Post reply

The message has the following error or errors that must be corrected before continuing:
Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.
Attachments: (Clear attachments)
Restrictions: 4 per post (4 remaining), maximum total size 192 KB, maximum individual size 64.00 MB
Uncheck the attachments you no longer want attached
Click or drag files here to attach them.
(Clear attachments)
Other options
Verification:
Please leave this box empty:
Type the letters shown in the picture
Listen to the letters / Request another image

Type the letters shown in the picture:
Type the third word in this sentence: 'The quick brown fox jumps.' (answer in lowercase):
Shortcuts: ALT+S post or ALT+P preview

Topic summary

Posted by truthbtold
 - Feb 10, 2006, 05:06 AM
Well.... I don't want to stand out incase big brother is watching this site, ya know?

but basically, if you'll agree with me, I said i'd send my legal paperwork to you but i do not know who you may be... corrections/legal/justice/the system/polygrapher.

Judge me how you'd like but I was only trying to help and just say this site is doing a good thing.  wow, look at my agend.  chill.
Posted by Sergeant1107
 - Feb 08, 2006, 09:24 PM
He sent me a PM which makes me believe he is a polygraph examiner trying to establish some credibility so he is more likely to be believed at a later date.

Truthbtold, if you don't have any objections, I will post the PM here so everyone can take a look at it.
Posted by Johnn
 - Feb 08, 2006, 06:51 PM
Okay, I've deleted my sarcastic post.
Posted by polyfool
 - Feb 08, 2006, 03:10 PM
On a second look at truthbtold's posts, nothing jumps out at me that screams polygraph examiner. However, I still find posts by "caught in the system" and "anti-anti" very suspect. George is right. We all should be very careful before accusing someone of being a polygraph examiner. Imagine the insult. I can't think of a worse name to be called.

Posted by George W. Maschke
 - Feb 08, 2006, 02:32 PM
Note that truthbtold's original post by no means casts polygraphy in a favorable light. In fact, the opposite is true. I see no reason to suppose that truthbtold is an impostor, and I urge all to be very careful before making such accusations.
Posted by Onesimus
 - Feb 08, 2006, 01:31 PM
Why are you guys so convinced he is a phony?
Posted by truthbtold
 - Feb 08, 2006, 03:08 AM
jesus h man, i'm just trying to share my experience and you guys are hella paranoid.

i do not know the special secret squirrell speak i need use to communicate with you guys but take my post as it is.

bottom line: i believe in the good of this site and the REAL TRUTH (the lie) behind the poly.  CM's need to be implemented in any case, because the poly is unreliable.
Posted by polyfool
 - Feb 07, 2006, 10:01 PM
Truthbtold's post is almost as good as the story told by "caught in the system" under the Dallas Sex Offender thread. Notice how "anti-anti" conveniently registers and makes his first post within the same half-hour as a post by  "caught in the system." Most likely the same polygraph examiner with a hidden agenda.
Posted by Johnn
 - Feb 07, 2006, 05:17 PM
Of course this post is made up.  He keeps saying, "Like I said, I've frequent here a lot" or whatever.  

He wants to emphasize this website for some reason.  No need to say, "like I said" when we can go back and read the post as many times as we'd like to.  
Posted by Twoblock
 - Feb 07, 2006, 04:36 PM
Bill

I agree.

I'll bet the whole story hasn't been told here. The post IS suspect.
Posted by Bill Crider
 - Feb 07, 2006, 04:03 PM
well, it could be that the 16 yr olds daddy wasnt happy and pressed charges. kinda bogus but the law is the law. I dont know anyting about this case, just an idea...

besides, its not like people who are telling the truth never pass the polygraph. its just that most of the people on this board i would guess told the truth and failed and are upset.
Posted by Twoblock
 - Feb 07, 2006, 01:59 PM
truthbtold

Truth #1.  LE is not going to waste their time investigating 18 yr. old guys dating 16 yr. old girls. Their is just not enough difference in age. If the girl is 13 or 14, hell yes. Go get'em.

Truth #2. If they arrested every 18 yr. in this circumstance, enough jails couldn't be built in 10 years to hold them.
Posted by truthbtold
 - Feb 07, 2006, 01:34 AM
And you got to remember, this site ISN'T promoting people to lie.  you don't have to lie to pass the test, but on the other hand you don't need to reveal the unnecessary.  

here's an idea, tell the truth, and use countermeasures so you don't get unjustly accused of lying.  

Because face it, if you're lying, then what do you have to hide?

If you're a child molester, it's one thing to go in and tell the truth about innocense and get fucked by the polys art, than it is to go in and lie about diddling children and passing.

The object of this site is to get around the BS of the poly, not get around criminal activity that has actually been committed and not being taken into accountability!

Posted by truthbtold
 - Feb 07, 2006, 01:25 AM
lol.... you guys got me all wrong.  I used behavioral CM's explained on pg 151 of the lie behind and a mental cm on the initial question where there will be stress anyway (it was an expected true question).

I controlled my breathing as well.  And I tried phasing out stressful questions by putting my mind elsewhere.

I am just telling you my experience ok?  If you are that closed minded to it, then you need to wake up a little bit.  

There isn't too much info about I/R tests and how to pass them besides stressing you behaviors.  Your irrelevant reactions are being compared to relevent reactions.... c'mon how fair is that???
Posted by Sergeant1107
 - Feb 07, 2006, 12:38 AM
Yet another version of the polygrapher examiner's favorite advice:  

"Just relax and tell the truth and everything will be fine."

Apparently none of the anectdotal evidence on this site has yet had any effect on the polygraphers who come here with made-up stories like this.  They still must believe that every single person on this board who claims to have told the truth and failed must be lying.

Or they fall back on the old "you must have had a bad examiner" excuse.