Post reply

Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
Log in
Sign up

May 04, 2026, 09:57 AM

AntiPolygraph.org Message Board
► Polygraph and CVSA Forums
► Polygraph Procedure
► Post reply ( Re: Pathological and Compulsive Liars? )

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.

Name
Email
Subject
Message icon

[quote author=InnocentWithPTSD link=msg=25519 date=1188348912]
Pathological and Compulsive Liars?

Do polygraph techniques exist that can detect pathological or compulsive liars?  Are such liars not purported to have the ability to pass polygraph exams?

[quote author=Stan_Smith link=topic=0.0 date=1188183612]Ya know what, if you all want to believe this compulsive liar, feel free.  I have the information from his posts that I needed.  I had thought perhaps you here were intelligent enough to see him for what he is.  Perhaps not.  Hey Lloyd, are you logging this apparation?  Are you pinging me?  Feel free.

All of you on this site that are truly innocent, I honestly hope you beat the wrap.  For those of you using it dishonestLLy for their own ends, the law will find the truth.

Peace all, Kenn....ooops, I mean Stan[/quote]

I really do not know for sure whether or not I passed the polygraph exam I was given.  It was part of an LE interrogation I was treated to for being the victim of a crime.  Perhaps during such interrogations one is intentionally misled.  I don’t blame the police though for a crime had been committed and it seems someone somehow planted the notion I was the guilty party.  Perhaps this was simple for pathological and compulsive liars can dupe normal people rather easily.

Though in the post above, Kenneth Koek (who first lied claiming his real name is Stan Smith) claims I am a compulsive liar, he also mocks me for ‘failing’ a polygraph exam.

[quote author=Lloyd Ploense link=topic=0.0 date=1188247965]Here Kenn:
Here Kenn.

[quote author=Stan_Smith link=topic=0.0 date=1187504804][quote author=Lloyd Ploense link=topic=0.0 date=1187485033]Gosh Stan:

You seem to be correct on two matters:
1)      There do seem to be a lot of you;
2)      Polygraph testing and the use of the results is based on circular logic.

The first seems to be obvious.  Where did you find that YesMan character?  I[b] honestly have no idea who he is and, quite frankly, his inablity to grasp the English language well makes me wish he was not on my "side" in this debate. [/b] I hope there are not many more like him.  The second requires a bit of analysis.

When a citizen is asked to take a polygraph exam, refusal to do so either disqualifies a citizen from consideration for employment by the government (for certain positions) [b]The polygraph's use for employment consideration is irrelevant to me, it is it's use as a tool to help guide LE in the right direction regarding a possible suspect that I agree with[/b]. or indicates to LE officials that the citizen has something to hide.  Should a citizen not ‘pass’ that unreliable exam the citizen is construed to be untruthful.  [b]Not neccesarily, it just means that perhaps there's more there that LE must look into.  [/b]

All this is too reminiscent of scenes from Monty Python movies where circular logic is presented quite humorously.  [b]Lloyd, it is not I that have been using circular logic, it is you as I pointed out already.  Attempting to turn your opponents arguemnt around on them is typical of someone with no actual basis for their own argument[/b].  It is not so funny Stan when there are real life consequences to the flawed practice of polygraph testing.

Now, a citizen cannot protest the false results of a flawed procedure without being wrongly accused of guilty fear.  [b]I will say this for the last time and then I will leave you all to your rantings (especially you Lloyd), Nobody has EVER been convicted of a crime based soley on having failed a polygraph test, PERIOD.  Unfortunately, innocent people occasionally go to jail.  This has never happened due SOLEY due to failure of a polygraph[/b].  Have you ever considered doing stand up comedy?  [b]Actually, I have considered it, and I'm thinking for my first joke I'll tell a story about a guy who poisoned his own wedding cake and when it was discovered, blamed the evil polygraph.[/b] ;D
Lloyd Ploense
[/quote]

Stan

[/quote]
[/quote]

How then are the two opposites reconciled?  We need to have a pathological and compulsive liar detector.  Fortunately, these exist.  They are called Judges.

When pathological and compulsive liars afflict a citizen, all he need do is keep comprehensive and organized records.  Here is a case in point.
Under oath in family court a woman claims:
•      She is pregnant with husband’s child, due to deliver July 2x, 199y, and asks the divorce be dismissed for want of equity;
•      She states and the court finds she is not pregnant during prove up;
•      She then inserts a fetus and delivers another man’s child on July 2z, 199y.
Got to hand it to her, she is a marvel of biology!

When a Judge sees several examples of such duplicity, he/she is compelled by the law to consider why.  When the motive is also clear, the Judge has a duty to rule.  I’m really glad we have Judges.

Does anyone have any other suggestions for pathological and compulsive liar detectors that really work?

