- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by Twoblock
- Jan 11, 2008, 12:38 PMnopolycop
I go to the University Law library because it makes me look intellectual. Ha. Really, I go there because I can have 3 or 4 volumes in front of me at a time for immediate reference. I have laidlaw and most of the other links including all Appeal courts and the U.S. Supct. BTW - I see a lot of full fledge lawyers there doing the same thing that I am doing and have had some interesting conversation with them which I also consider reasearch. Have gained a lot of courtroom jurisprudence knowledge from them. However, a few have been extremely arrogant.
I go to the University Law library because it makes me look intellectual. Ha. Really, I go there because I can have 3 or 4 volumes in front of me at a time for immediate reference. I have laidlaw and most of the other links including all Appeal courts and the U.S. Supct. BTW - I see a lot of full fledge lawyers there doing the same thing that I am doing and have had some interesting conversation with them which I also consider reasearch. Have gained a lot of courtroom jurisprudence knowledge from them. However, a few have been extremely arrogant.
Posted by nopolycop
- Jan 11, 2008, 12:02 PMQuote from: Twoblock on Jan 11, 2008, 09:58 AMnopolycop
The ADA, however, is loaded with Due Process violations. I remember a U.S. SpCt case "Tennessee v. Lane". Lane is a paraplegic who couldn't get to his court appointment because the courthouse was not wheel chair accessable. Ruling for Lane.
I have no experience in state cases, but I have spent days on end in law libraries researching federal law. From just one case you can grab hundreds of other citings. There are such cases in every Appeals Court District. It is endless and exciting. Although I will probably never be involved in another case, I still occasionally visit the law library just trying keep my mind in as good a shape as the rest of my body. Boy, that's a harder job.
Next week I will check my files and see if I can come with something of interest to you and if I do, I will PM you. Right now I am in the process of refining some placer gold to sell it.
Twoblock:
Legal research has by passed the county law library and is now in the electronic age. Most states have a free link to all their state appellate cases, and for federal cases, www.findlaw.com is a pretty good resource.
The interesting thing about federal (or state) due process cases is that all one has to do is make a cogent argument that a government action is unfair. If the court buys it, then the government has violated your constitutional rights to due process. This is where Croddy was headed, but never got there, because the court ruled that because the plaintiffs were not already government employees, they had no right to fair treatment from the government, because they had no constitutinally protected employment/property rights. As far as my request, probably not worth the time, but I will PM you with some additional information if you want to dabble a little.
Posted by Twoblock
- Jan 11, 2008, 09:58 AMnopolycop
My area of law research has been primarily in mining law and secondarily ADA. The ADA came about when my sister was kept overly doped up in a nursing home so as to present no problem and less care to the staff. Half of the patients there was in the same condition.
The mining law activity had nothing to do with employment. Some Due Process cases there but I can't remember them now.
The ADA, however, is loaded with Due Process violations. I remember a U.S. SpCt case "Tennessee v. Lane". Lane is a paraplegic who couldn't get to his court appointment because the courthouse was not wheel chair accessable. Ruling for Lane.
I have no experience in state cases, but I have spent days on end in law libraries researching federal law. From just one case you can grab hundreds of other citings. There are such cases in every Appeals Court District. It is endless and exciting. Although I will probably never be involved in another case, I still occasionally visit the law library just trying keep my mind in as good a shape as the rest of my body. Boy, that's a harder job.
Next week I will check my files and see if I can come with something of interest to you and if I do, I will PM you. Right now I am in the process of refining some placer gold to sell it.
My area of law research has been primarily in mining law and secondarily ADA. The ADA came about when my sister was kept overly doped up in a nursing home so as to present no problem and less care to the staff. Half of the patients there was in the same condition.
The mining law activity had nothing to do with employment. Some Due Process cases there but I can't remember them now.
The ADA, however, is loaded with Due Process violations. I remember a U.S. SpCt case "Tennessee v. Lane". Lane is a paraplegic who couldn't get to his court appointment because the courthouse was not wheel chair accessable. Ruling for Lane.
