AntiPolygraph.org Message Board

Well, here it is, the 100% truth about the Texas polygraph industry and what TAPE, Eric Holden, Bill Parker, Jay Holden, Maria Hubbard, Andy Shepard, Stuart Ervin, Jack St. John, Jon Rios, Richard Wood, Clayton Wood, Bridgette Woodall, et al. have been doing since 2008 to silence me from telling the truth.

TAPE and the above individuals have actively covered up the facts in regard of the racist and threatening emails sent to me in 2008 that have been irrefutably connected to Behavioral Measures (Bill Parker and Eric Holden, Principals) and the Texas Association of Polygraph Examiners; as lieguytoo was a member of the Behavioral Measures management team (a contract manager for one of their biggest contacts, and a member of the Board of Directors of the Texas Association of Polygraph Examiners with Maria Hubbard, Jack St. John, and Stuart Ervin. 

I will also lay out how Andy Shepard and Bridgette Woodall helped engage in a cover up in such a way that was unethical and direct violation of TAPE bylaws along with the entire executive committee and board of directors for the Texas Association of Polygraph Examiners for 2009. 

I will also lay out how the current Texas Association of Polygraph Examiners leadership continues to condone the acts of racist and threatening emails to intimidate a witness through their lack of condemnation of the incident, taking responsibility that it was one of their Board of Directors, and a public Condemnation of such actions because racism and making terroristic threats to intimidate a witness or a party in a legal actions wrong, (or one would think is wrong).

I will also go over the math of the Tarrant County Texas sex offender polygraph market during the lawsuit in 2008.  This will be very enlightening.

I will also go over, recent attempts to threaten or intimidate me into silence, (in as much detail as I am allowed without breaking my word) by a current member of the executive member of the Texas Association of Polygraph Examiners.

All of this and more will be laid out with undeniable and irrefutable documentation; much of which is emails from TAPE, documents gathered under subpoena, and court files; as well as documentation gathered under other means which have since been confirmed. 

I will lay out how the above listed people have engaged in this activity, not because they were telling the truth or that I did anything "unethical" or wrong, but have done so in the attempts blacklist me or run me out of the business through whatever control they can muster including but not limited to denying me to attend CEU classes to this day, which causes me to spend more money than the average polygraph examiner would have to spend to obtain CEU's because I have to become a licensed school and instructor when the average examiners does not.

To this day I am denied my CEU's out of retaliation and for no other reason than telling the truth.

I also expect that this "blog", for lack of a better term will be retaliated on by the frivolous filling of ethics complaints with professional organizations who have continuously told me they have no jurisdiction in this matter. 

In fact, the private organizations insist that this is a matter for the "courts" to handle.  Funny, that is how all this started and now they want me to go back to court to handle what frankly should have been handled years ago in the courts. 

I should also point out. I have tried to handle this behind closed doors only to be met with people who feel I should keep my mouth shut or others that marginalize what has happened and tell me to move on and not fight while the examiners in Texas continue to attempt to run me out of business or blacklist me.

All and all, I have tried to have this discussion in private, the industry wouldn't have it, so maybe we will have to have the discussion here. 

So any questions about the 2008 case and what happened and has happened since are free game.  I will hold nothing back and what I say will be the truth as I have offered to take a polygraph about it all in the past and have bet my future on the results of said polygraph. 

Having said that, the examiners involved have done everything to avoid taking a polygraph in regard to their accusations against me and under the same conditions. 

So you tell me whose story is more credible given the current President of the Texas Association of Polygraph Examiners has been recorded saying that anyone who refuses to take a polygraph is hiding something.

So where would we like to begin?  Should I begin with the truth about the demographics of the polygraph industry in Tarrant County in 2008 (which chances are haven't changed since *opinion) or should we start with how TAPE silenced me in 2009?

For background regarding the 2008 case to which Joe McCarthy (the fighting irish) refers in the above post, see Unlawful Referral Scheme Alleged in Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex Post-Conviction Sex Offender Polygraph Testing (https://antipolygraph.org/forum/index.php?topic=3887.msg28973#msg28973).

Before ya go looking at it, and say, stuff like "wow this guy is angry:" just for full disclosure, I was.  I don't deny it, these people pissed me off more than I ever thought I could be pissed off.  They made it personal from day one.

Some may say, I am doing this now out of anger.  Nope.  This is being done because it's time people know the truth.  The people involved have been slandering, libeling, and spreading vicious rumors about me for years; and I have been told and instructed not to fight back. 

"If you ignore them, then they will go away," was the mantra of people giving me this advice.  But I have found that bullies don't go away if you ignore them, they only become empowered and their lies get more extravagant and they start thinking they are bullet proof.

People will believe whatever they are spoon fed; it's easier to digest and one doesn't have to cook their own meal (so to speak).  SO the believe automatically whatever they are being spoon fed if there is no other information out there. 

Now, you will learn the truth about how business gets done here in Texas and how whistle blowers are silenced and ostracized.   

For instance, the math about sot referrals in Tarrant County Texas are shocking to say the least.  These numbers are not my numbers, they are the numbers that come straight from the defendants.  All document on will be provided. 

That is just the beginning of course.

Now again, I have tried to work this out in private, and I will prove that as well.  The people involved in Texas had no desire to work this out.  Either they think I didn't have the balls to do this or they didn't think I kept every shred of paper.  They will be very disappointed.

It seems their side of the story gets out there, and now it's time for my side of the story and all the facts to be disclosed so people can make their own EDUCATED decisions as to which side can be believed.

I will be silent no more in regard to my Texas dealings.  I'm done being the nice guy, time to be the jerk some people what people to believe that I am.


Tiocfaidh ár lá

Ok,

It's been brought to my attention, by a few other examiners, that people in the industry are not happy with me coming here again.

Well isn't that a shock?

I expected people in the industry to play victim with this, fact is, I was driven here.  This is not my first choice of venue to resolve this issue, I agonized over this decision. 

Having said that, here is a video response of the accusations that I am "discrediting" the polygraph industry.  I think this video makes it pretty clear why ultimately I am back here. It also makes clear that if the Texas examiners are going to say I am discrediting the polygraph industry, that might be a hard claim to back up when I have tried to handle this behind closed doors only to be ignored or marginalized. 

Also, it's a hard claim to make when you take into account that I am the only polygraph examiner EVER, who has displayed total faith in the product of polygraph to have volunteered to take the test I sell to people and to have offered up my livelihood and future based on the results.  Those videos as well are linked here. 

If anyone had discredited the polygraph industry, it has been the examiners who have either run form the test or the examiners who choose to protect the untruthful by not supporting the idea of using the test to solve this issue, or not calling those examiners who ran from the test we sell to account for refusing.  Any polygraph examiner who is afraid of our own test is a discredit and a blight on the industry; this I am sure we can all agree on.  If not maybe the industry needs to re-examine its mission as we are "seekers" and "verifiers" as well as dedicated to the TRUTH, are we not?

If we are dedicated to the truth, why do I see an industry trying so hard to bury these issues in favor of solving them. 

Anyway, the challenge videos make it clear that there was an expiration date to those challenges.  So I am done making the offer that I have made since 2008, that ship has now sailed and I am not inclined to obligate myself to keep begging for a chance to clear my name.  Now it's time for the examiners who have run from their own test to step up and explain why they feel that they are above the very people they test.

Do they not believe in the 89 to 94% accuracy they all claim, and they don't want the gamble?  Or do they believe as I do that this works, and they know they're lying.  There really is no good third option when you look at the conditions I set down for the people who fail, including me.  If I was truly lying, the industry could have been done with me in two hours of time.  If I was truly lying, this would have been the easy way out for them.

Instead the Texas examiners want to play chicken thinking I will back down.  This was a dangerous game that I have decided to call them on.  That is one of the reason why I came to AP; now I can't back down.  It forces me continue to stand up for myself because now it is out there. 

No more playacting games to get me to calm down and back down from my position so that my weakness for wanting to be kind and liked can be taken advantage of as a sign of weakness.

I am very aware that most people at AP don't care about me or what happens to me.  I am not here under any illusion that people here like or respect me.  I have decided to come here because this is my last option.  I have also decided to come here because the Texas examiners have made it clear to me that my first visit here will never be lived down.  Jack St. John keeping my TAPE complaint on line for as long as he did showed me that they will always endeavor to hold that complaint filled with lies and misinformation will follow me for the rest of my career. 

If this is the case, should I not have the right to defend myself publicly after they kept it out there publicly?  Do I not have a right to refute their claims against me in an equal public forum and present evidence in my defense?

Ya see, if Stuart Ervin, Jack St. John, Maria Hubbard, Andy Shepard et al. had done things correctly in the first place, I'd have nothing to complain about.  But instead, they all chose to lie, break their own bylaws, and then deny that they did anything wrong.  When I am done here, people will know the truth; this is the choice TAPE made and continues to make.  I am willing to stop anytime they are.  This is their choice, I am just giving them what they want.

Lastly, I have learned that coming here or handling this in private forum similar to that of PP really makes no difference other than one thing; now I have their attention.

Here is my prediction, complaints will be filed, if they haven't been already, that I am discrediting the industry, wrongly slandering people, etc etc.  TAPE will do everything in their power to make sure or to try to convince people into having a kangaroo court like they did.  If this happens, bylaws will no doubt be ignored just like what TAPE did.  I will have no right to face or cross examine my accuser, just like what tape did.  I will have no right to present evidence on my behalf, just like what TAPE did. Lastly, even if I did, it would all be for not, because the decision will be made long before I am even informed of a complaint, just like what TAPE did after I found out about the TAPE complaint from Maria Hubbards husband.

This is TAPE's way of trying to silence me, by blacklisting me and ostracizing me. 

If it's going to happen, why should I let it happen quietly?

Anyway

reasons why I am here (note, not all inclusive in the interest of brevity)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Mv0XN1ZoNU

Polygraph challenge to Maria Hubbard
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c69bttNR7Eg

Polygraph challenge to TAPE and certain members
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oxrJsrsmFd8

Irish, I have no doubt that you are (again) being viewed with contempt for upsetting the applecart.

In my opinion, however, the polygraph industry needs a serious reality check on several different levels. Therefore, I am confident that your efforts -- shocking as they may be to certain industry operatives -- will ultimately serve the greater good.

As for me, I experienced an epiphany of sorts a few years ago when my understanding of the politics (and profits) connected with "polygraph science" began to crystallize. Shortly thereafter I changed my occupation from polygraph examiner to polygraph consultant. It's an important distinction -- one that better enables me to serve clients in an honest and open capacity.

So, lad, if you have 'em dead to rights -- and it looks like you do -- give it holy hell.

You know I certainly would.

Daniel Mangan, M.A.
Full Member, American Polygraph Association
Certified PCSOT Examiner
www.polygraphman.com

I'm going to make this clear; I am not going after the industry as a whole.  I am not trying to discredit the polygraph industry; I am counting on the honor of the polygraph industry to do the right thing after they actually see the evidence.  I am hoping that once the industry sees what has been really going on down here and not the BS that TAPE, Holden, Rios, Hubbard et al. have been feeding them, the industry will do the right thing and intervene to fix it before things really get out of hand.  I have warned people that this was inevitable, but it seems no one wants to stand up to the people involved and call them out.

I don't understand why people are so afraid of these people down here in Texas and the truth.  Behind closed doors, many in the industry roll their eyes when you say "Texas" and they say, "ugh those guys;" but when it comes to calling to the mat on something, no one wants to touch it.

I am also hoping that TAPE and the people involved will come to their senses and start talking about doing the right thing privately over this nastiness.  In the mean time, this is the avenue they have chosen.  I have warned them many times over the past year that this was an inevitability, they have chosen to call my bluff.

By the end of this, it will be imposable for the industry to ignore what is going on.  That is why I am doing this.  I am not trying to discredit or damage the industry as a whole, just certain individuals within TAPE and the leadership that active covers up unethical behaviors like intentional volition of their own bylaws, restriction of grate or attempting to restrict trade, covering up acts of racism and terroristic threats by someone who was a board member if TAPE and a managing employee of behavioral measures, filing a ethics complaint that contained intentional material misstatements, the ethics committee, chaired by Andy Shepard, continued to hide evidence, disallowed a chance for me to present exculpatory evidence, intentionally and with malice disregarded TAPE bylaw, and lastly continued and still continues to actively cover up acts of racism and terroristic threats by failing to recognize and condemn the acts and apologies for his intentional and willful misstatements on his ethics committee report.  In the alternative admitting that he did a crap investigation, and the investigation was tainted and flawed by his own personal grudge against me and the grudges others held against me within TAPE.

Now as politics and profits go, wait another few hours.  Any doubts that Texas wants to toss out there that there is no restraint of trade scheme in Tarrant County Texas is about to be put to bed forever.  The best part about it, I'm going to prove it with documentation form their own lawyers.  The proof will be in their own numbers.  When a few other examiners see these numbers, they will not be happy; because I think one of the reasons Wood, Holden, Shepherd and the rest of them want me silenced, if the other examiners really saw how hard they are getting fucked over, there may be some explaining to do. 

Again, This is the direction everyone else has chosen.  All I am doing is granting their wish.

The Texas examiners can stop me any time; my phone is on.  All I want is the truth, and I want exoneration from the things they know are lies.  Lastly, I want to be simply left alone and allowed to make a living without them sending their little (and I use that phrase lightly *phrasing, boom) character assassin any more. 

Enough is enough.

Because it will be either total peace, or all out war, they can't have both.

It amazes me, this whole thing can be settled with an agreement and simple words.  The only money I was is the money I earn by competing fairly on an open market.  I don't understand why this is complicated.  Of course with Richard Wood, drilling home the meaning of the word capitalism seems hard.  I think in a few hours, everyone will see why Richard Wood don't want the JPCOT list being the only recognized polygraph examiners list the state of Texas works off of.  It will be easy why he is resistant to a free market.  He had, and from what I hear, still has a pretty sweet deal in Tarrant County.  It will be interesting to see how the Tax payers of Tarrant County will react when they find out that the polygraph firm their county counts on the most to protect their kids from the sexual predators couldn't tell if the people in their offices were lying or telling the truth 45% of the time.

