- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by Administrator
- Jan 25, 2009, 05:25 AM[postsmovedhere1] 2 [postsmovedhere2] Share Your Polygraph or CVSA Experience [move by] Administrator.
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Jan 21, 2009, 01:16 AMQuote from: admin on Jan 20, 2009, 11:02 AMQuote from: 26232A2E29470 on Jan 16, 2009, 02:43 AMAn off-topic reply by "fostermom" has been moved to this topic.So in other wards there nothing I can do to clear my name.
Your post was moved to a new message thread because it was off-topic for this thread, which is about the San Diego Police Department's polygraph program. In due time, these posts will be moved there, too.
QuoteIsn't there one person that would go out of there way to help a stranger. I wish I had the power to I WOULD. Remember the good sameritian that helped the injured person along the road. That is me. But I have no power to make that come true. Polygraphs lie I didn't lie on my polygraph. And I was shocked to death to fine out I didn't pass. Of course the detective that gave it we dealt with him before. He lies and twist the truth just to see if you make a mistake to convict you. I ask why would they let someone like that work for them (dishonest). Well they can't fire him and he's to young to retire so they had to do something with him. Well no matter how long or what it takes even if I go to my grave first. I'm going to clear my name. I want my foster parent title back. We were good at what we did. We had 19 infants and children all together. I can give you a list of names that can vouch for me. Even the case workers couldn't believe how the infants thrived when they lived with us. I loved feeding them, loving them, going shopping for them. Seeing the world through there eyes. Even one of the case workers the worked at YWCA said she couldn't believe the difference when I came to pick the one infant up. She would fuse the whole time she was visiting with her mom. And when I entered the room even if she didn't see me she would relax in her arms. The infants were well taken care of and loved by all of us. PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE I need my job back. Help me. fostermom.
Unfortunately, it is difficult, if not impossible, to prove that one hasn't done something. What can be shown, however, is that polygraph "testing" has no scientific basis and that the results should not be relied upon. Polygraphy is inherently biased against the truthful, and it is common for truthful people to wrongly fail. A statistical analysis by Dr. Alan Zelicoff based on the best available polygraph field studies suggests that "if a subject fails a polygraph, the probability that she is, in fact, being deceptive is little more than chance alone; that is, one could flip a coin and get virtually the same result for a positive test based on the published data."
To vindicate yourself, and to be able to work again as a foster parent, I think you're going to need legal representation. If you don't have a lawyer, Martindale's lawyer locator service might help you find one:
http://www.martindale.com
AntiPolygraph.org would be happy to assist your lawyer with documentation of polygraphy's unreliability.
Posted by fostermom
- Jan 20, 2009, 11:02 AMQuote from: 26232A2E29470 on Jan 16, 2009, 02:43 AMAn off-topic reply by "fostermom" has been moved to this topic.So in other wards there nothing I can do to clear my name. Isn't there one person that would go out of there way to help a stranger. I wish I had the power to I WOULD. Remember the good sameritian that helped the injured person along the road. That is me. But I have no power to make that come true. Polygraphs lie I didn't lie on my polygraph. And I was shocked to death to fine out I didn't pass. Of course the detective that gave it we dealt with him before. He lies and twist the truth just to see if you make a mistake to convict you. I ask why would they let someone like that work for them (dishonest). Well they can't fire him and he's to young to retire so they had to do something with him. Well no matter how long or what it takes even if I go to my grave first. I'm going to clear my name. I want my foster parent title back. We were good at what we did. We had 19 infants and children all together. I can give you a list of names that can vouch for me. Even the case workers couldn't believe how the infants thrived when they lived with us. I loved feeding them, loving them, going shopping for them. Seeing the world through there eyes. Even one of the case workers the worked at YWCA said she couldn't believe the difference when I came to pick the one infant up. She would fuse the whole time she was visiting with her mom. And when I entered the room even if she didn't see me she would relax in her arms. The infants were well taken care of and loved by all of us. PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE I need my job back. Help me. fostermom.
Posted by T.M. Cullen
- Jan 17, 2009, 01:59 PMIf they have all this evidence against her you mentioned above, why the need for the charade of a polygraph: "You need to take this 98% accurate (a lie) test to clear your name (another lie)".
If the polygraph has not been scientifically shown to be accurate enough to "clear one's name", is really just used to "coerce a confession" or otherwise get the person to unwittingly produce self-incriminating information (as an "investigative tool" as you put it) , people have a right to know that. So I guess the real blame I have for the polygraph is the way it is presented and represented.