I have no experience in state cases, but I have spent days on end in law libraries researching federal law. From just one case you can grab hundreds of other citings. There are such cases in every Appeals Court District. It is endless and exciting. Although I will probably never be involved in another case, I still occasionally visit the law library just trying keep my mind in as good a shape as the rest of my body. Boy, that's a harder job.
Next week I will check my files and see if I can come with something of interest to you and if I do, I will PM you. Right now I am in the process of refining some placer gold to sell it.
Posted by nopolycop
- Jan 10, 2008, 11:26 PMQuote from: Twoblock on Dec 19, 2007, 12:23 PMI'm not a lawyer, but I do fight my own cases pro-se. Fairly successful at it. Even though I am retired now, I still, occasionally, study federal law just in case-----. Besides I enjoy the research.
TwoBlock:
After this thread was resurrected, I saw the above phrase. Have you done any extensive research regarding due process and pre-employment polygraphs? From what I have seen in my research, most of the cases centered around the right to privacy issue regarding the questions on the polygraph, and were decided before the NAS study and US v. Scheffer.
The notion that an arbitrary and capricious test could be used to offer government employment has not been looked at, as far as I can tell, but I fully admit I haven't done a complete caselaw search, just a local state search and federal district and supreme courts. Your thoughts?
Anyone else who can advance this line of inquiry, please feel free to add to the discussion.
Posted by nopolycop
- Jan 10, 2008, 09:40 PMQuote from: Twoblock on Jan 10, 2008, 08:08 PMSancho and Kaisho my GOD your hands must be so tired form typing. You two should call each other.
Baldy-
Least you be misled, please understand no one here is trying to convince the other person of their correctness. All the posting here is an attempt to convince the non-posting guests who read this forum daily of their positions. Typically, the anti-poly crowd uses examples of "failed" polygraphs where the individual was actually telling the truth, (called a false positive) along with questioning the methods and intent of the polygraph community.
The pro-poly community uses misdirection and unscientific studies, (with a healty dose of techno-babble thrown in for good measure) to try to impress the readers with their scientific methodology to prove the polygraph works, (while at the same time admitting that mistakes occur). You will notice the vocal polygraphists here avoid the direct questions and try to emotionalize the issues.
For example, Donna Taylor, from the Utah Polygraph Association recently posted that 70% of the police applicants she recently tested "passed" the polygraph, but when asked by me how many of those passed by using countermeasures, she avoided the question, because if she would have answered honestly, she should have to admit that she has no clue is any or all of these 70% successful applicants used countermeasures. Whew...
Posted by Baldylocks66
- Jan 10, 2008, 08:08 PMSancho and Kaisho my GOD your hands must be so tired form typing. You two should call each other.
Posted by SanchoPanza
- Dec 19, 2007, 05:56 PMKaisho, You don't have to prove anything here. But based on the nature of some of the claims you made it was not unreasonable that you were asked to provided some support even if only circumstancial that your claims had some basis in fact. As long as you continue to accuse police officers, prosecutors and judges of committing specific crimes without some offer of proof you may expect your unsupported contention to continue to receive response.
BTW as long as people are being murdered, and children are being molested or victimized by pornographers and lives are being destroyed by domestic abuse yes IMHO stealing a projector with a possible 4yr penalty is a "Small Fry Felony"
I suspect that if your claims about your case were known by the people you are accusing there is a strong possibility you could be hiring an attorney again. If someone were to perhaps file a slander action against you in order to prevail you might be asked to PROVE the truth of your comments and if you are unable to do so your situation might only get worse not better.
You say you want to leave this alone and not post anymore but somehow you can't resist the urge to give it one more try. Like I said Checkers, Marbles, or Mumbelty Peg I am willing and ready. If you want me to leave you alone maybe you should complain to the person whi started this thread and see if he will help you. Maybe you should message the board administrator and see if he concludes that I have violated any of the forum rules. Maybe you should seek a support group to help you let this go. I suggest On and On Anon.