Again, their own numbers, not mine.

My phone ain't ringing so I guess they are fine with this information and don't deny it.  Oh well.

They wanted a war, they got one.  I call Tarlton's Quarter

Stand by, ran into a wee glitch in regard to releasing some of this documentation and specific information.  Have to reset for the release of general analysis of said specific information.  If they want to say I am lying, they can sue me and I will present specific information in court.

Point is, the examiners involved know I am telling the truth.  If they want to challenge my analysis in court as a libel or slander suit, I welcome them to do so. 

Need extra time

LOL, there had to be a few on the edge of their seats hoping I wouldn't cover all my bases. 

Awesome Irish!! Cant wait to see all the info, Thanks for the hard work.

The videos posted by the fighting irish are clear, compelling and informative. They should prove to be of highly significant value to anyone with even a passing interest in the underbelly of the polygraph indu$try.

The impact of these videos is palpable. I'm very impressed -- so much so that I myself will be using video in a somewhat similar manner in the runup to the American Polygraph Association elections in July.

Stay tuned for that miniseries.

Meanwhile, take a few minutes to hear what the fighting irish has to say -- and how he says it.

If what irish says is true -- and I personally wouldn't doubt that man for a New York minute -- it looks like certain members of TAPE screwed with the wrong "Irish dumbass."


Daniel Mangan, M.A.
Full Member, American Polygraph Association
Certified PCSOT Examiner
www.polygraphman.com

Dan/Mr. McCarthy,

When it comes to the good ship polygraph, it should not be surprising that my routine interests and subjects for commentary do not generally include the internecine squabbling of the Texas Association of Polygraph examiners. 

I see the conflict as a rather minor disturbance and little more than choosing the colors of the deck chairs on the Titanic, and, I suppose, I've made no secret that I'm rooting for the iceberg.

That having been said, I do admire someone who is not afraid to stand on principle, to fight overwhelming odds and to permanently lay it all out for all to see on YouTube. 

Good for you, Mr. McCarthy! 

My apologies to you in advance for any additional grief you may suffer as a result of having received a compliment from me...cheers

I am not looking for compliments.  I am seeking justice and vindication.  I desire only the truth be known and people make their own decisions based on the info they have. 

Sorry, Irish.  If you want more than a compliment regarding the means and effort you put forth, you ask too much.

Justice is what is deserved by those who are victims of polygraphy, not those who fight for a place in line at the polygraph money tit.

Do not misunderstand--I neither agree nor disagree with your position(s) regarding fair business practices--I simply maintain that they do not rise to the level of social justice as represented by the various issues more typically discussed on this site.

I will pay you one more compliment though--you have enough sense to realize that this site is likely read/routinely visited by more polygraphers (as well as the more obvious "anti" audience)  than all pro-polygraph sites combined.

In spite of my aforementioned opinion regarding your message of justice, if I were you and believed as you do, and the goal was to draw the largest audience of polygraph operators, I would begin and end my message here as well...

They won't listen to what I have to say privately, I know for a fact they will listen to me here.  I have posted two more videos privately on a message board to give people the opportunity to refute what I am saying or address the issue.  In the end, I don't want anyone to say they weren't given fair warning or a chance.

Once it is here, they have no choice to look at it and hopefully address it, at least in private. 

As for me wanting my place at "the polygraph money tit;"  I am not looking to get rich off polygraph.  I just want to offer a fair test at a fair price and let the maker decide.

The market can also decide, does it pick an examiner who believes in polygraph enough to step up to it himself and put his future on the line based on the results of that test; or does the market want to pick examiners who either have an integrity issue, and are too scared to take a polygraph; or worse yet, pick examiners that don't believe in the accuracy and reliability that they use as selling points.  Either way, it looks good for me and bad for them in the end.

OK, let it never be said that I didn't try.

Now, let me be clear about this; the number of tests that I quote in the next two videos is rounded down to the nearest hundred.  Why?  Because an agreement was entered into that I not disclose the responses in regard to this information.  Therefore, I will not provide the responses.  I will however discuss the problems that I have with what I learned from the responses and my analysis of the information gleaned from them. 

The over all percentages of business are however spot on and do not give away any actual responses. 

Now, if the examiners involved want to sue me for libel or slander, stating that I am being inaccurate other than what I have disclosed above; I welcome them to do so. 

Fact is, this wouldn't be necessary if this wasn't one of the areas for which I was accused of being a liar by the examiners involved and TAPE and wasn't one of the issues on the TAPE complaint that the Texas Association of Polygraph Examiners kept on their website, for public view, from my resignation in 2009 to when their second cease and desist was issued to TAPE in 2013. 

Because that complaint is in the hands of all kinds of people, I feel I have a right to refute the accusations therein, which have been made against me, and that due process afforded to me under the Texas Association of Polygraph Examiners bylaws denied to me.  Therefore I feel it is my right to publicly defend myself in a likewise public manner.

Anyway, I am starting at the beginning of the lawsuit and my accusations of a restrictive marketplace and the directing of examinations to one examiner (or group of examiners) over all others; thus creating what appears to be a monopolistic market. 

Moreover, I have been told by some examiners that, "not all examiners are equal."  I think this adage is true when you look at the facts, but I am willing to bet not in the same way the people giving the adage had expected. 

When you see that one firm gets 91% of the marketshare, you will also see that the "chosen one" in the market was drastically underperforming on a level that when I think about it, makes me ashamed that these people are being protected by the Texas Polygraph Industry, Tarrant County CSCD, and the CSOT providers involved; as they have yet (to the best of my knowledge) to address these issues to assure corrective action took or takes place to assure that every examinee gets a fair, independent, and unbiased polygraph examination. 

It is also in my hopes, that examiners and associations from around the country will become aware of what is truly going on down here, and/or can no longer turn a blind eye to it.

Again, I have been told that I am damaging or discrediting the Polygraph Industry by releasing this information.  I disagree.  I have been trying to fight behind closed doors to have this information heard and addressed; up to and including today.  All I have received for my trouble is a deaf ear; and then called before an ethics committee by the Secretary of TAPE in an effort to teach me a lesson that I should keep my mouth shut or face being ostracized or blacklisted. 

So, here is the information.  I will let the American Public decide; because they are the people who are truly affected in the end.  To the people of Texas, you are impacted the most; especially those in Tarrant County.  You have a polygraph firm out there that, in 2007/2008, according to their own numbers, can't get it right almost half the time.  Shouldn't you demand that your County Commissioner find out if this is still a problem or not?  After all, part of these polygraphs is asking these sex offenders if they are having contact with your kids.  Don't you want to make sure that they do their best to find out on the first try?

Well again, you be the judge.  If you live in Tarrant County Texas and you want answers; the presiding Judge of your County hires the Director of CSCD.  You may want to contact him to get those answers and to make sure these examiners are not still underperforming.  The Director of CSCD is not accountable to the Voters/Tax Payers, but the person who is accountable is presiding Judge of that county. Ya know, the guy you, The Voter,  elect every couple years.

Oh, I should also point out, that I have no dog in the fight in Tarrant County anymore.  Moreover, there is not enough money in the world that would make me want to go back to that county where the protection of the Good ole Boys, takes precedence over the protection of children. 

I have nothing to financially gain from the release of this information.  The only interest I have in this particular part is the public knowing the truth over the lies that TAPE and some examiners have been telling.

Tarrant County Basic Sex Offender Demographics
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QF-hc2Qdy7g

And here are the financial implications of the above video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pUZLgljwZ4

The 45% inconclusive rate that irish cites in his videos very likely speaks to the effectiveness of mental countermeasures, which are well known to the sex offender community.

Daniel Mangan, M.A.
Certified PCSOT Examiner
www.polygraphman.com

Dan, that is speculation, though there is an instance when I get a confession from an offender, Wood knows who he is, that bragged that he beat every test he was ever given there.  Well, until he got caught, by me.

Moreover, it doesn't explain my low inconclusive rate. 

I am thinking it is option A, or option B from video 2.

Either he sucks (might as well speak plainly) or the inconclusive rate was that high to pad the wallet.  Mr. Wood or Baby Wood can come here and defend his numbers, or he can simply call me.  That is, if he has the Wood

Quote from: danmangan on May 12, 2015, 10:15 AMThe 45% inconclusive rate that irish cites in his videos very likely speaks to the effectiveness of mental countermeasures, which are well known to the sex offender community.

Or to make more money with repeat exams :-[

I have noticed though, other than my email box getting a wee heavy, there is not the defending I saw back on 2008.  I guess it is easier to hide and ignore the facts than it is to face and address them.

I am still shocked about one thing.  If they were so confident I was lying and that they were telling the truth, and confident in the 89 to 93% accuracy rate, I gave them the opportunity to take me out of polygraph forever on a silver platter earlier this year.  I mean, I served it up to them like a pudding.  Maria Holden..... I mean Hubbard..... Maria Hubbard..... (Freudian slip) could have been the hero of Texas Polygraph.  Instead, she chose to run in the opposite direction like Tony Romo getting chased by the Patriots defensive line.

I don't understand that, especially when you see her website touting 94% accuracy rates. 

Then with everyone else following her to hide behind her skirt, even people deeply involved in APA studies like Holden.  And Andy Shepard former presiding member of the polygraph examiners board, what does that say about his confidence in if he has been on the up and up?  How do they feel no shame by selling a product they either don't believe in or are too scared to use themselves because they will be caught in their lies?

AH.... but it doesn't matter, I gave them and expiration date on the test thing and that ship has now sailed.  Now they have to live with being known as hypocrites and charlatans by running from using the very thing they sell.

Anyway, they are going to get caught in their lies anyway; I have one hell of a paper trail and I am nowhere near done exposing that trail yet. 

I do after all want to give people a fair chance to resolve this personally.  It's really their choice and one that it seems was already made.  Just a shame it has to be this way.  They can end this anytime they want.

Sex offenders talk among themselves, in part to share tips and tricks on how to beat the 'box -- and the entire treatment system.

If sex offenders with something to hide know of an approved  polygraph exam resource with a near 50/50 chance of coming up inconclusive rather than DI, that's where they will tend to flock, in my opinion.

Then, they can better manipulate their therapist and PO.

No, because very test that is inconclusive, Tarrant County CSCD considered a fail.  INC after INC is just insane from a money vantage point; especially sex offenders who usually don't have much of it.

Texas is a different animal than most other places from what I understand.  Too many inconclusives will get you revoked in some places where the judge is a prosecutor on the bench. 

Now I am not going to say that a person with INC after INC isn't lying about something possibly.  What I am saying that maybe the real problem is not the examinee, but in fact the examiner. 

Inconclusive, 95% (ball parking) of the time is just another word for piss poor test.  In my opinion

So, riddle me this, Irishman...

How can the "test" be scientific if it's almost entirely examiner dependent?

Moreover, where is the (non-self-report) research -- in authentic PCSOT settings -- that validates the industry's accuracy claims?

There are better people to toss that question to.  And when you do, ask why the examiners in Texas are so scared of their own tests.  I would sell my soul to the devil for a straight, on the record answer.

I am not blowing you off, my mind is just on this texas issue.  I'll be in Boston sometime this summer and we can have the long debates about all this other crap.

You want to argue validity, ask the polygraph illuminati why the test is good enough to see to other people, but it wasn't good enough to clear up this texas issue?

You may get the answer you are looking for with that question; should anyone have the sand to answer it

Quote
How can the "test" be scientific if it's almost entirely examiner dependent?

The test (lie detection in general, PCSOT in particular) has no diagnostic validity, Dan.  I presume that is what you mean by "scientific." 

If it ("the test") did, there would exist a compelling rationale for compulsory pre-conviction sexual defendant testing  relative to the compulsory fishing expedition (PCSOT) of individuals rightly or wrongly relegated to a class of people who have little public appeal and/or personal clout.

Actually there is more of a basis for my mock-suggested defendant testing than with PCSOT--at least with the first, the examiner knows a crime has been committed and is often assisted by investigator bias (admittedly considerably more so for guilty subjects brought in for a polygraph exam than innocent subjects) developed through his or her involvement in the relevant criminal investigation.

OK, but SOT is a fact of life, it is here and being done and it is not going anywhere...... for now.

I can't speak for other states, but here in Texas, it is a dirty business filled with people who are too scared of polygraph when there is a basis for testing, in your words.

I am now on a crusade to do the right thing and expose it all, and/or fix it; and if the industry don't get on board with cleaning up from within, the integrity of the PCSOT market will lose what credibility it has left.

The Polygraph Examiners in Texas lost the right to partly regulate our own industry because we have shown that we are not trustworthy enough to do so in a manner that is fair and reasonable.  TDLR only got half the job done though; but more on that later.

How can you make the public feel warm and fuzzy about a procedure that a given industry avoids using itself like the black plague; all while telling the public that this is a good fix to the issue of sex offender self report?

Moreover, if we are here, for lack of a better term, to judge the integrity of others, should we not be willing to look from within and judge our own though the use of facts, adherence to our own rules, and a sense of equity to ALL involved. That when something is an issue, fix the issue over cutting off the hand of the person pointing out the issue?

Or maybe I have simply consumed too much koolaide.

All I know is this Texas issue is not going away until it is solved.  This has been made clear by the actions of the examiners involved in this Texas mess.  There are examiners down here that are more obsessed with their vendetta against me for coming here in 2008 that they just didn't want to let everything pass quietly and let it go.  If I am going to be forced out, I will not go without letting people know the truth and provide documentation to prove it up. 

This just makes me see what a destructive group of people they are, and if they will do this to me after squeezing out a win on a technicality, what will they do or what have they done to an easier target.

The people of Texas deserve to know what they are getting into.  Because someday, it may be them or someone they love in that polygraph chair.

How you ask?

It's not just the sex offenders. Some counties are using PCSOT like testing with DWI as well and they are looking into expanding into other areas.  Now while the vast majority of America doesn't want to diddle a kid, those same people do get into a car after throwing a few back and it is literally a throw of the dice if they get caught. 

