- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by Anthony R
- Sep 30, 2021, 10:22 PMWell, at least when Gary is pitching his DVSA, against Charlie's CVSA, Gary can say his competitor is in the process of liquidation bankruptcy and probably will not be able to offer support and recertification training. Anyhow, if I was in Gary's shoes, that is exactly what I would be doing.
Also, if I was Gary, I would be trying to press bankruptcy fraud. Like I have said, I am no attorney, heck, I am not even a fake Ph.D, but it appears to me Charlie is trying to mix and match Chapter 7 and Chapter 11 bankruptcies.
Gary, if you are reading this, or if you are one of Gary's attorneys, please weigh in.
Also, if I was Gary, I would be trying to press bankruptcy fraud. Like I have said, I am no attorney, heck, I am not even a fake Ph.D, but it appears to me Charlie is trying to mix and match Chapter 7 and Chapter 11 bankruptcies.
Gary, if you are reading this, or if you are one of Gary's attorneys, please weigh in.
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Sep 30, 2021, 01:21 AMOn 28 September 2021, Judge Ashley Zuckerman stayed Baker's case against NITV LLC pending resolution of NITV LLC's bankruptcy case.
Posted by Anthony R
- Sep 29, 2021, 03:45 PMI did not get a chance yesterday to see the case management meeting concerning the bankruptcy/failure of NITV LLC.
Any news, or did it somehow get postponed like so many of the past legal actions?
It would be interesting to have a legal analysis of how Charlie can use the Chapter 7 liquidation bankruptcy like a Chapter 11 BK to keep operating his CVSA business while also selecting what creditors to pay and which ones to stiff.
Any news, or did it somehow get postponed like so many of the past legal actions?
It would be interesting to have a legal analysis of how Charlie can use the Chapter 7 liquidation bankruptcy like a Chapter 11 BK to keep operating his CVSA business while also selecting what creditors to pay and which ones to stiff.
Posted by Anthony R
- Sep 24, 2021, 02:23 PMThis will be interesting. Charlie will likely be put under oath which will be interesting for an individual with his history of hubris. A few things that pop out to me, and I just received a Google education on the Case Management Conference, or 341, is firstly, the presumption of fraud factor. It appears to me that the recent purchase of a 1.6 million dollar home would definitely raise the eyebrows of the law firms and his business foe faux doc Gary Baker. Also, as I have mentioned on an earlier post, my lay eye picked up the contemptuous exchange factor. It appears that Charlie is up to date on paying the firm that wrote the mean letter to AP in June, 2019, but is trying to shaft at least two other law firms.
Personally, I would not be surprised if any of Charlie's creditors bring up the shifting of assets between like sounding LLCs. A government bureaucrat contracting with NITV LLC, or NITV Federal Services may not pick up on the subtle difference in name, but a decent lawyer will latch on that in a heartbeat.
Who knows what will be dug up in this hearing or future discovery if this petition continues. I know this is antidotal, but in my work experience, two of my former employers classified most of their workers as independent contractors, like Charlie does with his instructors. Long story short, this eventually blew up in my former employers' faces with multiple government agencies, and especially the IRS whipping their asses with huge sanctions. Throw in Charlie receiving PPP funds and who knows what may happen. Discovery can really suck for those not on the up and up.
I cannot imagine creditors owed hundreds of thousand of dollars walking away from Charlie. But on the other hand, I was also surprised by someone whom calls himself Dr. based on a strip mall diploma, and also refers to himself as a renaissance man admitting business failure.
Personally, I would not be surprised if any of Charlie's creditors bring up the shifting of assets between like sounding LLCs. A government bureaucrat contracting with NITV LLC, or NITV Federal Services may not pick up on the subtle difference in name, but a decent lawyer will latch on that in a heartbeat.
Who knows what will be dug up in this hearing or future discovery if this petition continues. I know this is antidotal, but in my work experience, two of my former employers classified most of their workers as independent contractors, like Charlie does with his instructors. Long story short, this eventually blew up in my former employers' faces with multiple government agencies, and especially the IRS whipping their asses with huge sanctions. Throw in Charlie receiving PPP funds and who knows what may happen. Discovery can really suck for those not on the up and up.