Sancho Panza
P.S. I also read the information about John Jardine IV. His life was not an easy one and his death was a genuine tragedy. Today the training that officers and EMTs receive in dealing with excited delirium cases would probably have worked just as well with Mr. Jardines violent epileptic episodes and increased the liklihood of him arriving at the hospital alive. I did note that it was a cop who suggested removing the handcuffs in the ambulance and that he was over ruled by the EMTs . The Jardine family did not name a single Police Officer, Attorney, or Judge in their suit.
S.P
BTW as long as people are being murdered, and children are being molested or victimized by pornographers and lives are being destroyed by domestic abuse yes IMHO stealing a projector with a possible 4yr penalty is a "Small Fry Felony"
I suspect that if your claims about your case were known by the people you are accusing there is a strong possibility you could be hiring an attorney again. If someone were to perhaps file a slander action against you in order to prevail you might be asked to PROVE the truth of your comments and if you are unable to do so your situation might only get worse not better.
You say you want to leave this alone and not post anymore but somehow you can't resist the urge to give it one more try. Like I said Checkers, Marbles, or Mumbelty Peg I am willing and ready. If you want me to leave you alone maybe you should complain to the person whi started this thread and see if he will help you. Maybe you should message the board administrator and see if he concludes that I have violated any of the forum rules. Maybe you should seek a support group to help you let this go. I suggest On and On Anon.
Sancho Panza
P.S. I also read the information about John Jardine IV. His life was not an easy one and his death was a genuine tragedy. Today the training that officers and EMTs receive in dealing with excited delirium cases would probably have worked just as well with Mr. Jardines violent epileptic episodes and increased the liklihood of him arriving at the hospital alive. I did note that it was a cop who suggested removing the handcuffs in the ambulance and that he was over ruled by the EMTs . The Jardine family did not name a single Police Officer, Attorney, or Judge in their suit.
S.P
Posted by Twoblock
- Dec 19, 2007, 02:01 PMSanchoPanza
Re: your last para.
But it sometimes happens. About 2% of Fedaral District Courts cases makes it through the respective Circuit Courts of appeal. But very few Writs of Certiorari are accepted bt the U.S. Sup.Ct. Most can be denied or remanded base on previous cases. Few are argued.
On the other hand, I have read cases where state Circuit Court Judges are made to look very foolish by the federal system and I bet you have too.
Re: your last para.
But it sometimes happens. About 2% of Fedaral District Courts cases makes it through the respective Circuit Courts of appeal. But very few Writs of Certiorari are accepted bt the U.S. Sup.Ct. Most can be denied or remanded base on previous cases. Few are argued.
On the other hand, I have read cases where state Circuit Court Judges are made to look very foolish by the federal system and I bet you have too.
Posted by SanchoPanza
- Dec 19, 2007, 01:11 PMTwoblock, a pre-sentence report is prepared post-conviction, generally by a probation/parole officer to assist the judge in deciding what a persons sentence might be after and only after they have been found guilty. Pre-sentence reports must be ordered by the court and if a judge ordered a pre-sentence report before an official finding of guilty he would be overturned in a heartbeat. Based on all sorts of mitigating factors. A convicted person might be sentenced to prison, the county jail, or a probation period and includes besides mitigating factors and sentence recomendations, a short list of conditions that a probaitoner must agree to as a condition of release. for example people found guilty of DUI might be sentences to AA meetings and things like that. The defense has an absolute right to be heard and contest the pre-sentence report before sentence is imposed. A judge is not bound by any recomendation that appears in a pre-sentence report unless the crime results in a mandatory minimum sentence.
If you are familiar with the federal courts you already know how reluctant judges are to make any descision they think might be overturned, mostly I suspect because they hate to look foolish in front of their peers.
Sancho Panza
If you are familiar with the federal courts you already know how reluctant judges are to make any descision they think might be overturned, mostly I suspect because they hate to look foolish in front of their peers.
