I am late teens, and was recently placed on probation. I was convicted of assaulting a police officer while under the influence of alcohol. Now I am going to be asked if I drank while on probation. Now should I fail this test, what is to happen? According to the rules I can be incarcerated up to sixty days. Now does this usually happen? I am attending college and recently got a job, if I should be incarcerated I would have to drop out of school. I was told I would be taking this test after I passed an alcohol/drug evaluation with flying colors, and my P.O. thinks I lied. Anyone with experience anything like this know what will probably happen? Im thinking she might just make me take outpatient alcohol classes, is it likely i will receive community service, jail time or further probation? I am in Washington STate. Thanks for any help or advice.
Post conviction polygraphs, in must States, can not be used as evidence of probation violations. So don't concern yourself with it. Thats the worst thing to.
The poly is nothing more than a psycological poly designed to induce an admission of wrong doing. You will must likely be told " You showed deception on the question concerning........ can you explain this to me?"
Look the man straight in the eyes and say "I'm sorry but I answered all your question truthfully is there anything else you care to ask of me? Ok, thank you very much and have a nice day. Than get up and leave.
In other words present a don't give a shit, it doesn't really matter to me kind've attitude. Now remember if you have been deemed deceptive the results may not be used to prove a violation of probation, thats not to say your PO will not make you life hell.
But so what cause your clean and really trying to put your life together. Right? ;D
Sam,
What sie tells you is correct. The questions, answers and charts from the poygraph typically can't be used. What can be used is your admission to wrongdoing in the post-test interrogation.
So, like sie said, tell the examiner "See ya", and hit the door. Don't give him/her a chance to manipulate you by hanging around and "discussing" your results.
Quote from: sie on Jul 20, 2003, 07:39 AM
But so what cause your clean and really trying to put your life together. Right? ;D
I havent drank in a long time, and I am doing better in school this quarter. Sounded like you were being sarcastic, just to let u and everyone know, there are a few good people, and people who really are trying to set things right that fear lie detection.
How would I find out if polygraphs are admissable in probation violation hearings in washington state, and if they arent admissable in most states, whats the point of them besides trying to get a confession? I spoke with a public defender who said that evidence rules are 'lax in probation violation hearings', so that makes me wonder, anywhere I can find out for sure?
Sam,
Great that you have "mended your ways". Take your polygraph with confidence, and don't buy any of that "you had trouble with #5" BS the examiner is liable to give you. And again, don't hang around for the interrogation. Good luck :)
Just saw Terminator 3, and as Arnie said, "I'm back!"
Hey Sam, when you say , "I haven't drank in a long time...", can you define "long time"?
Is that a long time as in you haven't had a drink since you took after the police officer, or a long time as in the last few days?
How about this simple question, have you drank any alcoholic beverages since you were put on probation?
Good luck with your polygraph, you'll need it. However, when in doubt, try sucking air through your asshole!
Just in case, that's the hole down between your butt cheeks, not he one between your lips.
Damn, I love this site!!!
BATMAN
Batman,
Nice to see that you haven't lost any of your wit and charm in your absence ;)
Welcome back.
Quote from: sam dawson on Jul 20, 2003, 06:21 PM
just to let u and everyone know, there are a few good people, and people who really are trying to set things right that fear lie detection.
Everyone fears lie detection. Its the polygraph that I
don't fear cause I know it can't detect deception. Once you overcome "
Fear" of detection they become cake walks. It really is laughable. :D
Sam,
QuoteHow would I find out if polygraphs are admissable in probation violation hearings in washington state, and if they arent admissable in most states, whats the point of them besides trying to get a confession? I spoke with a public defender who said that evidence rules are 'lax in probation violation hearings', so that makes me wonder, anywhere I can find out for sure?
The point of the polygraph is the state wants you to admit that you have a problem, and face it head on. Sort of like going to AA and doing the "My name is Sam and I'm an alcoholic" thing. So they use the poly to scare you into admitting that you have this problem. Ostensibly they only want to help you, thus the general restriction on using the results for a VOP. That's where the intent of the Legislature and the desires of the Dept. of Corrections part company.