I cannot imagine creditors owed hundreds of thousand of dollars walking away from Charlie. But on the other hand, I was also surprised by someone whom calls himself Dr. based on a strip mall diploma, and also refers to himself as a renaissance man admitting business failure.
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Sep 23, 2021, 01:13 PMA "Case Management Conference" is set for Tuesday, 28 September 2021 at 11:30 AM before Judge Ashley Zuckerman.
The hearing is to be held via Zoom:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/94110438096?pwd=TjVsQ3ROYWZQcklZbjV3RkdRTUd5Zz09
Meeting ID: 94110438096
Password: 208540
The hearing is to be held via Zoom:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/94110438096?pwd=TjVsQ3ROYWZQcklZbjV3RkdRTUd5Zz09
Meeting ID: 94110438096
Password: 208540
Posted by Anthony R
- Sep 01, 2021, 10:33 PMI am hoping that no news is good news on this litigation. Hopefully, Charlie is ringing up substantial legal debt at three figures per hour every weekday, and that the billable hours will keep piling up so when Gary eventually wins, there will be nothing left to win, just like there wasn't when Charlie "won" against Arthur and Dektor.
It appears that the headquarters of NITV at 11400 Fortune Circle is owned by a LLC, Landview Management, that is controlled by Charlie's wife. So, Gary may have a nice building, albeit with multiple liens.
It will be interesting to see Charlie try to play the part of a successful entrepreneur to his gullible clients, and concurrently play the part of a financially broken and failed businessman to the courts.
So, let us hope that Charlie and Gary will cross each other out like a middle school algebra problem and with them the pseudoscience of VSA.
It appears that the headquarters of NITV at 11400 Fortune Circle is owned by a LLC, Landview Management, that is controlled by Charlie's wife. So, Gary may have a nice building, albeit with multiple liens.
It will be interesting to see Charlie try to play the part of a successful entrepreneur to his gullible clients, and concurrently play the part of a financially broken and failed businessman to the courts.
So, let us hope that Charlie and Gary will cross each other out like a middle school algebra problem and with them the pseudoscience of VSA.
Posted by Anthony R
- Aug 10, 2021, 12:10 PMCouple of questions: Will this case be going to trial after Gary's lawyers look over the records, the QuickBooks sales and data records and client list are examined? Also, is the CPA, Kevin Foytek, originally retained by NITV? If so, has, or will Foytek be disposed by Gary's lawyers?
After further reading the attachments, I have learned that many of Charlie's employees, specifically the instructors, are independent contractors. Many businesses use independent contractors as regular employees to avoid withholding taxes and social security payments, which is a real no-no and can land one in hot water with the IRS. Which brings up another question, did Charlie use PPP funds for these independent contractors?
Gary's lawyers appear to be walking a thin line. They probably have enough on Charlie to force him out of business or at least into bankruptcy, but that would put Gary, near the back of the line for any funds after liquidation of NITV. Also, are Gary's lawyers mandated reporters for any illegal acts they will find on NITV?
After further reading the attachments, I have learned that many of Charlie's employees, specifically the instructors, are independent contractors. Many businesses use independent contractors as regular employees to avoid withholding taxes and social security payments, which is a real no-no and can land one in hot water with the IRS. Which brings up another question, did Charlie use PPP funds for these independent contractors?
Gary's lawyers appear to be walking a thin line. They probably have enough on Charlie to force him out of business or at least into bankruptcy, but that would put Gary, near the back of the line for any funds after liquidation of NITV. Also, are Gary's lawyers mandated reporters for any illegal acts they will find on NITV?
Posted by Anthony R
- Aug 03, 2021, 12:17 PMI'm getting a little off topic, but I find the psychological makeup of Charlie pretty interesting and how this psychological makeup is leading to Charlie's apparent downfall.
