- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by nobody is here
- Jan 24, 2025, 07:17 AMWow. This is sad. These polygraphers and law enforcement pigs will do ANYTHING to get a confession out of somebody. I guess catching a "Russian spy" sounds good and sexy and any law enforcement would love to have that fame.
Sadly, once a person confesses, even if the confession is coerced, it is hard for the person to claim innocence. I assume the mental distress argument has been used many times by defendants. How often does it work, for acquittals and appeals?
Now they have locked him away and denied him access to lawyers and outside communication?! Is this even legal?
Didn't the late polygraph critic Doug Williams also get sent to the same prison in Florence, CO, or a different one?
However, at the same time, most spies when caught are told to deny everything up until the bloody end. Even Chinese spy Chaoqun Ji, who was convicted then released on a "spy swap" in November 2024, denied being a spy.
What is the truth? Was Debbins really coerced into a false confession? Or were the polygraphers and FBI just that darn good at interrogating him that they squeezed the truth out of him and now Debbins will try any argument to renege and get out of that harsh prison?
We will never know.
Sadly, once a person confesses, even if the confession is coerced, it is hard for the person to claim innocence. I assume the mental distress argument has been used many times by defendants. How often does it work, for acquittals and appeals?
Now they have locked him away and denied him access to lawyers and outside communication?! Is this even legal?
Didn't the late polygraph critic Doug Williams also get sent to the same prison in Florence, CO, or a different one?
However, at the same time, most spies when caught are told to deny everything up until the bloody end. Even Chinese spy Chaoqun Ji, who was convicted then released on a "spy swap" in November 2024, denied being a spy.
What is the truth? Was Debbins really coerced into a false confession? Or were the polygraphers and FBI just that darn good at interrogating him that they squeezed the truth out of him and now Debbins will try any argument to renege and get out of that harsh prison?
We will never know.
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Jan 23, 2025, 05:33 AMnobody is here,
Thank you for sharing Christopher Burgess' remarks.
It's noteworthy, I think, that since his guilty plea, Peter Debbins has withdrawn his confession and attempted to appeal. Meanwhile, the U.S. Bureau of Prisons is keeping him under exceptionally harsh terms of confinement.
After Debbins was sentenced to 188 months' imprisonment in May 2021, I was interested to know what became of him and where he was being incarcerated. Perplexingly, a search of the federal Bureau of Prisons' inmate locator web page for Peter Debbins for a long time showed zero results. I wondered whether perhaps his location was being concealed for some political reason, and whether he was perhaps being considered for a prisoner exchange with Russia.
This seems not to have been the case. A review of the docket in Debbins' case shows that shortly after sentencing, in a letter sent from the Alexandria City Detention Center, he attempted to withdraw his guilty plea and filed a notice of appeal (later withdrawn).
By January 2022, Debbins was incarcerated at the United States Penitentiary, Big Sandy in Inez, Kentucky, from where on 16 July 2022 he filed a "Request for a Court-Appointed Attorney to Assist with 2255 Motion" (a motion to vacate, set aside, or correct a prison sentence) in which he wrote, among other things, (hand printed in all caps):
On 4 August 2022, the U.S. Attorney's Office filed a response in opposition to Debbins' motion that included two exhibits that were filed under seal. (With the exception of the indictment, none of the documents filed under seal in this case have been unsealed.)
On 27 December 2022, Debbins wrote to the court, informing it of his new address, the United States Prison, Florence ADMAX. He gave his address as:
This prison is generally recognized as the most restrictive in the federal prison system. It is not clear why Debbins has been incarcerated here.
On 25 August 2022, Debbins filed a motion to vacate his sentence under 28 U.S.C. 2255, arguing that he "was suffering from untreated mental illness and had insufficient knowledge of the law." Debbins also argued that he had ineffective assistance of counsel and that his confession was coerced and involuntary. Debbins' main arguments are included in a 19-page hand-written addendum, in which he writes, among other things (again in all caps):
In short, Debbins is claiming that the admissions he made to having committed espionage on behalf of Russia are untrue, that he was not mentally competent at the time he pled guilty, and that he had ineffective assistance of counsel.
