Post reply

The message has the following error or errors that must be corrected before continuing:
Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.
Attachments: (Clear attachments)
Restrictions: 4 per post (4 remaining), maximum total size 192 KB, maximum individual size 64.00 MB
Uncheck the attachments you no longer want attached
Click or drag files here to attach them.
(Clear attachments)
Other options
Verification:
Please leave this box empty:
Type the letters shown in the picture
Listen to the letters / Request another image

Type the letters shown in the picture:
What is the last month of the year?:
Shortcuts: ALT+S post or ALT+P preview

Topic summary

Posted by George W. Maschke
 - Nov 29, 2004, 06:13 PM
I have heard from Malcolm Nothling that the doctor in the disciplinary case whose alleged inappropriate behavior was "confirmed" by the polygraph was re-instated and that no polygrapher challenged his testimony.
Posted by George W. Maschke
 - Jan 01, 2003, 06:03 PM
Beech Trees,

I don't know the answer to that question.
Posted by beech trees
 - Dec 26, 2002, 11:34 AM
Quote from: George W. Maschke on Dec 26, 2002, 06:32 AM
Malcolm Nothling's renunciation of polygraphy seem to have gotten at least one polygraph operator hot under the collar. See the following press release by Ben Lombaard of the South African Professional Polygraph Association:

http://www.polygraph.org.za/st_13_10_2002.htm

Merry Christmas George, et. al.!

Interesting reading... was Mr. Nothling recognized by the Court as an expert witness?
Posted by George W. Maschke
 - Dec 26, 2002, 06:32 AM
Malcolm Nothling's renunciation of polygraphy seem to have gotten at least one polygraph operator hot under the collar. See the following press release by Ben Lombaard of the South African Professional Polygraph Association:

http://www.polygraph.org.za/st_13_10_2002.htm
Posted by George W. Maschke
 - Oct 14, 2002, 08:48 AM
From Liz Clarke's article, "It's all lies" in the 12 October 2002 edition of the Sunday Tribune:

QuoteIn a landmark case in South Africa a leading polygrapher, Malcolm Nothling, has agreed to testify as an expert witness in a disciplinary hearing involving a doctor found guilty of inappropriate behaviour, an accusation supposedly "confirmed" by a lie detector test.

Although his testimony could ruin his career, Nothling said that he could no longer live with the "reality" that polygraph testing was "a profoundly flawed" procedure.

"It doesn't surprise me that a report of this nature [the U.S. National Academy of Sciences report] has been done. Although I have no scientific evidence, I have suspected for some time that the results of polygraph tests are not always accurate. In fact, I would go as far as to say they are biased more against the truthful person than they are against those who are lying."

Nothling said that the day he beat the test by using "certain techniques" available over the Internet was the day he realised it was no longer a reliable-enough tool to establish innocence or guilt. "I think it is playing Russian roulette with people's lives and careers," he said. "We all want a crime-free society, but not when criminals are getting away with their activities and the innocent are possibly being victimised."