First off, let's examine his need to humiliate the Dektor, a minor player in the bogus VSA game that was so small time that the proprietor had to go pro se. As I mentioned before, Charlie "won" the lawsuit but this "victory" resulted in what appears to be a permanent, and seemingly accurate mirrored website that points out such factors as his fake doctorate, fake "scientific" study and all sorts of embarrassing tidbits. Also, threatening the web consultant was way overboard. This legal victory probably resulted in Charlie spending way more in legal fees than any business he may have lost to Dektor.
Now, let us look at the ongoing litigation between Gary and Charlie. From what information I could find online, Gary was also a small time player in the VSA charade. The sources I found said Gary made between $25,000 to maybe $40,000 a year, and some years Gary didn't even bother to file a tax return. Strictly small potatoes.
The point I am trying to make is if Charlie would have swallowed his immense ego, and settled with Gary several years ago, he could have saved himself from his probable business ruin. I bet Charlie could have settled with Gary for around the $25,000 mark, which is a chunk of change for someone used to making that kind of money per annum.
But, Charlie can never admit to being wrong and I believe he clearly thinks he has the kind of IQ that a doctorate holder possesses. Now, Charlie's CVSA clearly failed in the Michael Crowe case to be point he had to settle with the Crowe family. Even though his LLC said in court that the CVSA cannot determine truth, Charlie still doubled down on his BS. Also, although the CVSA was wrong on the case of the probation officer that was falsely accused in court, Charlie still said his machine was right and the PO was lying.
I think, like most BS artists, that Charlie thought he could BS, anyone, which backfired during that infamous Brian Ross interview. Charlie tried to wow Mr. Ross by flying into work in a helicopter and having a Ph.D. prominently displayed on his office wall. Don't need to rehash hear, but Charlie came across as a two bit conman.
Charlie's lack of intellectual horsepower to go further than the Associate's degree level is clearly embarrassing to him, to the point he had to get a strip mall doctorate.
Charlie's façade is crumbling and he is in full blown panic mode. Charlie does not like anyone chipping away at his façade as also evidenced by the threat letter to AP in 2019.
Now, what gives me the right to make a psychological assessment on Charlie? I would answer that my years of interviewing probationers and parolees and submitting written reports to the courts and court room testimony under oath.
What give's Charlie the right to claim to hold a Ph.D.? Not a damn thing.
First off, let's examine his need to humiliate the Dektor, a minor player in the bogus VSA game that was so small time that the proprietor had to go pro se. As I mentioned before, Charlie "won" the lawsuit but this "victory" resulted in what appears to be a permanent, and seemingly accurate mirrored website that points out such factors as his fake doctorate, fake "scientific" study and all sorts of embarrassing tidbits. Also, threatening the web consultant was way overboard. This legal victory probably resulted in Charlie spending way more in legal fees than any business he may have lost to Dektor.
Now, let us look at the ongoing litigation between Gary and Charlie. From what information I could find online, Gary was also a small time player in the VSA charade. The sources I found said Gary made between $25,000 to maybe $40,000 a year, and some years Gary didn't even bother to file a tax return. Strictly small potatoes.
The point I am trying to make is if Charlie would have swallowed his immense ego, and settled with Gary several years ago, he could have saved himself from his probable business ruin. I bet Charlie could have settled with Gary for around the $25,000 mark, which is a chunk of change for someone used to making that kind of money per annum.
But, Charlie can never admit to being wrong and I believe he clearly thinks he has the kind of IQ that a doctorate holder possesses. Now, Charlie's CVSA clearly failed in the Michael Crowe case to be point he had to settle with the Crowe family. Even though his LLC said in court that the CVSA cannot determine truth, Charlie still doubled down on his BS. Also, although the CVSA was wrong on the case of the probation officer that was falsely accused in court, Charlie still said his machine was right and the PO was lying.
I think, like most BS artists, that Charlie thought he could BS, anyone, which backfired during that infamous Brian Ross interview. Charlie tried to wow Mr. Ross by flying into work in a helicopter and having a Ph.D. prominently displayed on his office wall. Don't need to rehash hear, but Charlie came across as a two bit conman.