Ultimately, on 13 April 2023, Judge Claude M. Hilton, who presided over Debbins' trial and plea agreement, ruled against Debbins in his 2255 motion.
Thank you for sharing Christopher Burgess' remarks.
It's noteworthy, I think, that since his guilty plea, Peter Debbins has withdrawn his confession and attempted to appeal. Meanwhile, the U.S. Bureau of Prisons is keeping him under exceptionally harsh terms of confinement.
After Debbins was sentenced to 188 months' imprisonment in May 2021, I was interested to know what became of him and where he was being incarcerated. Perplexingly, a search of the federal Bureau of Prisons' inmate locator web page for Peter Debbins for a long time showed zero results. I wondered whether perhaps his location was being concealed for some political reason, and whether he was perhaps being considered for a prisoner exchange with Russia.
This seems not to have been the case. A review of the docket in Debbins' case shows that shortly after sentencing, in a letter sent from the Alexandria City Detention Center, he attempted to withdraw his guilty plea and filed a notice of appeal (later withdrawn).
By January 2022, Debbins was incarcerated at the United States Penitentiary, Big Sandy in Inez, Kentucky, from where on 16 July 2022 he filed a "Request for a Court-Appointed Attorney to Assist with 2255 Motion" (a motion to vacate, set aside, or correct a prison sentence) in which he wrote, among other things, (hand printed in all caps):
Quote...I HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO SECURE AN ATTORNEY DUE TO THE FACT THAT SINCE JANUARY 27, 2022 I HAVE BEEN UNDER SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE MEASURES (SAM) PER THE REQUEST OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO THE BUREAU OF PRISONS (BOP). THE SAM HAS PLACED ME IN ISOLATION AND SEVERELY RESTRICTED MY COMMUNICATIONS AND ABILITY TO PREPARE MY 2255 MOTION, [unclear] MY CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS.
DURING THE PAST SIX MONHS I HAVE BEEN PROVIDED ONLY FOUR PHONE CALLS, AND ONLY ONE WAS WITH A POTENTIAL ATTORNEY, WHO HAD GREAT DIFFICULTY WITH OVER A TWO MONTH DELAY IN OBTAINING AUTHORIZATION TO COMMUNICATE WITH ME. I AM NOT ABLE TO COMMUNICATE WITH OTHER POTENTIAL ATTORNEYS....
On 4 August 2022, the U.S. Attorney's Office filed a response in opposition to Debbins' motion that included two exhibits that were filed under seal. (With the exception of the indictment, none of the documents filed under seal in this case have been unsealed.)
On 27 December 2022, Debbins wrote to the court, informing it of his new address, the United States Prison, Florence ADMAX. He gave his address as:
QuotePETER DEBBINS
05852509
ADX-FLORENCE, CONTROL UNIT
FLORENCE, COLORADO
This prison is generally recognized as the most restrictive in the federal prison system. It is not clear why Debbins has been incarcerated here.
On 25 August 2022, Debbins filed a motion to vacate his sentence under 28 U.S.C. 2255, arguing that he "was suffering from untreated mental illness and had insufficient knowledge of the law." Debbins also argued that he had ineffective assistance of counsel and that his confession was coerced and involuntary. Debbins' main arguments are included in a 19-page hand-written addendum, in which he writes, among other things (again in all caps):
QuoteCOUNSEL FAILED TO FILE A MOTION TO SUPPRESS MY STATEMENTS. WITHOUT THE STATEMENT MADE TO THE FBI THERE ARE NO GROUNDS AGAINST ME. GIVEN THE TOTALITY OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES, I DID NOT MAKE THE CLAIMS KNOWINGLY AND WILLINGLY. A COMBINATION OF THE PRESSURES OF MY UNTREATED MENTAL ILLNESS, ECONOMIC COERCION, THE FBI'S POWER OF AUTHORITY, AND A WORKPLACE POLYGRAPH CREATED THE CONDITIONS IN WHICH MY FREE WILL WAS OVERBORNE AND I WAS COERCED INTO MAKING AN INVOLUNTARY AND FALSE CONFESSION.