What if she had actually PASSED her polygraph despite the photos...etc., and as a result, people assumed she was INNOCENT. I would place just as much BLAME on the polygraph in that case.
My point is that people should give little if any weight to the results of a polygraph, either way. I'm talking about employers, neighbors, friends...etc. You are right, they SHOULD focus on photos, medical reports...etc.
I'd be interested to know the affect all this evidence would have on the polygraph operator's performance. The polygraph is rather subjective. Do polygraphers have access to photos, medical reports...etc? Couldn't that prejudice to polygrapher and affect his/her ability to render objective results?
TC
If the polygraph has not been scientifically shown to be accurate enough to "clear one's name", is really just used to "coerce a confession" or otherwise get the person to unwittingly produce self-incriminating information (as an "investigative tool" as you put it) , people have a right to know that. So I guess the real blame I have for the polygraph is the way it is presented and represented.
What if she had actually PASSED her polygraph despite the photos...etc., and as a result, people assumed she was INNOCENT. I would place just as much BLAME on the polygraph in that case.
My point is that people should give little if any weight to the results of a polygraph, either way. I'm talking about employers, neighbors, friends...etc. You are right, they SHOULD focus on photos, medical reports...etc.
I'd be interested to know the affect all this evidence would have on the polygraph operator's performance. The polygraph is rather subjective. Do polygraphers have access to photos, medical reports...etc? Couldn't that prejudice to polygrapher and affect his/her ability to render objective results?
TC
Posted by pailryder
- Jan 17, 2009, 07:54 AMMr C
So let's review. Some people gave her this problem. The social workers lied when they said it happened before. The pictures were maybe faked. The doctors lied, nothing wrong with that childs ribs. The investigators got the wrong suspect.
Evidence from social workers, evidence of previous problems, medical evaluation with x-rays by a doctor, investigators report with pictures, but the polygraph smeared her name. She was fired because of the polygraph. Everything can be blamed on the POLYGRAPH?
Par for this site!
There is your answer, TC.
So let's review. Some people gave her this problem. The social workers lied when they said it happened before. The pictures were maybe faked. The doctors lied, nothing wrong with that childs ribs. The investigators got the wrong suspect.
Evidence from social workers, evidence of previous problems, medical evaluation with x-rays by a doctor, investigators report with pictures, but the polygraph smeared her name. She was fired because of the polygraph. Everything can be blamed on the POLYGRAPH?
Par for this site!
There is your answer, TC.
Posted by T.M. Cullen
- Jan 16, 2009, 02:20 PMQuoteSometimes people falsely accused have no other avenue to clear themselves. If they did they would use it. Polygraph is often the last option for their defense.
The polygraph has not been scientifically shown to detect deception in a reliable and accurate way. Certainly not accurate enough to legitimately smear a person's name. So that is a sad state of affairs.
In cases where attorneys come to you to supposedly clear the name of their client, did the client take the original (name smearing police poly) at the advice of their attorney, or were simply talked into it by the police? And, effectively, interrogated without the attorney present?
Thanks
TC
Posted by T.M. Cullen
- Jan 16, 2009, 02:07 PMQuoteThey called me a lier. When they took her to the doctors she had something wrong with one of her bibs. I'm not a abuser. And I was talked into a polygraph. We were dumb all the way threw this. We only have ourselves to blame. We didn't get a lawyer until it was to late.
The main purpose of a polygraph is to get some sort of confession or self-incriminating info from you when they don't have enough REAL evidence against you. It is an opportunity for them to interrogate you without having a lawyer present. A police officer posted here the other day admitting to that.
Child neglect, abuse must be especially hard to prove. I have a two year old son who is a real dare devil and is always climbing up places and falling down. He has had numerous bruises on his head.
I don't know what you can do at this point. Incidently, if you had refused to take the polygraph they would probably have said you must be "hiding something". So you just can't win.
Go see a lawyer and don't talk to anyone until you do!
