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:
What color are school buses in the United States?:
Shortcuts: ALT+S post or ALT+P preview

Topic summary

Posted by newportsupport
 - Oct 03, 2007, 04:07 PM
Thanks again guys, much appreciated...Any comments on employing a combo of those 3 cm's? Or should I just stick to 1 or 2?
Posted by Sergeant1107
 - Oct 03, 2007, 03:32 PM
Quote from: Paradiddle on Oct 03, 2007, 09:10 AMReally now guys, to compare your applicant screening poly experiences with this "poster's" single issue lawyer risk assessment test is a stretch. I just heard the theme from Schindler's List play when I read your posts. This last Q and A was like a game of tee-ball---and George was holding the ball. You need to get up earlier.
If you had an experience with the polygraph similar to mine (telling the truth to three different examiners and having each one tell me they could easily tell I was lying to them) would you find it reasonable to believe the polygraph works great in every other situation, for every other person, just not for you?  Or would it be more reasonable to believe the polygraph is not capable of detecting deception?

I don't see how any reasonable person could have three different polygraph examiners tell them they are lying when they are telling the truth and not conclude that the polygraph is incapable of detecting deception.
Posted by Ludovico
 - Oct 03, 2007, 02:45 PM
Just take your meds as prescribed by your doctor and try not to worry about your polygraph.
Posted by newportsupport
 - Oct 03, 2007, 01:34 PM
Thanks for the advice guys I really appreciate it. Do you think that those 3 CM's are over killing it? I really want to pass this thing, i've been working my butt off the past 3 years of college and I want to goto law school and if I get a misdemeanor it could really have a negative effect on my job future.
Posted by Ludovico
 - Oct 03, 2007, 09:38 AM
[mod-slapped, again]

damn.

thank you sir, may I have another.

--------

I don't have any advice for you about your polygraph. You have evidently thought things through very carefully.

So, good luck to you.

I will say that doctors, in my experience, do not prescribe your kind of medications trivially. So you are probably best off following your doctor's competent recommendations.

Posted by Paradiddle
 - Oct 03, 2007, 09:10 AM
Really now guys, to compare your applicant screening poly experiences with this "poster's" single issue lawyer risk assessment test is a stretch. I just heard the theme from Schindler's List play when I read your posts. This last Q and A was like a game of tee-ball---and George was holding the ball. You need to get up earlier.
Posted by George W. Maschke
 - Oct 03, 2007, 01:43 AM
Quote from: newportsupport on Oct 03, 2007, 12:28 AMI apologize but I cant tell if your being sarcastic, are you? Are those 3 cm's overkilling it? Should I only use 1 or 2 or does combining 2 or 3 work?

Ludovico is a polygraph operator. He is not attempting to help you.
Posted by George W. Maschke
 - Oct 03, 2007, 01:36 AM
Quote from: Paradiddle on Oct 03, 2007, 12:09 AMWith all due respect, why on god's earth would you want to use internet countermeasures (unscientifically proven or verified) if you are innocent? Hold your head up high, get some rest, tell the truth, and be done with it. As we say in my region, don't piss in the paint!

I followed your advice and was falsely accused of deception by an FBI polygrapher and falsely accused of using countermeasures (I didn't even know what they were) by an LAPD polygrapher.

By the way, the polygraph countermeasures described in The Lie Behind the Lie Detector are not without some scientific support. In peer-reviewed studies by Charles Honts and others (citations and abstracts provided in the bibliography of TLBTLD), some 50% of programmed guilty examinees passed the polygraph after receiving a maximum of 30 minutes of instruction.
Posted by Sergeant1107
 - Oct 03, 2007, 01:24 AM
Quote from: Paradiddle on Oct 03, 2007, 12:09 AMHold your head up high, get some rest, tell the truth, and be done with it. As we say in my region, don't piss in the paint!
I had a virtually identical plan when I took my polygraphs.  I failed three out of four.

Maybe I should have used countermeasures.  Even if they only worked 25% of the time, I wouldn't have been any worse off than I already was.
Posted by newportsupport
 - Oct 03, 2007, 12:28 AM
I apologize but I cant tell if your being sarcastic, are you? Are those 3 cm's overkilling it? Should I only use 1 or 2 or does combining 2 or 3 work?
Posted by Ludovico
 - Oct 03, 2007, 12:23 AM
With a plan like that you are sure to make a grand impression.
Posted by newportsupport
 - Oct 03, 2007, 12:20 AM
Haha, thanks very much for the kind words I appreciate it more than you could imagine! The thing is i'm not 100% innocent, theres a grey area because I have things I prefer to hide in regards to the allegation, I have done what they are accusing me of in the past, however in this specific incident I am innocent and haven't partook in this activity in over a year. And even than it was a very rare thing that I'd do once in a blue moon when drunk @ a party.However in my teens I did it all the time...
Posted by Paradiddle
 - Oct 03, 2007, 12:09 AM
With all due respect, why on god's earth would you want to use internet countermeasures (unscientifically proven or verified) if you are innocent? Hold your head up high, get some rest, tell the truth, and be done with it. As we say in my region, don't piss in the paint!
Posted by newportsupport
 - Oct 02, 2007, 11:50 PM
Thanks a bunch for the response/insight, your opinion is really valued and I will consider everything you have said. However, I am not withholding (much) information at all, theres 1 or 2 things I am concerned about (past drug use & sale in my teens, current  (legal) prescribed drug use) ...In lie tests when the person has a drug charge, are there not many CQ's? Is it mostly r/i? Or will it be a pretty standard you think? Remember, this is being done privately - I suggested this to my lawyer and he is friends /has a good relationship with the tester...If I fail it will have no adverse effects the court/judge/prosecutor will never see it, if I pass than it could really help...
Posted by Paradiddle
 - Oct 02, 2007, 11:35 PM
Just on an aside, the test will probably be different than what you expect. As someone who has been polygraphed several times and is an actual examiner, they are a very difficult experience if you are withholding info--or are hesitant to talk of things (wink)------and I have never thought "woopty do" after any of them. No, I don't care much to be polygraphed thank you.
Just a heads up.