- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by notguilty1
- Sep 01, 2008, 12:24 PMQuote from: SanchoPanza on Sep 01, 2008, 12:28 AMIf not trusting you behind me with your testicles exposed is all it takes to make me a homophobe, BUY ME A T-SHIRT.
If you lack the capacity to accept a sincere apology, I suggest you alternately pracitice aviated intercourse with a perforated pastry in axial motion.
As to me understanding your threat in due time. All I can say is that it takes a real brave guy to threaten someone from behind the anonymity of a bulletin board.
as to changing the subject... What happened to your "silver bullet" barney? What happened to your contention that If you got DNA the outcome of a case is on auto pilot? You seem to know even less about criminal investigation than you do about polygraph and I'm suprised. I didn't think it was possible.
Notguilty1 you are exibiting the behavior of a pusillanimous supercilious twit.
Over my head? Poor boy, you couldn't reach the soles of my shoes with a 3 section extention ladder.
You have yet to make a single supported point except for the one located between your ears.
And for now, You and I are DONE.
Sancho Panza
Sancho it was YOU who brought the classless "testicle" or, as you so eloquently put it "balls" element into this conversation and now, "exposed" testicles! ( wow Sancho what an imagination can anyone say..... therapy?)
How very consistent of you to twist reality to bolster your "findings"
sounds like classic polygrapher crap to me. Do you ever do anything else like think for your self?
My scenario would result in a conviction as a direct result of DNA evidence. Of course, the likes of you and Polygraph would have no influence in that, and that kills you and your pseudo- science world. You so much want to be taken seriously in the "real" world.
It would, and does every day constitute a "silver bullet" in this scenario and in scenarios like it. Maybe you should get your head out of the APA books and actually read a newspaper.
As for my "threat" again, a twist of reality from you Sancho.
I decline to be the person to educate you. :-? :-?
If you need to have a persecution complex I completely understand given the unrealistic position you hold on Polygraph.
I am sure the readers here WILL understand what I meant. I am not concerned if you do.
News flash......THIS IS NOT ABOUT YOU SANCHO.
Posted by SanchoPanza
- Sep 01, 2008, 12:28 AMIf not trusting you behind me with your testicles exposed is all it takes to make me a homophobe, BUY ME A T-SHIRT.
If you lack the capacity to accept a sincere apology, I suggest you alternately pracitice aviated intercourse with a perforated pastry in axial motion.
As to me understanding your threat in due time. All I can say is that it takes a real brave guy to threaten someone from behind the anonymity of a bulletin board.
as to changing the subject... What happened to your "silver bullet" barney? What happened to your contention that If you got DNA the outcome of a case is on auto pilot? You seem to know even less about criminal investigation than you do about polygraph and I'm suprised. I didn't think it was possible.
Notguilty1 you are exibiting the behavior of a pusillanimous supercilious twit.
Over my head? Poor boy, you couldn't reach the soles of my shoes with a 3 section extention ladder.
You have yet to make a single supported point except for the one located between your ears.
And for now, You and I are DONE.
Sancho Panza
If you lack the capacity to accept a sincere apology, I suggest you alternately pracitice aviated intercourse with a perforated pastry in axial motion.
As to me understanding your threat in due time. All I can say is that it takes a real brave guy to threaten someone from behind the anonymity of a bulletin board.
as to changing the subject... What happened to your "silver bullet" barney? What happened to your contention that If you got DNA the outcome of a case is on auto pilot? You seem to know even less about criminal investigation than you do about polygraph and I'm suprised. I didn't think it was possible.
Notguilty1 you are exibiting the behavior of a pusillanimous supercilious twit.
Over my head? Poor boy, you couldn't reach the soles of my shoes with a 3 section extention ladder.
You have yet to make a single supported point except for the one located between your ears.
And for now, You and I are DONE.
Sancho Panza
Posted by notguilty1
- Aug 31, 2008, 10:55 PMQuote from: SanchoPanza on Aug 31, 2008, 10:14 PMQuotesancho wrote at the start of this post:Notguilty1 I want to make this very clear that statement was not meant to cast aspersions on your grandmother and if that is the way you interpreted it, I sincerely apologize.
