posted 07-24-2004 06:47 PM         

While perusing the most recent Relevant Issue, I noticed a report of "confirmed" countermeasures. I must add that I was disheartened to see the samples of charts with an explanation of what may have been occuring. The tracings in question are clearly atypical and indicative of CMs. These may provide an excellent sampling for George to display to his minions and reiterate his instructions to be careful about tipping one's hand with the pneumos, when employing CMs. More importantly, if George knows exactly what the examinee was doing (she may well have been employing any myriad of CM activities...) he can put two and two together and recognize the one secret he has not yet stumbled upon...that is that often times the examinee employing CMs has no clue that the signature is occuring in the pneumo. Yes, even when one is squeezing the anal sphincter!

It may well be that in this case the examinee was in fact deliberately manipulating her breathing. She may also have been doing something else and had no clue that the breathing was affected. The toughest thing to teach ourselves is to interrogate without giving up what tipped us off. Additionally, if you interrogate on "controlled breathing" and the examinee has been squeezing his or her posterior, one may lose credibility. If I got this story correct, the examinee dod not confess to the examiner. Let them tell you what they were doing. Tell them you know what they were doing but don't jump at breathing from the start...if it was anal action, you may never get the confession if you go after breathing! Many examinees using other CMs don't know they have messed up their respiration pattern. Of course, if you've gotten lucky and run into someone who just read Doug Williams and controlled their breathing AND squeezed, that's great. But why take the chance.

posted 07-24-2004 08:58 PM            

Also, I like that these are so obvious because the guys selling countermeasures make it sound like there is really no way we can tell. George is continually preaching his "Challenge to the Polygraph Community" to prove we can detect countermeasures. This little sample should make it obvious even to the untrained that we can.

All in all, my belief is that this is positive, not negative. With that said, I'm 100% willing to be wrong. I am really growing to love this profession and would not purposely do anything to damage it. My goal in fact is quite the opposite.

------------------
Ralph Hilliard
PolygraphPlace Owner & Operator
http://www.polygraphplace.com

posted 07-25-2004 07:39 AM         

My message in no way was to question your motivation or good intentions. I can tell from your enthusiasm since attending the training and overall good efforts that your intentions are positive. And as I mentioned, it's just one man's opinion. But I like to keep us all thinking and on our toes.

posted 07-25-2004 07:46 PM            

Is there no way to tell the difference between the types of CM's? Any research on that?

I really have to get a movement sensor. limestone says they are working on a piezo sensor and i'll jump on that when they get it working. I was able to use the lafayette piezo sensor while at school and it worked very well.

------------------
Ralph Hilliard
PolygraphPlace Owner & Operator
http://www.polygraphplace.com

posted 07-26-2004 07:27 AM         

We can't say that ALL cm activity will show in the pneumo but most will evidence some atypical activity in that channel, as well as the other channels affected (in the case of physical cms, etc.).

Again, the concern is that most of the examinees doing something other than breathing manipulation do not realize they are also causing their breathing to change from what we consider normal respiratory activity or response. I have experienced and heard other similar experiences, where an examinee confessing to squeezing the sphincter or pressing toes, adamantly denied manipulating breathing...they didn't know. (Dr. Gordon Barland has been advocating for years that we not show the charts or divulge what specifically we think they were doing for this very reason.) Other examinees of course are doing both, particularly if they are gulible enough to follow the Sting's advice.

posted 07-27-2004 03:35 PM         

In looking at your charts, I doubt a motion sensor would have helped you in this case. It clearly looks as though only the breathing was being manipulated and a motion sensor won't help confirm breathing CMs. If a pucker had been deployed, you would have seen a GSR spike at that point in the charts.

Don't get me wrong, I use an Axciton Motion Sensor and I love it. I just think that the best CM detector is your own two eyes!

I think that George and Doug are the best thing that ever happened to our profession. They teach these CM's and the subject never gets any good at it and tends to over apply the taught techniques. This just make the CMs easier to spot.

I think I should also point out that I did a test where only breathing CM's were used and admitted to. In this case there was a corresponding GSR spike but no indication of a contraction or movement on the motion sensor. My thought here was that the added tension of applying a breathing CM caused the spike. That's only my thought and perhaps Dr. Barland may have a better explaination.

Ted