- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by nopolycop
- Feb 14, 2008, 08:43 PMQuote from: notguilty1 on Feb 14, 2008, 01:42 PMI can give you some hints on how LEO's think...
Admiting to being in the location of the crime is physical evidence,
Say what? Physical evidence is evidence in solid form, tangile, touchable, displayable in court, (or at least photographs of it).
Posted by Twoblock
- Feb 14, 2008, 08:42 PMnomegusto
I don't believe signing that pice of paper abrogates his 5th. Amendment Rights. One cannot give up their right to sue no matter what they are forced to sign. As I've said before "that peice of paper, presented by polyghaphers, is as usless as tits on a bore hog". That would never hold up in federal court.
There are some cases being readied now covering a laid-off enployee exit agreement that they will not bring legal action against the company. If they don't sign the agreement then they don't receive the lay-off package. They have been informed that they can't sign away their right to sue. I don't have any case law because I'm not sure if this has ever been before the U.S. SpCrt. I have just begun my research. You can bet that one of the present cases will wind up there. I am advising (pro bono of coarse) on one and another thing you can bet on is that I will find a way to mention the polygrapher paper.
I don't believe signing that pice of paper abrogates his 5th. Amendment Rights. One cannot give up their right to sue no matter what they are forced to sign. As I've said before "that peice of paper, presented by polyghaphers, is as usless as tits on a bore hog". That would never hold up in federal court.
There are some cases being readied now covering a laid-off enployee exit agreement that they will not bring legal action against the company. If they don't sign the agreement then they don't receive the lay-off package. They have been informed that they can't sign away their right to sue. I don't have any case law because I'm not sure if this has ever been before the U.S. SpCrt. I have just begun my research. You can bet that one of the present cases will wind up there. I am advising (pro bono of coarse) on one and another thing you can bet on is that I will find a way to mention the polygrapher paper.
Posted by nomegusto
- Feb 14, 2008, 07:37 PMIt was a scenario.
It could be any crime (including theft).
Remember you volunteered to do the poly
Good Kudo
You signed a sheet of paper waiving your 5th Ammendment Rights
Mistake - especially with no counsel present (I know, you didn't know).
Need I say more...
It could be any crime (including theft).
Remember you volunteered to do the poly
Good Kudo
You signed a sheet of paper waiving your 5th Ammendment Rights
Mistake - especially with no counsel present (I know, you didn't know).
Need I say more...
Posted by notguilty1
- Feb 14, 2008, 07:05 PMQuote from: notguilty1 on Feb 14, 2008, 06:52 PMAbout me, well I'm pro polygraph.
I'm not a cop, but I do work for a Federal Agency.
I'm not a polygrapher, however I'm a interviewer/LE Questioneer
I'm here because if you google polygraph. This is the first site that popped up. Plus there is informative information on the website.
NVI non verbal indicators
Again, pleading is NOT a good thing.
Some will disagree on my stance. Thats fine. I'll disagree with others.
Again, even though you were hired. You were there.
Again, your wording is suspicious. It doesn't matter what you wrote, because your not understanding what were looking for.
If your innocent. Cool by me. If your guilty again it's your life, not mine.
Ok, here is a scenario for you...
A murderer is being interviewed.
He answers I would of never killed that person, what do I have to gain, I couldn't hurt a fly. I have never been arrested before, and then goes on about his credit.
If that was me... SUSPICIOUS!!!!!! It's not the credit though, and I'm not giving out information were others can use...
I guess your right. Not being savy in these matters I did what I thought was right in hopes that the Det. would see that. Remember I was going in there, I felt, with the facts on my side since I didn't do this.
My comment to him about my credit was to show that I had no financial need to do this. Of course since I was assumed to be guilty if I said I needed to pee it could be twisted to mean "guilty".
If I was accused of murder that would not apply so I don't get your comparision.
Thanks for your insight
Posted by nomegusto
- Feb 14, 2008, 06:52 PMAbout me, well I'm pro polygraph.
I'm not a cop, but I do work for a Federal Agency.
I'm not a polygrapher, however I'm a interviewer/LE Questioneer
I'm here because if you google polygraph. This is the first site that popped up. Plus there is informative information on the website.
NVI non verbal indicators
Again, pleading is NOT a good thing.
Some will disagree on my stance. Thats fine. I'll disagree with others.
Again, even though you were hired. You were there.
Again, your wording is suspicious. It doesn't matter what you wrote, because your not understanding what were looking for.
If your innocent. Cool by me. If your guilty again it's your life, not mine.
Ok, here is a scenario for you...
A murderer is being interviewed.