LP
[/quote]

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.

Insert width (px):

Insert height (px):

(Clear attachments)

Other options

Return to this topic
Don't use smileys

Verification:

Please leave this box empty:

Listen to the letters / Request another image

Type the letters shown in the picture:

Shortcuts: ALT+S post or ALT+P preview

Topic summary

Posted by PRIME44

- Dec 09, 2023, 12:57 PM

EMILY YAZAGUARY IS A COMPULSIVE LIAR AND PUT EMANUAL WALKER IN ALABAMA PRISON AND HE IS INNOCENT PRIME44

Posted by InnocentWithPTSD

- Aug 28, 2007, 08:55 PM

Pathological and Compulsive Liars?

Do polygraph techniques exist that can detect pathological or compulsive liars? Are such liars not purported to have the ability to pass polygraph exams?

Quote from: Stan_Smith on Aug 26, 2007, 11:00 PMYa know what, if you all want to believe this compulsive liar, feel free. I have the information from his posts that I needed. I had thought perhaps you here were intelligent enough to see him for what he is. Perhaps not. Hey Lloyd, are you logging this apparation? Are you pinging me? Feel free.

All of you on this site that are truly innocent, I honestly hope you beat the wrap. For those of you using it dishonestLLy for their own ends, the law will find the truth.

Peace all, Kenn....ooops, I mean Stan

I really do not know for sure whether or not I passed the polygraph exam I was given. It was part of an LE interrogation I was treated to for being the victim of a crime. Perhaps during such interrogations one is intentionally misled. I don't blame the police though for a crime had been committed and it seems someone somehow planted the notion I was the guilty party. Perhaps this was simple for pathological and compulsive liars can dupe normal people rather easily.

Though in the post above, Kenneth Koek (who first lied claiming his real name is Stan Smith) claims I am a compulsive liar, he also mocks me for 'failing' a polygraph exam.

Quote from: Lloyd Ploense on Aug 27, 2007, 04:52 PMHere Kenn:
Here Kenn.

Quote from: Stan_Smith on Aug 19, 2007, 02:26 AM
Quote from: Lloyd Ploense on Aug 18, 2007, 08:57 PMGosh Stan:

You seem to be correct on two matters:
1) There do seem to be a lot of you;
2) Polygraph testing and the use of the results is based on circular logic.

The first seems to be obvious. Where did you find that YesMan character? I honestly have no idea who he is and, quite frankly, his inablity to grasp the English language well makes me wish he was not on my "side" in this debate. I hope there are not many more like him. The second requires a bit of analysis.

When a citizen is asked to take a polygraph exam, refusal to do so either disqualifies a citizen from consideration for employment by the government (for certain positions) The polygraph's use for employment consideration is irrelevant to me, it is it's use as a tool to help guide LE in the right direction regarding a possible suspect that I agree with. or indicates to LE officials that the citizen has something to hide. Should a citizen not 'pass' that unreliable exam the citizen is construed to be untruthful. Not neccesarily, it just means that perhaps there's more there that LE must look into.

All this is too reminiscent of scenes from Monty Python movies where circular logic is presented quite humorously. Lloyd, it is not I that have been using circular logic, it is you as I pointed out already. Attempting to turn your opponents arguemnt around on them is typical of someone with no actual basis for their own argument. It is not so funny Stan when there are real life consequences to the flawed practice of polygraph testing.

Now, a citizen cannot protest the false results of a flawed procedure without being wrongly accused of guilty fear. I will say this for the last time and then I will leave you all to your rantings (especially you Lloyd), Nobody has EVER been convicted of a crime based soley on having failed a polygraph test, PERIOD. Unfortunately, innocent people occasionally go to jail. This has never happened due SOLEY due to failure of a polygraph. Have you ever considered doing stand up comedy? Actually, I have considered it, and I'm thinking for my first joke I'll tell a story about a guy who poisoned his own wedding cake and when it was discovered, blamed the evil polygraph.
Lloyd Ploense

Stan

How then are the two opposites reconciled? We need to have a pathological and compulsive liar detector. Fortunately, these exist. They are called Judges.

When pathological and compulsive liars afflict a citizen, all he need do is keep comprehensive and organized records. Here is a case in point.
Under oath in family court a woman claims:
• She is pregnant with husband's child, due to deliver July 2x, 199y, and asks the divorce be dismissed for want of equity;
• She states and the court finds she is not pregnant during prove up;
• She then inserts a fetus and delivers another man's child on July 2z, 199y.
Got to hand it to her, she is a marvel of biology!

When a Judge sees several examples of such duplicity, he/she is compelled by the law to consider why. When the motive is also clear, the Judge has a duty to rule. I'm really glad we have Judges.

Does anyone have any other suggestions for pathological and compulsive liar detectors that really work?

LP