Boom. Then they are at the mercy of Mr. 45%.  All it will take is to screw over one important politician's niece or nephew, and polygraph will be looking at another EPPA.  I am not the only one who sees this.  I am not the only examiner who sees this coming if we don't clean it up from within.

Fact is, the Texas Polygraph Industry would rather play damage control to their integrity over have integrity by coming clean about their behavior, taking responsibility and accountability for it's actions, and fixing the integrity of the foundation to build a stronger and more trustworthy structure.

If you want a more honest and trustworthy profession, that is where it starts, with integrity from within.  Something that is seriously lacking.

But Drew, the APA's own meta-analysis clearly states that polygraph's average accuracy is 89% for single-issue exams and 85% for multiple-issue exams.

The APA has the facts and figures to support those claims to a .95 confidence level. It's all there at www.polygraph.org.

Are you suggesting the APA's convincing meta-analysis is merely a by-product of its very own statistical alchemy?

Maria Hubbard insists accuracy up to 94%.  SO who do I believe, the APA or Maria? 

It's an honest question

Dan,

Your assessment of the APA's statistical competence is more politic than mine, so I'll live with yours...LOL

A point of clarification though--a multiple issue criminal exam, e.g., the MGQT, is quite different than a screening/fishing expedition such as the PCSOT...the latter is the lowest of the low in a world not in danger of fear of heights....

No, and I repeat, NO meta analysis of any number of MGQT studies indicates anything about the validity of the PCSOT. Apples and oranges...

Drew, so PCSOT tests are just a SWAG (Scientific Wild-Ass Guess)?

They would be JUST that if not for the serious consequences of both false positive and false negative errors to both individuals (victims, victim families, convicted (rightly and wrongly) felons, etc.) and society...but because of the seriousness of a SWAG with issues of import they are both an abomination and, perhaps less importantly, an offense to the intellect...

But again, for now they are here to stay and at least down here being expanded.  So my question here is, would you rather have someone doing it that is fair, unbiased and doesn't play the inconclusive game; or would you rather have people running these test that can't follow their own bylaws, will lie, libel and slander their own kind and most of all abuse the INC call?

Again, numbers speak for themselves

WHO REALLY IS JPCOT?  TRUTH COMING SOON

UPDATE

I know I promised a video entitled "WHAT IS JPCOT AND WHO ARE THEY," and I have not been ignoring that promise.

However, documentation has just recently come into my possession that has put the finalizing of that on hold till the end of the month when I go to South Texas and confirm the veracity of said documentation from the confidential source.

If this document is verified, it will blow the issue of JPCOT out of the water and identify recent committee members.  I am actually kind of excited about this because, if this document proves to be true, it will be the first verifiable proof of the existence of a JPCOT Committee in the State of Texas after TAPE and its Lawyers denied the existence of during the lawsuit in 2008.  To see it on paper is one thing, I want to see the actual email on a computer screen before I commit to this document because of the people involved. 

In accordance to the agreement made between me and the source of this information; if it turns out that what I have is as indisputable and undeniable as the gentleman claims, I will update the video accordingly, and the source will remain confidential. 

If I cannot verify the document, I will update here accordingly and expose the person who tried to pass off inaccurate information for the purposes of full disclosure and fairness.

Thank you for your Patience

Seemed like an easy find Joe. You are on the list:

http://www.texaspolygraph.org/JCR.pdf

Quote from: the_fighting_irish on May 19, 2015, 08:57 PMThank you for your patients 

Patience you mean...Freudian slip?

f ing auto correct

Quote from: Arkhangelsk on May 19, 2015, 09:24 PMSeemed like an easy find Joe. You are on the list:

http://www.texaspolygraph.org/JCR.pdf

No no no no

That is the approved polygraph examiners JPCOT list.

I am talking about a committee, people who make decisions on behalf of JPCOT.  I held out in my lawsuit that TAPE had a hand in rule making for JPCOT, and if a trial had happened, two TAPE newsletters were going to be admitted into evidence that in 2005, TAPE met to discuss changes in the JPCOT guidelines and therefore, TAPE was JPCOT.  See attached document

If I remember my responses and discovery correctly, TAPE denied that there was even a JPCOT committee after 1998. 

If this document is correct, it shows the existence of a JPCOT committee.  This would mean the existence of two polygraph rule making authorities in Texas.  The TDLR, which had to take over licensing and regulating the Texas Polygraph Industry because the Board of Polygraph Examiners could no longer be trusted to make decisions that put the State of Texas over their own personal conflicts of interest.

https://www.sunset.texas.gov/public/uploads/files/reports/Polygraph%20Examiners%20Board%20RTL%202009%2081st%20Leg_0.pdf

See bottom of key findings

Then another Committee with the ability to make rules that may have a direct tie back to The Texas Association of Polygraph Examiners as it appears, on this presently unverified document, that one of the members of this "Committee" is a current sitting officer of TAPE, and was at the time of the production of said document, and was an officer of TAPE at the time my lawsuit was pending. 

So, if I can verify the authenticity of this document, and I can find pleadings of TAPE denying the existence of a JPCOT Committee, TAPE might be having some questions to answer. 

Follow me now?

There are other possible implications to this, but I will save that for if/when I have verify this document. 

A couple names are kinda surprising to me, but one name is not shocking at all and I will take great pleasure in disclosing; as this person is directly tied with everything from 2008, to current.

Yes, I follow you now Joe. You've presented so much info recently, it may be a good idea to put it all into a cliff notes version so readers can see what your real beef is.

Totally fair statement ARK

but I just got back from my information gathering meeting.  Talk about a stack of info, emails, and all kinds of goodies.

Stand by for the cliff notes.

But right now, I need to consider how to best use some of this stuff and gather more info on guys named Young and Richardson. 

But wow, today was eye opening in so many ways and I now have evidence of how dysfunctional and totally mess up the leadership in the Texas industry is.

Stay tuned for some shocking info once I think about how to best use some of this, and protect some totally innocent parties.

I might be an Masshole, but I am not a fiend.  There are totally innocent people involved that need to be protected over me making a point.

As far as JPCOT goes, I confirmed the documentation and its authenticity and got more documentation as a bonus.  This is going to take time to put together; but not too much time.

Having said that, I will take your advice.

In the meantime, enjoy this lovely music interlude.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wb0Jmy-JYbA

Ok, I am kinda glad I took my time with this. 

There is much going on right now down here that is just plain interesting to me. 

Before I start, I know this post is long; and I am sorry.  Rest assured everything in this post has a reason for being here.  Doing it this way beats making multiple posts.  So again, please forgive the lone post, but there is a reason for it.  Cliff Notes Version of seven years of abuse and bullshit is not easy.

Anyway,  my beef, which I think I have made clear in the past is both simple and complicated.  The principals are so simple; right and wrong.  The Devil is in the details.  Belive me, I wish I could simplify this, but nothing is ever simple when polygraph is involved and when you threaten the status quo or the fiefdom like markets, there are people in the industry who live to make things more complicated.

There's only one thing that the general polygraph community  (outside the State of Texas) and myself find each other being basically the same page.  I have been told, up and down the ladder; "this is an issue best handled by the courts."  This is the beef that I have and the general polygraph community has about this situation; or so I've been told. 

I TOTALLY AGREE WITH THIS! 

However, at this time, I cannot file a libel and slander suit, as the statute of limitations laws have run out on all the clear actions on my end.  If I filed a lawsuit, I'd be doing so in violation of the law and therefore, the suit would be considered a frivolous lawsuit.  Also, all the actions which have been taken recently in regard to libel and slandering me through the spread of current incidents of misinformation, people have been hiding where the information came from. As such I cannot directly attach it to the other side with 100% certainty at this point in time. 

This is the difference between truthful and untruthful people.  Truthful people have no problems with being attached to what they say or what they do.  Untruthful people like distancing themselves from the lies they tell; and if someone calls them on their lies, they offer no clear explanation or evidence and simply try to drown out the truth with noise because they have little else to work with. 

So, this being said, if there is to be a chance of the issue being settled in court, the other side would have to file against me.

If they're so insistent that I'm defaming them, this should not be a problem.  So, every time I get on AP, I make clear and provable accusations that I can prove to be true.  When I do state opinion, I do my best preface it as opinion. 

Now, having said this; I can prove that Maria's a liar and a cheat.  She's a charlatan who sells a product, that her actions show, she has no faith in to clear her own name or use in her own life.  These are facts evidenced by her past behaviors.   

This woman is just a really bad person, in my opinion, with no moral character or sense of decency. She is a liar, a backstabber, and everything she says should be examined for the truth in my opinion.   I would suggest that no one take anything that woman says at face value; fact check everything.

This is how she and the people around her from TAPE work, and I base this off the past.  Once she gets it in her mind that she has a vendetta, she will say or write anything to carry that vendetta out to the fullest; weather true or not.  Bottom line, if you don't benefit her or stroke her ego, you are of no use to her and you are nothing more than someone to sell down the river if doing so would be more beneficial.

This is just a warning to people you don't know any better.

If you watch and videos all the way though, (yes I know they are long) and look at the supporting documentation, it is pretty clear that Ms. Hubbard lacks credibility and will manipulate facts to get what she wants.  Sorry but the evidence doesn't lie. 

When she is called out on her lies, the only weapon she and the rest of the TAPE leadership have are finger pointing, lies, and exaggeration with no facts to back them up.  That is how these people work.  Basically if you scream your lies loud enough, lies become the truth.  That is their plan of attack.

Honestly, I don't know how she has any credibility left anywhere.   If she will lie on an ethics complaint to a president of a polygraph association, if she will lie to an ethics committee or to a tribunal (I assume she stuck to her story), what is to stop her from lying in a court, or on some paper work? 

It makes sense, if you will lie just to hurt someone to achieve a vendetta, you will lie to hurt anyone if you think it has some benefit.  Isn't this something that is a core belief in polygraph? 

If she doesn't like what I said, take me to court.  Prove I am lying.  I wish her and her co-plaintiffs the best of luck.  After all, the private polygraph associations have said this is an issue that needs to be handled by the courts; I have just handed to her and to TAPE and all parties' involved fresh causes of action. 

So, I suggest Maria and TAPE leadership to stop trying to drag people who want nothing to do with the Texas fight into the Texas fight.  I also wish that associations would stay out of it unless they want to mediate an end.  If you can't be part of the solution, don't be a part of the problem.   Don't say it's an issue to be handled in the court and then take up the fight for yourselves.

If the private polygraph associations TRULY believe this should be handled in the courts (which is the advice I have been given), then I would hope they would advise Ms. Holden.... I mean Hubbard.... to do the same rather than drag them into this.  At this point, the private polygraph associations insist they want nothing to do with this; we will see if that is true when Maria files her next bullshit complaint about this post.

Basically, if they don't file suit against me, the issue must not be important enough to want to clear their name publicly and get satisfaction, so why should a private association take the complaint seriously?  Just tell them the same thing I been told, "this is an issue to be handled by the courts." Then don't get involved dragging whatever organization into the court battle.   I want to keep this in Texas if I can.

Fact is, I have BEGGED the private associations to mediate this.  Either they refuse to handle this fairly behind closed doors or they say they have no jurisdiction.  SO, where else am I to go?  I have no other recourse.  AP is the last place I can go and be heard. 

As to the general polygraph community who are flipping out that I came back here.  It is the general leadership and their attitude that I should just lay down and take it over making waves that forced me here because there is no other recourse available to have my grievances heard fairly and evidence presented that there is a clear problem in Texas; a problem that goes right to the top of the Texas Association of Polygraph Examiners.  If you don't like that I have come here, look at all the times I tried to handle this privately.  Remember how the issues I wanted to address fell on mostly deaf ears, or worse yet ignored over one word.  Look back at all the times I warned that this was the next logical step for me.  Then, look at the inactions or the way my grievances were marginalized and outright ignored.  Then look in the mirror and take some responsibility. 

better yet, look at the deal that was made between me and TAPE in October 2014.  A deal that TAPE went back on in 24 hours.  I wonder how much Maria had to do with nixing that deal?  No I don't. I already know.

Any accusations that this is where I wanted to go all along are bullshit.  Any accusations that I stir the pot are made out of ignorance or an outright fabrication if you look at the history between 2009 and 2014.  Anyone who says I did not make every effort to avoid coming back to AP, make yourselves known to me at APA so I can look you in the eye and call you a liar.  I don't care who you are, how long you been in the business, what you have done for polygraph in the past.  A lie is a lie. If you are willing to lie and you are important, that importance should be re-examined.  If you lie and you have been in this business for a long time, you need to be reminded what we do.  Lastly, you may have done important stuff in the last, but lying to yourself or others does not create a positive example for the next generations of examiners to live up to.

Everything I have posted up to this point has been for the benefit of giving them new causes of action against me if I am lying.  If this is something that needs to be handled in court, I am literally handing you people a written invitation.  What more do you want, an embossed invitation? 

All they have to prove is that I am lying.  Of course they could have done that with polygraph anywhere from 2008 to the start of this new year; but that ship has sailed and it's made for great marketing.