Sancho Panza
Posted by Twoblock
- Dec 19, 2007, 12:23 PMSanchoPanza
A clarification: I'm not here to judge guilt or inocence because I know nothing about the case. However, isn't a pre-sentence report for the purpose of helping the judge in deciding the case? If the failed polygraph report was included in the pre-sentence report, the judge certainly saw it. Can we say, without a doubt, that the judge didn't consider the failed poly? I can't. His first lawyer was a dud and at fault no matter what the appellate court thinks. He was remiss in not hammering the passed poly. What can $40 ph buy you in an appointed lawyer?
All I know, and I can't pinpoint cases for you, about the ones being declared innocent and released is what I read in the papers and hear on TV. But, as I remember, most were shoddily prosecuted an defended.
In reality, and as you've probably observed, maybe I shouldn't debate state cases because my realm of interest has been at the federal level because of my envolvement in mining which has mostly been on federal lands. There is a vast difference between state and federal laws. I'm not a lawyer, but I do fight my own cases pro-se. Fairly successful at it. Even though I am retired now, I still, occasionally, study federal law just in case-----. Besides I enjoy the research.
A clarification: I'm not here to judge guilt or inocence because I know nothing about the case. However, isn't a pre-sentence report for the purpose of helping the judge in deciding the case? If the failed polygraph report was included in the pre-sentence report, the judge certainly saw it. Can we say, without a doubt, that the judge didn't consider the failed poly? I can't. His first lawyer was a dud and at fault no matter what the appellate court thinks. He was remiss in not hammering the passed poly. What can $40 ph buy you in an appointed lawyer?
All I know, and I can't pinpoint cases for you, about the ones being declared innocent and released is what I read in the papers and hear on TV. But, as I remember, most were shoddily prosecuted an defended.
In reality, and as you've probably observed, maybe I shouldn't debate state cases because my realm of interest has been at the federal level because of my envolvement in mining which has mostly been on federal lands. There is a vast difference between state and federal laws. I'm not a lawyer, but I do fight my own cases pro-se. Fairly successful at it. Even though I am retired now, I still, occasionally, study federal law just in case-----. Besides I enjoy the research.
Posted by TheKaisho
- Dec 19, 2007, 11:58 AMHas anyone here heard of the Innocence Project?
So far, over 200 people have been exonerated of heinous crimes because of this organization's efforts.
If anyone here believes there was NO top-to-bottom (or, rather bottom-to-top) conspiracy in ALL of those cases, then that is a very naive opinion.
Over 200 people convicted of crimes they did not commit...hmmm, I would be willing to bet that in some of those cases, there was a conspiracy.
Also, did anyone read about the Milwaukee cops who are going to federal prison for beating someone badly? This after they were acquitted on State charges.
Surely, noconspiracy there, huh?
Sheesh, why do I feel I have to be the one who has to point out the world is a mean, ugly place where those that are in authority are just as capable as those who are not of deceit, trickery and conspiracy?
Please let this be the last thing I say about my case...to date, there was no response to the fact that Det. Lyman told me if I passed a polygraph, he would look elsewhere. I took a polygraph and passed it, yet he continued to press his case. If Det. Lyman had stayed true to his word, I would not be a felon.
Now...no more, please. It is upsetting to me.
So far, over 200 people have been exonerated of heinous crimes because of this organization's efforts.
If anyone here believes there was NO top-to-bottom (or, rather bottom-to-top) conspiracy in ALL of those cases, then that is a very naive opinion.
Over 200 people convicted of crimes they did not commit...hmmm, I would be willing to bet that in some of those cases, there was a conspiracy.
Also, did anyone read about the Milwaukee cops who are going to federal prison for beating someone badly? This after they were acquitted on State charges.
Surely, noconspiracy there, huh?
Sheesh, why do I feel I have to be the one who has to point out the world is a mean, ugly place where those that are in authority are just as capable as those who are not of deceit, trickery and conspiracy?
Please let this be the last thing I say about my case...to date, there was no response to the fact that Det. Lyman told me if I passed a polygraph, he would look elsewhere. I took a polygraph and passed it, yet he continued to press his case. If Det. Lyman had stayed true to his word, I would not be a felon.
Now...no more, please. It is upsetting to me.