Charlie's lack of intellectual horsepower to go further than the Associate's degree level is clearly embarrassing to him, to the point he had to get a strip mall doctorate.
Charlie's façade is crumbling and he is in full blown panic mode. Charlie does not like anyone chipping away at his façade as also evidenced by the threat letter to AP in 2019.
Now, what gives me the right to make a psychological assessment on Charlie? I would answer that my years of interviewing probationers and parolees and submitting written reports to the courts and court room testimony under oath.
What give's Charlie the right to claim to hold a Ph.D.? Not a damn thing.
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Aug 03, 2021, 09:21 AMToday's hearing did not go well for NITV/NITV Federal Services. The judge overruled most of NITV Federal Services' objections, and as a result, it will be required to turn over:
The contents of these files are not likely to become public, however, as counsel for E. Gary Baker agreed to an "attorneys eyes only" protective order.
- Its "accounting/QuickBooks data files" for the years 2005-2018
- A client list with customers numbered 1-2703
- A "QuickBooks Sales By Customer Summary"
The contents of these files are not likely to become public, however, as counsel for E. Gary Baker agreed to an "attorneys eyes only" protective order.
Posted by Anthony R
- Jul 30, 2021, 01:38 PMAgain, thanks for the excellent job you do keeping this information about this on-going litigation supplied on a timely basis. Most everyone I have read on this thread figured out that Charlie & Co. would be engaging in hiding assets and if opposing counsel keeps digging, I betcha they will find two sets of books aside from the multiple LLCs. Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if criminal charges eventually arise and maybe even a RICO action.
Charlie really screwed himself by flaunting a "highly successful renaissance man lifestyle" while having at least one helicopter, collector guitars, expensive photography equipment, etc. But now he is claiming to be broke.
I've seen so many Charlie like characters in my life generally, and specifically in my criminal justice career. Basically, Charlie is a one trick pony. He can bullshit, and I will give credit where credit is due, exceptionally well. However, he apparently cannot reason abstractly, a faith that eventually befalls most bullshit artists. Which means the gig will end eventually.
The number one danger to criminals for instance, is other criminals. AP has done an exceptionally job exposing the lie industry charlatans, but the lie industry derail each other better than us people whom seek honesty in the CJ system could ever do. I believe that the fake Ukraine study NITV promotes was debunked by APA, and Gary appears to be putting a major ass whuppin' on Charlie & Co. Even if Charlie wins, he will still be out of a heap of money from having to pay his attorneys. Mr. Fleck appears to be good at hiding, but he will reappear when his payday arrives.
Back when I was a newly minted PO, I got very upset on a case I prepared went south at trial. A more experienced PO told me that not to worry, that the "street" will take care of that criminal. Interesting that we see another charlatan taking out Charlie.
Charlie really screwed himself by flaunting a "highly successful renaissance man lifestyle" while having at least one helicopter, collector guitars, expensive photography equipment, etc. But now he is claiming to be broke.
I've seen so many Charlie like characters in my life generally, and specifically in my criminal justice career. Basically, Charlie is a one trick pony. He can bullshit, and I will give credit where credit is due, exceptionally well. However, he apparently cannot reason abstractly, a faith that eventually befalls most bullshit artists. Which means the gig will end eventually.
The number one danger to criminals for instance, is other criminals. AP has done an exceptionally job exposing the lie industry charlatans, but the lie industry derail each other better than us people whom seek honesty in the CJ system could ever do. I believe that the fake Ukraine study NITV promotes was debunked by APA, and Gary appears to be putting a major ass whuppin' on Charlie & Co. Even if Charlie wins, he will still be out of a heap of money from having to pay his attorneys. Mr. Fleck appears to be good at hiding, but he will reappear when his payday arrives.
Back when I was a newly minted PO, I got very upset on a case I prepared went south at trial. A more experienced PO told me that not to worry, that the "street" will take care of that criminal. Interesting that we see another charlatan taking out Charlie.
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Jul 30, 2021, 05:28 AMA 30-page Pretrial Stipulation filed on 27 July 2021 lays out the issues that are to be argued and decided at trial in this case. This document is attached to this post.
