- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by lawyer
- May 20, 2004, 06:26 PMQuote from: Twoblock on May 20, 2004, 05:49 PMLawyer
If one files a court action against the polygrapher and his agency charging them with falsly labeling one a liar (which essentially blacklists one with all other agencies), isn't it up to that side to prove their innocense? Especially when it can be proved, for instance, that one never used or sold drugs? Also, isn't blacklisting against the law?
It is an old axiom but it is true. It is impossible to prove a negative.
Posted by Twoblock
- May 20, 2004, 05:49 PMLawyer
If one files a court action against the polygrapher and his agency charging them with falsly labeling one a liar (which essentially blacklists one with all other agencies), isn't it up to that side to prove their innocense? Especially when it can be proved, for instance, that one never used or sold drugs? Also, isn't blacklisting against the law?
If one files a court action against the polygrapher and his agency charging them with falsly labeling one a liar (which essentially blacklists one with all other agencies), isn't it up to that side to prove their innocense? Especially when it can be proved, for instance, that one never used or sold drugs? Also, isn't blacklisting against the law?
Posted by lawyer
- May 20, 2004, 05:08 PMQuote from: No Name on May 18, 2004, 10:02 PMIf you are told by the agency the polygraph is reliable, and you make a career decision to take it believing it is accurate, I think you should be able to take legal action if you are false positive. And especially if the agency really was aware of the high false positive rates all along.
For one thing, you don't have a right to be employed, and for another it would be impossible for you to prove that "you are false positive".
Posted by No Name
- May 18, 2004, 10:02 PMIf you are told by the agency the polygraph is reliable, and you make a career decision to take it believing it is accurate, I think you should be able to take legal action if you are false positive. And especially if the agency really was aware of the high false positive rates all along.
Posted by ibenubee
- May 15, 2004, 03:50 AM My first suggestion is to stay away from porno sites, especially if you can go to prison for visiting them. From reading your post it is obvious that polygraph is not the issue here. If it was a "post conviction" polygraph there must have been enough evidence for the conviction in the first place, which had nothing to do with polygraph. Anyone who is in the position of knowing that they are on probation and are at the mercy of their probation officer should get their crap together. Obviously you haven't. You're on probation and are looking at porn with your wife's knowledge "to piss her off" and then you get caught cheating on her. Wake up and get it together. This site is for people who are getting screwed over by polygraphs, not people who are getting screwed over by their own stupidity.
Posted by ray p
- May 15, 2004, 02:38 AMHey every one who knows of this site. I am a married man of seven years, Tow years ago I was a porn junky. Basically to piss my wife off."full of regrets"!!! any way I cheated on her and she turned my pc to a state trooper. They asked me for permission for a foresic search I agreed "no big damn deal??" well I was arrested for "encouraging child sex abuse2" i.e. three thumbnails of teens were on pages as ads. I took a post conviction specific issue poly. I passed whith flying colors with everything I had lied about. Ecept!!! the questions the examiner emphasised verbally. I had no "stim" test or anything to verify a lie. I was also yelled at because I moved my arm and was threated with jail term. Then I was asked the relavent question directly afterwards. I was pissed and there was never any recording of any kind. HELP!!!! WHAT DO I DO? :-/
Posted by Marty
- May 03, 2004, 05:38 AMQuote from: This Sucks on May 02, 2004, 09:54 PMThis Sucks,
Well no BS here my friend, it must be your breath...
Riddle me this smart guy, I now have a better understanding of the questions asked on the poly and it still seems highly illogical that I would use counter measures on questions such as my name etc and not on the relavent ones... But hey what do I know?..
Thanks again for your insightfull post it has been helpful.
I guess the saying is true opinions are like assholes, every one has one, and you appear to have a large one than most.
--ts
Screening tests are looked on as suspect by many polygraphers that otherwise value them for specific incident tests and as interrogation tools. Confounding the uncertainty associated with screening polys is the widespread info, not always understood, about how polys work.
Non deceptive individuals will still vary considerably in their response to various questions but now we have the additional criteria of CM detection. This will convert some additional exam results from NDI to CM's suspected. This may happen even when the examinee is in fact non deceptive. It will likely also convert some true DI's to NDI's.