HOW DID I MAKE THESE CLAIMS? IN JULY 2019 I HAD TO TAKE A PERIODIC POLYGRAPH WITH MY CONTRACT CLIENT, THE DEFENSE INTELLIGENCE AGENCY (DIA). THIS WAS NECESSARY FOR MY CONTINUED EMPLOYMENT, WHICH NEGATED MY FREE WILL. THE POLYGRAPH IS IN AND OF ITSELF A STRESS INDUCING EXERCISE. I WANTED TO PASS THE POLYGRAPH BUT WAS SUFFERING MENTAL ILLNESS AND BELIEVED THAT TELLING MY DELUSIONAL CLAIMS WOULD CALM ME, ALLOWING ME TO PASS—CLEARLY SHOWING A LACK OF KNOWINGNESS.
HOW DID THESE DELUSIONS COME ABOUT? WHEN ONE IS SUFFERING UNTREATED MENTAL ILLNESS REASON AND LOGIC ARE SEVERELY ATTENUATED. MY BEST UNDERSTANDING IS THAT PSYCHOSIS CAUSED ME TO BELIEVE THAT I BETRAYED MY FAITH, OUR COUNTRY, MY MEN, AND MY MISSION, AND DEPRESSION CAUSED ME TO OBSESS OVER THESE DELUSIONS AND OTHER IMAGINED FAILINGS. HOWEVER, PSYCHOSIS AND DEPRESSION DID NOT COMPEL ME TO CONFESS. I WAS COMPELLED BY A WORKPLACE POLYGRAPH. MENTAL ILLNESS WITH GOVERNMENT COERCION NEGATED MY KNOWLEDGE AND FREE WILL RENDERING MY CONFESSION AS INVOLUNTARY.
MY PSYCHOSIS WHICH DRAMATICALLY WORSENED AFTER 2014 CAUSED OBSCURE MEMORIES OF DRUNKEN MEETINGS WITH INNOCULOUS [sic] RUSSIANS TO MORPH INTO ENCOUNTERS WITH RISS [Russia's intelligence and security services] IN WHICH I TOLD NATIONAL DEFENSE INFORMATION AND MADE DECLARATIONS OF LOYALTY TO THE RUSSIAN STATE. WHEN YOU HAVE A CHEMICAL IMBALANCE YOUR MIND PLAYS TRICKS ON YOU. MY UNHEALTHY MIND WAS FERTILE GROUNDS FOR SUCH DELUSIONS TO EMERGE BECAUSE I TRAVELED EXTENSIVELY IN RUSSIA AND ENGAGED IN NUMEROUS SOCIAL INTERACTIONS, AND ACQUIRED VAST KNOWLEDGE OF INTELLIGENCE OPERATIONS SINCE 2011.