The key point that appears to be at issue is whether NITV, LLC., against which the judgment in this case was originally issued, fraudulently transferred assets to avoid paying the judgment debt, and whether Charles Humble, his wife, Lourdes Irimia, and NITV Federal Services are liable for that.
A "Hearing on Defendants' Objections to Request for Production" is set for Tuesday, 3 August 20201 at 8:30 AM before Judge Ashley Zuckerman.
The hearing is to be held via Zoom, a videoconferencing service:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/94110438096?pwd=TjVsQ3ROYWZQcklZbjV3RkdRTUd5Zz09
Meeting ID: 94110438096
Password: 208540
+1 8778535257 US Toll-Free
+1 8884754499 US Toll-Free
The key point that appears to be at issue is whether NITV, LLC., against which the judgment in this case was originally issued, fraudulently transferred assets to avoid paying the judgment debt, and whether Charles Humble, his wife, Lourdes Irimia, and NITV Federal Services are liable for that.
A "Hearing on Defendants' Objections to Request for Production" is set for Tuesday, 3 August 20201 at 8:30 AM before Judge Ashley Zuckerman.
The hearing is to be held via Zoom, a videoconferencing service:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/94110438096?pwd=TjVsQ3ROYWZQcklZbjV3RkdRTUd5Zz09
Meeting ID: 94110438096
Password: 208540
+1 8778535257 US Toll-Free
+1 8884754499 US Toll-Free
Posted by Anthony R
- Jul 28, 2021, 01:41 PMThank you and your kind reader for the PDF. Well, it looks like the war between the foe faux docs will be on-going. Good.
Charlie is really a piece of work claiming that Gary is too aggressive and greedy, especially after Charlie threatened to destroy the livelihood of Matt Vanderhoff, an IT consultant that wrote some software for Dektor, as well as threatened "sanctions" against AP. Karma does exist at least in Charlie's case. Really, Charlie could lose everything, and I would not be surprised to even see his 4th wife (whom appears young enough to be his grand daughter) jump ship. I have zero mercy for someone that Charlie that has destroyed probably thousands or lives and has dented, or prevented so many criminal justice careers.
I'm thinking that Charlie may realize the gig is up, and he is going down, and wants to take Gary down to Hell with him by continuing to run up litigation expenses.
This comment should probably be in another heading, but one thing I find interesting is that in the VSA side of so-called lie detection, it is the manufacturers that attack each other (CVSA, DVSA, Dektor). But on the polygraph side, it is the operators that attack each other, for example, the Dr. Phil polygraphists.
Charlie is really a piece of work claiming that Gary is too aggressive and greedy, especially after Charlie threatened to destroy the livelihood of Matt Vanderhoff, an IT consultant that wrote some software for Dektor, as well as threatened "sanctions" against AP. Karma does exist at least in Charlie's case. Really, Charlie could lose everything, and I would not be surprised to even see his 4th wife (whom appears young enough to be his grand daughter) jump ship. I have zero mercy for someone that Charlie that has destroyed probably thousands or lives and has dented, or prevented so many criminal justice careers.
I'm thinking that Charlie may realize the gig is up, and he is going down, and wants to take Gary down to Hell with him by continuing to run up litigation expenses.
This comment should probably be in another heading, but one thing I find interesting is that in the VSA side of so-called lie detection, it is the manufacturers that attack each other (CVSA, DVSA, Dektor). But on the polygraph side, it is the operators that attack each other, for example, the Dr. Phil polygraphists.
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Jul 27, 2021, 02:07 PMA reader kindly sent a PDF version of Marc Freeman's South Florida Sun-Sentinel article, "Which Company Is Telling the Truth: Battle in Lie-Detecting Industry Is Getting Stranger than Fiction," which I have attached to this post.
Posted by Anthony R
- Jul 26, 2021, 03:16 PMThanks for the update. I read as much of the article by Marc Freeman as I could before getting popped out since it is a pay for view piece. I could only briefly read parts of the article so please forgive me if I am missing some points.