He answers I would of never killed that person, what do I have to gain, I couldn't hurt a fly. I have never been arrested before, and then goes on about his credit.
If that was me... SUSPICIOUS!!!!!! It's not the credit though, and I'm not giving out information were others can use...
I'm not a cop, but I do work for a Federal Agency.
I'm not a polygrapher, however I'm a interviewer/LE Questioneer
I'm here because if you google polygraph. This is the first site that popped up. Plus there is informative information on the website.
NVI non verbal indicators
Again, pleading is NOT a good thing.
Some will disagree on my stance. Thats fine. I'll disagree with others.
Again, even though you were hired. You were there.
Again, your wording is suspicious. It doesn't matter what you wrote, because your not understanding what were looking for.
If your innocent. Cool by me. If your guilty again it's your life, not mine.
Ok, here is a scenario for you...
A murderer is being interviewed.
He answers I would of never killed that person, what do I have to gain, I couldn't hurt a fly. I have never been arrested before, and then goes on about his credit.
If that was me... SUSPICIOUS!!!!!! It's not the credit though, and I'm not giving out information were others can use...
Posted by notguilty1
- Feb 14, 2008, 06:42 PMQuote from: notguilty1 on Feb 14, 2008, 01:42 PMI can give you some hints on how LEO's think...
Glad to see you haven't been charged with a crime.
Your right, the test is inadmissable, however your statements are more than admissable, as you did waive your 5th Ammendment Rights.
Admiting to being in the location of the crime is physical evidence, and the fact you were there makes you highly suspect.
It's amazing what people can say that gets them into trouble. Your rationalizing with the investigator(subconcious), your making yourself sound like a good guy (which you probably are). But thats suspicious in our expierence. 90% of the people I've arrested where overtly too NICE. Willing to help me out as much as they can. Suffice to say, the not guilty ones are the individuals that
A. Are blunt
B. Are pissed that I'm wasting there time while there trying to make a living.
C. Will never EVER tell me about there history. I can find that out on my own. Or ask ask ask...
D. What does prestine credit have to do with a criminal cases? Criminals can't have good credit either?
E. Did I mention blunt? There answers are too.
F. Wording is key. So is your NVI's. I'd love too see them, but it'll never happen.
Like anything else. There is no issues with passive compliance. It's the over compliant person I worry about the worst. It's kind of like what are you hiding?
Did the officer ask you about your credit? If not, why did you bring it up? The only thing he cares about honestly is getting the gun off the street and back into the owner's possesion . Nothing more, nothing less. However the person that did take the weapon will be charged if he/she is caught.
8-)
Pleading your innocent. IE: Talking about your credit eitc etc, will raise flags.
Hi Nom,
Well I am finding your replies informing.
*I was at the scene because he hired me to be there.
*I was compliant with the officer because I truly had nothing to hide and felt that cooperating was a better option than getting pissed at the detective that was just doing his job.
*The reason that I listed my record and my credit as well as my not being a gun owner was to show that I had absolutly no motive to do this. ie. I didn't need money by selling it, i was unlikely to do it since I have never had a problem with the law before, and I would not be intereted in guns since I don't own any of my own.
I do understand that many criminals do cooperate but many don't ever see "cops" on TV?
*I don't know what NVI's are
*I don't understand why pleading my case is so "suspicious"
The fact that your a cop and are on a antipolygraph site makes me wonder why you'd be here if you are so inclined to believe the tests.
I am really hoping that this gun turns up somewhere so I can have ulimate proof that the test is a scam.
Posted by nomegusto
- Feb 14, 2008, 01:42 PMI can give you some hints on how LEO's think...
Glad to see you haven't been charged with a crime.
Your right, the test is inadmissable, however your statements are more than admissable, as you did waive your 5th Ammendment Rights.
Admiting to being in the location of the crime is physical evidence, and the fact you were there makes you highly suspect.
It's amazing what people can say that gets them into trouble. Your rationalizing with the investigator(subconcious), your making yourself sound like a good guy (which you probably are). But thats suspicious in our expierence. 90% of the people I've arrested where overtly too NICE. Willing to help me out as much as they can. Suffice to say, the not guilty ones are the individuals that
A. Are blunt
B. Are pissed that I'm wasting there time while there trying to make a living.
C. Will never EVER tell me about there history. I can find that out on my own. Or ask ask ask...
D. What does prestine credit have to do with a criminal cases? Criminals can't have good credit either?
E. Did I mention blunt? There answers are too.
F. Wording is key. So is your NVI's. I'd love too see them, but it'll never happen.
Like anything else. There is no issues with passive compliance. It's the over compliant person I worry about the worst. It's kind of like what are you hiding?