I can find no reference in the RCW to polygraphing probationers. RCW 9.95.210 provides for various conditions, none of which include polygraphing. The statute goes on to say
"The secretary of corrections will promulgate rules and regulations for the conduct of the person during the term of probation." However, I find nothing in the Administrative Code showing where the DOC has promulgated any rules governing probationers.
The Administrative Code, at WAC 381-40-110, does however contain parole conditions, one of which is
:"As a term and condition of parole, the board may impose a requirement that the parolee take a polygraph examination." This same paragraph goes on to state
"Failure to pass the polygraph examination shall not be a basis for parole suspension or revocation."Since you're not on parole, the above theoretically wouldn't apply. But parole and probation are controlled by the same state agency, and supervision is by the same people. In the absence of a codified procedure governing polygraphs for probationers, a court should look to a similar situation for guidance. That would be parole conditions.
As for evidence in probation revocations, the prosecution has only to prove the violation "by the preponderance of the evidence", rather than the more restrictive "beyond reasonable doubt" used in criminal court. Preponderance just means that the prosecution's evidence must be more believable than your defense, regardless of how implausible it may be.
If you have further doubts, seek out an attorney (not a public pretender!) and see what they think. Might cost you $50.00 for a consultation, but it would be worth it to know.
Orolan
You're a real knucklehead. You write:
"The point of the polygraph is the state wants you to admit that you have a problem"
Sam's conviction pretty much identifies a problem, unless it was a corrupt court, jury, bad defense attorney, etc..... As a law abiding citizen, wouldn't you want Sam to complete his probation as dictated by the state? Maybe the local prison (where you live) should just open up the doors and set everyone free. There's no real need for them to complete their state appointed sentences, is there?
Saidme,
You really should come out of your little poly room once in a while and see what is happening in the rest of the world, particularly in your own chosen field of expertise.
Post-conviction maintenance polygraphs are given primarily to those whose convictions are related to drugs, alcohol or sex. All three of these areas involve compulsions and addictions that the offender may not be willing to admit to themselves they have, let alone to others. The polygraph is used to try to gain this admission, if there is one to be made, and it is simply another tool in the therapy process.
One statute, related to sex offenders, reads as such:"As part of a treatment program, participation at least annually in polygraph examinations to obtain information necessary for risk management and treatment and to reduce the sex offender's denial mechanisms." This is the prevailing attitude amongst therapists and legislatures, and this is why many states have maintenance polygraphs. They aren't giving them to solve as-yet undiscovered crimes. The trouble with the maintenance polygraphs is they are similar to the tests given for pre-employment screening. With no known specific incident to investigate, it becomes a "fishing expedition" full of very generalized questions related to the underlying conviction.
As for Sam, yes his conviction identifies a problem. He assaulted a police officer. So do plenty of other people. And yes, he should serve out his probation sentence as required. I don't advocate anything different.
The fact that Sam was under the influence of alcohol at the time is the issue here. Does Sam have a drinking problem? Is he an alcoholic? Was the situation one of having a bad day combined with having a few beers with the guys after work? We don't know the answers to these questions. Neither does the state. Hence the treatment program. If Sam is an alcoholic or susceptible to performing acts of violence while under the influence, the treatment program is supposed to identify those issues and get Sam to acknowledge them to himself.
Your comment about throwing open the prison doors makes absolutely no sense in respect to my post. I don't see anything where I advocated that Sam or anybody else be excused from serving their sentence. I suspect you are upset because I did advocate that he avoid your precious post-test interrogation ???
Maybe you have been out of the loop too long. You should take a few refresher courses in criminal psychology, as things have changed since the 70's :)
If I'm not mistaken these exams also identify offenders who continue to offend. I suspect that might have little to do with the reason for post conviction polygraph examinations. You know, a little deterrence.
Regarding your comments about Sam. I suspect you are in the rehabilitation or corrections field. The rationalizations you discuss for Sam's behavior (bad day, beer, alcoholic) are of no interest to the law enforcement officer conducting the investigation. Yes, we'll document that information but we're working with elements of proof to get a case before a jury. It's not our job to get Sam to see the light and become a better person. That's what rehabilitation programs are for.