Wenn Ihre Großmutter Hoden hätte, würde sie Ihr Großvater sein
The correct translation is "If your grandmother had balls, she'd be your grandfather". and it was a comment on your constant "what iffing" Sort of like "If frogs had wings they wouldn't bump their butts when they hopped.
I have no direct knowledge of your grandmother and if I did I would be too much of a gentelman to say.
As for your threat.QuoteMe on the other hand .... I do have them and use them when appropriate and look behind you sancho because a set of testicles attached to a large bull is on you.
Are you threatening me with rape? I hate to dissappoint you but I don't roll like that. Not that I have anythng against you, Your sexual habits are none of my concern. Live like you want to live. Just don't try to force your lifestyle on me.
BUT you need to put your "Silver Bullet" argument back in your shirt pocket Barney and move on before you shoot your toe off.
Sancho Panza
Clearly my ignorant geek my statement went over your head which from your posts is not that high.
However it has uncovered another character flaw. Homophobia!
Not surprised at all by the way.
I will not participate in lowering myself to making the kind of judgmental comments you have. I have no interest in your sexual habits. ( I highly assume you have none so any would be an improvement )
If you cannot understand my "threat" as you put it you will in due time.
But we digress, In Sancho's feeble attempt to take the eye off the topic at hand which is he is totally losing any logical argument in favor of Polygraph's validity as a test to measure deception.
This is the point of this site and the point we want to make to all that come here to find the truth about Polygraph
Sancho has reduced himself with arguing with someone who he finds to be ignorant and illiterate. Sad place to be Sancho.
I would hate to have a job were I have to spend the time you do defending what I do for a living.....
Ma Sancho, sei proprio un mal'educato parlando nella maniera che parli.
Peccato che non capisci cosa ti dico.
Posted by notguilty1
- Aug 31, 2008, 10:45 PMQuote from: SanchoPanza on Aug 31, 2008, 09:46 PMQuoteSancho, sei proprio un deficente che non hai mai imparato il modo che si vive con horore !Hows that for language??? I guess it's about normal from you it contains misspellings and syntax errors that render translation difficult if not impossible. Sorta like your english.
how's that for language?
Sancho Panza
If you knew language instead of using a dictionary you would understand what I wrote.
You seem to have no difficulty reading my english.
Posted by SanchoPanza
- Aug 31, 2008, 10:14 PMQuotesancho wrote at the start of this post:Notguilty1 I want to make this very clear that statement was not meant to cast aspersions on your grandmother and if that is the way you interpreted it, I sincerely apologize.
Wenn Ihre Großmutter Hoden hätte, würde sie Ihr Großvater sein
The correct translation is "If your grandmother had balls, she'd be your grandfather". and it was a comment on your constant "what iffing" Sort of like "If frogs had wings they wouldn't bump their butts when they hopped.
I have no direct knowledge of your grandmother and if I did I would be too much of a gentelman to say.
As for your threat.
QuoteMe on the other hand .... I do have them and use them when appropriate and look behind you sancho because a set of testicles attached to a large bull is on you.
Are you threatening me with rape? I hate to dissappoint you but I don't roll like that. Not that I have anythng against you, Your sexual habits are none of my concern. Live like you want to live. Just don't try to force your lifestyle on me.
BUT you need to put your "Silver Bullet" argument back in your shirt pocket Barney and move on before you shoot your toe off.
Sancho Panza
Posted by SanchoPanza
- Aug 31, 2008, 09:46 PMQuoteSancho, sei proprio un deficente che non hai mai imparato il modo che si vive con horore !Hows that for language??? I guess it's about normal from you it contains misspellings and syntax errors that render translation difficult if not impossible. Sorta like your english.
how's that for language?
Sancho Panza
Posted by notguilty1
- Aug 31, 2008, 08:13 PMQuote from: SanchoPanza on Aug 31, 2008, 04:27 PMNotGuilty! Wenn Ihre [highlight]Großmutter Hoden hätte, würde sie Ihr Großvater sein[/highlight]
Let's use your example minus your unfounded presumptions.
