer might be able to get the case dumped before you are even able to introduce the CM confession. (Also, how much would the states be willing to spend on experts to testify on these cases? My guess: nothing.) Do we have any lawyers in the forum who might be able to shed some light on this? By the way, how was school? [This message has been edited by Barry C (edited 03-02-2004).] IP: Logged |
J.B. McCloughan
Administrator
|
posted 03-03-2004 03:16 PM
I am not a lawyer but I personally think that it would be difficult, if not impossible in most cases, to prosecute someone for this given the test issues and settings for the majority of us. It may however be applicable in security setting. For example; A spy is sent to achieve employment from a federal/state/local agency and in doing so has knowledge that the final goal is to thwart the security of this nation. To do so they are instructed, and/or receive information, and/or obtain information on how to ‘attempt’ to ‘beat’ the polygraph, to gain employment. Their actions could be construed in and of themselves as a conspiracy against the Untied States of America. Even if they do not achieve the end result, the intent was still there. Proof of this is another matter.Just my thoughts on the issue. For interesting reading, see the following link http://www.supremecourtus.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/01-1184.pdf
It is long winded but covers some of the very issues we are discussing. IP: Logged |
J L Ogilvie
Moderator
|
posted 03-03-2004 05:31 PM
How about this option? In our department we have been talking about disqualifying applicants for counter measures. Obviously it is an integrity issue.We could only do so if they admitted the use of CM's and could not keep them from re-applying a year later. However if the applicants begin to get the idea they will not be hired if they use counter measures maybe they will think twice about it. I am only talking about those applicants who are being truthful but using counter measures because George told them they had too to pass the test. The liars will take care of themselves. It is very difficult to get them to admit they used CM's. We have even caught them red handed posting messages to George to tell about how successful they were and they still won't admit it. Personally, I think they should all be told that if they try CM's they will automatically be dropped from the process for a minimum of one year. I have told them that if I believe they are screwing with the test, they will be asked to leave. ------------------
IP: Logged | |
Polygraph Place Bulletin Board