Regarding my "precious post-test interview." Why does it bother you that law enforcement officers illicit confessions out of child molesters, rapists, murderers, and the like. Do you advocate that kind of behavior? I'm not sure whether you're in the corrections/rehabilitation field or in a correctional facility getting group therapy in rehabilitation program. Hmmmm ;)
Saidme,
Knowing they are subject to periodic polygraphs may work as a deterrent for sex offenders, and I believe it does. The structure of the examinations needs some work, but that is for another thread.
In the case of drug and alcohol abusers, I don't see it offering any more of a deterrent than the standard random UA requirements. While easily defeated with advance warning, UA's are impossible to beat with regularity when given at random places and times. And in Sam's case the polygraph would hold no deterrent value, since he was not told in advance that he was subject to take one.
I am not in the rehabilitation or corrections field. You would be quite surprised to learn what I do for a living.
I understand that you are not into rehabilitation and you and your fellow criminal investigators care not about the underlying reasons for a person's crime. As you say, you want to get a case before the jury. That's fine.
Sam has already been before the jury (or entered a plea). The investigation is over, and he has now entered the rehabilitation phase. So the underlying factors are now important, not to an investigating officer, but to his probation officer and therapist.
It does not bother me that investigators get people to confess to crimes. Nor does it bother me that they use a polygraph machine to do it. After all, the polygraph is more humane than some other interrogation methods in widespread use in today's world. I am as pro law-and-order as the next guy.
What does bother me is that most of you refuse to admit that the machine does absolutely nothing. I have no doubt that your confession rate would not drop very much if you simply turned the machine off and conducted your examination and interview as usual. The examinee's fear and belief that the machine is telling you every time they lie is what makes the confessions possible.
And no, I'm not in a correctional institution, group therapy, rehabilitation program or any combination thereof :)
Quote from: Saidme on Jul 21, 2003, 08:44 PM
Regarding my "precious post-test interview." Why does it bother you that law enforcement officers illicit confessions out of child molesters, rapists, murderers, and the like.
It bothers know one not even George when the polygraph is used by law enforcement during specific event criminal investigations.
What worries everyone is when a child molester "
passes" your screening test that shouldn't have ( false Negative), is giving a clean bill of health, is released from supervision and goes out and reoffends.
The therapists passes the buck to the polygrapher, "He/She passed a polygraph test. The polygrapher now claims that the polygraph is not 100% and now nobody wants the credit or should i say to take responsibility.
There's no more chest pounding going on about how the polygraph helps protect society from the likes of Pee Wee Hermin
Well, shit happens right?
i spoke with someone who took a lie detector in my area, he said his test was only 4 questions, and 3 of those questions was just the same thing repeated 3 times. He also said the polygraph was hooked up to a computer. Any thoughts ?
Sam
I will say at the outset that my knowledge of the workings of the polygraph was gained right here on this website by both sides of the poly subject. I will, however, pass on a tidbit of what I received in private emails from a long time polygrapher.
He said that he "had much more confidence in analog charts than he did the computer analysis because the computer charts reflected so much BS interference". (This is a very condensed sentence). He also indicated the "analog test requires a very experienced examiner who also possesses very good psychoanalytical skills to reach the desired 80% accuracy. That is only acquired with both training and talent".
As I have stated here before one of the problems that I have with polygraphy is ONE man has the power to free or condem. However, if a polygrapher can wrangle a true (and I say again a TRUE) confession from a sex offender or murderer I would shake their hand. But then I read of so many who were scared into a false confession, and are now being released from prison because of DNA, I get concerned.
I don't know Washington's laws but, I don't think a poly can be forced on you unless it was stipulated by the judge as part of your probation. Check your probation rules. If the order FROM THE JUDGE does not require a poly, then you can legally refuse to take it. NO PO has the authority to change a judge's order. The punitive ones will try to make you believe they can.
A NASCAR driver once wispered to me that he liked the old Model T Fords over these new fangled machines. Of course he ain't won nothing lately.
Hey Sammy my boy,
How 'bout you and I go out for a few brewskies and we can talk about your upcoming polygraph? Oh yeah, I forgot you don't drink any more. Excuse me while I go get my waders, the shit's starting to get a little deep around here. Come on bud, when was the last time you let a little of Grandpa's secret recipe cross over your lips?