"A women (Do you means woman or multiple victims?) has been raped, a suspect is arrested, as part of the interrogation a Polygraph is administered. The suspect fails or passes the Polygraph, a confession is not attained. DNA evidence is found at the scene and on the victim, it's a match to the suspect.
At trial do you think that the Polygraph results will even be entered (what ever they may be) into the trial? I think not since they have a silver bullet in the DNA evidence a fully admissible scientific test that yields consistent valid and reliable results. "
As to your question about Polygraph, It's not up to me, It's up to the judge what evidence is admitted and if you have read my previous post regarding the courts where polygraph has been admitted and the criteria for admission you will see that it might go either way.
As to whether or not the DNA is a "Silver Bullet" It is not absolute proof. In order to admit the DNA, the prosecutor has to prove that the victim was indeed raped, that the rapist actually ejaculated or leaked seminal fluid,(Many Rapists Don't),that the source of the DNA was really seminal fluid and uncontaminated by blood or epithelial cells, that the seminal fluid was not transferred from another surface to the victim by contact,(Locard's Principle in action), that other possible suspect's know or unknown semen or DNA samples were not present. (Hotel Bedspreads may have stains or transfers from dozens of donors; Home bedding may have several depending on the habits of the people who live in the house and the quality of the alleged match. (1 in 1000 vs 1 in a trillion). Then you have to prove that the sample was collected according to accepted forensic protocols, that the laboratory followed proper analysis procedure and finally that there was no police misconduct.
I assure you any defense attorney that didn't get his Law Degree from a box of Cracker Jack is going to attack all of those issues because if he can raise reasonable doubt in the mind of a single juror on just one of those issues, then the rapist walks out of court laughing at the system. Assuming of course, they had the right guy to begin with. Remember, due to pre-trial discovery the defense attorney gets to plan his attack for months before the trial.
Even if you reconstruct your scenario to repair all those dents I just put in your "Silver Bullet" my answer regarding polygraph will still be based on what the courts have said so far. In other words It's not up to me, It's up to the judge what evidence is admitted and if you have read my previous post regarding the courts where polygraph has been admitted and the criteria for admission you will see that it might go either way. One of the errors in your scenario would be that if the polygraph were offered as evidence by EITHER SIDE the results of the examination would be material to the probative value of the evidence, whether it bolstered the states evidence or refuted it.
I also have a problem with calling a test that can return match results anywhere from 1 in a thousand to 1 in a trillion "Consistent"
Of course all things being equal, an admissible confession in a rape case generally results in a Plea Deal, thus saving the victim from further trauma at the hands of the defense attorney and the state would save the time and expense of defending all of those attacks on your Silver Bullet.
Really Notguilty1 MOVE ON
Sancho Panza
Your childish posts show your fear that the truth is upon you.
sancho wrote at the start of this post:
Wenn Ihre Großmutter Hoden hätte, würde sie Ihr Großvater sein
Sancho, My grandmother did not have testicles so she wasn't my grandfather. Me on the other hand .... I do have them and use them when appropriate and look behind you sancho because a set of testicles attached to a large bull is on you.
BTW I will withhold any comment on your grandparents or parents. I am sure they are fine people that have enough with dealing with how you turned out.
Posted by notguilty1
- Aug 31, 2008, 08:01 PMQuote from: SanchoPanza on Aug 31, 2008, 04:44 PMNotGuilty1
If Just If your polygraph was in fact a false positive what damages have you sufferred as a result other than an uncomfortable interrogation.
If you really want to know why you weren't charged and it didn't have anything to do with you begging your boss for mercy and paying the money back, why don't you just ask the detective?
That would end the speculation, but if you want to claim it wasn't filed because the polygraph was the only evidence they had, be prepared to be asked for proof. You aren't very believable.
Or if you're too embarrassed to ask, send me his name and number and I'll call him for you.
If he submitted the case and the D.A. decided to Nolle prosequi with or without explanation the detective probably wasn't too happy either.
Sancho Panza
Sancho again you show your pompous ass attitude and thanks for that.