THE DIA WAS ACTING AS A PRIVATE PARTY AS AN AGENT OF THE GOVERNMENT. IT IS A GOVERNMENT AGENCY AND IT DIRECTED ME TO SPEAK WITH THE FBI. I HAD THE ADDED COERCION OF BELIEVING I WAS UNDER ORDERS TO PROVIDE THE CLAIMS TO THE FBI. THE DIA CONTACTED THE FBI AND THE FBI CAME TO THE DIA OFFICES TO INTERROGATE ME, CAUSING ME TO BELIEVE THE FBI AND THE DIA WERE WORKING IN TANDEM. THE DIA AGENT TOLD ME NOT TO HIDE ANYTHING SUCH AS EMAILS AND I ALSO UNDERSTOOD THIS TO MEAN NOT TO WITHHOLD ANY CLAIMS FROM THE FBI. SINCE I BELIEVED THAT THE DIA SHARED MY CLAIMS WITH THE FBI I FELT COERCED INTO REPEATING THOSE CLAIMS TO THE FBI. I FEARED THAT IF MY CLAIMS DID NOT MATCH THAN [sic] THE FBI WOULD MAKE MY LIFE DIFFICULT TO INCLUDE POSSIBLE ARREST OR NEGATIVELY REPORTING TO THE DIA HINDERING MY CLEARANCE—A FORM OF ECONOMIC COERCION. DURING THESE INTERROGATIONS THE FBI DID NOT READ ME THE MIRANDA WARNING SO I WAS UNKNOWING OF THE LEGAL SITUATION I WAS IN. THE FBI TOLD ME THEY WANTED TO KNOW WHAT HAPPENED AND WHAT RISS ACTIVITIES WERE. SINCE BOTH DIA AND FBI HAVE A COUNTER-INTELLIGENCE MISSION I BELIEVED THE INTERROGATIONS WERE JOINT. IN FACT DURING ONE OF THE INTERROGATIONS I TOLD THE FBI TO READ THE WRITTEN CLAIMS I GAVE TO THE DIA SINCE IT WAS DIFFICULT FOR ME TO REMEMBER WHAT I ORIGINALLY TOLD THE DIA.
COUNSEL INCORRECTLY TOLD ME THAT MY STATEMENTS WERE VOLUNTARY SINCE I WASN'T IN CUSTODY.
THE ONLY TIME THE FBI READ ME A MIRANDA WARNING WAS AT THE OCTOBER 2019 FBI POLYGRAPH WHICH I BELIEVE DID NOT PRODUCE INCULPATORY CLAIMS. THE POLYGRAPH ASSESSED IF I WAS CREDIBLE WHEN I CLAIMED NO POST-2011 RISS CONTACT. THIS POLYGRAPH WAS TAKEN INVOLUNTARILY.
SINCE I UNDERSTOOD THAT THE DIA REQUIRED THE FBI INVESTIGATION FOR MY CLEARANCE HENCE MY EMPLOYMENT I WAS COERCED TO FULLY COOPERATE WITH THE FBI, SO I ANSWERED EVERY QUESTION AND AGREED TO EVERY REQUEST. I FEARED THAT FAILURE TO FULLY COOPERATE WOULD RESULT IN NEGATIVE ACTION. THE FBI QUICKLY INFORMED THE UNITED KINGDOM (UK) HOME OFFICE OF MY CASE AND THE HOME OFFICE EXECUTED A SEARCH WARRANT OF MY HOUSEHOLD AND MADE THREATENING STATEMENT [sic] TO MY WIFE. THE UK HOME OFFICE BARRED MY TRAVEL TO THE UK SO I COULD NOT BE WITH MY FAMILY. THE FBI ASKED ME TO SURRENDER MY PASSPORTS AND DELAYED IN RETURNING THEM TO ME WHEN I ASKED FOR THEM. UNDER THIS COERCION WITH MY MENTAL ILLNESS I WAS COMPELLED TO ANSWER EVERY QUESTION, AGREE TO ANY REQUEST, AND SHARE MY CLAIMS.
In short, Debbins is claiming that the admissions he made to having committed espionage on behalf of Russia are untrue, that he was not mentally competent at the time he pled guilty, and that he had ineffective assistance of counsel.
Ultimately, on 13 April 2023, Judge Claude M. Hilton, who presided over Debbins' trial and plea agreement, ruled against Debbins in his 2255 motion.
Posted by nobody is here
- Jan 21, 2025, 03:42 AMChristopher Burgess from Clearancejobs.com gave a speech recently, it is on YouTube:
https://youtu.be/tF_QHygu8ps
At around the 18:30 mark, he starts talking about Peter Debbins.
At 21:34, he says that Debbins "passed multiple polygraphs."