Here this will explain it better

What Are Defamation, Libel and Slander?
Generally speaking, defamation is the issuance of a false statement about another person, which causes that person to suffer harm. Slander involves the making of defamatory statements by a transitory (non-fixed) representation, usually an oral (spoken) representation. Libel involves the making of defamatory statements in a printed or fixed medium, such as a magazine or newspaper.
Typically, the elements of a cause of action for defamation include:
1      A false and defamatory statement concerning another;
2      The unprivileged publication of the statement to a third party (that is, somebody other than the person defamed by the statement);
3      If the defamatory matter is of public concern, fault amounting at least to negligence on the part of the publisher; and
4      Damage to the plaintiff.
In the context of defamation law, a statement is "published" when it is made to the third party. That term does not mean that the statement has to be in print.
Damages are typically to the reputation of the plaintiff, but depending upon the laws of the jurisdiction it may be enough to establish mental anguish.
Most jurisdictions also recognize "per se" defamation, where the allegations are presumed to cause damage to the plaintiff. Typically, the following may consititute defamation per se:
•      Attacks on a person's professional character or standing;
•      Allegations that an unmarried person is unchaste;
•      Allegations that a person is infected with a sexually transmitted disease;
•      Allegations that the person has committed a crime of moral turpitude;
While actions for defamation have their roots in common law, most jurisdictions have now enacted statutes which modify the common law. They may change the elements of the cause of action, limit when an action may be filed, or modify the defenses to an action for defamation. Some may even require that the defendant be given an opportunity to apologize before the plaintiff can seek non-economic damages.
What Defenses Are Available To People Accused of Defamation?
The most important defense to an action for defamation is "truth", which is an absolute defense to an action for defamation.
Another defense to defamation actions is "privilege". For example, statements made by witnesses in court, arguments made in court by lawyers, statements by legislators on the floor of the legislature, or by judges while sitting on the bench, are ordinarily privileged, and cannot support a cause of action for defamation, no matter how false or outrageous.
A defense recognized in most jurisdictions is "opinion". If the person makes a statement of opinion as opposed to fact, the statement may not support a cause of action for defamation. Whether a statement is viewed as an expression of fact or opinion can depend upon context - that is, whether or not the person making the statement would be perceived by the community as being in a position to know whether or not it is true. If your employer calls you a pathological liar, it is far less likely to be regarded as opinion than if such a statement is made by somebody you just met. Some jurisdictions have eliminated the distinction between fact and opinion, and instead hold that any statement that suggests a factual basis can support a cause of action for defamation.
A defense similar to opinion is "fair comment on a matter of public interest". If the mayor of a town is involved in a corruption scandal, expressing the opinion that you believe the allegations are true is not likely to support a cause of action for defamation.
A defendant may also attempt to illustrate that the plaintiff had a poor reputation in the community, in order to diminish any claim for damages resulting from the defamatory statements.
A defendant who transmitted a message without awareness of its content may raise the defense of "innocent dissemination". For example, the post office is not liable for delivering a letter which has defamatory content, as it is not aware of the contents of the letter.
An uncommon defense is that the plaintiff consented to the dissemination of the statement.
Public Figures
Under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, as set forth by the U.S. Supreme Court in the 1964 Case, New York Times v Sullivan, where a public figure attempts to bring an action for defamation, the public figure must prove an additional element: That the statement was made with "actual malice". In translation, that means that the person making the statement knew the statement to be false, or issued the statement with reckless disregard as to its truth. For example, Ariel Sharon sued Time Magazine over allegations of his conduct relating to the massacres at the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps. Although the jury concluded that the Time story included false allegations, they found that Time had not acted with "actual malice" and did not award any damages.
The concept of the "public figure" is broader than celebrities and politicians. A person can become an "involuntary public figure" as the result of publicity, even though that person did not want or invite the public attention. For example, people accused of high profile crimes may be unable to pursue actions for defamation even after their innocence is established, on the basis that the notoriety associated with the case and the accusations against them turned them into involuntary public figures.
Why Commencing A Defamation Action Is Not Aways A Good Idea
While people who are targeted by lies may well be angry enough to file a lawsuit, there are some very good reasons why actions for defamation may not be a good idea.
The publicity that results from a defamation lawsuit can create a greater audience for the false statements than they previously enjoyed. For example, if a newspaper or news show picks up the story of the lawsuit, false accusations that were previously known to only a small number of people may suddenly become known to the entire community, nation, or even to the world. As the media is much more apt to cover a lawsuit than to cover its ultimate resolution, the net effect may be that large numbers of people hear the false allegations, but never learn how the litigation was resolved.
Another big issue is that defamation cases tend to be difficult to win, and damage awards tend to be small. As a result, it is unusual for attorneys to be willing to take defamation cases on a contingent fee basis, and the fees expended in litigating even a successful defamation action can exceed the total recovery.
Another significant concern is that, even where the statements made by the defendant are entirely false, it may not be possible for a plaintiff to prove all of the elements of defamation. Most people will respond to news that a plaintiff lost a defamation lawsuit by concluding that the allegations were true.
In other words, the plaintiff in a defamation action may be required to expend a considerable amount of money to bring the action, may experience significant negative publicity which repeats the false accusations, and if unsuccessful in the litigation may cement into the public consciousness the belief that the defamatory accusations were true. While many plaintiffs will be able to successfully prosecute defamation actions, the possible downside should be considered when deciding whether or not such litigation should be attempted.

http://www.texaslegalweb.com/index.php?page=article&id=93

If this is the only way I can be heard fairly and have the opportunity to clear my own name against the defamation, slander and libel that Hubbard, Holden, Parker, TAPE et al have engaged in since 2009 that have damaged me, I will fight that fight. 

Moreover, I've been told that it is easier and less costly to defend this kind of an action than it is to prosecute.  Hell after the jury is done finding in my favor, TAPE may have to dissolve and other examiners will be broke after paying my legal bills and damages.

I promise I'll take it to trial.  Even if the case is dropped by the plaintiffs side, I will not drop my counterclaim.  I will make TAPE and the examiners involved prove up their case.  Bottom line, if they file, I promise there will be a trial.  I will let a jury decide who is lying and telling the truth.  I office in Dallas County and live in Collin; pick which jurisdiction you want to do it. there will be no motions of summery judgment, let's take it to trial and let a jury decide.  Talk is cheap, it's post time.

I also see this as a public service.  The Texas Public needs to know what kind of people are running an industry that is entrusted in protecting Texas's children from convicted sex offenders.  Sex offenders need to also know whom they are giving their money to also.  Are the people being tested getting a 100% fair, independent, and unbiased test?  IS that not our DUTY and obligation? To give fair independent and unbiased tests.  How can me demanding that be a bad thing?

By coming here I'm creating a public data base and repository of information that I have no control of.  Once it is here, here it will stay forever.  Kinda makes some people regret not taking me more serious privately huh? 

I know this is working already as I been informed that lawyers are asking for charts more and there is a movement to more carefully scrutinize what we do in Texas. 

I'll admit it, I been teaching lawyers on both sides of the fence how to score charts.  So I think both sides will be watching us examiners much more closely.  Sorry Richard, I guess the days of your mass inconclusive rates will be coming to a permanent end.  Sucks to be you huh?

Thinking of expanding this class to other areas.  NOTE:  I WILL NEVER TEACH A CLASS ON PERFORMANCE OF COUNTERMEASURES.  I BELIEVE IN POLYGRAPH AND LOVE WHAT I DO FOR A LIVING.  Don't mistake my dislike for a lot of the people in the business and their behavior for a weakening in my strong and unwavering belief in the product.  For me, I believe in the product I sell, even if I have given up on the people. 

Personally, I think everyone in the Tarrant County system should be demanding charts from Wood's and Associates given their past history with a large inconclusive rate.  Charts should be reviewed, past present and future to be sure history hasn't or won't repeat itself.   

If you are reading this and are a part of that 45% in 2008, I would consult an attorney who specializes in DTPA.  Sorry 45% inconclusive rate on a test that boasts 89 to 94% accuracy and reliability?  Come on, do you buy that?  Never mind, clearly you did.  What's sad is because this happened over two years ago, the records have probably already been destroyed.  I would love to know if mass inconclusive rates are still happening, but I doubt you'd get accurate numbers out of anyone because we are not mandated to keep track of that kinda thing under the law.

Also, did you know that Erick Jay Holden, Rick Holden (I am assuming this is Eric Sr), Clayton Wood and Robert Young have been enjoined from being in the presence of certain children?  (I can prove this though official court documentation) More on that later.  Seems interesting that people who claim to be protecting children are enjoined from being around a couple of them in the child's best interests.  Hmmmmmmmmm.  One can only speculate as to why, but I doubt anyone will give me or anyone else an honest answer given their history of lies and secretive nature. 

Oh what a tangled web, huh Clayton, Eric and Jay?

Hey Clayton, does the wife know you been enjoined from having an "intimate or dating relationship" with Maria, around her children between the hours of 9pm and 8 am?  Well, I guess she knows now huh? 

Again, it's not defamation if it is the truth, and this is a TRO, signed by a Judge.  Maybe you should explain what that intimate nature is given that you are not a family member of the Hubbard's.  Don't like what I said Clayton? Well to quote you form the TAPE conference in Fort Worth in 2008, "cry baby."  I think your wife may want to start asking questions about what was so "intimate" about your relationship with Maria.

She can always call me for a copy of the order....... naaaaa better yet, I'll just cut out the middleman and attach it to the post.  That's me, Mr. Helpful.  I wonder Clayton, if your wife asks you to take a polygraph to prove no funny business, my polygraph chair is waiting for ya.  Hell, I won't even charge for the test.  I may very well be the only way she will get a fair test as everyone else can say whatever you want them to and she would probably never know the difference.  Naaaaaaaaa, you would run from the test just has you have in the past.

Now a lot of people will say I have gone too far; I disagree.  These are people who have shown me no quarter in the past, why should I extend that same courtesy?  I give what I get. 

This is the choice they made boys and girls.  This war, at this time last year was private. Maria made the choice to escalate this to the next level.  I was nice and quite publically until this time last year, the choice to escalate was yours Maria.  You kicked a sleeping dog and the rest of you decided to join in thinking I would be too scared to fight back.

How is that working for you now?  How any of you don't see Maria as the liability that she is, well, it's shocking to me; especially you Clayton.  Maria's totally a liability to you at this point one would think.  I doubt your wife would be comfortable with you being around her now. 

How people don't see that there are some integrity issues here with Jay, Rick, Clayton, Maria and whoever this other guy is, is puzzling.  Am I the only one that sees an integrity issue with Maria and Clayton, both married people, and both on the TAPE executive committee, being attached to one another in a publicly filed document as having an "intimate" relationship?  Wait, weren't Maria and Clayton both officers in TAPE while my ethics complaint was being investigated, heard and voted on behind my back?  Hmmmmmmmm the plot thickens.  Not to mention that Jay was doing the hunka chunka with Maria at the same time.  Wow, depending on how one looks at this document, one can easily speculate that Maria has been plucked more time than a Texas Bluebonnet in spring from within TAPE alone.  Oh what a tangled web. 

Now, given Rick's previous history (https://antipolygraph.org/documents/holden-sexual-harassment.shtml) women from within the industry, well one can only speculate as to the intimate relationship there? Not making any accusations, just asking questions based on the TRO.  Everyone can make their own speculations.  But Rick, I am sure your wife may want to ask you what kind of "intimate" or dating relationship you had with her.  Did she know you were enjoined from being in the presence of children in those children's best interests?  Hmmmmmmmmmm

Personally, at this point, I am shocked no one has told Maria to knock it off with her little vendetta and hope the dog goes back to sleep.

I do think that simply letting the dog go back to sleep may be the smart way to go. One has to wonder, what else does Joe know?  What other interesting documentation does Joe have like emails that show Maria as a member of the JPCOT committee and emails within that committee that have statements like, "I think we should keep dialogue  within our group....."  Oh what the hell, I'll just attach that one document too, let otter people decide what to make of it. Who, how many, and how close are the informants who are talking to Joe?  Are they just informing on Maria or are there other players?  All answers in due time. The answers will be surprising and unlikely.  Rats ratting on rats, ya just got to love it.  There is always a rat.

So my suggestions to TAPE and to the other polygraph examiners who are pissed that the real truth is coming out, first look at Maria.  Everything over the past year in regard to the reestablishment of hostilities points back to her.  Then look at yourselves for playing along with her vendetta.  All I am doing is defending myself in the only way the polygraph community has left me.  Don't kick a sleeping dog and not expect you'll get bit.

At one point I was quiet, she decided to be instigator from the first conference last year to recent.  You know I can be controlled when left alone.  It seems to me, the X factor here is the person who just won't let go of a vendetta.  Is it really a good idea to keep someone like this around and in a position of power?  Think about it.

Personally, I think the best thing to do is to give the dog a steak and let the dog go back to sleep.  But oh how Maria loves to kick. 

But for now, it is time the public know what kind of people are running the polygraph industry in Texas.  They are the kind of people who cover up threatening and racist emails from a member of their own Board of Directors.  People who refuse to follow their own bylaws.  The kind of people who have an interest in protecting one another and their messed up relationships they have with one another internally.  People who use lies, intimidation, treats of harm, sexually harassing and racist anonymous emails, false allegations, set up ethics committee investigations and fraud to silence a whistleblower.  Their actions, in my opinion, show them to be people of questionable character and little to no integrity.  At this point, Maria and those involved will play the victim.  Fact is they're not victims; they're bullies and manipulators on a level that far surpasses that of the very people they test.

They will claim that I am the bully, and I hope they do.  Making this claim would be to admit that this group of Big Bad Texans is being pushed around and picked on by one Yankee Masshole.  Wow, doesn't that get your
"Big Bad Texan Membership" Card taken away from you?  So go ahead, make that claim.  That one man is picking on all of you and that you are all victims of one Masshole in the middle of TEXAS.  Oh that would be awesome.  Talk about an ego boost.  One Masshole Yankee made a bunch of Texans scatter like roaches on Texas soil.  WOW!  I guess the truth is in fact a mighty weapon, and the pen is indeed mightier than the sword. 

Hey I have an idea, lets do this.  HONESTY GAME!!!!!!

Is there any polygraph examiner on this message board (and I know there are a lot of you), that is willing to log in under your real name and admit that you have a 45% inconclusive rate or defend a 45% inconclusive rate?  Remember, log in under your REAL name.  Don't be a coward and hide behind a screen name.  What about you Maria, I know you are obsessively checking this, defend the 45% inconclusive rate of Clayton's company.........  What about you Clayton, some of this 45% inconclusive of the 91% of Tarrant County Offenders are yours; defend it.  Anyone? Explain why 45% inconclusive of 91% of an entire market is acceptable? 

See, if I'm lying, there is another cause of action Clayton and Richard.  Call Ned, I'm sure he would love to have in on this.  I'll by the coffee and donuts.  I promise to be kinder and more reasonable this time Ned.  Well, at least till everyone else starts being difficult. 

I can't wait for my day in court.  I feel pretty good with a jury with the evidence I have.  SO you feel good with the lies you guys have?

From 2009 to 2014, I have played by the status quo that TAPE, Hubbard, Holden, Parker, Sheppard, Ervin et al set.  TAPE and Ms. Hubbard made me realize last year that the status quo can be changed at any point they wish and that I was being held to their lies and vicious libel and slander at their will and pleasure.