Posted by SanchoPanza
- Dec 19, 2007, 11:07 AMAt what point was his failed polygraph allowed into evidence? If you carefully review his posts he offers nothing more than an opinion that the judge saw his results before finding him guilty.
Kaisho only said that he thought it must have been given to the judge in chambers because he could not believe he could have been otherwise convicted. He doesn't know that it is just the only explanation he says he can think of.
He also said Polygraph information appeared in his pre-sentence report which is not subject to the rules of evidence. If his passed polygraph was not argued at his sentencing his lawyer is to blame as I believe Kaisho is because I have never heard of a sentencing hearing where the defendant was not allowed to speak on his own behalf.
Twoblock, here is a man who claims a degree in "criminology" which should give him some education as to how the criminal justice system works and what his rights are. He is also represented by at least two attorneys who should be familiar with the system. According to his account of the appellate decision the apellate court thought his first attorney did an OK job because his claim of inneffective assistance of counsel was rejected.
I have yet to see a single false incarceration case where the proven "conspiracy" ran all the way from the detective to the apellate court and included the defense attorneys. Please point me towards one, I think it would make interesting reading.
There is no failure of discovery here because TheKaisho and his attornys already knew the reults of both polygraph examinations. The kaisho did not claim that any admissable evidence was withheld only that it was rejected. His third post held what he considered to be exculpatory claims. If discovery was withheld he probably wouldn't have most of that information.
Sancho Panza
Kaisho only said that he thought it must have been given to the judge in chambers because he could not believe he could have been otherwise convicted. He doesn't know that it is just the only explanation he says he can think of.
He also said Polygraph information appeared in his pre-sentence report which is not subject to the rules of evidence. If his passed polygraph was not argued at his sentencing his lawyer is to blame as I believe Kaisho is because I have never heard of a sentencing hearing where the defendant was not allowed to speak on his own behalf.
Twoblock, here is a man who claims a degree in "criminology" which should give him some education as to how the criminal justice system works and what his rights are. He is also represented by at least two attorneys who should be familiar with the system. According to his account of the appellate decision the apellate court thought his first attorney did an OK job because his claim of inneffective assistance of counsel was rejected.
I have yet to see a single false incarceration case where the proven "conspiracy" ran all the way from the detective to the apellate court and included the defense attorneys. Please point me towards one, I think it would make interesting reading.
There is no failure of discovery here because TheKaisho and his attornys already knew the reults of both polygraph examinations. The kaisho did not claim that any admissable evidence was withheld only that it was rejected. His third post held what he considered to be exculpatory claims. If discovery was withheld he probably wouldn't have most of that information.
Sancho Panza
Posted by TheKaisho
- Dec 19, 2007, 11:05 AMTwoblock, JP and Donna Taylor,
Thank you for the props, people.
For an obvious reason, I will address my response to the entire board.
Yes, you all only have my word that things happened the way I say they did. Short of having a mini-trial in person, how am I supposed to give you something else?
However, I have no motivation to lie to any of you. Does anyone believe that I would sit here and type this just to type it? I may not have much of a life, but I do have one.
And I do have a right to my opinion as to why I got convicted. I never meant anyone to believe that the polygraph results were the only reason I was convicted, but I am certain as I can be that the polygraph played some role, when it should not have played any role. I can say with a straight face that as my polygraph results were in my pre-sentence report, then someone down at the Courthouse, other than the Prosecutor, had to have known them. Proof of that failure was enclosed with the report. I am holding it in my hands right now.
Some people keep backhanding me by saying I have to offer PROOF of my allegations. Hmmm, in this arena, I do not know how to do that.
Should I snail mail everyone a copy of the police reports, the trial transcript, the briefs for my appeal and let you decide? Hmm, if I could afford it, I might.
Also, for a reason that I cannot and do not wish to go into here, there was something else going on with my family at the time that was and is still very painful for me to discuss. I do not wish to expose it because I have seen how some people will use what I said as yet another knife to carve me up and I cannot handle it emotionally.