Absent open discussion about how polygraphers examine the informed, one can reasonably speculate the principal CM detection mechanisms target people that deploy them erroneously, such as on irrelevent questions or the "long and strong" suggestions offered here recently. Unfortunately, some of these will falsely identify CM's simply due to individual variation. You may well be one of these.
Marginal science produces marginal results. The theory is that false positives are unfortunate but unavoidable. However, the loss of highly qualified individuals that simply avoid careers in LE is a likely consequence that is not a part of the agency's equation.
-Marty
Posted by This Sucks
- May 02, 2004, 09:54 PMQuote from: I-Smell-BS on May 02, 2004, 08:18 PMWell no BS here my friend, it must be your breath...
TS, you are now ranked in the top 10. Yep, probably one of the biggest whiners I have seen on this board, and that is saying something because George and his buddies are the best whiners and crybabies around. All you guys are so sure of your qualifications and so convinced you would be "perfect" for the job, and the polygraph guy is just out to get you. Everyone of you are completely innocent. Not one who has been called a liar ever told even one lie. Sure smells like BS to me.
Riddle me this smart guy, I now have a better understanding of the questions asked on the poly and it still seems highly illogical that I would use counter measures on questions such as my name etc and not on the relavent ones... But hey what do I know?..
Thanks again for your insightfull post it has been helpful.
I guess the saying is true opinions are like assholes, every one has one, and you appear to have a large one than most.
--ts
Posted by I-Smell-BS
- May 02, 2004, 08:18 PMQuote from: This Sucks on May 01, 2004, 08:56 PMThe thing that gets me is that I was rejected solely without merit. If it had been phase one or phase two testing that I did not pass, it would be one thing, but to be rejected due to a flawed test and flawed polygrapher is really eating me up. It just makes no sense.
,
TS
TS, you are now ranked in the top 10. Yep, probably one of the biggest whiners I have seen on this board, and that is saying something because George and his buddies are the best whiners and crybabies around. All you guys are so sure of your qualifications and so convinced you would be "perfect" for the job, and the polygraph guy is just out to get you. Everyone of you are completely innocent. Not one who has been called a liar ever told even one lie. Sure smells like BS to me.
Posted by This Sucks
- May 01, 2004, 08:56 PMGentlemen, thank you for your kind words as well as recommendations for action. I will be writting a letter/letters this weekend, perhaps they will allow me a retest, but my hopes are not real high.
My wife has been so great throughout all this turmoil, to say this has been a major dissapointment would be an understatement but having her stand there beside me has helped enormously.
The thing that gets me is that I was rejected solely without merit. If it had been phase one or phase two testing that I did not pass, it would be one thing, but to be rejected due to a flawed test and flawed polygrapher is really eating me up. Like I stated before, I have patterned my life since the age of eight in the hopes of becoming and FBI agent. I avoided all the trappings of drugs, theft etc because in my head I would tell myself that if I did this act, I could never be in the FBI, not that I would do them anyway, but I would fall back on the FBI as a mental check, so to speak.
Damn I am pissed off!! To think I was more than willing to give up my current career that pays more than twice what an agent makes in order to realize a childhood dream. I absolutely had no reason to use countermeasures, and especially on such irrelevant questions like my name. It just makes no sense.
Thanks again guys,
TS
My wife has been so great throughout all this turmoil, to say this has been a major dissapointment would be an understatement but having her stand there beside me has helped enormously.
The thing that gets me is that I was rejected solely without merit. If it had been phase one or phase two testing that I did not pass, it would be one thing, but to be rejected due to a flawed test and flawed polygrapher is really eating me up. Like I stated before, I have patterned my life since the age of eight in the hopes of becoming and FBI agent. I avoided all the trappings of drugs, theft etc because in my head I would tell myself that if I did this act, I could never be in the FBI, not that I would do them anyway, but I would fall back on the FBI as a mental check, so to speak.
Damn I am pissed off!! To think I was more than willing to give up my current career that pays more than twice what an agent makes in order to realize a childhood dream. I absolutely had no reason to use countermeasures, and especially on such irrelevant questions like my name. It just makes no sense.