NO MORE

I'm changing the status quo to the truth; and they HATE that.  So much so, that instead of letting the law handle this or resolving and fixing the problem behind closed doors, they will no doubt use internal, non public hearings where they have the advantage because

1, The polygraph community lacks the courage to call the liars to the plate because to do so would mean they would have to admit that the golden children in polygraph are not so shinny.

2, The polygraph community would rather take the path of least resistance and silence me to ostracism than actually listen to me and look at the evidence.  After all, best way to silence the truth is to bury it instead of looking at it.  This was made very clear to me over the years

3, They can make up or change the rules to suit their own needs and no one will ever know because it happened outside the public eye and the internal system lacks transparency and public accountability.

Thems da facts

I'm going to lay everything out, publically, document by document, fact by fact until they decide they want me to stop and they ask me nicely, and with hat in hand.  Or if what I present are lies, they can take the advice of national polygraph leaders and settle this out in court.  Personally, at this point, I hope they will want to settle this out in court; but I will leave the door open for private discussions.

Point by point, it lays out like this.

The Texas polygraph industry at its top and administration is corrupt at best and sick and twisted at worst.  There are people in positions and seats of power that lack moral character and integrity to run a business that is designed to verify the character and moral integrity of others (or lack thereof).

The polygraph industry in general is either incapable or unwilling to address or fix the root problem and is much more eager to make efforts to ignore, marginalize, or silence the whistle blower rather than examine and fix the real issue.  This must be fixed. 

There is no system in place to hold state organizations accountable or responsible when their own bylaws are ignored or tossed out the window.  There is no internal process in place to assure that ALL are given equal protect under industry bylaws and that said bylaws are followed in regard to giving those accused of ethics violations due process as it is spelled out in bylaws.  Again, it is easier to make up the rules as they go along or ignore bylaws, which were put in place to protect the accused as much as those making accusations.

They polygraph industry scoffs at the idea of using the very test it holds out to be anywhere from 89 to 94% accurate and reliable to settle issues within the industry before the issues get out of hand.  (something I have been asking for since 2008 and the other examiners involved have actively run away from)

If we are to be a credible and trusted industry, we need to do a better job of earning that trust and credibility. 

This industry (in Texas) must be free of the "gatekeeper" mentality, which has been SOP in Texas for years.  It is a mentality that got the Board of Polygraph Examiners taken away from us and put in the hands of TDLR.  Of this there can be no doubt as the Sunset Commission has clearly reported that that Board has made decisions that was in direct conflict with the people of Texas and in their own self benefit.  Even the Sunset Commission in Texas implied the Texas Polygraph Industry corrupt by documenting that decisions were made in the best interests of Board members over The People of Texas.  Sorry people, these are the facts.

The days of 45% inconclusive rates have to go, PERIOD.  Also, I feel it is in the best interests of the polygraph industry to investigate that 45% inconclusive rate and make sure that it is not an ongoing problem.  Sorry a 45% inconclusive rate is unacceptable by any scientific standard, especially when the community in general boasts a 89 to 98% accuracy and reliability rate.  If you disagree, log in under your own name and tell me why it's acceptable if you are man or woman enough to do so.

Lying on or making material misstatements on an ethics committee complaint, or to an ethics committee, or to a tribunal should not be tolerated and should be punished by public reprimand.

An Ethics Committee lying on a report should be harshly condemned and the guilty party should be expelled from every Association for which that person has affiliation.  Zero Tolerance.

Any executive committee or board of director caught intentionally not following bylaws should be publically reprimanded and removed from office.  Zero Tolerance.

Sorry, polygraph leadership should be held to a higher standard, as they should know better.

Improper relationships within the industry should not be tolerated.  From what I see, there is some sick shit happening here in Texas, within the executive committee of TAPE.  This is evidenced in the TRO filed in Huntsville.  I just love how there is no denying court documents. 

We need to be an industry that should treat others on the level and our actions be square with the character our business is supposed to promote.

All I'm trying to do is inspire ethical conduct in the polygraph industry in the only way that they have left me to do so.  This is the game the Texas polygraph industry has laid out

I believe in the product I sell, so much that I bet my future on it.  Has any other examiner ever done that publically?  If you are an examiner, would you put your own career on the line with the very test you sell?  If so, log in under your real name and be man or woman enough to declare it publically like I have.  If you can't or won't, you have no place to judge me, and you need to examine why you would sell a product you don't believe in to use yourself.  You should also consider you to be a thief, as every dollar you take, you are stealing from someone you consider a sucker.  Lastly, if you don't believe in the product you sell enough to put your life on the line with it when the chips are down, then go look in the mirror and tell yourself "I am a failure and a charlatan."  Because, in my opinion, that is what you are.   SHAME ON YOU.

There is my beef

The situation in Texas, if true, is highly troubling to say the very least. If I succeed in my bid to become president-elect of the American Polygraph Association, I will set into motion a review and housecleaning operation the likes of which the APA has never seen.

I am actually hoping that the industry will do the right thing and hear me out privately mediate and address the issues long before the next election and before things get way out of hand. 

Ya know, I wonder what ATSM has to say about huge inconclusive rates and a lack of examiner oversight, as well as the appearance of improprieties and a lack adherence to TAPE's own bylaws within it's leadership. 

Also I think ATSM needs to look into the blacklisting of people within our own industry over a simple feud between individuals and the blacklisting of whistle blowers for improper and unethical behavior within the industry. 

I say this because now I am sure that Ms. Holden...... I mean Hubbard, will do doubt make every effort to have me blacklisted within every association she can.  I am further concerned that other associations will play along with the blacklisting efforts over examining my grievances and finding a solution and resolution to restore the industry to an appearance of inspiring ethical conduct over covering up unethical conduct and vilifying the person bringing such conduct to light. 

I did my best to avoid having to air this here, but frankly, this is the only place where I know they are paying attention.  I know for a fact that polygraph leadership and the named parties are obsessively watching this thread.  Now people are watching to see what other lies come out of Huntsville.  I have been told by more than a few people, right here in Texas, that they can't wait to see this go to trial in Huntsville to see who far the rabbit hole goes with the weird relationships exposed in the TRO.

The reviews in my email are mixed, to some I am a villain (nothing new there), to others I am the person who is doing something others are simply too scared to do.  They have something to lose, as from what I understand, I have been told the mantra in TAPE is "don't turn up like Joe McCarthy" 

They say this clearly inferring how easy it was to ostracize me and get me to resign with either an act of fraud, or a Board of Directors vote in violation of the Association's bylaws; no one will give me the definitive truth as to what happened.

Let me explain.  I was told in an email, from then President Stuart Ervin, that, "the Board of Directors have determined this has merit, this matter will be brought up to membership vote and there is no provision in the bylaws for debate."

See page page 7 of attached TAPE emails

Also see attached page 9 of the TAPE bylaws where it clearly states

"Members may be censured by action if the majority of the Board of Directors.  The censure will be in a closed session in the presence of the majority of the Board of Directors, the Ethics Committee Chairman (Andy Shepherd)and the member against whom such actions is to be considered.  At least ten days prior to this closed session the ethics committee chairman shall request the attendance of that member by writing"

It should be noted that Mr. Shepherd either intentional failed to send out that notice, OR, was derelict in his duty to do so.  Andy seems to not be man enough to inform me of which happened, and seems to avoid taking responsibility for either or, as an unethical coward will do.  Come on over and look me in the eye and call me a liar to my face Andy. 

Funny how the Board of Directors voted on such an issue in direct violation of the Bylaws huh.  Who, I wonder was on that Board of Directors? Lets have a look, shall wee?

Gilbert Capuchina
John Rios
Marvin Nowell
Clayton Wood

Stuart Ervin became president
Jack St John became vice president
Maria Holden.... I mean Hubbard. (I just can't seem to get that right)became Secretary

Now, Lets take a look at these names.  It's an interesting list, is it not?

John Rios, sitting president who said in this video "all he knows is whats in the bylaws, I had nothing to do with this" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ddYN2jbH0Ds

Well we now know, and the evidence shows......... this..... was a lie

Clayton Wood, a defendant in my 2008 lawsuit and can be heard in a video posted on a different string taunting me along side daddy acting like a brave man.  Guess it's easy to be brave in a mob who will protect you huh Clayton?  We also know that there are appearances of an improper relationship with Secretary maria Hubbard, who made it spear her plot to take out the "Irish Dumbass" with Jay Holden, who she was also having in improper relationship with.  Wow, one can speculate how she played her political game huh?

Marvin Nowell, who was Secretary during the lawsuit and made it clear his discontent to me.

Man seems the cards were pretty much stacked huh?

Now, when I asked John Rios, Jack St. John and Mike Chimarys About the Board of Directors vote, ALL of them told me, while we spoke at the October 2014 conference,  so such vote occurred.  Well wait, lets go back to page 7 of the emails posted on this posting.

"the Board of Directors as determined that this has merit and requires a membership vote"

How I wonder could this have happened, when such a vote would be

1, in direct violation of TAPE Bylaws
and
2, three respect members, and current officers of TAPE insist that this vote never happened

Curious huh?

Lets look a wee deeper, shall we?

When we go back to the email; an email for which is undisputed by the way, it continues, "the only way the vote will not be taken would be if your membership was resigned."

SO my choice was clear; resign or face a kangaroo court.

Now there are two possibilities of what happened here.  Either Rios, St.John and Chimarys were selling Stuart down the river rather than admit that a vote took place in violation of the bylaws, or, my resignation was gained through an act of fraud perpetrated by Mr Ervin that Jack St. John was in on as he was in distribution of that email in the cc. 

Wow, interesting is it not.

SO, let me call Mr. Ervin, St, John and Rios out here.  Which is it?

Did the vote happen in intentional violation of TAPE Bylaw?

or

Did Mr Erivin and Mr. St John obtain my resignation though an act of fraud? 

Cue Jeopardy music now

What about you Clayton? Did the vote happen and you voted to hang me?  And did you vote to hang me out of revenge because I sued you and daddy, or did you vote to hang me for your girl?  My phone is on big man, better yet, stop by my office in Dallas and tell me to my face.  You can bring a friend, bring a couple if you want.... cry baby.

Did you guys really think this was not going to catch up to you?

Moreover, how does the industry excuse of reconcile the unethical activity of either fraud or intentionally and willfully tossing out the bylaws of an organization?

Wait, in order to keep tax exempt status, doesn't an organization have to adhere to it's bylaws?  Ahhhhhh never mind, maybe we will let the IRS decide that. A nice little letter will be going out to them in todays mail. 

I wonder how ATSM would feel about polygraph examiners intentionally committing fraud on any level or tossing their own rules.  I mean if they will fraud their own kind or break their own rules, who's to say they won't do the same on a test?  Ya know, like calling someone inconclusive when they may not be or not following standards that assure inconclusive results are rare? 

Hey, just tossing some questions out there.

I truly hope that the big Polygraph Associations don't feel that this is acceptable behavior.  Now no one can ignore the evidence, it's all out there.  I would hope the APA leadership would never condone a Polygraph Associtaion acting in this manner.

Bullying
Fraud
Lying
Intentionally and willfully violating it's own bylaws
Inappropriate relations within the leadership ranks or relationships that set an appearance of impropriety or conflict of interest.

Come on TAPE, defend yourselves.  Rios, Clayton, St John, Hubbard I call out guys out.  Defend these actions, you are all attached to them, directly and in some cases "intimately"

I am calling you all out, right here; you won't talk privately so here is the only place I can do so it seems.  Tell everyone where I am wrong.  Deny those emails.  Deny your own documents.  Rios, deny that is you on that video. 

I'm waiting

Maria, come on, you wanted a fight; the fight is here.  Defend yourself....... naaaaa you're too busy trying to figure out who the rats around you could be.  The answer is not as obvious as you would think and quite shocking.

What about you St. John?  You tried to act like the tough guy last October, now that you been caught in your lies, and one exposed, do I expose the others?  One of which is in that group of emails.

My phone is on people.  How far do we want to go with me?  Because I am at the point where the question is not about how far am I willing to go? The real quest is, do I possess the constitution, the depth of faith and character to take this as far as is needed?

Answer, I have little to lose

Come on, ya'll ain't scared of one harmless Yankee Masshole, are you?  Well, it seems the Masshole has the moral high ground right now.

Kinda funny when you think about it, My name being Joe McCarthy and being opposed to blacklisting

Oh yea, one more thing for today.

John Rios is a detective for the New Braunfels PD.  Given what you see in evidence here and his proven lack of honesty in my youtube video, if you are a defense attorney on a case he has involvement with, I would seriously consider looking into everything he says; especially if your client is black. 

As president of TAPE, he condones racisim though the organization's continued lack of condemnation of racially charged emails sent by a board of directors member of TAPE.  He has been made aware of these emails and the origins of these emails.  He has also been made aware that a member of TAPE's ethics committee covered these actions up. 

I find his lack of condemnation of these actions as president of TAPE disturbing.  I further find his willingness to disregard organizational bylaws concerning from a public safety standpoint, because if he is willing to disregard the Bylaws of an organization for which he is the president, who is to say he won't disregard police procedure or worse yet, the civil rights of others knowing he will never be called to the matt on it?

You had a chance to do the right thing John, you blew it.

Quote from: the_fighting_irish on Jun 05, 2015, 02:57 PMkinda funny when you think about it, My name being Joe McCarthy and being opposed to blacklisting

The irony had previously crossed my mind. I'm still digesting your epistles.

I understand, when you haven't lived it, it is an awful lot to digest.

Having said that, I want to make clear again, I know there are a lotos people at AP who couldn't care less about this problem.  I understand that I am a polygraph examiner who believes in his job, and therefore it is understandable that there is little to no sympathy. I know I have less friends here than in the polygraph community.  Trust me, I came here knowing and understanding this.  I know I am just another examiner to you guys and therefore hated as much as you hate them. 