TC
Posted by fostermom
- Jan 16, 2009, 11:16 AMThis is foster mom again. I don't know how private this is to say to much to you or who ever. I don't have anything to hide. I didn't use my name is because I didn't want it to get back to the people that are giving me this problem. I found other people that are like me. They told the truth on the polygraph and they failed to. One was a police man to try to go into the secret service. Was he lying that he failed to? My story is we were foster parents for 5 years we had 19 infants and children in our home. We adopted our 17 infant. I took the foster infant that was in my care at the time for a visit to see her mom. When I went to pick the infant up she had marks on her face. I asked what happened. And the only answer I got was I had to take her to the agency. They took her from me and took pictures. And said this happen before and she could not come home with me. I don't know what they mean by that. One time she had a bruise on her face. But I told them what happened. They called me a lier. When they took her to the doctors she had something wrong with one of her bibs. I'm not a abuser. And I was talked into a polygraph. We were dumb all the way threw this. We only have ourselves to blame. We didn't get a lawyer until it was to late. I used to love life. But now since this happened. I gave up on everything. I was humiliated, called a lier, and ashamed for something I DIDN'T do. I still can't understand what happened to me that day. All is I'm looking for is answers why this had to happen to me. And my name cleared so I can get my job back. If I could only get a judge to listen to me. And know that I'm telling the truth. Just give me a chance to clear my name. I can't with this "indicated" hanging over my head. All is I'm doing is praying for all this to go away and for me to get my life back. I'm sorry this probely sound like I'm babbling on. But I still can't grasp what happened to me. Take care. fostermom
Posted by pailryder
- Jan 16, 2009, 07:49 AMMr Cullen
You are correct that polygraph is often used as an interrogation tool, especially, within the law enforcement community. I have conducted tests of criminal suspects where the known case facts were so strong that I knew the requesting agency was only interested in obtaining a confession. But you are mistaken if you believe that is the only possible use.
Ask yourself why an attorney would pay for my services. Certainly not to interrogate his client! Sometimes people falsely accused have no other avenue to clear themselves. If they did they would use it. Polygraph is often the last option for their defense.
As a polygraph examiner I have exclusive control over the adminstration of the exams I conduct, but no control over how the results are used after I report. I can conduct a perfect, by our standards at least, session and the results can be misused or misunderstood by others.
My report of a polygraph result is not evidence of anything. It is my opinion based on my training and experience, and that is all. Many times my opinion has cleared suspects and directed the investigators in a different direction.
The polygraph world is not monolithic and it is not perfect, but we do try to learn from related discplines and our mistakes and, with some notable exceptions, are fair and good at what we do.
You are correct that polygraph is often used as an interrogation tool, especially, within the law enforcement community. I have conducted tests of criminal suspects where the known case facts were so strong that I knew the requesting agency was only interested in obtaining a confession. But you are mistaken if you believe that is the only possible use.
Ask yourself why an attorney would pay for my services. Certainly not to interrogate his client! Sometimes people falsely accused have no other avenue to clear themselves. If they did they would use it. Polygraph is often the last option for their defense.
As a polygraph examiner I have exclusive control over the adminstration of the exams I conduct, but no control over how the results are used after I report. I can conduct a perfect, by our standards at least, session and the results can be misused or misunderstood by others.
My report of a polygraph result is not evidence of anything. It is my opinion based on my training and experience, and that is all. Many times my opinion has cleared suspects and directed the investigators in a different direction.
The polygraph world is not monolithic and it is not perfect, but we do try to learn from related discplines and our mistakes and, with some notable exceptions, are fair and good at what we do.
Posted by T.M. Cullen
- Jan 16, 2009, 12:46 AMQuoteI would not assume fostermom was accused of a sex crime, more likely simple physical abuse or neglect of the child/children. I would not assume the doctors who examined the child/children found evidence of abuse/neglect. The licensed clinical social workers for DDC&Y who removed the child/children from fostermoms care and the state police detectives who work cases like this work from facts. While they may use poly as an investigative tool, they do not often act soley on the basis of a poly. But, when they do assume they tend to err on the side of the child victim.
Hopefully, fostermom will pipe in again and state whether or not she was asked to take the poly before or after any factual evidence had been discovered (i.e. anything other than an accusation of abuse).
In cases where there is no evidence, just an accusation, are accused persons asked to take a poly?
Investigative tool? Can you elaborate? Isn't the polygraph just a form of interrogation? Is a polygraph chart labeled "deception indicated" considered evidence?
Regardless, family members, friends, neighbors, the media...etc. assume people to be guilty just for failing a polygraph. And you can fail a polygraph despite telling the truth. That is the problem, and apparent concern of fostermom.
TC
Posted by pailryder
- Jan 15, 2009, 10:37 PMMr Cullen
I would not assume fostermom was accused of a sex crime, more likely simple physical abuse or neglect of the child/children. I would not assume the doctors who examined the child/children found evidence of abuse/neglect. The licensed clinical social workers for DDC&Y who removed the child/children from fostermoms care and the state police detectives who work cases like this work from facts. While they may use poly as an investigative tool, they do not often act soley on the basis of a poly. But, when they do assume they tend to err on the side of the child victim.