That said, Mr. Freeman would be well served to study AP for an incredible amount of information on the on-going rumble between Baker and Humble. Also, the Brian Ross ABC interview of "Dr," Humble, especially the longer version should be viewed by Mr. Freeman.
Here are a few points that need to be further examined:
* If NITV/Humble cannot pay the judgement against them, they probably need to declare bankruptcy. Gary's lawyers really need to start leaning on Charlie & Co. Charlie bragged to Brian Ross that NITV "has had a remarkable level of success." Really Charlie, don't blame your foe faux doc for your failure to pay a settlement.
* Charlie and Gary need to show their research on VSAs "work" and furnish some empirical data, not a phony baloney Ukraine published article. Charlie's attempt to explain his "science" to Brian Ross appeared to have backfired.
* Just because polygraphs are bogus does not mean VSAs are legit. The research I have found shows they are both 50/50. The CVSA given to me was, however, 100% inaccurate.
* Finally, like the purpose of AP, all forms of polygraphs, VSAs and even e-meters need to be gone now. A bogus CVSA dented my career, but we have former Afghanistan allies that may be murdered by the Taliban because of various charlatans more interested in making money than the welfare of their fellow humans.
I hope Marc Freeman does a series of articles about the fallacy of so-called lie detection.
That said, Mr. Freeman would be well served to study AP for an incredible amount of information on the on-going rumble between Baker and Humble. Also, the Brian Ross ABC interview of "Dr," Humble, especially the longer version should be viewed by Mr. Freeman.
Here are a few points that need to be further examined:
* If NITV/Humble cannot pay the judgement against them, they probably need to declare bankruptcy. Gary's lawyers really need to start leaning on Charlie & Co. Charlie bragged to Brian Ross that NITV "has had a remarkable level of success." Really Charlie, don't blame your foe faux doc for your failure to pay a settlement.
* Charlie and Gary need to show their research on VSAs "work" and furnish some empirical data, not a phony baloney Ukraine published article. Charlie's attempt to explain his "science" to Brian Ross appeared to have backfired.
* Just because polygraphs are bogus does not mean VSAs are legit. The research I have found shows they are both 50/50. The CVSA given to me was, however, 100% inaccurate.
* Finally, like the purpose of AP, all forms of polygraphs, VSAs and even e-meters need to be gone now. A bogus CVSA dented my career, but we have former Afghanistan allies that may be murdered by the Taliban because of various charlatans more interested in making money than the welfare of their fellow humans.
I hope Marc Freeman does a series of articles about the fallacy of so-called lie detection.
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Jul 26, 2021, 12:17 PMMarc Freeman writes about the ongoing civil litigation between Gary Baker and Charles Humble in an article titled, "Who's telling the truth? Battle over lie-detecting is stranger than fiction," published in the South Florida Sun-Sentinel. Excerpt:
Quote
...
Endless litigation
The feuding began in 2003, when Humble's original company, NITV, LLC, sued Baker in federal court for false advertising and unfair competition. The following year, NITV sued Baker for a second time, but by early 2005 the parties had agreed to a settlement.
The peace was temporary. That same year Baker sued NITV for defamation, this time in Palm Beach County Circuit Court. He accused NITV of sending out "Scam Alert" notices to police departments around the country warning about Baker's product.
A jury sided with Baker, and in 2011, a state appeals court agreed Baker was entitled to a $250,000 award for damage to his reputation. The trial judge later approved that judgment plus interest.
But Baker says he still hasn't seen any money. Scott W. Zappolo, attorney for Baker, said he is now asking a new judge to order Humble's company to pay out over $400,000, including the interest amount.
Humble's attorney, William A. Fleck, could not be reached for comment despite attempts by email and calls to his office.
But Humble explained that his original NITV company lost too much business over false attacks by Baker and his partner, making it unable to pay the judgment.
"They killed the cow they are going after," Humble said, blaming the defamation on a former employee.
On top of that dispute, in 2015 Humble sued Baker and a partner, accusing them of doing illegal international business in Central America and other places. Baker denies the allegations.