No there is no IF in my case I did not commit the crime and there was also no IF in the false positive ( or better yet it did what Polygraphs do "measure a reaction to a question) and it had nothing to do with guilt.
I know this falls on deaf ears with you since your thing is to find liars with your silly machine.
I did not need to beg anyone and the accuser was not my "boss" and certainly didn't pay anything to him. I had nothing to do with that theft so there was nothing to pay.
As to what I suffered. In dollars and cents probably little. What it showed me however was that there is a scam being perpetuated on the american public so I have been taught that when you see injustice you attempt all you can to right it. I am sure this was lost in your upbringing and you obviously have been taught to get yours no matter what the method.
As for asking the detective I have 2 responses.
1) I had nothing to do with the theft so if they have something to charge me with they know where I am. I am done being "cooperative"
2) The detective and his "examiner" have shown themselves to be liars and not above lying to an honest citizen that was more than willing to cooperate with the assumption that I was dealing with a man of honor. He clearly was not. In my subsequent research into the matter I discovered that the police are not on the side of the honest and simply want a confession ( this comes from police friends and family I have spoken to as well as other legal research).
The detective knows all he has is his silly poly result and that is inadmissible in court!
All I wish for you Sancho is that one day you'll be on the receiving end of your "test" . It can happen unless as I am sure you may, you decline to be tested because of your knowledge of the test in an attempt to get out of being tested.
JUST BECAUSE I DID NOT SUFFER ANY MONETARY LOSS AS A RESULT OF MY FAILED POLYGRAPH DOES NOT MEAN I DON'T STAND UP FOR WHAT I KNOW IS INJUSTICE AND GO AFTER GEEKS LIKE YOU AND THE SCAM YOU PERPETUATE ON OTHERS.
Sancho, sei proprio un deficente che non hai mai imparato il modo che si vive con horore !
how's that for language?
Posted by SanchoPanza
- Aug 31, 2008, 04:44 PMNotGuilty1
If Just If your polygraph was in fact a false positive what damages have you sufferred as a result other than an uncomfortable interrogation.
If you really want to know why you weren't charged and it didn't have anything to do with you begging your boss for mercy and paying the money back, why don't you just ask the detective?
That would end the speculation, but if you want to claim it wasn't filed because the polygraph was the only evidence they had, be prepared to be asked for proof. You aren't very believable.
Or if you're too embarrassed to ask, send me his name and number and I'll call him for you.
If he submitted the case and the D.A. decided to Nolle prosequi with or without explanation the detective probably wasn't too happy either.
Sancho Panza
If Just If your polygraph was in fact a false positive what damages have you sufferred as a result other than an uncomfortable interrogation.
If you really want to know why you weren't charged and it didn't have anything to do with you begging your boss for mercy and paying the money back, why don't you just ask the detective?
That would end the speculation, but if you want to claim it wasn't filed because the polygraph was the only evidence they had, be prepared to be asked for proof. You aren't very believable.
Or if you're too embarrassed to ask, send me his name and number and I'll call him for you.
If he submitted the case and the D.A. decided to Nolle prosequi with or without explanation the detective probably wasn't too happy either.
Sancho Panza
Posted by SanchoPanza
- Aug 31, 2008, 04:27 PMNotGuilty! Wenn Ihre Großmutter Hoden hätte, würde sie Ihr Großvater sein
Let's use your example minus your unfounded presumptions.
"A women (Do you means woman or multiple victims?) has been raped, a suspect is arrested, as part of the interrogation a Polygraph is administered. The suspect fails or passes the Polygraph, a confession is not attained. DNA evidence is found at the scene and on the victim, it's a match to the suspect.
At trial do you think that the Polygraph results will even be entered (what ever they may be) into the trial? I think not since they have a silver bullet in the DNA evidence a fully admissible scientific test that yields consistent valid and reliable results. "
As to your question about Polygraph, It's not up to me, It's up to the judge what evidence is admitted and if you have read my previous post regarding the courts where polygraph has been admitted and the criteria for admission you will see that it might go either way.