Fact is, if there is going to be polygraph, there has to be an anti polygraph; this creates balance.  I feel nothing in the world should go unchallenged.  Any person, institution, test, or procedure should not have that kind of unfettered total control.  I have found the human element of polygraph wants and likes the idid of not being challenged.  They like Asking the questions, but hate answering them.  They love forcing people to to be honest; but seem to, at least in the case of some on Texas, have a huge problem with honestly themselves.  In Texas, the leadership in Texas polygraph seem to want this to be a system of hypocrisy. 

What's funny to me is the people coming up out of nowhere with information.  Seriously, I have heard from a few totally unexpected people this weekend.  It's amazing the things you learn from people when they start getting brave enough to step forward. 

I am showing people that TAPE and it's little Board of Directors, Committee and the charlatans who pull the strings are not as bulletproof as one would think.  One could say that they are "the biggest pussies in the room, with all of the control."  Wink wink, you know who I am talking about in that..... "Hen" house? :-? Sound familiar anyone?  Might be something to think about next time you're thinking deep thoughts in can; just don't stay in there too long; it's wrong to keep someone waiting after all.

I have to do some fact checking and confirm a few things; but worry not guys, one would be amazed what one can find when one knows where to dig.  Better yet, you may want to be worried if I find the information, and it's true.  Because if what I hear is true, I may have more evidence of racism in the Texas Polygraph industry soon, and it will go up here. Not a good time for cops or retired cops to be connected to racism, especially in clear cases that may have had someone removed from important positions before.

Now, having said that, the person who may have been involved with that situation I'm investigating is watching this thread and I know that for a fact. A lot of examiners in Texas are watching to see if their name turns up here.  All I can say to that person is this, you have been warned that I am digging for this information; and if it is out there, I will find it.  I promise, it is not a matter of if, it's a matter of when.  Now, having said that, I have fulfilled my obligation to give you due warning.  If what I am looking for is true, and can be found, I have an obligation to allow you to opt out.  I would suggest you use my phone and govern yourself accordingly.

I have even gotten calls from people telling me more about one of my friends mentioned in the recent posts  that I will be checking into as well.

All kinds of conversations have happened this weekend.  Information and documentation is on the way in some cases, and in others I have to go digging.  The best thing about it is I know where to dig, and because their games, I have plenty of time.  Idle hands will always find a way.

If they won't clean their own house and reconcile their karmic ledger (so to speak) on their own, I will have to do it for them by showing the world the dirt so they are forced to clean up.

Joe, I agree with you about the hypocrisy. In my opinion, the polygraph industry is rife with hypocrisy. For example, the polygraph cheerleaders don't want anything to do with either a bill of rights for test subjects (alerting potential test takers to the risks, realities and limitations of polygraph testing), or any form of a countermeasure challenge.

Why the staunch opposition? Such initiatives would have a profound effect on polygraph's commercial viability.

If would-be polygraph takers knew what the risks really are, most would opt out of the "test."

As for a countermeasure challenge series, I predict about half of the CM ringers would beat the box.

Clearly, neither of those scenarios would be good for business.

BTW, Joe, if the matters of racism you spoke of turn out to be substantive, you might want to consider contacting Marisa Taylor of McClatchy News Service. Ms Taylor has successfully reported, quite extensively, on some of polygraph's troubling inside issues, so she may find your information to be of very high value.

In my view, the polygraph industry needs both a stern reality check and some serious house cleaning.

Daniel Mangan, M.A.
Full Member, American Polygraph Association
Certified PCSOT Examiner
Candidate for APA President-Elect

I am sure Melissa is watching and waiting to see how far the rabbit hole goes.  I am very sure of this. 

What shocks me Dan, these guys know what I have, and they know what else I will find that they can't hide.  I am shocked that they are not trying to stop the bleeding. 

There is only so much finger pointing and victim stancing they can do.  They absolutely choose to prove that they are people of good character and take some responsibility.  Instead of being men, they choose to be little boys and girls who want to play victim and blame someone else for 100% of their bad behavior getting out.

And these are people that are supposed to be bringing sex offenders out of denial?  wow

They can't help but to submerge themselves in denial themselves.  I have even given these people a chance to come clean to me in private where it would stay.  They refuse to look in the mirror and say "it was me too, I have some responsibility"

Even when I talked to Rios in October and asked him why he lied to me just months before, he couldn't admit that he lied and apologize.  All I wanted was an apology.  That is free and only costs a few seconds of ego.  Have any of them ever thought that once they tell the truth and take some responsibility, then I have no more reason to complain?  Once they tell the truth there is nothing to expose, there is no more controversy.

You people in Texas can't be this stupid.  Is't it easier to just fess up to it, say you were wrong and fix it rather then have me come here and expose it all? Really, I have to teach you people how to take responsibility?  Really?

Prove me wrong. 

Joe, history repeats itself -- first as tragedy, then as farce. It looks like these Texans are fighting their very own Alamo...

BTW, I misspoke earlier. The polygraph investigator from McClatchy News is *Marisa* Taylor, not Melissa. I have since corrected that post.

Ya know Dan, I can't figure these people out.  If I had been them, I would have simply fessed up on the lieguytoo thing and condemned his actions and racism as quickly as possible to take any ammunition away from me or render it inert.  There was an easy way to turn that into PR gold and avoid the PR nightmare.  Instead, even though today, they want to bury what happened and deny it ever took place.  I guess denial is easier than taking responsibility for their own actions.  Wait is that not a criminal thinking error of some sort? 

What's really sad is the people at the head of the denial are either current and former law enforcement officers.  Not a good time to look racist guys, just saying. 

Rios would rather damage his own credibility by protecting these people rather than be a real leader and stand up for the right thing. 

I also think Rios thought I would simply give up on my CEU's last year.  Fact is, it was messing with my license last year that set this off where I saw that these people were never going to let this go, while they expect me to let it go. 

Then in October they went back on their sweetheart deal I gave them, and that's when I saw that they never really will never walk away from all this because according to that deal, that is all they were required to do; walk away.  No admissions of wrong doing, no apologies, no allowing me back into TAPE.  The agreement was, I leave them alone, they leave me alone.  They were fine with the me leaving them alone part, but had a problem when it came to agreeing to leave me alone.  How do you blow a deal like that?

SO much for the "joe just wants a fight," argument.

Ya know what's really stupid, if they had kept their word and honored their handshakes, all the documentation I have against them would have been burned in a bonfire in December of last year.  Right now, I would have had nothing.  Morons.

Then Maria just had to keep poking the bear.  Didn't know how to leave well enough alone, so she just kept this whole thing going. 

I have been accused of being the person stirring the pot.  Yet no one is willing to look at the fact that the pot, water and ingredients in the pot all belong to TAPE and the examiners involved and then they handed me the stick in early 2014.  Between 2009 and 2014 there was no pit, no stick and no fire. 

I also find it interesting and odd that Maria's divorce was filed just a couple weeks after Maria filed her BS complaint against me in September of 2014.   Don't know what to make of this, but the timing is strange to say the least.  All in good time though.  I'm sure I will know everything all in good time.

Gotta wonder if Clayton Wood's wife knew about what was going on or knows the truth about what is going on between Clayton and Maria?  I have actually spoken to a few examiners in Texas who have called me in shock of seeing Clayton involved with something like this.  I got to be honest, I was shocked too. 

But not if you look at how the pattern of succession is in TAPE.  If old patterns hold true, either Clayton or Maria are the next in line to be president of TAPE.  Now, if one were to look at the list of names on the above listed TRO, one can easily speculate that she may be positioning herself (phrasing) for the presidency in a very special way.  Of course I am just speculating based of a clear pattern of behavior one can easily derive from her past proven behaviors and the recent TRO. 

Either way, one of them will be TAPE president by the end of the year and I suspect, it won't be on their "merits" as a polygraph examiner.  Sorry that is the appearance of impropriety TAPE seems willing to be ok with and accept.

But this is how polygraph examiners succeed in Texas, not by their merits or the good work they do, but because of who ya know or who ya....well you get the idea. 

Again 45% inconclusive is not an indicator that one is doing a good job; and examiners who run from their own tests that would solve what they claim is a "damaging" controversy is not what one would call meritorious.

And TAPE seems ok that these are their examples of exemplary examiners; worthy of the privilege of directing Texas polygraph into a direction of prosperity and the example of good character.

In the end, I expect the retaliation to start soon.  TAPE and Maria and the examiners involved will file their internal complaint because they know the industry will do more to protect them and thereby themselves rather than admit there has been and is still an ethics problem no one is strong enough to admit and handle.  It's easier to take out the person shinning the light on the mess than it is to clean it up. 

Watch, I predict that I will be totally ostracized by this time next year, not because what I am saying is a lie; but because what I am saying is the truth.

They can't help themselves

I wonder why this happened?  Actually, that was a rhetorical question, I know why; but all in due time. 


"TO THE SENATE OF THE SEVENTY-NINTH LEGISLATURE, REGULAR SESSION:
On January 18, 2005, I submitted the name of Kelly B. Hendricks of Humble for appointment to the Polygraph Examiners Board for a term to expire June 18, 2009.
I hereby withdraw her (sic) nomination for this board and request that the Senate return this appointment to me.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/Rick Perry Governor"

http://www.journals.senate.state.tx.us/sjrnl/79r/pdf/sj02-16-f.pdf

On a more positive note; there is no better experience in the world than performing a polygraph and knowing that the test you just performed helped that person enter the next chapter in their lives.  Every once and a while, polygraph helps people in a positive way.

It's not all negativity and interrogation

Quote from: the_fighting_irish on Jun 07, 2015, 02:32 PMI know I am just another examiner to you guys and therefore hated as much as you hate them. 

Not so Joe. This forum has matured in recent years; there is very little hate expressed. I personally am here to engage in a lively debate and I'm not entrenched on either side. In fact, you and Dan yourselves mentioned the idea of having a spirited debate with others in the industry. I welcome other polygraph examiners, their input is crucial and can add balance to the discussion. Of course, we have the ever articulate and deep thinking quickfix, but it would be nice to have a more robust industry participation.

Quote from: the_fighting_irish on Jun 09, 2015, 02:57 PMthere is no better experience in the world than performing a polygraph and knowing that the test you just performed helped that person enter the next chapter in their lives.  Every once and a while, polygraph helps people in a positive way.

Joe -

       I'm not being a smart alec, but am very sincerely asking how it can help a person in a positive way ?  I'll I've seen is tragedy.  People who pass seem just grateful not to be falsely accused of something. 

[/quote]Not so Joe. This forum has matured in recent years; there is very little hate expressed. I personally am here to engage in a lively debate and I'm not entrenched on either side. In fact, you and Dan yourself mentioned the idea of having a spirited debate with others in the industry. I welcome other polygraph examiners, their input is crucial and can add balance to the discussion. Of course, we have the ever articulate and deep thinking quick fix, but it would be nice to have a more robust industry participation.[/quote]

It will never happen on this string, and if it does, no one will attach their real name to it.  How are they going to argue with facts, documents, and irrefutable proof?  They haven't been willing to up to this point.  Polygraph examiners, especially those in Texas have avoided this issue for years. They don't have the balls to come to my office to talk to me, they lack the guts to talk to me on the phone, I would be willing to bet they don't even have the guts to talk to me on their own ground at a TAPE meeting. 

Fact is, not a one of them is man enough to look me in the eye and have an honest discussion with me.  Fact is, even if they did talk to me, they would avoid giving an honest and clear answer on the record to reasonable questions. 

I have lost all faith that these people are willing to protect their own integrity, much less have a debate or even a conversation.  They are unwilling to discuss or settle issues where there are clear acts of unethical activities in private, despite what they say or might say, I have tried before I was forced here.  Anyone who says different is a liar.

I have learned that the polygraph industry is about two things, money and power.  Examiners who truly believe in what we do are few and far between. Those who do, are afraid to stand up and demand that we look into real ethical issues. It is more important to punish a person for bring the issues to light; even when he has tried to address the issues privately before going public only to have the issues ignored or marginalized. 

I know the industry will never want to settle this issue.  I also know the Texas Examiners will hold the 2008 grudge forever; all while they tell me to "get over it and move on."  Fact is, the only one who tried to move on, has been me.  Again, I would love to have someone tell me different to my face so I cannot only call that person a liar or miss-informed; then prove it to them. 

Fact is, I just want to sit in my office, work for my clients, go to my CEU's and be left the hell alone.  I want to make a living honestly.  Believe it or not, I want them to make a living.  I sell a good product at a fair price.  They sell what they tell people is a good product and claim it is a fair price.  I want to earn my work, they feel they are entitled to it because they've been here longer and as such don't have to earn it. 

Last year I saw that this will never be truly behind me because no one in Texas will put it behind them.  They will always find a new way to try to kick me out or be a thorn in my side; even when I capitulate.  This doesn't happen because I was wrong, it happens because I know the truth.  That is why I am a danger to TAPE and the examiners involved.  They are scared that one day, someone will actually listen.  Essentially, the truth is like kryptonite to TAPE. 

So rather then be a doormat or punching bag, I decided to just plain expose the truth.  Basically, they can't do anything more to me than they already have.  I have nothing to lose and everything to gain.  And now I have put them on notice.

If TAPE and the examiners involved plan to compete with me by using lies, slander, and libel; I will compete using the truth.

If they have a problem with it, APA and others on the national scene said this is an issue for the courts and they have no jurisdiction; so get a lawyer and lets dance.  Call Tiger, file and we can start discovery ASAP. 

Otherwise, if this is going to be a pissing contest and you don't want to go behind closed doors, the fight will happen here.  This is the battle ground the industry has chosen, I tried to keep it away from here.  This is not my chosen battle ground.  I'd rather fight this at APA or NPA with people who have an interest in this Texas bullshit ending once and for all.  It is TAPE who will keep this fight going, just as they did last year.  This can stop anytime you people want.  This time, I am not backing down and I am not surrendering just for the sake of peace like I was willing to do October of last year.

Again, don't kick a sleeping dog and not expect to get bit.  Sometimes the best thing to do is give the dog a steak and hope it goes back to sleep.

Quote
Joe -

       I'm not being a smart alec, but am very sincerely asking how it can help a person in a positive way ?  I'll I've seen is tragedy.  People who pass seem just grateful not to be falsely accused of something. 

