drugs and LEO Background Disclosure

[Anonymous]

Torpedo,

The problem with polygraphy is not with quality control and industry regulation.  None of that makes one whit of difference with a technique(s) that has no diagnostic validity under any circumstances.  In fact, the comedians who do polygraphy on television are somewhat less dangerous (more widely and easily recognized by the public for what they are) than those like you who offer some pretense of knowing what you are doing...

[n0mad]

"88" was easy to remember? You just happened to have thought of that out of nowhere, and it just happens to be the 8th letter of the alphabet, and also means good luck? Most people would have chosen their year of birth.

[John Doe]

The polygraph can be beaten.  I did it.  I did it without any training other than reading TLBTLD.  The polygrapher was, by his own admission, a retired FBI polygrapher and a current polygrapher instructor for the State of California.  Before my examination, he told me that he was trained in the dection of countermeasures and any attempt to use countermeasures would result in permament disqualification from State employment and from any agency that inquires as to my disqualification from the State.  I used countermeasures, and withheld the entire truth on some of the relevent questions; ie drug use history.  I passed the polygraph and I have been employed with the State for over two years now.  

Simple fact:  The polygraph can be beaten and beaten with very little training.  Nothing can change that fact.  I did it and I know others who have done it.  

Merry Christmas,

John Doe

[Torpedo]

Dear John Doe....either you are fibbing...or have been fibbed to!...While the examiner you spoke with may very well have been a retired FBI examiner....there simply is no such thing as "a current polygraph instructor for the State of California". That implies that he works (or has worked for a state sponsored school....of which there is only one.  While there are a number of schools in California, the only state- sponsored school is in Texas for the Department of Public Safety.

[guest]

perhaps he went to the Ed Gelb School of Bloating Your CV, eh?

Dear John Doe....either you are fibbing...or have been fibbed to!...While the examiner you spoke with may very well have been a retired FBI examiner....there simply is no such thing as "a current polygraph instructor for the State of California". That implies that he works (or has worked for a state sponsored school....of which there is only one.  While there are a number of schools in California, the only state- sponsored school is in Texas for the Department of Public Safety.

[Torpedo]

Guest, I certainly acknowledge that is possible....but wouldn't it also be possible that Mr. Doe is.......let me see now....LYING??? (not that anyone on these boards....pro or anti.... have engaged in that practice  before.   What is fair is fair.....you spin the bottle and it stops wherever!

[Anonymous]

Torpedo,

It's relatively irrelevant as to whether either Mr. Doe or the alleged "retired FBI polygrapher"  was "fibbing."  Mr. Doe's understanding of the latter gentleman's pedigree is rather unimportant...apparently he (as well as who knows how many other people) has "beaten" the polygraph with very little effort and training.  No one with a grain of sense does or will believe your idle claims that you and your colleagues are able to RELIABLY (not get an occasional admission from the naive through the rather arbitrary and capricious brow beating of large numbers of examinees) detect countermeasures.  If you really believe you can do so (yeah right!), prove it!

[Skeptic]

Torpedo,

It's relatively irrelevant as to whether either Mr. Doe or the alleged "retired FBI polygrapher"  was "fibbing."  Mr. Doe's understanding of the latter gentleman's pedigree is rather unimportant...apparently he (as well as who knows how many other people) has "beaten" the polygraph with very little effort and training.  No one with a grain of sense does or will believe your idle claims that you and your colleagues are able to RELIABLY (not get an occasional admission from the naive through the rather arbitrary and capricious brow beating of large numbers of examinees) detect countermeasures.  If you really believe you can do so (yeah right!), prove it!

I second this.  Torpedo, you can settle this issue of whether countermeasures can be detected right now by taking up the Polygraph Countermeasure Challenge.  It's fun, it's easy and it's simple!  How about it?  Care to put your money where your mouth is?

[Torpedo]

Skeptic, Annoymous...forget it....you will not twist this issue (or me) around...as is so very typical of SOME on this board fropm your camp (not all mind you....some ascribe to engage in worhtwhile discussions and others just take shots. George, can you see my point...I have no desire to PROVE anything....continually throwing challenges out will not prove anything.  I accept the fact that even if I did accept the challenge, and it were to come out in my favor.....there would be some who would say that it wasn't done right....so what is the point.  I will be glad to discuss...but forget these adolescent challenges

[Torpedo]

...and I can't hrelp but ask.....just what is meant by "relatively irrelevant".....is that anyhing like partially pregnant?