As to whether or not the DNA is a "Silver Bullet" It is not absolute proof. In order to admit the DNA, the prosecutor has to prove that the victim was indeed raped, that the rapist actually ejaculated or leaked seminal fluid,(Many Rapists Don't),that the source of the DNA was really seminal fluid and uncontaminated by blood or epithelial cells, that the seminal fluid was not transferred from another surface to the victim by contact,(Locard's Principle in action), that other possible suspect's know or unknown semen or DNA samples were not present. (Hotel Bedspreads may have stains or transfers from dozens of donors; Home bedding may have several depending on the habits of the people who live in the house and the quality of the alleged match. (1 in 1000 vs 1 in a trillion). Then you have to prove that the sample was collected according to accepted forensic protocols, that the laboratory followed proper analysis procedure and finally that there was no police misconduct.
I assure you any defense attorney that didn't get his Law Degree from a box of Cracker Jack is going to attack all of those issues because if he can raise reasonable doubt in the mind of a single juror on just one of those issues, then the rapist walks out of court laughing at the system. Assuming of course, they had the right guy to begin with. Remember, due to pre-trial discovery the defense attorney gets to plan his attack for months before the trial.
Even if you reconstruct your scenario to repair all those dents I just put in your "Silver Bullet" my answer regarding polygraph will still be based on what the courts have said so far. In other words It's not up to me, It's up to the judge what evidence is admitted and if you have read my previous post regarding the courts where polygraph has been admitted and the criteria for admission you will see that it might go either way. One of the errors in your scenario would be that if the polygraph were offered as evidence by EITHER SIDE the results of the examination would be material to the probative value of the evidence, whether it bolstered the states evidence or refuted it.
I also have a problem with calling a test that can return match results anywhere from 1 in a thousand to 1 in a trillion "Consistent"
Of course all things being equal, an admissible confession in a rape case generally results in a Plea Deal, thus saving the victim from further trauma at the hands of the defense attorney and the state would save the time and expense of defending all of those attacks on your Silver Bullet.
Really Notguilty1 MOVE ON
Sancho Panza
Let's use your example minus your unfounded presumptions.
"A women (Do you means woman or multiple victims?) has been raped, a suspect is arrested, as part of the interrogation a Polygraph is administered. The suspect fails or passes the Polygraph, a confession is not attained. DNA evidence is found at the scene and on the victim, it's a match to the suspect.
At trial do you think that the Polygraph results will even be entered (what ever they may be) into the trial? I think not since they have a silver bullet in the DNA evidence a fully admissible scientific test that yields consistent valid and reliable results. "
As to your question about Polygraph, It's not up to me, It's up to the judge what evidence is admitted and if you have read my previous post regarding the courts where polygraph has been admitted and the criteria for admission you will see that it might go either way.
As to whether or not the DNA is a "Silver Bullet" It is not absolute proof. In order to admit the DNA, the prosecutor has to prove that the victim was indeed raped, that the rapist actually ejaculated or leaked seminal fluid,(Many Rapists Don't),that the source of the DNA was really seminal fluid and uncontaminated by blood or epithelial cells, that the seminal fluid was not transferred from another surface to the victim by contact,(Locard's Principle in action), that other possible suspect's know or unknown semen or DNA samples were not present. (Hotel Bedspreads may have stains or transfers from dozens of donors; Home bedding may have several depending on the habits of the people who live in the house and the quality of the alleged match. (1 in 1000 vs 1 in a trillion). Then you have to prove that the sample was collected according to accepted forensic protocols, that the laboratory followed proper analysis procedure and finally that there was no police misconduct.
I assure you any defense attorney that didn't get his Law Degree from a box of Cracker Jack is going to attack all of those issues because if he can raise reasonable doubt in the mind of a single juror on just one of those issues, then the rapist walks out of court laughing at the system. Assuming of course, they had the right guy to begin with. Remember, due to pre-trial discovery the defense attorney gets to plan his attack for months before the trial.