Then Burgess says that Debbins had a bad polygraph one day, after previously passing several polygraphs, and Debbins "broke" and wrote a confession.
There you have it.
https://youtu.be/tF_QHygu8ps
At around the 18:30 mark, he starts talking about Peter Debbins.
At 21:34, he says that Debbins "passed multiple polygraphs."
Then Burgess says that Debbins had a bad polygraph one day, after previously passing several polygraphs, and Debbins "broke" and wrote a confession.
There you have it.
Posted by George W. Maschke
- May 14, 2021, 10:45 AMAt today's sentencing hearing, Judge Claude M. Hilton sentenced Peter Debbins to 188 months (15 years and 8 months) in prison to be followed by five years of supervised release. 188 months is the low end of the 188-235 months indicated by the Sentencing Guidelines, and is less than the 17 years sought by the prosecution.
Polygraphy was not mentioned during the hearing.
Polygraphy was not mentioned during the hearing.
Posted by George W. Maschke
- May 12, 2021, 08:27 AMYesterday, Tuesday, 11 May 2021, the government filed a Response to Debbins' Memorandum in Aid of Sentencing. The government's Response includes as Exhibit A an "Unclassified Declaration of FBI Special Agent Jeffrey B. Parsons." Parsons was present for all of the FBI's interviews of Debbins, and among other things, he discusses the polygraph examination that the FBI conducted on Debbins:
QuoteC. The Polygraph Administered by the FBI in October 2019
14. In Debbins's letter to the court dated February 2, 2021, he states that, in the period between 2014 and his arrest, he "[w]as paranoid of the GRU and loved ones." Debbins explains, "I thought my wife and daughter were working for the GRU, which may explain why I didn't pass the 2019 FBI polygraph. The FBI didn't believe me when I told them that I had no post-2010 contacts."
15. For the background of the Court, the FBI began investigating Debbins after he failed a polygraph as part of his security clearance reinvestigation in early July 2019. Between July 2019 and December 2019, the FBI interviewed Debbins on multiple occasions about his cooperation and contacts with Russian intelligence agents. During these interviews, Debbins claimed that he stopped cooperating with the Russian intelligence agents after 2010. At the FBI's request, Debbins agreed to take a polygraph examination regarding whether he had any communication with the GRU or any other branch of Russian intelligence after 2010.
16. The FBI administered the polygraph to Debbins on October 23, 2019. Before the polygraph, Debbins signed two forms—a "Consent to Interview with Polygraph" and an "Advice of Rights." During the examination, the polygrapher asked Debbins whether he had any contact with Russian intelligence or the GRU since 2011. Debbins failed the polygraph.
17. During the interview immediately following the failed polygraph, Debbins continued denying any contact with the GRU since 2011. He offered a number of explanations as to his inability to pass. However, Debbins did not mention any paranoia that his wife and daughter were working for the GRU as a possible explanation. In fact, Debbins explicitly told the FBI that his wife was not involved with the Russian intelligence service during a separate interview.
Posted by George W. Maschke
- May 11, 2021, 02:35 AMQuote from: George_Maschke on May 10, 2021, 08:51 PMDoes this statement by Debbins prove that his admissions during the polygraph are what led to him being caught?
No, it doesn't prove that such is the case. But it suggests it.
Posted by George W. Maschke
- May 09, 2021, 04:55 AMPeter Debbins' Memorandum in Aid of Sentencing is now publicly available. It includes a psychiatric assessment by Dr. David L. Charney that has been redacted.