I don't think you are being rude at all.  All I can say is today, someone has a new start, and that makes me feel like I did something.  It's a feeling that escapes me sometimes because of all the other noise with all the other issues. 

Positive things happen with polygraph all the time.  Just like me getting wrapped up in the pessimism that surround me from fighting the liars and charlatans here in Texas; it is hard for you guys to see the good work polygraph does sometimes because you don't see the forest beyond the trees.

Sometimes the guy does get the job, or gets a professional license to start a new chapter, or someone coming to this country to be free of fear of being tortured or killed because of race creed or political belief who just wants a life that never got started.  Sometimes polygraph does catch the bad guy.  Sometimes polygraph does set the good guy free. 

Think about it for a minute. Would I have offered myself up to the test myself and put my whole life on the line based on the result if I didn't believe that this test can exact positive change?  There is a polygraph examiner in the world who publicly was willing to sit for the very test I expect other people to sit for.  Is it not enough for you that there is at least one example who is willing to lead by example?

How is this not a positive thing?  See, polygraph is not all negative and traps.

It felt good to take a few minutes and just be proud that this test procedure may have just helped someone look at the end of the tunnel and not think the light at the end was a freight train.  I got to tell you, that one test means more to me than five tests any other examiner in DFW did today.  Would the money be better if I had the five tests today, yea; but not at the expense of forgetting that I fought to get here.  Because of that, someone got a fair test and a fresh start.

That kind of feeling trickles down to other things.  I just wanted to say something here so when I read this in a couple years, I will remember there were times I wasn't always cynical and on guard. 

Sadly, it's something that passes quickly; because I realize that when I get too positive and optimistic, that is when some people decide I am at my weakest and take advantage.

Over the years I have had to adjust.  I wouldn't say I became heartless, I just learned to use me heart less.  So when I get a reminder that I still have one, I try to take advantage of it and enjoy the moment thinking that maybe everything will turn out ok. 

Then I realize where I am and who I have to deal with in this town. 

I agree with Joe, that, under the right circumstances, good things can stem from a polygraph exam.

But there's a hell of a lot of victimization that occurs in the polygraph field every day.

Such victimization could be dramatically curtailed if there existed a bill of rights for potential examinees alerting them to the risks, realities and limitations of the "test."

The polygraph industry wants nothing to do with that concept.

Similarly, the industry continues to avoid any type of substantive countermeasure challenge.

What kind of message does that send?

Meanwhile, polygraph's self-appointed intelligentsia --mainly the loyalist industry geeks, technocrats and statistical alchemists behind the public relations campaign promoting polygraph validity -- fortify their insular, make-believe world with claims that manage to escape vigorous scientific scrutiny, yet bamboozle a surprising number of people who outwardly appear smart enough to know better.

But those willing and gullible consumers, such as sexual offender treatment providers, *want* to believe in polygraph. That makes a big difference.

Joe's right about another thing... The polygraph industrialists will never appear on this forum to honestly discuss the heavy issues -- be they political, academic or otherwise -- in a meaningful way.

That in itself pretty much says it all.

Of course, all of this is just the humble opinion of one lowly polygraph operator who's trying to effect change.

Daniel Mangan, M.A.
Full Member, American Polygraph Association
Certified PCSOT Examiner
Candidate for APA President-Elect

I'm grateful that Joe and Dan are in the polygraph business.  I wish that I had encountered guys like them during my tribulations.  Please keep pushing guys.  You seem to represent the best way forward. 

To me, the best solution is not to make the polygraph the panacea of truth.  If someone flunks the drug use question, for example, then put that part of their lives under a microscope.  If nothing further is revealed in the BI, then DROP IT !  Today's powers to be say that it costs too much money to consider a man's (or woman's) hard earned reputation.  I think our founding father's would have said, "spend the extra money and find some other way to save $" I also dispute the lame excuse that a focused BI would cost more money. As a former investigator I can also attest to the fact that it is next to impossible to ascertain how much money would actually be spent by going the extra mile.  Government employee investigators and most contractors are salaried employees.  I don't recall money ever being an issue on an investigation.  No one ever said to me, "Good job, we've pretty much solved this case but now we must close it because we've spent too much money on it".  That is, in essence, what happens when someone has completed all processing and then gets bumped from a job strictly because of the polygraph with no follow-up investigation. 

Please google the following:
AMERICAN POLYGRAPH ASSOCIATION - MODEL POLICY

The link is:
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CB8QFjAAahUKEwiLu5jw3oXGAhXIGKwKHaRRAJQ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.polygraph.org%2Ffiles%2FModel_Policy_for_Law_Enforcement-Public_Services_Pre-Employment_Screening_Examinations.doc&ei=7X94VcuQIMixsAWko4GgCQ&usg=AFQjCNF0itWZeGNtF34-AP9-kpnDbD1m-Q

and you will find the following:
3.3      Polygraph test results should never be used as the sole basis for the selection or rejection of a law-enforcement or public-service applicant.

In all fairness, 2008, was my fault by coming here.  Plain and simple.  2008 was nothing but anger that started from the fist day in that courtroom when some of the other examiners made it personal.  Looking back at that, I think they were looking and poking me for a certain reaction, and I at a weak and fragile point in my life where  I gave them the reaction they were looking for.  Well,  except the predictions that I would harm my self or others.  I am sure there are people disappointed I didn't do that.  Sick fucks as they are.  Then, with the help of some of the minions on PP just kept pushing the buttons that frankly I let them push.

I have no one to blame for that but myself.  They all egged me on, they all pushed the buttons; but it's a two way street, I shouldn't have let them get to me. 

The first time I came here, ok, that is on my tab.  Doesn't matter that I didn't know about PP, I came here, I have to own it, it is what it is, it happened.

Coming here this time, that is on the industries tab.  I was pushed here, I even warned people it would come to this.  No one cared.  So, my hands are clean on this one.  I am just here to tell the truth, and at the end, drop the mic and leave, boom.  I will let the consumer decide.

Problem is, the people involved here are entirely self absorbed, entitled, and they think they are bulletproof.  Some of them think they can put out a crappy product, like Mr. 45% & Co. and still get 91% of the business.  Not because they earned it, but because they feel entitled to it. 

The argument that the PP sycophants made that I was inexperienced and therefore may not be as good at their golden boys and girl are now irrelevant.  I get more pretest confessions from what Parole Officers have told me.  I have a lower inconclusive rate than at leafs one of the big boy firms around here. Finally, everyone that walks out of my room can never say they weren't treated fairly; regardless of the result.

Barry Cushman was right when he said on PP that "not all polygraph examiners are created equal."  Some of us are better and that scares the examiners who have been around for a while and haven't had to hunt for their food; so to speak.  If you go by Richard Wood's numbers, I am 35 times more the polygraph examiner than anyone in his worthless office.  Fact, boom

I would put my work up against anyone at Holden's office, and never look back.  Frankly I wouldn't even lower myself.  Based on the recent evidence out, the Holdens' have some integrity issues to work out.  But come of that will get worked out in a Walker County Courtroom, and I can't wait to watch that show go down.

I also call bullshit in stats argument that I should have handled it there or within the industry rather than come here.  Well, I tried that and saw it wouldn't have mattered.  The polygraph industry hides dirty laundry under the bed rather than took it in the washer. 

The real test of the Integrity of the polygraph industry is if organizations play into Maria and TAPE's efforts to ostracize or blacklist me for exposing the corrupt and dirty system in Texas and the lack of desire to fix it.  Because we know that is what Maria and TAPE will do; they are nothing if not predictable.

Come on, look at the things you say above.

Just follow me here I have a point

QuoteBut there's a hell of a lot of victimization that occurs in the polygraph field every day.

Here you are saying that everyone who takes a polygraph is a potential victim of a fraud.  Or at least that is my take.

QuoteMeanwhile, polygraph's self-appointed intelligentsia --mainly the loyalist industry geeks, technocrats and statistical alchemists behind the public relations campaign promoting polygraph validity -- fortify their insular, make-believe world with claims that manage to escape vigorous scientific scrutiny, yet bamboozle a surprising number of people who outwardly appear smart enough to know better.

Here you are saying that polygraphs "best and brightest" are charlatans and snake oil sales men.  You're calling them bean counters who cook the books to back up the ponzi scheme (lack of a better analogy at this time) that they sell as polygraph.  lastly you are saying that they are perpetrating a fraud because their numbers are cooked to look better than what they might actually be.

That is what I take from those statements. 

Now, assuming I'm correct; this is what you believe but have never really had a "smoking gun," so to speak.  You have never had any real, clear and convincing evidence, beyond the your experience and what you have seen in the past.  There has been nothing you can point to and say, "there, right there; there is the smoking gun.  Here is the evidence, I have it in their own writing, they are busted."

Not once, to the best of my knowledge have they ever tried to kick you out of the APA or otherwise ostracize you.  This makes sense, the things you say are of no threat to them because you have no smoking gun, so to speak.  You may have a ball bat, but no gun. So there is no need to silence you.  Anything you say, they feel they can shrug off.

I mean if Maria was truly concerned that the provable truth was damaging to the industry, how is speculation not damaging to the industry?  Why has she never filed a complaint against you?  Because you are not a threat to HER, the examiners "in her life" or TAPE.  She doesn't care about the industry, she cares about herself and the money that flows to Clayton and Rick; her "buddies."

Think about it, the only difference between most of what you say (we do disagree on some points), and what I say is, when I say the numbers don't seem to be adding up, I have evidence that there is a problem.  When I bring it up to the "powers" they shrug it off, then when I bring it public because something needs to be done, attempts are made to silence me or discredit me in the industry.  Damn the hard core evidence obtained from the examiners themselves.  "THE TRUTH ISN'T THE TRUTH.  OUR TRUTH IS THE TRUTH"

When you say there are funky and suspect relationships (cronyism) in the industry, it is laughed off. Because you have no evidence of impropriety that they can't say, "naaaa, he is taking this or that out of context."  But I come along and prove with court documents that there are more than "strange and symbiotic" relationships going on, oooooo no, Joe is having a "falling down" decompression.  Look out he is going to sling an AR15 on his back and kill off his "Texas oppressors"   The sky is falling, the sky is falling.  LMAO, that is still funny to me; what a bunch of chicken littles.   I wonder if they're disappointed that I am not the person they predicted?  I mean, come on, you'd think that would be a safe question to answer guys. 

I'm not trying to say that you don't make valid points; you do.  What I am saying is no one ever comes after you because they were never stupid enough to hand you the smoking guns you needed to show you are right about a few things. 

In Texas, they were stupid enough to leave a trail, arrogant enough to think it would never surface, and MORONIC enough to not leave me alone when I was quiet and didn't feel backed into a corner in regard to my future.

Again, if I had been just left alone in my office, my little one man operation would never had been a threat to them again.  They had me beaten down to a state of capitulation. 

I was willing and even eager to capitulate in October of last year, agreeing to all their terms and asking for nothing more than reciprocity. 

Wait till I have all that ready to publish.  The true colors of John Rios, St. John and TAPE will be clear then.  They are people and an organization that cannot be trusted to keep their word.  I base this on history and the documentation I will release at my discretion at the right time.

Anyway, like I said, the retaliation will begin anywhere between now and January or February of next year.  If I shoed up to TAPE for state approver CEU's I would be stopped before I even got in the door, or while their I will either be threatened, attacked or someone would attempt to coax me into a fight like Maria Hubbard tried to do in Vegas, coward that she is.

And evan, great post.  Problem is, agencies don't have to follow APA policy she it comes to polygraph.

I do think the APA has made efforts to put policies in play which appear to protect the consumer.  However, these policies are just guidelines and the APA, seems hesitant to address provable issues in the industry.

I want to be wrong and wish someone would tell me I'm wrong and why.  I am just calling it like I see it.  With all due respect.

Ya know, it's amazing what ya find when digging though the old files that were given to me by an old friend years ago when I was going though the lawsuit.  Back then, I must have thought these documents weren't very relevant pre lieguytoo.

But now they just seem to be another piece of the puzzle that independently verify what I am trying to warn the Texas Public about in regard to the powers that be having some issues with racism and sexism.

Now the documents sissy letter and sissy lawyer letter go together, as sissy letter refers to the lawyer letter.  Because these two documents were in the same file, one can only assume they are both attached to her.  I am trying to further authenticate that letter, but I haven't seen sissy literally in about 3 or 4 years.  But again, given the source of the documents, one document refers to the other, and the fact they were both in the same file, this is good enough for me to feel confident enough to post.  Authentication from sissy would just be icing on the cake.

ANYWAY, If you read the document, sissy letter, it is easy to see that the problems in Texas go waaaaaayyyy back and go right to the tippy top.  It should be noted that Kelly Hendricks openly admits on his website that he is the Chairman of JPCOT.  This letter makes pretty clear assertions that Mr. Hendricks was remove by then Governor Rick Perry for issues that revolve around sexual harassment and racist comments.  I am trying to get more information about this; but from what I understand, the sexist comment was something like "how does it feel being the only pussy in the room with all the power."  Would that be an accurate statement Kelly?  (I tried to give you a chance to opt out Kelly.  I followed my obligation.  You had an opportunity to avert this).

I am still looking for exact information about the racist comment, but I think by now I have demonstrated that I have the ability to find it.  Worry not, I will find it and when I do, I will post it if all this is still ongoing.  Not a good time to be a man of the south and a racist guys. Just not a good time to be "that guy."

On this note, given the information posted here, I call on Kelly to do the right thing and step down from the JPCOT Committee, You know, the JPCOT Committee that TAPE's lawyers said didn't exist back in 2008.  We'll get to that.

Anyway, Kelly, step down before I have the ability to confirm what is said in the attached document.  I would also suggest that TAPE call for the resignation of Kelly Hendricks given that I have already posted documentation that TAPE controls JPCOT to some degree or the other.