However, in order to avoid being overly cryptic (which some will also use to their advantage) I will throw you all a bone so that you can stop thinking about my motivations.
Type Jardine death at ASU into Google. The articles you will find there is about my brother, John, who died at Arizona State University in 1999. The litigation that followed took 6 years. My parents settled with the University but they lost their suit against the City of Tempe in late 2005; long after my conviction and exactly, almost to the day, the Appellate Court refused my appeal.
During all of that time, I learned much about the legal system, much I found disturbing and unfair; to both sides of an issue, I might add. I received quite an education on qualified Immunity and just how hard it sue to sue city hall. If it were as simple as some believe, everyone would be doing it.
I also found out how far some people are willing to go to protect themselves and their secure jobs.
Few here can truly appreciate the depths that some people will go to deny culpability for what they did.
It was against this backdrop that I met Det. Lyman, a campus police officer. It was against all my physical health problems, my depression and my concerns for what my family was going through (and had yet to go through) when I met Det. Lyman in January, 2003.
I am begging you all, have some respect, please, do not try to engage me about the law suit or its consequence for my family. I do not wish to talk about it in detail. I have wrote what I wrote simply because I want others to appreciate where I was at in my head and heart then and why I found it so hard to trust anyone, especially a campus police officer.
By the way, my family paid for the trial lawyer, the state paid for the appellate one.
To other readers, and not in direct response to Sancho:
I never said the polygrapher had to manipulate the results. One can only make that particular assumption if the pseudo-science of polygraphy can really separate Truth from Deception; which it cannot do.
Perhaps I actually did "fail it," does that, in and of itself, mean I stole anything? With an error rate of 10%-15%, I would hardly call that conclusive. Did I say anywhere in my post, that the examiner himself shared the results with anyone other than the prosecutor?
Still no mention of the first polygraph I took over this matter, which I passed. Does that mean I did not steal it? I guess only Deceptive results count in some worlds.
Like I said, polygraphy, is a subjective load of crap increasingly being fed to a more unsafe and scared society as one of the only tools that can protect people from the potential wolves in their midst.
One of the things that bothers me the most and should bother everyone, pro and con alike is the dramatic resurgence of any technology from 9/11 to today. We should do all we can to avoid becomong too dependent on anything; especially something that, if one believes it is a science, has an error rate of 10%-15%.
Obliviously, some people do not know where I am from, really. This place is not a bastion of liberal democracy, but an ultra-conservative and monied mini-bible belt. Believe me, they know how to "get things done" around here, if they feel the need.
Case-in-point: a local substitute teacher was acused of fondling an 11 year-old female student. He was pulled from class, escorted off the grounds and was later arrested for his alleged crime. Apparently, this girl's mother is a corrections officer at the local State Prison. In order to avoid any "conflict of interest" the county prosecutor recused his office from prosecuting the guy. Where to get another prosecutor? Hmmmm, lets go to the county south of here (where I was convicted, BTW) and get one. Okay. Fine. However, the Superintendant of the School District where this alleged assault happened is the BROTHER of the the prosecutor they imported. No possible conflict of interest there, huh? Do not tell me about where I live, I have seen and heard things.....
Lucky for that poor bastard that they jury was out 40 minutes and returned a verdict of not guilty. However, that guy's teaching life is over now. He will never be hired again, not here. No way. Is that fair?
A small fry felony that could carry four years in prison...not so small fry, huh?
As I stated before, people would be amazed at the lengths they would go to to avoid culpability.
Again, can we get back to the original question, which was why would a polygrapher care if a subject passed or failed?
BTW, the Legos in my toy box are missing some pieces and it is only a real house of cards if you have been given the FULL DECK; which no one here has. To provde every facet would take way too much effort and I am tired.
And one last thing about my case....I feel I have to repeat myself over and over agian because someone here just is NOT getting it:
For the last time, I do not really care if you think me guilty or not. I only wrote what I did to share MY EXPERIENCE with polygraphs and to say, based upon that experience and what I have read here concerning the experiences of others, that it really IS a psuedo-science, with little or no basis in fact.