By the way, better the "polygraph was hooked up to a computer" than a 220 volt wall socket! Come to think of it, that would be a good way to get some more of those false confessions. Gotta go, I see a potential victim walking by.
BATMAN
Twoblock
You wrote: "I will say at the outset that my knowledge of the workings of the polygraph was gained right here on this website by both sides of the poly subject."
Haven't you got a life? What the hell are you doing on this website if you don't have a dog in the hunt? Why don't you get on some Miner's website and talk about things you do know about?
You wrote further: "ONE man has the power to free or condem."
That might have some impact on a sex offender test and as far as I'm concerned, better safe than sorry. I seriously doubt there is any effective rehabilitation for sex offenders. When it comes to the old specific issue test you couldn't be further from the truth. I guess in a nutshell I'm telling you you're full of shit. Don't speak about polygraph unless you know what you're talking about. ;)
Saidme,
Why don't you go to some right-wing, rush limbaugh loving, neo-nazi, repugnican website and post with your friends?
I'm sorry that your dearly beloved polygraph has been proven a big, fat lie...a psuedo-scientific falsity.
Did you know that the top scientists and psychologists in our nation view the polygraph as nothing more than a joke? And that is how I view you. I'm tired of laughing at your idiocy, go post somewhere else.
-Okieboy
George
Your supporters are really coming out of the woodwork. You must be so proud to have a child molester backing your crap. Let's see now, if (when) Okieperv reoffends, do families and or jurisdictions of the young victims have any recourse in filing criminal charges and or civil suits against you and your little I'm behind the 1st amendment website? Do the ends justify the means, no matter how many youngsters get hurt? Obviously the examiner who DQ'd you deserves a medal. You should be in no way affiliated with a law enforcement or intelligence organization. Stay in Europe. >:(
Saidme,
You write in reference to Mr. Maschke,
Quote...Obviously the examiner who DQ'd you deserves a medal....
This passage is quite revealing. That examiner found Mr. Maschke to be deceptive (Mr. Maschke claims that this was a wrong/false diagnosis and you have offered no evidence to the contrary .) You have through your words empowered that examiner with the non-existent authority to disqualify applicants. That is the function of the hiring agency and presumably its human relations department. It is interesting to see the allusions of grandeur that you posses and attribute to your colleagues. It is for this reason as well as your vulgar unprofessional responses on this site to those lay people who (making no claim of professional membership) are frequently equally childish, that you should not have the even the authority that you do have. With regard to Mr. Maschke's polygraph examiner, I would agree that that individual deserves a medal or trophy. In fact I believe he should be the anti-polygraph community's man of the year for at least the past three or four years running. While making you and yours look silly on a daily basis, he (along with Mr. Scalabrini) has done as much as any individual to inform the American and international publics about various aspects of the fraud we know as polygraphy.
The examiner should receive a medal because of his diligent duty in identifying a potential dishonest candidate. You, nor I can determine whether or not George was truthful on his polygraph examination. George's blatant flippant attitude toward offender's of the criminal justice system render him incapable of performing federal, state, or local law enforcement duties. His little website attempts (added emphasis) to assist those trying to circumvent the criminal justice system. Anyone who thinks otherwise is an idiot. Regarding Okieboy (or perv as like to use) another poster identified him as a child molester and if he wants to refute it then let him do so. I haven't seen him do it yet. Regarding this website, do you believe this website may assist criminal with furthering their criminal behavior? Be honest! ;)
Saidme,
You write:
Quote...The examiner should receive a medal because of his diligent duty in identifying a potential dishonest candidate...
You appear to have created the new polygraph result (to go along with DI, NDI, and Inconclusive) of Potential Deception Indicated (PDI). I think even your colleagues would be embarassed at this evolutionary development in the world of CQT polygraphy.
Where'd you see that dipshit?
Anonymous
You didn't answer the question. ???
My crime was indecent exposure...and it had nothing to do with children.
People like Saidme, ignorant people that is, have a tendency to generalize. It is easier than actually thinking.
Some examples of these ignorant right wingers opinions are "all blacks are lazy", "all arabs are terrorists", and "all people convicted of a sex crime are child molesters".