Did the officer ask you about your credit? If not, why did you bring it up? The only thing he cares about honestly is getting the gun off the street and back into the owner's possesion . Nothing more, nothing less. However the person that did take the weapon will be charged if he/she is caught.
8-)
Pleading your innocent. IE: Talking about your credit eitc etc, will raise flags.
Glad to see you haven't been charged with a crime.
Your right, the test is inadmissable, however your statements are more than admissable, as you did waive your 5th Ammendment Rights.
Admiting to being in the location of the crime is physical evidence, and the fact you were there makes you highly suspect.
It's amazing what people can say that gets them into trouble. Your rationalizing with the investigator(subconcious), your making yourself sound like a good guy (which you probably are). But thats suspicious in our expierence. 90% of the people I've arrested where overtly too NICE. Willing to help me out as much as they can. Suffice to say, the not guilty ones are the individuals that
A. Are blunt
B. Are pissed that I'm wasting there time while there trying to make a living.
C. Will never EVER tell me about there history. I can find that out on my own. Or ask ask ask...
D. What does prestine credit have to do with a criminal cases? Criminals can't have good credit either?
E. Did I mention blunt? There answers are too.
F. Wording is key. So is your NVI's. I'd love too see them, but it'll never happen.
Like anything else. There is no issues with passive compliance. It's the over compliant person I worry about the worst. It's kind of like what are you hiding?
Did the officer ask you about your credit? If not, why did you bring it up? The only thing he cares about honestly is getting the gun off the street and back into the owner's possesion . Nothing more, nothing less. However the person that did take the weapon will be charged if he/she is caught.
8-)
Pleading your innocent. IE: Talking about your credit eitc etc, will raise flags.
Posted by notguilty1
- Feb 14, 2008, 11:30 AMQuote from: notguilty1 on Feb 12, 2008, 03:49 PMI love these whoa is me tales. But thats just me.
A. Have you been charged with a crime?
B. Is there any physical evidence linking you to a crime?
C. Did you slip during the LE Questioning inwhich you incriminated yourself.
Reading your initial posts, would lead me to believe you know more then what your saying. But, I'm reading it, and analyzing. Nothing more.
Key words in your statement.
Submit- Meaning your giving up control, your rights etc etc.
Why were you unnerved that the police wants a stolen (misplaced) firearm in the hands of the owner? :-?
(Quote) The detective then came back in and interrogated me for a while where I asked what I could possibly gain from this. My record is perfectly clean not even a moving traffic violtion, my credit is presitine and I have never been a gun owner.
(end quote) - You've raised my suspicion ten fold with this statement. Just so you know.
Well, I don't know what to think. Your looking for sympathy from a website that a few users are LEO's, interviewers, and overall good people. You have written a statement concerning your expierence with the polygraph. In your case I whole heartedly believe in the polygraph within the totality of the situation. However, you didn't state whether or not you've confessed to a crime. Which is the object. Kudos to you then. The majority of investigators, interviewers, LE questioneers don't need the polygraph to catch deception, or raise suspicion. It's reading your words (which by the way can be used in court).
Good Luck, and have a great day.
Pura Vida!
Whether I have raised suspitions in you really doesn't matter.
If you can't see that questions that pertain to you being accused of a crime can in fact be unnerving then you need to read posts here.
I don't see how my statement to the Det. can raise flags, it is all true.
I would have nothing to gain from stealing this thing and I do have a prestine record.
I guess unfortuantly for me from what you say if it is true, since I have NO experience with all this ( I have no criminal record) I may have said things that may have raised suspition. After all, etting me to crack is what they were after thus the unnerving feelings.
I did not admit to anything since I had nothing to admit to.
*I have not been charged with a crime
*There was no physical evidence linking me to the crime expept the owner saying I did
*I don't know if I "slipped" during the questions, I guess if you want to believe that someone is guilty it really doesn't matter what the person say's in thier defense.
THANK GOODNESS THIS BS TESTING IS NOT ADMISSABLE IN COURT IF IT HAD ANY MERRIT IT WOULD BE LIKE DNA TESTING IS.
By the way I was not looking for "sympathy" from anyone here I simply posted my experience's and seeking info on this.
Posted by nomegusto
- Feb 12, 2008, 03:49 PMI love these whoa is me tales. But thats just me.
A. Have you been charged with a crime?
B. Is there any physical evidence linking you to a crime?
C. Did you slip during the LE Questioning inwhich you incriminated yourself.
Reading your initial posts, would lead me to believe you know more then what your saying. But, I'm reading it, and analyzing. Nothing more.
Key words in your statement.