Do the right thing Kelly

Now as we can clearly see, women and minorities seem to have a wee bit of a hard time in Texas.  I am shocked that this is not a problem to the bigger associations; APA, AAPP etc etc.  As these associations seem 100% content to either ignore what is happening in Texas, avoid it by claiming it has no power or jurisdiction, or condone it by looking the other way.  One thing I have not seen or heard is any association CONDEMN these behaviors (racism, sexism, possible monopolistic practices)

I have been trying to tell you people on the higher level for years about this stuff and you have been ignoring me.  Now we have a separate account, someone not attached to me in any way, saying pretty much the same thing.  What do you people need to take a look at what is going on here in Texas, a burning cross?

If this is happening to other examiners, in outré own industry, what are the chances that race may play a role with pass or fail?  It's a fair question.  If they will engage in this behavior with examiners, they will engage in this behavior with truly no voice, the examinee.

I can say John Rios doesn't care, he won't do anything about it, and I have video evidence that I presented the lieguytoo racist crap to him; still no TAPE condemnation.  The Same condemnation Andy Shepard said in his grievance report said I would be entitled to.  In fact, The TAPE Board actively covered it up, the same way they will try to sweep all this under the carpet.  Because TAPE and JPCOT are accountable to no one.  They will ignore it and hope it goes away, because they know no one will call them on it.  Hey, it's worked before hasn't it?

Then there is the sexism.  Rick Holden with the sexual harassment complaint. The implication in the TRO in the Hubbard divorce that Rick is involved in an "intimate relationship with Hubbard, the very same woman that, I think there is pretty solid proof that Jay Holden, his son, was doing the hunk chunk with.....eww.  And now, another prominent member of tape, past president, respectable man in the community possibly having some sexual harassment issues.  Then there is Clayton wood the Vice President of TAPE and his alleged inappropriate "intimate relationship" with the same woman as "team Holden." 

Seriously, this is who the "experts" are in teaching sex offender polygraph.  On some level it makes sense I guess.  But with the rise of Female sex offenders in the market, it does make one wonder if sexism will get in the way of test results.  After all, if women in the industry have been treated like this, how will they treat women who truly have no voice?  Hmmmmmmmmm

Lastly, it is my understanding that Rick Holden will be making a presentation at APA on sex offender polygraph.  SERIOUSLY? With everything out there that has been documented...... ugh never mind....  Maybe the ASPCA will let Michael Vick do a seminar on animal rescue or the Brady Center will have Ted Neugent do a speech on responsible gun control  lmao

Ya know, it just shocks me that these people want all this stuff out there.  They know I have the info or can get it, they know they can stop this in a few hours.  Either they think no one will eventually listen, or they think I don't have the guts to take this as far as is needed to fix these problems in an industry that I love and care about more than they do.  At the very least, I believe in polygraph more than any one of them; their silence and refusal to be test has proven that hands down.

Oh yea, Hey Maria, look what else I found while I was digging away... Well just a sample of what I found anyway.  So much more interesting things to dig through and look at.

Apparently, at one point you felt the same way about TAPE that I did.  Now how about that folks?  Or were you just lying and playing Mark the same way you lied and played me?

It is nice to see you confirm that you have a violent side. And you have no problem with, how did you put it "someone would lose some teeth.... HA HA" for mouthing off to you.  Funny, everyone thinks I am the violent one.  As it turns out, the mentally unstable violent one is you, and by your own admission, in your own email.

So to all those people who believed Maria's "victim" act earlier this year, especially one person in particular, and you know who you are, here is the true colors of Maria Holden..... I mean Hubbard. 

See, just what I said there; by mouthing off about her, I should be concerned that she will knock my teeth out.  She already threatened me in front of a room full of polygraph examiners in January of this year.  Anyway, not that I am worried anyway. I have been toe to toe with bigger and better.... Well, maybe not bigger; but better.

Ladies and gentleman, I give you Maria Hubbard.  Potentially violent hot head and manipulator.

Her own words boys and girls.

Oh and for the record, Marria was 2005 Rookie of the year for TAPE, so I guess she was playing Mark.  I hear when she accepted she said she was a "force to be reckoned with." 

Well, Ms. Titanic, you have decided to go to war with Mr. Iceberg. 

Well, Back to the Boxes for me.

To quote your Prince Charming Jay Holden, "adios my coconut."

NOTE; not a reference to her "Mexican American Heritage"
It's Jay Holden's pet name for her.  Isn't it cute?

Cue sappy romantic music here


(http://texaspolygraphservices.com/yahoo_site_admin/assets/images/Cheaters_III.39113228_std.jpg)

Just think people, these are the "credible" people that are running the Texas Polygraph Industry right now; cheaters, liars, racists.   

Yup Texas' best, right?  God, let's hope not.

It was brought to my attention that I uploaded duplicate documents in an earlier post.  My apologies and it had been corrected.  Sorry for any confusion. 

I will also attach the same attachments to this one as well

Anyway, on the road to pick up some fresh documents.  I do so enjoy coffee

Talk about battening down the hatches.  Rumors are bouncing all over down here, including but not lilted to finding a way to have me arrested if I go to TAPE conference for CEU's later in the year.  Given the fact that most of them are cops or ex-cops, I have a hard time discounting this rumor as silliness.

The one rumor I haven't heard, and the one thing that has not been done is; not one person has either sued or threatened to sue me yet.  I have heard a rumor or two that people talked to lawyers; and no doubt those lawyers told people they have no cases because they have to prove what I am saying is a lie, and everything out there is proven though their own documentations or court documents. 

Now, when I heard the rumor (note, it's a rumor) that they would try to find a way to have me arrested; I have to admit, I laughed my balls off.  Because if the rumor is true, this is the best they have.  If the rumor is true, all they can think of to do is to trim up some charges on me because that is all they are left with.

If what I am hearing is indeed true, how pathetic are they?  This is the best they can do, this is the best they have. 

Maybe I might show up to TAPE just to see if they have the balls to do it.

They have been trying to keep me from meetings by saying I am not a member.  Here you can see John Rios saying that I couldn't go in last year in this video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ddYN2jbH0Ds

Of course he was lying, as it turns out, looking at the bylaws, I did have a right to be in there.


MEETINGS

1.      The seminars of this Association shall be held semi-annually at a place selected at each semi-annual seminar.

2.      The place of the seminar shall be determined by a majority vote of all members present and voting.  If more than two places are nominated, the place receiving the smallest number of voted on the first ballot shall be dropped from consideration and the balloting continued until one place, of two remaining, has received a majority of all votes cast and the place of the next seminar be determined thereby.

3.      In order to attend a semi-annual or any meeting of the Association a member of any class membership shall be in good standing.

4.      Elected officials of other polygraph organizations may be invited to attend the business meeting of the Association at the discretion and invitation of the President.  Non-Examiners or other Polygraph Examiners may attend a seminar for all activities excluding the business meeting of the Association.

Here is the link to their bylaws

http://www.texaspolygraph.org/ByLaws.htm



So it seems John lied on two more points in that video

1, that I was not allowed in the conference because it is for "members only and nonmembers are only allowed by invitations"

2, that the only thing he cares about is what is in those bylaws. 

Wow, it seems john either lies a lot, or what he doesn't know could just about fill up a phone book.

So which is it John, were you mistaken or were you lying. 

I got money that he never give an answer.

So yea, I think I may attend this year, even if I do fear that Ms. Hubbard might become violent or attempt to instigate a confrontation.  We all know how TAPE and Maria love ambushes and confrontations.  What do ya bet, someone will try to pick a fight.  I can tell ya it won't be me.  All I want to do is get my needed CEU's.  In and out, done.  Why should I have to spend more money to keep my license than if I simply go to a CEU class?  What gives TAPE the right to make me spend more money than I have to, just to keep my license?

If I were a betting man, I would bet that Hubbard, or someone at her direction will try to instigate something.  I'll tell ya this, if someone thinks I will instigate anything, they will be in for a long day. 

I will be amused to see if they follow their bylaws, or do they fancy themselves as the gatekeepers of the polygraph industry.

John Rios says he follows his bylaws, so this should not be a problem.


I will also be amused to see if they change their bylaws just to try to keep me out.  It has also occurred to me, if John had just followed the bylaws, none of this would be happening over the past year.  Just thought I should point that out too.

Here is just another example that TAPE doesn't gate about their own bylaws.

As a matter of fact, John Rios, broke his own bylaws last year by keeping me out of the meeting.  I wonder if I filed a complaint, would he be censured for breaking them?  Would an ethics committee even be empaled?  Hmmmmm

Anyway

Not a one of them have come here to defend themselves or tell me I am wrong; and they were so vocal in 2008.  I guess it's hard to say I am wrong when I can prove everything I am saying with their own documents.

Not a one of them is man or woman enough to talk to me directly.  None of them have made any effort to stop this in a reasonable manner.

Not a one of them has taken this issue to court, given the fact that I have laid a lot out and if I was slandering, libeling or defaming them, they would have clear new causes of action.

One a single polygraph examiner, has come here, under a real or fake name to defend their heroes.  I guess it is pretty hard to poke holes in the truth. 

I am waiting for these so called lawsuits I was threatened with last year. 

All the big polygraph associations said this was an issue to be handled by the courts and I agree; here I am waiting.  I guess what I am saying and exposing can't be lies, otherwise, why would they not make a court silence me?  Because they know they can't prove that I'm lying.

Quote from: the_fighting_irish on Jun 29, 2015, 04:18 PMI will also be amused to see if they change their bylaws just to try to keep me out.

I suspect that's precisely what will happen. I recall that in the aftermath of the Marston Polygraph Academy scandal (https://antipolygraph.org/forum/index.php?topic=3509.msg24466#msg24466), which came to light through an anonymous report and was substantiated through investigation but swept under the rug (https://antipolygraph.org/forum/index.php?topic=3509.msg25584#msg25584), the American Polygraph Association's response was to change its by-laws to preclude any future ethics investigation based on an anonymous report (APA Bylaws, Sec. 13.1.1.1).

Only thing TAPE would succeed in doing there is proving to me and the world that a whole group of Big Bad Texans are afraid of being exposed by one Yankee Masshole.  That is funny as hell to me.  A group that insist that the truth is important to them, yet they are afraid of the truth and the one, lone, Masshole exposing the truth. 

That has actually always been amusing to me.  This whole group of "Texans" who insist they are being victimized by one lone Yankee.  Doesn't that get your Texas citizenship revoked? 

Think about it.  They say they have done nothing wrong and that I am lying.  They have avoided using their own product that they are telling the truth, where as I was eager to do so and under harsh consequences are failure.  The Texans run.

I have told them that if I am lying, sue me.  Presidents of larger polygraph associations say this is an issue to be handled in the courts.  I agreed, so I restated my accusations, If I am lying, they have totally new causes of action that are only a couple months old. The Texans run.

I make an agreement with them that pretty much concedes to all their demands and I drop all I demands save one; reciprocity.  We shake on it, I keep my word in good faith; until the Texans thrown their handshake and word away and run.  If these people are examples of good Texans, then I guess Texans are not people of their word or men of honor.  That is what I take from their example.

If they change their bylaws, just for little ole me;nothing like admitting that I am a professional threat to them and that their only option left open to them is siege warfare. 

When all they have to do to end this is talk and end it.  TAPE will never admit that this was done in october.  They want to make me seem to be the unreasonable one.  Fact is, Like I saved everything from 2008, I saved everything from the past year. 

So I would be amused if they do pass a bylaw just for me.  All it would do is further cement that I am right.  I would be careful how I write it if I were them.  It is a fine line between reasonable and antitrust given that TAPE, according to its own past newsletters, pretty much is JPCOT, which regulates the sex offender polygraph industry in Texas and does so illegally because they are not a regulatory agency. 

I'm afraid this issue is still happening you have offenders who are willing to go thru treatment as required but the polygraphs situation is bias towards the offender where you have a list given to you by the court and your therapist and probation officer only wants you to go to Woods who give you some different reasons for you no passing every time you take a test even though deep down you know it's not true so yes we need to unite to stop this bias and unfair treatment against probationers who just want to do their probation in peace

Billy, speaking as a certified PCSOT examiner and full member of the American Polygraph Association, a reasonable course of action would be to have a contested exam reviewed by an independent polygraph examiner.

In the event that the original examiner refuses to release the complete polygraph test file, the exam in question should be considered null and void.

Please feel free to contact me for further information.

QuoteI'm afraid this issue is still happening you have offenders who are willing to go thru treatment as required but the polygraphs situation is bias towards the offender where you have a list given to you by the court and your therapist and probation officer only wants you to go to Woods who give you some different reasons for you no passing every time you take a test even though deep down you know it's not true so yes we need to unite to stop this bias and unfair treatment against probationers who just want to do their probation in peace

Here is the truth about why this is.  NOTE:  The evidence provided, is evidence provided by Wood's own lawyer, and the lawyer of what might be your provider.  So when they day I am lying, and they will, let me know.  Or better yet, show them the video they have probably have already seen, and tell them to look at the documents I hold up.  They may find them familiar

Anyway, here they are.  Please watch them all the way through.  Please learn the truth. This is why there are so many inconclusive, if he still played that stunt.

If he does, ask for charts if he does.  Because as you will see, Woods and associates have a wee problem with getting their crap right.  I mean come on, who has a 45% inconclusive rate?  That means almost half the time, they can't tell if someone is telling the truth or not.

Just as I suspected, Tarrant County still loves a firm that can't tell truth or deception half the time.  Way to have high standards CSCD.

Ya know what is even more sad?  Clayton Wood, one of the examiners responsible for this 45% inconclusive rate, is the President of the Texas Association of Polygraph Examiners

part 1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QF-hc2Qdy7g&index=9&list=PLfdmQbJ2BVYROwsBSdkO9eZDhyVvccFnc

part 2

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pUZLgljwZ4&list=PLfdmQbJ2BVYROwsBSdkO9eZDhyVvccFnc&index=10

This is the truth, from their own lawyers.  They can't deny it.  CSCD and your provider, are sending you to an examiners whose skills are, questionable, when you look at the facts in the videos

I would question the inconclusive results, and some DI results from ANYONE at Woods and Associates. 

Demand charts every time.  If they don't want to give up the charts, refuse to retest and hire a lawyer.  Show the lawyer the video.  And call it like it is, you don't want to use a firm that is at worst corrupt, at best incompetent; when you look at the facts in these videos