I say let saidme go on thinking this way. At least we can point out the idiots by what they speak.
-OkieBoy
Orolan,
What is your field of employment? Maybe just a hint..
Thanks..
Peter
Peter,
I could tell you I teach criminal psychology at a major university, or I could tell you I'm the guy who asks "Do you want fries with that?" at McDonalds. Odds are that either one would cause some people to view what I post here in a different light strictly based on that knowledge. Which isn't really the way it should be. I want my posts to be read and interpreted based on the content of them without that content being qualified based on how I pay my bills. Understand?
E-mail me at the address provided in my profile and I'll tell you what I do for a living. But you'll need to convince me that you will keep it to yourself.
Quote from: OkieBoy on Jul 29, 2003, 04:12 PMMy crime was indecent exposure...and it had nothing to do with children.
-OkieBoy
Excuse me for being a little presumptuous but lets assume your a public masturbator and your targets are adult woman. What happens if my child just happens along at the wrong time? ???
Your minimizing. :o
sie,
Guilty of a little "presumption" of my own. What does happen ??? Does you child know that Mom's body is different than Dads? Does s/he know why? Does s/he know that there are "bad" people in this world? Does s/he know what masturbation is?(probably does regardless of whether or not you know s/he knows ;))
It is my understanding that a child too young to already know that a public masturbator is doing something "nasty" will not be traumatized by the observation. And a child old enough to know what is going on should have already been sufficiently educated by his/her parents to simply be disgusted by the observation.
It would seem that the only child traumatized by such an act would be a child raised in a Barney-like fantasy world who believes that all people are loving and nice; thinks babies come from the cabbage patch; thinks people don't die, they just go to another place; has no idea of the concept that boys are different than girls, except that girls wear dresses and boys don't , etc. These are the same kids who shock their parents by marrying the first abusive alcoholic drug addict that comes along "because he said he loved me"(I actually know such a girl).
I am not trying to minimize OkieBoy's offense at all. It just seems that the scenario you describe, if it results in the child being traumatized, is more an indication of failed parenting skills than of his perversion.
Now that I've stepped in it with both feet, I'll await the repercussions ;)
Sie,
And if you're allowing your little kids to go to frat parties, then that says something else about your parenting skills.
Maybe you should be informed before passing judgements.
But that's okay. Generalizing is a common mistake amongst idiots. You're in good companionship with Saidme.
-OkieBoy
Orolan
You wrote: "I am not trying to minimize OkieBoy's offense at all."
That's exactly what you did. ;)
Saidme,
Sounds to me like Orolan was presenting different factors and points of view into the equation, something narrow-minded individuals like yourself seem incapable of comprehending.
-OkieBoy
Saidme,
Sie presented a hypothetical question, applied to a hypothetical incident. To which I presented a valid opinion.
At no time did I minimize or discount OkieBoy's specific incident for which he was charged and placed on probation.
Don't read so much between the lines. I'm not hooked up to your machine ;)
This is fantastic, Okie Boy coming to the defense of his defender.
Orolan, you wrote: "It is my understanding that a child too young to already know that a public masturbator is doing something "nasty" will not be traumatized by the observation. And a child old enough to know what is going on should have already been sufficiently educated by his/her parents to simply be disgusted by the observation."
You wrote further still:
"It would seem that the only child traumatized by such an act would be a child raised in a Barney-like fantasy world who believes that all people are loving and nice; thinks babies come from the cabbage patch; thinks people don't die, they just go to another place; has no idea of the concept that boys are different than girls, except that girls wear dresses and boys don't , etc. These are the same kids who shock their parents by marrying the first abusive alcoholic drug addict that comes along "because he said he loved me"(I actually know such a girl). "
All excellent rationalizations which could assist in producing a post-test confession. I may have to incorporate some of your material in my next case that's similar to this one. Appreciate the material.
Your intent (only you know that) may not have been to present it as rationalizations but they are rationalizations/minimizations nevertheless. ;)
Saidme,
Are you a polygrapher? You mentioned your next case.
Cool!
Hey, do you use crystal pyramid power to heal yourself when you are sick also?
Hey, the latest issue of UFO magazine is out! Do you wanna come along and wait for the Alien overlords who founded the human race to land?