[Luther]

Torpedo, I do appreciate your efforts and time that you spend with us on this site.   You seem to be a gentleman and an educated one at that.  I do not understand why you don't seem to accept the FACT that many people do routinely beat lie detector tests.  I know it is easy for someone to post on a message board about a so called experience, but I have to admit that I too know of 3 police officers who have totally beaten their polygraph exams.  Two of the officers work for the Dallas police department and one of them works for the Plano, TX p.d.   All I can say is that this is the 100% truth.  If you choose not to believe, that is your choice.  The truth often hurts.  You should read all of the testimoials on Doug Williams' site.  I seriously doubt that they are all fabrications.

[guest]

Torpedo sure knows how to push the right buttons.  He posts once and at least ten of you feel compelled to set him straight.  He is just like a rooster in a hen house - he crows once and all you hens sure do cackle.

[George W. Maschke]

Skeptic, Annoymous...forget it....you will not twist this issue (or me) around...as is so very typical of SOME on this board fropm your camp (not all mind you....some ascribe to engage in worhtwhile discussions and others just take shots. George, can you see my point...I have no desire to PROVE anything....continually throwing challenges out will not prove anything.  I accept the fact that even if I did accept the challenge, and it were to come out in my favor.....there would be some who would say that it wasn't done right....so what is the point.  I will be glad to discuss...but forget these adolescent challenges

Torpedo,

Dr. Richardson's polygraph countermeasure challenge is hardly "adolescent." It is quite serious, and was first offered at a public meeting of the National Academy of Sciences' Committee to Review the Scientific Evidence on the Polygraph:

http://antipolygraph.org/nas/richardson-transcript.shtml#challenge

You would have those who visit AntiPolygraph.org to believe that you and other polygraphers can reliably detect countermeasures. For example, earlier in this message thread, you wrote:

...as soonas he is caught (and he WILL be caught) using CM's...

and

...I am every bit as confident that I will be able to detect most, if not all (if you care to gamble) of any countermeasures that you might throw at me.  My experience and attention to the training that has been provided to me and becoming knowledgeable of what countermeasures people can, and will throw at me enable me to take the position that I have and espouse the confidence that I do....

However, the fact that not just you, but no one in the polygraph community has been willing to accept Dr. Richardson's challenge (698 days and counting) suggests that you and your fellow polygraphers are not nearly as confident in your ability to detect countermeasures as you would have others believe.

The polygraph community has to date offered no evidence whatsoever that it has any ability to reliably detect countermeasures. Indeed, the federal polygraph community stonewalled the National Academy of Sciences with regard to purported federal countermeasure studies as it conducted its review of the scientific evidence on the polygraph. The National Academy of Sciences report notes at p. 118:

...we were advised by officials from DOE and DoDPI that there was information relevant to our work, classified at the secret level, particularly with regard to polygraph countermeasures. In order to review such information, several committee members and staff obtained national security clearances at the secret level. We were subsequently told by officials of the Central Intelligence Agency and DoDPI that there were no completed studies of polygraph countermeasures at the secret level; we do not know whether there are any such studies at a higher level of classification....

And Paul M. Menges, who teaches the Department of Defense Polygraph Institute's countermeasure course for polygraphers has gone so far as to suggest that making countermeasure information available to the public (such as AntiPolygraph.org is doing) should be outlawed:

http://antipolygraph.org/articles/article-029.shtml

So why should anyone believe you (and your fellow polygraph operators) when you claim that you can reliably detect countermeasures?

[Torpedo]

I see this as a circular argument....you will not relent, and I will not change my views.  I believe I can catch those who elect to use countermeasures....you believe otherwise....I CHOOSE not to take you up on your challenege...I recognize Drew's academic credentials, but he too has tired of the back and forth banter...that much is fairly evident to me.  My reference to adolescent challenges is the "put up or shut up"approach that your followers assume. I guess the best one can hope for is that we agree to disagree...period.

[George W. Maschke]

Torpedo,

There is no circular argument here. A circular argument is one that makes a conclusion based on material that has already been assumed in the argument.

Rather, what we see here is your (and the polygraph community's) utter failure to support with evidence your claimed ability to detect countermeasures.