Even if you reconstruct your scenario to repair all those dents I just put in your "Silver Bullet" my answer regarding polygraph will still be based on what the courts have said so far. In other words It's not up to me, It's up to the judge what evidence is admitted and if you have read my previous post regarding the courts where polygraph has been admitted and the criteria for admission you will see that it might go either way. One of the errors in your scenario would be that if the polygraph were offered as evidence by EITHER SIDE the results of the examination would be material to the probative value of the evidence, whether it bolstered the states evidence or refuted it.
I also have a problem with calling a test that can return match results anywhere from 1 in a thousand to 1 in a trillion "Consistent"
Of course all things being equal, an admissible confession in a rape case generally results in a Plea Deal, thus saving the victim from further trauma at the hands of the defense attorney and the state would save the time and expense of defending all of those attacks on your Silver Bullet.
Really Notguilty1 MOVE ON
Sancho Panza
Posted by notguilty1
- Aug 31, 2008, 12:26 PMQuote from: SanchoPanza on Aug 31, 2008, 08:38 AMIF IF IF IF
Notguilty1, Si su tía tuviera testículos, ella sería su tío.
It's not up to me, It's up to the judge what evidence is admitted and if you have read my previous post regarding the courts where polygraph has been admitted and the criteria for admission you will see that it might go either way.
If DNA and latent Print Comparison confirms that the bloody palmprint found on the murder weapon belongs to the suspect and is the victim's blood, you're saying it would be all over right? Go to Jail, Do Not Pass Go, Do Not Collect $200.00?
Or what if two fingerprint experts disagreed that the print was the suspects?
Or what if the DNA Match was only 1 in 1000 instead of one in a trillion?
Or what if there was a plausible reason for the boody print other than the suspect committing the murder?
Real Life isn't a Sherlock Holmes novel or CSI Miami. Crime Scene Specialists hardly ever get involved in shootouts or interviews and criminal cases are never won or lost based on one person's interpretation of a single piece of evidence.
Sancho Panza
[/quote
FACT STILL REMAINS THAT DNA HAS, AND DOES ROUTINELY CONVICT CRIMINALS AND EXONERATE THE INNOCENT.
POLYGRAPH ON THE OTHER HAND HAS AND STILL DOES NOT. ANY EXPLANATION FOR THAT?SANCHO???
Besides my example did not include a murder or a weapon, finger or palm prints, it was a rape with DNA left on the victim, semen if your need specifics
Very true to your style you alter the scenario to suit your needs. NICE TRY!
As I stated in my case scenario ( not CSI Miami, this scenario happens in real life every day) the DNA evidence would surly convict the suspect and Polygraph results would most likely not even be brought in. Why??? Because the Polygraph results ( without a confession as a direct result of the Polygraph interrogation) would be laughed at by any defense attorney and most likely by judge too.
My failed Polygraph is still sitting on the detectives desk doing NOTHING! Why would that be if it was so reliable ( the examiner told me 98% accurate!!) you'd think with a scientific, expensive ( I'm told) with a examiner with over 30 years experience why would it not be a slam dunk conviction?? I WAS NOT EVEN CHARGED WITH A CRIME IN SPITE OF MY FAILED POLYGRAPH.
Posted by SanchoPanza
- Aug 31, 2008, 08:38 AMIF IF IF IF
Notguilty1, Si su tía tuviera testículos, ella sería su tío.
It's not up to me, It's up to the judge what evidence is admitted and if you have read my previous post regarding the courts where polygraph has been admitted and the criteria for admission you will see that it might go either way.
If DNA and latent Print Comparison confirms that the bloody palmprint found on the murder weapon belongs to the suspect and is the victim's blood, you're saying it would be all over right? Go to Jail, Do Not Pass Go, Do Not Collect $200.00?
Or what if two fingerprint experts disagreed that the print was the suspects?
Or what if the DNA Match was only 1 in 1000 instead of one in a trillion?
Or what if there was a plausible reason for the boody print other than the suspect committing the murder?
Real Life isn't a Sherlock Holmes novel or CSI Miami. Crime Scene Specialists hardly ever get involved in shootouts or interviews and criminal cases are never won or lost based on one person's interpretation of a single piece of evidence.