But seriously, Bigfoot has been spotted just outside of this small town in Oklahoma that my grandparents are from. Do you wanna go and try and communicate with him? Maybe your spirit-angel guide could give you enough rainbow power to send love-vibrations to the big, furry guy.
Let me know.
Thanks,
OkieBoy
ps: Why don't you just use your "Chi" powers to tell if someone is lying? I heard Kung Fu masters can actually do this.
OB
I love it when you use your full wit and charm. ;)
Quote from: orolan on Aug 02, 2003, 02:08 PMsie,
It is my understanding that a child too young to already know that a public masturbator is doing something "nasty" will not be traumatized by the observation. And a child old enough to know what is going on should have already been sufficiently educated by his/her parents to simply be disgusted by the observation
Oh, I see; its the parents fault and not that of the offender.
QuoteIt would seem that the only child traumatized by such an act would be a child raised in a Barney-like fantasy world who believes that all people are loving and nice; thinks babies come from the cabbage patch; thinks people don't die, they just go to another place; has no idea of the concept that boys are different than girls, except that girls wear dresses and boys don't , etc. These are the same kids who shock their parents by marrying the first abusive alcoholic drug addict that comes along "because he said he loved me"
It is this kind of thinking that lead to your offending.
Sie,
QuoteOh, I see; its the parents fault and not that of the offender.
More like a shared responsibility. The severity of a child's reaction to observing the genitals of a male under any circumstances is directly related to what they know. This knowledge is imparted (or not) by the parents of the child. The offender has culpability for performing the act, whether the child was the target or not.
QuoteIt is this kind of thinking that lead to your offending.
Your logic escapes me. The act is illegal, even if it doesn't traumatize the child. Any person who would knowingly target another person (child or not) with an act of public masturbation is going to do so regardless of his/her thoughts about the severity of the targeted person's reaction to it. He/she is doing it for their own gratification, and being observed is all they need. I don't recall ever hearing of a person justifying their indecent exposure on the grounds that it "shouldn't have bothered the target". You're reaching way out on this one.
BTW, what happens when your child sees a mother breast-feeding a baby ???
Some kind of reading here. Let's cut to the chase, in Texas, there is only good people and bad people. The sex offender is worse than a bank robber or killer, regardless if they ever touched, talked about, or wrote about teen sex. I really want to point out that "thinking" about sex with children has been declared the same as a murderer. We all need to take a step back and remember that the US was founded on not only principles, freedom of speech, and your innocent until proven guilty as basic rights. Gee, what a concept, you really should commit a crime to be guilty of a crime!!!!!!!!
Let's be the first in a new wave of justice (as in the way the forefathers were thinking), and combine our meager resources to form a class action civil lawsuit against the mass hysteria that has became the norm recently.
Yes, sounds like ACLU stuff which I used to think a radical left wing group as a "normal" member of society that I was (in the US that is).
If anyone out there is a lawyer and web designer, get with me and all others here to start a non-profit organization to either get the levels of gray set up for true justice or to use the "system" as they do(might makes right, or in this case $$ rules).
Radical? No, just realize that all the rights we fought for in the late 60's and early 70's have been totally nullified.
I will divulge my story and background if anyone is interested.
I am very serious about the fact that we need to bind together to achieve the proper stature and level of justice that we really deserve or are willing to fight for in the American legal system.
Am I in left field? Tell me, as far as the laws go, by the letter, 1/4 of the US should be incarcerated.
Am I wrong or is my thinking that far from the norm? If it is, then the entire fault must lie in my sphere of influence. OK, that includes major corporations, significant corporate positions, and extending to the regular guy on the street so to speak.
Please send a reply and let me know if you are with or against this psychological approach.
After all, this is the land of the "free" is it not?
Regards,
1984
P.S. - yea it's late, but I had a meeting tonight that is weighing heavy on me.
aldo,
As the Savage said in Chapter 17 of "Brave New World"; "But I don't want comfort. I want God, I want poetry, I want real danger, I want freedom, I want goodness. I want sin."
Re your website idea, look at this site. There is much activity "behind the scenes" by the owners of and contributors to this site of the sort you advocate.
http://www.geocities.com/eadvocate/issues/index.html