Thanks again guys,
TS
Posted by Fair Chance
- Apr 30, 2004, 09:39 PMDear This Sucks,
Yes, it does. No matter how you try to excuse the results, it hurts. The FBI prides itself on its scientific excellence yet it still defends and promotes the polygraph prescreening exam. You are no doubt one of 3,500 applicants before the fiscal year 2004 is over that will fail the exam. The other 3,500 applicants (agent and support) will pass. It is a 50-50 crapshoot. Please send a letter of appeal and keep trying to appeal. The FBI is counting on you to become frustrated and embarassed about your "failure" and not contest anything.
Please do not stop trying.
Regards.
Yes, it does. No matter how you try to excuse the results, it hurts. The FBI prides itself on its scientific excellence yet it still defends and promotes the polygraph prescreening exam. You are no doubt one of 3,500 applicants before the fiscal year 2004 is over that will fail the exam. The other 3,500 applicants (agent and support) will pass. It is a 50-50 crapshoot. Please send a letter of appeal and keep trying to appeal. The FBI is counting on you to become frustrated and embarassed about your "failure" and not contest anything.
Please do not stop trying.
Regards.
Posted by Drew Richardson
- Apr 30, 2004, 01:03 PMI do not know nor pretend to know where ground truth lies with regard to this thread's story. That having been said, I do believe that neither my former colleagues in the FBI nor anyone else involved with polygraphy can reliably and accurately identify countermeasure application as would be confronted in commonly utilized polygraph screening exams. Because of that and their (FBI Polygraph Examiner's) likely and correct realization that someone is using such countermeasures somewhere at sometime, I do think it probable that some wild guessing leading to wrongful accusation(s) of countermeasure usage is most likely occurring.
On a more fundamental level though, I do believe that one or more of those examiners possesses the requisite grain of sense to realize that polygraph screening does not work as intended, is a veritable disaster, and should be discontinued. What I am left wondering though is whether there are one or more such individuals who also possess the fortitude to buck the system and risk the consequences of telling the emperor that he is naked when it comes to such matters...
On a more fundamental level though, I do believe that one or more of those examiners possesses the requisite grain of sense to realize that polygraph screening does not work as intended, is a veritable disaster, and should be discontinued. What I am left wondering though is whether there are one or more such individuals who also possess the fortitude to buck the system and risk the consequences of telling the emperor that he is naked when it comes to such matters...
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Apr 30, 2004, 06:12 AMI am saddened to read of your experience. Like you, I also had never heard of polygraph countermeasures until a polygrapher accused me of using them.
Although I am not optimistic about your chances of being granted a "re-test" (granting of such would be an implicit admission on the Bureau's part that it lacks confidence in its ability to detect countermeasures), it is important that you contest your polygrapher's accusation in writing. Your polygrapher's accusation is now part of your permanent FBI HQ file, and it may adversely impact your future career prospects with any U.S. Government agency that requires a security clearance. The letter you send will be added to your file and will at least document the fact that you dispute the accusation. I don't think it would hurt to cc your letter to your Applicant Coordinator as a courtesy.
I hope you will consider joining us in working to put an end to polygraph screening. You'll find some suggestions on how to do that on the Get Involved page.
Although I am not optimistic about your chances of being granted a "re-test" (granting of such would be an implicit admission on the Bureau's part that it lacks confidence in its ability to detect countermeasures), it is important that you contest your polygrapher's accusation in writing. Your polygrapher's accusation is now part of your permanent FBI HQ file, and it may adversely impact your future career prospects with any U.S. Government agency that requires a security clearance. The letter you send will be added to your file and will at least document the fact that you dispute the accusation. I don't think it would hurt to cc your letter to your Applicant Coordinator as a courtesy.
I hope you will consider joining us in working to put an end to polygraph screening. You'll find some suggestions on how to do that on the Get Involved page.
Posted by THIS SUCKS
- Apr 30, 2004, 12:32 AMQuote from: FBI Examiner on Apr 29, 2004, 09:02 PMHIHi John! how ya doing? You really dropped the ball on my exam..lol.. Probably not you, but feels nice pretending. I sure am having a hard time believing that an agency which I highly respect uses a test which is so flawed....I repeat, I wish I had known about this site before my test, because I was dumb enough to go into it thinking that telling the truth is the way to go..
Boy was I wrong
Posted by FBI Examiner
- Apr 29, 2004, 09:02 PMHI 