It also includes a 5-page letter dated 2 February 2021 from Debbins to Judge Claude M. Hilton seeking clemency. In it, Debbins mentions that he was polygraphed by the FBI in 2019, writing at pp. 3-4:
It also includes a 5-page letter dated 2 February 2021 from Debbins to Judge Claude M. Hilton seeking clemency. In it, Debbins mentions that he was polygraphed by the FBI in 2019, writing at pp. 3-4:
QuoteI didn't confront the mental pathologies that plagued me and my feelings against the Kremlin, and because of that, I made another great mistake in 2014. I embraced an occult belief system in which I believed I was my own God, and thought I could conform to my will. My recitations and visualization rituals did not transform reality but created delusions. I created an imaginary advisory council of current and historical figures to guide and assist me. Instead of changing Russia. I descended into insanity unable to distinguish between reality and fantasy, and from 2014 until my arrest, I experienced the following:
• Suffered from insomnia which gave me 3 hours of sleep a night
• Had bizarre dreams, night terrors, and hallucinations of meeting with the GRU. I even thought they were in my house and I removed the smoke detectors believing they were surveillance devices.
• Crossed moral boundaries
• Was always in a manic state of high energy
• My mind would race constantly
• Conducted trances to enter into the "subconscious universe"
• Believed I could communicate via telepathy and dreams
• Excessively used caffeine, alcohol, and sleeping medication
• Believed in signs and omens
• Was paranoid of the GRU and loved ones. I thought my wife and daughter were working for the GRU, which may explain why I didn't pass the 2019 FBI polygraph. The FBI didn't believe me when I told them that I had no post-2010 contacts
• Believed the souls of my aunts and uncles who perished from Stalin's famines were living through me
• Created fantasies of past misdeeds needing atonement
• Had delusions of becoming a double agent
• As a CI professional, I was becoming that what I gazed upon and demonized myself as having affinity to Russia.
With all of this psychological and physiological torture, I simply wanted to unload these racing thoughts to pass my polygraph, without considering the legal ramifications. I made self-destructive and self-incriminating statements as a subconscious suicide attempt of a tormented soul, whose life was ruined by this de-humanizing Kremlin regime.
Posted by George W. Maschke
- May 08, 2021, 06:55 AMAs of today, Saturday, 8 May 2021, Peter Debbins' sentencing hearing remains scheduled for Friday, 14 May 2021 at 9:00 AM before Judge Claude Hilton in Room 800 of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia at Alexandria:
https://www.vaedonline.uscourts.gov/schedules/w-weeklyhilton.html
On Friday, 7 May 2021, the prosecution filed a 30-page sentencing memorandum that at p. 15 briefly mentions a polygraph examination that Debbins underwent in July 2019:
The referenced Exhibit A was filed under seal.
It seems unusual to me that Debbins would have traveled to the United States for any routine polygraph screening. That's not a cost-effective way of polygraphing personnel assigned to a large overseas facility in a stable and secure allied country (as Debbins was). A more economical approach would be to send a polygraph operator on TDY to polygraph multiple personnel on-site. It is also unusual for a failed polygraph to result in questioning by the FBI.
https://www.vaedonline.uscourts.gov/schedules/w-weeklyhilton.html
On Friday, 7 May 2021, the prosecution filed a 30-page sentencing memorandum that at p. 15 briefly mentions a polygraph examination that Debbins underwent in July 2019:
QuoteD. Procedural History
As of July 2019, Debbins was working for a DIA contractor overseas. See Tomlinson Decl. ¶ 7; Ex. A, ¶ 22. That month, as part of his security clearance reinvestigation, he returned to the United States to take a polygraph examination, which he failed.5 See Ex. A, ¶ 23. After Debbins failed the polygraph, he participated in a series of voluntary interviews with FBI agents from July 2019 to December 2019. See id. ¶ 24. During these interviews, Debbins detailed his cooperation with the Russian intelligence agents from 1996 until 2010. See id. Debbins has claimed that his conspiracy with the Russian intelligence agents did not continue past January 2011. See id. 25; SOF ¶ 1.
5. The government includes the information that Debbins failed his polygraph examination solely to provide the context leading to the FBI interviews—not as a factor to be considered in determining Debbins' sentence.
The referenced Exhibit A was filed under seal.