Submit- Meaning your giving up control, your rights etc etc.
Why were you unnerved that the police wants a stolen (misplaced) firearm in the hands of the owner? :-?
(Quote) The detective then came back in and interrogated me for a while where I asked what I could possibly gain from this. My record is perfectly clean not even a moving traffic violtion, my credit is presitine and I have never been a gun owner.
(end quote) - You've raised my suspicion ten fold with this statement. Just so you know.
Well, I don't know what to think. Your looking for sympathy from a website that a few users are LEO's, interviewers, and overall good people. You have written a statement concerning your expierence with the polygraph. In your case I whole heartedly believe in the polygraph within the totality of the situation. However, you didn't state whether or not you've confessed to a crime. Which is the object. Kudos to you then. The majority of investigators, interviewers, LE questioneers don't need the polygraph to catch deception, or raise suspicion. It's reading your words (which by the way can be used in court).
Good Luck, and have a great day.
Pura Vida!
A. Have you been charged with a crime?
B. Is there any physical evidence linking you to a crime?
C. Did you slip during the LE Questioning inwhich you incriminated yourself.
Reading your initial posts, would lead me to believe you know more then what your saying. But, I'm reading it, and analyzing. Nothing more.
Key words in your statement.
Submit- Meaning your giving up control, your rights etc etc.
Why were you unnerved that the police wants a stolen (misplaced) firearm in the hands of the owner? :-?
(Quote) The detective then came back in and interrogated me for a while where I asked what I could possibly gain from this. My record is perfectly clean not even a moving traffic violtion, my credit is presitine and I have never been a gun owner.
(end quote) - You've raised my suspicion ten fold with this statement. Just so you know.
Well, I don't know what to think. Your looking for sympathy from a website that a few users are LEO's, interviewers, and overall good people. You have written a statement concerning your expierence with the polygraph. In your case I whole heartedly believe in the polygraph within the totality of the situation. However, you didn't state whether or not you've confessed to a crime. Which is the object. Kudos to you then. The majority of investigators, interviewers, LE questioneers don't need the polygraph to catch deception, or raise suspicion. It's reading your words (which by the way can be used in court).
Good Luck, and have a great day.
Pura Vida!
Posted by notguilty1
- Feb 05, 2008, 11:35 AMQuote from: notguilty1 on Feb 05, 2008, 09:34 AMng1
Just so you know, I am a private, not a police, polygraphy examiner. You were subjected to a rough, but standard interrogration technique following your exam. If your police examiner states he cant clear you, you can understand that to mean you did okey, but the police dont have another suspect. Try to keep things in perspective and dont take it personally, realize how difficult, from the police point of view, it is to investigate such a case. Finger prints are useless, there are no witnesses, there will be no confidential informer. The only avenue the police have to quickly resolve this is by interrogration and confession, so they gave you their best shot.
Everyone who enters customers homes and businesses to provide services is at risk for this type of allegation. Based on your reported answers I think you handled yourself very well.
Thanks very much for your response.
I do understand that the police need to do their jobs and that it isn't personal.
I doubt however that I did OK on the test since I spoke to some one that I personally know who knows the accusers ex-wife. She informed the person I know that the police told her ex-husband that I failed the test.
I have done my best to try to put this behind me. Thanks again for your reply any info on this helps me learn and understand more so I can put this all in prospective.
Posted by pailryder
- Feb 05, 2008, 09:34 AMng1
Just so you know, I am a private, not a police, polygraphy examiner. You were subjected to a rough, but standard interrogration technique following your exam. If your police examiner states he cant clear you, you can understand that to mean you did okey, but the police dont have another suspect. Try to keep things in perspective and dont take it personally, realize how difficult, from the police point of view, it is to investigate such a case. Finger prints are useless, there are no witnesses, there will be no confidential informer. The only avenue the police have to quickly resolve this is by interrogration and confession, so they gave you their best shot.
Everyone who enters customers homes and businesses to provide services is at risk for this type of allegation. Based on your reported answers I think you handled yourself very well.
Just so you know, I am a private, not a police, polygraphy examiner. You were subjected to a rough, but standard interrogration technique following your exam. If your police examiner states he cant clear you, you can understand that to mean you did okey, but the police dont have another suspect. Try to keep things in perspective and dont take it personally, realize how difficult, from the police point of view, it is to investigate such a case. Finger prints are useless, there are no witnesses, there will be no confidential informer. The only avenue the police have to quickly resolve this is by interrogration and confession, so they gave you their best shot.
Everyone who enters customers homes and businesses to provide services is at risk for this type of allegation. Based on your reported answers I think you handled yourself very well.