It does not matter to me what anyone thinks, really. I know I did not do anything to deserve this and no amount of invective or personal attack is going to change that.
Can we now forget about my case? I would so love to do so....
Again, thank you TWOBLOCK, JP and Donna
Thank you for the props, people.
For an obvious reason, I will address my response to the entire board.
Yes, you all only have my word that things happened the way I say they did. Short of having a mini-trial in person, how am I supposed to give you something else?
However, I have no motivation to lie to any of you. Does anyone believe that I would sit here and type this just to type it? I may not have much of a life, but I do have one.
And I do have a right to my opinion as to why I got convicted. I never meant anyone to believe that the polygraph results were the only reason I was convicted, but I am certain as I can be that the polygraph played some role, when it should not have played any role. I can say with a straight face that as my polygraph results were in my pre-sentence report, then someone down at the Courthouse, other than the Prosecutor, had to have known them. Proof of that failure was enclosed with the report. I am holding it in my hands right now.
Some people keep backhanding me by saying I have to offer PROOF of my allegations. Hmmm, in this arena, I do not know how to do that.
Should I snail mail everyone a copy of the police reports, the trial transcript, the briefs for my appeal and let you decide? Hmm, if I could afford it, I might.
Also, for a reason that I cannot and do not wish to go into here, there was something else going on with my family at the time that was and is still very painful for me to discuss. I do not wish to expose it because I have seen how some people will use what I said as yet another knife to carve me up and I cannot handle it emotionally.
However, in order to avoid being overly cryptic (which some will also use to their advantage) I will throw you all a bone so that you can stop thinking about my motivations.
Type Jardine death at ASU into Google. The articles you will find there is about my brother, John, who died at Arizona State University in 1999. The litigation that followed took 6 years. My parents settled with the University but they lost their suit against the City of Tempe in late 2005; long after my conviction and exactly, almost to the day, the Appellate Court refused my appeal.
During all of that time, I learned much about the legal system, much I found disturbing and unfair; to both sides of an issue, I might add. I received quite an education on qualified Immunity and just how hard it sue to sue city hall. If it were as simple as some believe, everyone would be doing it.
I also found out how far some people are willing to go to protect themselves and their secure jobs.
Few here can truly appreciate the depths that some people will go to deny culpability for what they did.
It was against this backdrop that I met Det. Lyman, a campus police officer. It was against all my physical health problems, my depression and my concerns for what my family was going through (and had yet to go through) when I met Det. Lyman in January, 2003.
I am begging you all, have some respect, please, do not try to engage me about the law suit or its consequence for my family. I do not wish to talk about it in detail. I have wrote what I wrote simply because I want others to appreciate where I was at in my head and heart then and why I found it so hard to trust anyone, especially a campus police officer.
By the way, my family paid for the trial lawyer, the state paid for the appellate one.
To other readers, and not in direct response to Sancho:
I never said the polygrapher had to manipulate the results. One can only make that particular assumption if the pseudo-science of polygraphy can really separate Truth from Deception; which it cannot do.
Perhaps I actually did "fail it," does that, in and of itself, mean I stole anything? With an error rate of 10%-15%, I would hardly call that conclusive. Did I say anywhere in my post, that the examiner himself shared the results with anyone other than the prosecutor?
Still no mention of the first polygraph I took over this matter, which I passed. Does that mean I did not steal it? I guess only Deceptive results count in some worlds.
Like I said, polygraphy, is a subjective load of crap increasingly being fed to a more unsafe and scared society as one of the only tools that can protect people from the potential wolves in their midst.
One of the things that bothers me the most and should bother everyone, pro and con alike is the dramatic resurgence of any technology from 9/11 to today. We should do all we can to avoid becomong too dependent on anything; especially something that, if one believes it is a science, has an error rate of 10%-15%.
Obliviously, some people do not know where I am from, really. This place is not a bastion of liberal democracy, but an ultra-conservative and monied mini-bible belt. Believe me, they know how to "get things done" around here, if they feel the need.