I would not assume fostermom was accused of a sex crime, more likely simple physical abuse or neglect of the child/children. I would not assume the doctors who examined the child/children found evidence of abuse/neglect. The licensed clinical social workers for DDC&Y who removed the child/children from fostermoms care and the state police detectives who work cases like this work from facts. While they may use poly as an investigative tool, they do not often act soley on the basis of a poly. But, when they do assume they tend to err on the side of the child victim.
Posted by T.M. Cullen
- Jan 15, 2009, 07:54 PMQuoteMr Cullen
I am not a police officer but I have often been asked to interview both the accuser or accusers and accused in similar cases. If fostermom was asked by the state police to take a poly, someone made an accusation that led to the investigation. Are you assuming the accuser and perhaps victim lied? I dont know and neither do you, but I know there is more to that story. I would withhold judgement and advice until I heard both sides.
I am assuming accusations were made, and that she was told (probably by somebody in LE who knows otherwise) that she needed to take the polygraph to "clear her name", or "eliminate herself as a suspect" (which is not true, the polygraph can't do that).
Not knowing the truth about polygraphy, and being naive and gullible about it (like most of the public) she believed the LE person and eagerly volunteered to take it as a way of clear her name and reputation as a "foster mom".
She then was polygraphed, told the truth, yet failed. As a result, most people ASSUMED she was guilty and "passed judgment" on her, accordingly.
This made her VERY frustrated and angry. As a result, she started "looking for answers". So, she searched everything she could about the polygraph (not something a guilty person is likely to do). She found this BBS, learned the truth about the polygraph and made her post.
It is a common pattern. Wish I had a dollar for every time it has happened. But, yes, the above is all assumption, but based on personal experience and that of many others. As far as assumptions go, most polygraph operators would probably assume she is just lying.
So, ASSUMING my version is true, and that she is not just a child molester putting on and "act" by coming to this board under an "alias" pretending to be "looking for answers" and advice. Maybe as a way of making herself feel less "guilty". What should she do? What recourse does a person like this have, assuming she is being truthful?
Thanks,
TC
P.S. Given your recent claim that single issue polygraphs are "very accurate", and the persistent claim by polygraphers that the test is 98% accurate, one could quite easily assume she IS lying. So, all ASSumptions aside, the million dollar question still remains: "Are polygraphs accurate?"
Posted by pailryder
- Jan 15, 2009, 05:09 PMMr Cullen
I am not a police officer but I have often been asked to interview both the accuser or accusers and accused in similar cases. If fostermom was asked by the state police to take a poly, someone made an accusation that led to the investigation. Are you assuming the accuser and perhaps victim lied? I dont know and neither do you, but I know there is more to that story. I would withhold judgement and advice until I heard both sides.
I am not a police officer but I have often been asked to interview both the accuser or accusers and accused in similar cases. If fostermom was asked by the state police to take a poly, someone made an accusation that led to the investigation. Are you assuming the accuser and perhaps victim lied? I dont know and neither do you, but I know there is more to that story. I would withhold judgement and advice until I heard both sides.
Posted by T.M. Cullen
- Jan 15, 2009, 04:23 PMQuoteDoes anyone know how I can clear my name. I'm praying there just one person that can step forward and help me clear my name to get my job back. Take care. god bless. fostermom
Pailryder and/or Gary Davis,
Do either of you have an answer for this lady?
TC
Posted by fostermom
- Jan 15, 2009, 04:12 PMI'm looking up people who failed there polygraph to. And I came upon this web site. I also was a victim to this ridiculous lying machine. I WAS a foster mom until the State police and the DDC&Y agency believe the lying lier detector test. I also am innocent. Now I'm marked for life"indicated".
Was fired from 2 jobs and my life is ruined. When this happens it changes your life forever. Does anyone know how I can clear my name. I'm praying there just one person that can step forward and help me clear my name to get my job back. Take care. god bless. fostermom
This post was split from the message thread San Diego Police Department Polygraph = HORRIBLE Experience and re-named. -- AntiPolygraph.org Administrator
Was fired from 2 jobs and my life is ruined. When this happens it changes your life forever. Does anyone know how I can clear my name. I'm praying there just one person that can step forward and help me clear my name to get my job back. Take care. god bless. fostermom
This post was split from the message thread San Diego Police Department Polygraph = HORRIBLE Experience and re-named. -- AntiPolygraph.org Administrator