Posted by notguilty1
- Feb 04, 2008, 09:03 PMQuote from: notguilty1 on Feb 04, 2008, 08:16 PMHello, notguilty1
Did your examiner tell you that in his opinion you showed deception, or did he say he was unable to clear you based on those three charts?
As soon as the test was over he said " I can't clear you based on this"
afterwards when I was talking to him and I asked " do you mean to tell me this machine says I am lying"? He then said "it shows me that there is some deception".
So he accualy said both.
Posted by pailryder
- Feb 04, 2008, 08:16 PMHello, notguilty1
Did your examiner tell you that in his opinion you showed deception, or did he say he was unable to clear you based on those three charts?
Did your examiner tell you that in his opinion you showed deception, or did he say he was unable to clear you based on those three charts?
Posted by pailryder
- Feb 04, 2008, 08:12 PMHello, notguilty1
Did your examiner tell you that in his opinion you showed deception, or did he say he was unable to clear you based on those three charts?
Did your examiner tell you that in his opinion you showed deception, or did he say he was unable to clear you based on those three charts?
Posted by notguilty1
- Feb 03, 2008, 02:59 PMHello All
I have been reading posts here for a few weeks now.
Here is my story. I have been in a service business for many years with a prestine record of honesty and repeat business.
About a month ago I was accused by a customer of stealing a gun from his home where I was working.
Of course I was in shock at the accusation but understood that he may have believed this. At first he called just to ask if somehow the gun had been "misatkenly taken" when I was cleaning up.
I never saw or taken a gun while I was in his home. At that time I advised him to call the police to report it and that I would answer any questions if they needed to talk to me.
I did get a call from the PD the initial converstaion on the phone was pleasant and as I expected was just to cover all bases.
I was asked if I would submitt to a poly if nessisary and I responded "sure"
A week or so later I was called again by the PD and asked to come down and take a poly. I agreed. the date was made and I showed up never expecting to fail the test.
The poligrapher started by asking questions before the test and some were disturbing like, "if you did take this gun would you be inclined to tell us where it is to get this resolved" I was un nerved by this and other statements like, " we just want to get the gun back to Mr. X"
to the pre question I answered that I did not have a answer since it implies that I did this. Since I have spent no time pondering what I would do if I took it.
Anyway, I was hooked up and I was asked the seires of questions that have been read to me before the test 3 times in different order.
I could feel my heart thump when I was asked questions specific to the accusation.
After the test I was told by the poligrapher " I cannot clear you based on this"!!!
The detective then came back in and interrogated me for a while where I asked what I could possibly gain from this. My record is perfectly clean not even a moving traffic violtion, my credit is presitine and I have never been a gun owner.
Now, I from personal experienceknow that polygraphs mesure only your reation to a question and does NOT detect lies.
I still can't believe it and I shutter at the thought that many people are procecuted and lose jobs based on this scam.
Any comments are appreciated
I have been reading posts here for a few weeks now.
Here is my story. I have been in a service business for many years with a prestine record of honesty and repeat business.
About a month ago I was accused by a customer of stealing a gun from his home where I was working.
Of course I was in shock at the accusation but understood that he may have believed this. At first he called just to ask if somehow the gun had been "misatkenly taken" when I was cleaning up.
I never saw or taken a gun while I was in his home. At that time I advised him to call the police to report it and that I would answer any questions if they needed to talk to me.
I did get a call from the PD the initial converstaion on the phone was pleasant and as I expected was just to cover all bases.
I was asked if I would submitt to a poly if nessisary and I responded "sure"
A week or so later I was called again by the PD and asked to come down and take a poly. I agreed. the date was made and I showed up never expecting to fail the test.
The poligrapher started by asking questions before the test and some were disturbing like, "if you did take this gun would you be inclined to tell us where it is to get this resolved" I was un nerved by this and other statements like, " we just want to get the gun back to Mr. X"
to the pre question I answered that I did not have a answer since it implies that I did this. Since I have spent no time pondering what I would do if I took it.
Anyway, I was hooked up and I was asked the seires of questions that have been read to me before the test 3 times in different order.
I could feel my heart thump when I was asked questions specific to the accusation.
After the test I was told by the poligrapher " I cannot clear you based on this"!!!
The detective then came back in and interrogated me for a while where I asked what I could possibly gain from this. My record is perfectly clean not even a moving traffic violtion, my credit is presitine and I have never been a gun owner.
Now, I from personal experienceknow that polygraphs mesure only your reation to a question and does NOT detect lies.
I still can't believe it and I shutter at the thought that many people are procecuted and lose jobs based on this scam.
Any comments are appreciated