It seems unusual to me that Debbins would have traveled to the United States for any routine polygraph screening. That's not a cost-effective way of polygraphing personnel assigned to a large overseas facility in a stable and secure allied country (as Debbins was). A more economical approach would be to send a polygraph operator on TDY to polygraph multiple personnel on-site. It is also unusual for a failed polygraph to result in questioning by the FBI.
Posted by troll_of_truth
- Apr 19, 2021, 08:51 PMQuote from: George_Maschke on Apr 19, 2021, 02:20 PMI did not ask for proof from the government. I asked for proof from George, proof that Debbins took and passed a polygraph given by either INSCOM or DIA to substantiate his claim of "another catastrophic failure of polygraph screening". He already admitted that he has nothing more than "strong circumstantial" evidence, which is not evidence, but speculation/conjecture.
George has given proof. If a polygraph is required for those jobs, and Debbins worked those jobs, then he took a polygraph. You still didn't answer my question. If you do not accept deductive reasoning from news articles and official court documents as proof, and the U.S. government will not release an official statement, then what type of proof will you accept?
Posted by quickfix
- Apr 19, 2021, 02:20 PMI did not ask for proof from the government. I asked for proof from George, proof that Debbins took and passed a polygraph given by either INSCOM or DIA to substantiate his claim of "another catastrophic failure of polygraph screening". He already admitted that he has nothing more than "strong circumstantial" evidence, which is not evidence, but speculation/conjecture.
Posted by troll_of_truth
- Apr 19, 2021, 10:13 AMQuote from: quickfix on Apr 19, 2021, 06:57 AMQuote from: troll_of_truth on Apr 18, 2021, 10:18 PMWe, the antipolygraph community, can make deductions from news articles, court documents, and other information we find online. We can surmise that people have passed the polygraph while hiding criminal activity.
That's the very definition of speculation. Thank you, you just proved my point.
Actually, I think I proved my own point, quickfix. If the U.S. government will not publicly provide the proof that you seek, what would appease your hubris as the most definitive proof? Tell us exactly what you want to see, aside from U.S. government statements which will not occur.
Posted by quickfix
- Apr 19, 2021, 06:57 AMQuote from: troll_of_truth on Apr 18, 2021, 10:18 PMWe, the antipolygraph community, can make deductions from news articles, court documents, and other information we find online. We can surmise that people have passed the polygraph while hiding criminal activity.
That's the very definition of speculation. Thank you, you just proved my point.
Posted by quickfix
- Apr 18, 2021, 02:57 PMI meant real proof, not a blog from a whining sniveling wannabe who never was.
Posted by quickfix
- Apr 18, 2021, 09:12 AMQuote from: troll_of_truth on Apr 17, 2021, 09:37 PMThe fact is, Debbins is one of many polygraph-passing federal criminals.
Where is your proof? Show the evidence.
Posted by troll_of_truth
- Apr 17, 2021, 09:37 PMHey quickfix,
You seem to be in denial that Debbins beat a polygraph. Everyone who works at DIA has to take a polygraph. (see the faq "Do I need to take a polygraph test?") Therefore, if Debbins worked at DIA, even as a contractor because contractors undergo the same clearance process as their government officers, he took a polygraph. I found this article with proof of several other federal criminals who passed polygraphs as well. The government is not going to publish a full unredacted polygraph report. It is hard enough trying to get this through FOIA/PA. The fact is, Debbins is one of many polygraph-passing federal criminals. The polygraph is a joke.
You seem to be in denial that Debbins beat a polygraph. Everyone who works at DIA has to take a polygraph. (see the faq "Do I need to take a polygraph test?") Therefore, if Debbins worked at DIA, even as a contractor because contractors undergo the same clearance process as their government officers, he took a polygraph. I found this article with proof of several other federal criminals who passed polygraphs as well. The government is not going to publish a full unredacted polygraph report. It is hard enough trying to get this through FOIA/PA. The fact is, Debbins is one of many polygraph-passing federal criminals. The polygraph is a joke.