Sancho Panza
Notguilty1, Si su tía tuviera testículos, ella sería su tío.
It's not up to me, It's up to the judge what evidence is admitted and if you have read my previous post regarding the courts where polygraph has been admitted and the criteria for admission you will see that it might go either way.
If DNA and latent Print Comparison confirms that the bloody palmprint found on the murder weapon belongs to the suspect and is the victim's blood, you're saying it would be all over right? Go to Jail, Do Not Pass Go, Do Not Collect $200.00?
Or what if two fingerprint experts disagreed that the print was the suspects?
Or what if the DNA Match was only 1 in 1000 instead of one in a trillion?
Or what if there was a plausible reason for the boody print other than the suspect committing the murder?
Real Life isn't a Sherlock Holmes novel or CSI Miami. Crime Scene Specialists hardly ever get involved in shootouts or interviews and criminal cases are never won or lost based on one person's interpretation of a single piece of evidence.
Sancho Panza
Posted by notguilty1
- Aug 30, 2008, 11:22 PMQuote from: PhilGainey on Aug 27, 2008, 09:53 PMQuoteYou know sancho if you would use your vast knowledge of polygraph and please explain how a truthful person fails a polygraph
OK pay attention. ANY scientific test by definition must have an error rate. If there is no error rate it cannot be called a scientific test. Scientific tests have accuracy rates and error rates. Accuracy Rate is what you have left after you subtract the error rate from 100% .Error rates are made up of False Positives and False Negatives. In Polygraph a False Positive is where the results of the examination indicate deception when the subject is telling the truth. A False Negative in Polygraph means that the results indicate truthfulness when the subject was in fact lying regarding a relevant issue. If you add the number of false positives to the number of false negatives and calculate the total as a percentage of the tests in a given group, you have the error rate.
Generally in polygraph there are 3 possible results for examinations. Deception Indicated, No Deception Indicated and Inconclusive. Inconclusive results are not part of the error rate. Inconclusive just means that the data was unsuitable for evaluation. The NAS study said that more research needed to be done to quantify the error rate in polygraph. They said the same thing when they reviewed DNA research.
I can't tell you every possible thing that could cause an error in a polygraph test any more than you could tell me every possible thing that could cause an error in a DNA comparison. From the literature I have read, polygraphists shouldn't do an exam after an aggressive interrogation due to the possibility of physiological exhaustion causing an error, they don't permit extra people in the polygraph room in order to avoid errors caused by distraction due to talking or movement of the 3rd party, they don't test people with recent injuries to avoid errors caused by chronic pain and they don't conduct tests on people unable to comprehend the meaning of questions to avoid errors caused by misunderstanding the meaning of a question, etc. I can't name them all but errors do occur. If you look at other scientific tests you would discover that many have a much higher error rate than any quantified by known studies for polygraph. A TB skin test for example has an error rate between 30 and 70%.
Error rates cannot be affected from within a testing protocol. If you change your scoring/evaluation criteria to reduce false positives, false negatives will increase proportionately. Error rates can only be changed by altering the protocol in some fashion.
Since all scientific tests have error rates, necessarily forensic examinations used by the police also have error rates and a false positive in any of them could put a suspect in exactly the same predicament as a false positive in a polygraph test.
This includes but isn't limited to:
Latent Fingerprint comparison: The FBI AFIS system sometimes provides dozens of probable matches that require further investigation. Sometimes it only kicks out one match and it's the wrong guy. Why? I don't know. Do you?
I won't do that with the rest but they all have error rates
Blood Alcohol Analysis (Breath)
Blood Alcohol Analysis (Blood)
Handwriting Comparison
Statement Analysis
Determination of speed from skid marks
Determination of speed from yaw marks
Determination of speed from deformation of metal
Presence of blood
Presence of human blood
Marijuana field test
Marijuana Lab test
Heroin Field test
Heroin Lab Test
as a matter of fact to save time all presumptive tests for drugs whether in the field or lab have error rates.