Case-in-point: a local substitute teacher was acused of fondling an 11 year-old female student. He was pulled from class, escorted off the grounds and was later arrested for his alleged crime. Apparently, this girl's mother is a corrections officer at the local State Prison. In order to avoid any "conflict of interest" the county prosecutor recused his office from prosecuting the guy. Where to get another prosecutor? Hmmmm, lets go to the county south of here (where I was convicted, BTW) and get one. Okay. Fine. However, the Superintendant of the School District where this alleged assault happened is the BROTHER of the the prosecutor they imported. No possible conflict of interest there, huh? Do not tell me about where I live, I have seen and heard things.....
Lucky for that poor bastard that they jury was out 40 minutes and returned a verdict of not guilty. However, that guy's teaching life is over now. He will never be hired again, not here. No way. Is that fair?
A small fry felony that could carry four years in prison...not so small fry, huh?
As I stated before, people would be amazed at the lengths they would go to to avoid culpability.
Again, can we get back to the original question, which was why would a polygrapher care if a subject passed or failed?
BTW, the Legos in my toy box are missing some pieces and it is only a real house of cards if you have been given the FULL DECK; which no one here has. To provde every facet would take way too much effort and I am tired.
And one last thing about my case....I feel I have to repeat myself over and over agian because someone here just is NOT getting it:
For the last time, I do not really care if you think me guilty or not. I only wrote what I did to share MY EXPERIENCE with polygraphs and to say, based upon that experience and what I have read here concerning the experiences of others, that it really IS a psuedo-science, with little or no basis in fact.
It does not matter to me what anyone thinks, really. I know I did not do anything to deserve this and no amount of invective or personal attack is going to change that.
Can we now forget about my case? I would so love to do so....
Again, thank you TWOBLOCK, JP and Donna
Posted by Donna.Taylor
- Dec 19, 2007, 10:37 AMQuote from: Jesper on Dec 19, 2007, 10:18 AMSanchoPanza
Appology accepted.
You are correct in most of your legal assessments. Ex-Parte communication was certanily ripe for appeal, Public Officials do not enjoy qualified immunity for illegal acts, his lawyer were duds , etc. However, have you heard of any detectives, prosecutors and judges being sanctioned for the illegal incarceration of the dozens that are now being released. As in this case, evidence was withheld from discovery and the courtroom process along with poor investigations. Based on what he said, it is easy to envision that Kaisho was the recipient of their wrath because he stood his ground.
I disagree with you about his Due Process being violated. Without going into great detail, I'll state one: The fact that his first passed poly was not allowed into evidence. His lawyer was at fault for not pushing it because the failed poly was.
Sometimes defense attornies will have their clients take a polygraph before allowing their client to take the exam with the prosecution. Usually, polygraphs are only allowed if stipulated to by both parties before the examination is conducted. Additionally, when defense attornies have their clients submit to polygraphs - most of the time - they don't have a police report with ALL of the facts. This is probably why the first polygraph was not mentioned.
Also, as for a presentence report - Sancho is correct. After a client is found guilty, a sentencing hearing is scheduled 30-45 days after so that a PSI (pre-sentence report) can be completed. So information about a polygraph in a PSI would be after the fact.
Posted by Jesper Paten
- Dec 19, 2007, 10:21 AMSir Ponzo,
You have demeaned the poor fellow Kaisho and dismissed his hardship as if it were nothing more than cold cabbage.
I wish that you are happy in your polygrapf dementia.
If I had a 'Be Nice' stick, I would hit you with it.
For all the pages that you wrote in defence of polygrapf. It is all wasted.
For polygrapf is as useful as tits on a cadillac.
(apologies to General Motors)
Respectfully,
JP
You have demeaned the poor fellow Kaisho and dismissed his hardship as if it were nothing more than cold cabbage.
I wish that you are happy in your polygrapf dementia.
If I had a 'Be Nice' stick, I would hit you with it.
For all the pages that you wrote in defence of polygrapf. It is all wasted.
For polygrapf is as useful as tits on a cadillac.
(apologies to General Motors)
Respectfully,
JP