Urinalysis
Ink analysis
Identification of trace evidence
Foot Print Comparison
Puzzle fit analysis
Ballistics
Hair Analysis
I still stand by my previous post that if you took all of the people who have posted on this board during the last 8 years whining that they told the truth and failed their polygraph and added them to the 1325 signatures including Joke Names, Duplications and Line Voided, during that same time period, and compared them to the number of polygraph tests administered during that same time period, you would find that you are a member of a very tiny yet vocal group, even if you assume that every one of your number is the victim of some error.
I would argue that if every one of you were found to have some error on your polygraph you couldn't successfully invalidate the 98% accuracy rate claim that Jack Trimarco allegedly made to Dr. Maschke regarding polygraph.
While an error in your particular case may be significant to you because of your personal involvement, the mere possibility that an error was made in your case is not that significant to the big picture.
Do you really think your interrogation would have been any less traumatic if you didn't take a polygraph and the investigator decided you were the culprit? You just decided to focus on polygraph as the source of your discomfort when it was the interviewer that made you feel bad.
I don't know of anyone who has ever been convicted of a crime based solely on the results of a polygraph, but a blanket statement that they cannot be admitted as evidence is innacurate.
Sancho Panza The character was the voice of reason in the face of insanity.
Or Perhaps a Fine Cigar
Ok since the threads title is Polygraph interrogation VS DNA testing.
I submit this scenario:
A women has been raped, a suspect is arrested, as part of the interrogation a Polygraph is administered ( as you know in an attempt to get a confession because, thats all Polygraph is good for) suspect fails or passes the Polygraph, it's after all a possibility given the weak nature of the test, a confession is not attained. DNA evidence is found at the scene and on the victim, it's a match to the suspect.
At trial do you think that the Polygraph results will even be entered (what ever they may be) into the trial? I think not since they have a silver bullet in the DNA evidence a fully admissible scientific test that yields consistent valid and reliable results.
You stated yourself that you know of no one that has ever been convicted solely on the results of a Polygraph. However MANY have been convicted and cleared by DNA testing.
I doubt there are any DNA analysts on any web site defending their jobs.
So lets stop comparing Polygraph to actual proven and accepted scientific tests Sancho
Now for comparison I submit crystal balls, tarot cards, psychics
(police actually use them at times in cold cases as last ditch attempts and throw logic out the window) these are all fairly comparable to Polygraph and the validity of the results.
Posted by SanchoPanza
- Aug 30, 2008, 10:32 AMCullen What happened to you?
Did you get angry and give somebody a piece of your mind then forget to ask for it back?
You haven't demonstrated that you have any qualifications whatsoever to determine what constitutes a scientific test and what doesn't.
Let me Give you a couple of hints. My last name is NOT Webb and No one has ever called me Skip but you.
Your powers of deduction rival the brilliance of a one watt bulb in front of a burning road flare at High Noon on an Arizona 4-lane highway.
Sancho Panza
Did you get angry and give somebody a piece of your mind then forget to ask for it back?
You haven't demonstrated that you have any qualifications whatsoever to determine what constitutes a scientific test and what doesn't.
Let me Give you a couple of hints. My last name is NOT Webb and No one has ever called me Skip but you.
Your powers of deduction rival the brilliance of a one watt bulb in front of a burning road flare at High Noon on an Arizona 4-lane highway.
Sancho Panza
Posted by T.M. Cullen
- Aug 29, 2008, 09:50 PMQuoteIt would just be an example of an error and errors occur in ANY scientific test.
There is that false syllogism again:
Errors occur in any scientific test.
The polygraph has errors.
The polygraph is therefore a scientific test!
Use of divining rods involve errors too.
Is use of a diving rod scientific?
As mentioned in another thread, the NAS report concluded that so called polygraph testing doesn't stand up to scientific scrutiny.
Just accept it. The polygraph is an interrogation, not a valid test. DNA testing is. And it's testing procedure is not subjective like the polygraph and doesn't change across examiners, agencies...etc.
Mr. Webb, get help! Mr. Sackett and Coffey are awaiting your arrival at the sanitarium. You can all enjoy a relaxing cup of hot chocolate with them in the lounge. Dr. Phil will be along afterwards to conduct a group session. Don't be late!