scared

[George W. Maschke]

Polycop,

I for one decline the challenge you've put forth. Little of interest would come of it. You suggest that we poll at random 100 (post-conviction sex offender) counselors who use polygraphy at least to some extent, and ask them whether they would ever go back to not using the polygraph at all (assuming they didn't rely on polygraphs from the very beginning of their careers). In the survey you suggest, the outcome is foreordained: those polled have all decided to rely on polygraphy, at least to some extent. If they were of a mind not to rely on polygraphs, then they probably wouldn't be using them. So what's the point?

In addition, your proposed methodology systematically excludes all counselors who have decided not to rely on polygraphy.

And finally, while some sex offender counselors may find the admissions obtained from polygraph screening to be useful, their opinions regarding its utility do not speak to the validity of polygraphy. And we don't claim that CQT polygraphy has no utility, just that it has no grounding in the scientific method and has no validity as a diagnostic technique.

By contrast, the polygraph community claims to be able to detect countermeasures. Drew Richardson's thus far unanswered polygraph countermeasure challenge (215 days and counting) speaks directly to this claimed ability.

[Anonymous]

Polycop,

You write:

...There is alot [Sic] of noise on this site about the "unfairness" of post-conviction sex offender testing...

My primary concern with this type of polygraph screening is not that it is unfair (you win, it is ), but that it is completely inaccurate and has no business being masqueraded to clinical psychologists or any other counselors (unfortunately, many times lacking the scientific backgrounds to evaluate the validity of "tools" that are peddled to them) as a diagnostic tool.  I don't know and haven't discussed this matter with this diverse group of professionals, but am aware of one who has researched (and presumably will publish) the issue of the post traumatic stress syndrome (PTSD) that various polygraph examinees have suffered as a result of having endured the nonsense connected with taking polygraph exams.  I would suggest you double your professional liability insurance before that one is released.  

[George W. Maschke]

Polycop, Anonymous,

See also Kathleen Coulborn Fowler's paper, "The Polygraph, Its Use in Cases of Alleged Sexual Abuse: An Exploratory Study" (74 kb PDF). The following is an excerpt:

Results: Polygraph findings were unrelated to other evidence of likelihood of sexual abuse, that is to the child's statements or demonstrations of sexual abuse, medical evidence, psychological symptoms, or indicators of sexual abuse from sources other than the child. When alleged offenders passed polygraphs, criminal prosecution was not sought. However, failing polygraphs was not predictive of criminal prosecution. Decisions by child protective services to substantiate or not were not consistently related to any indicators of possible sexual abuse. Decisions by professional evaluators about sexual abuse were best predicted by children's psychological symptoms.

[Bnickell]

Now so that you know I DID NOT DO IT,  and it pisses me off that because someone gets pissed at you they can make allegations and put you in this situation.

Im 47 with no history of ever hurting anyone.....
Also as for her allegations in July here is what she was writing in chat rooms in may,

Session Start: Tue May 28 03:56:56 2002
Session Ident: Anna-belle
<Amber15> you ever been with your uncle
<Amber15> I need help
<Anna-belle> sorry, i never was, amber
<Anna-belle> what kind of help?
<Amber15> I want to try to be with him but hes doesn't look at me that way
<Amber15> he has cuctody of me
<Amber15> hes older than me
<Amber15> ive had sex with guys my age and a couple girls too
<Amber15> its hard to be alone with him but we go fishing all night
<Amber15> but I end up sleeping for 3 or 4 hours
<Anna-belle> slow down =) you want to have sex with your uncle?
<Amber15> yes
<Amber15> sorry
<Amber15> just thats hes working his baking job and will be home soon
<Amber15> im supposed to be in bed sleep
<Anna-belle> and who else lives with the two of you?
<Amber15> his wife and my cousin and his girlfriend and baby
<Anna-belle> that's like, not an easy way
<Amber15> I know
<Anna-belle> you want just sex, or love him?
<Amber15> both maybe

Bnickell

[Bnickell]

so you tell me, I have 12 of these and she does not even know she was being logged at the times she logged onto the internet.


anyway I have to go to work right now Ill be back later.
Bnickell

[jet-journalist]

To POLYCOP,
Just look up the case its public. The CID Agent asked him to take a polygraph. He agreed with no problems, went down to the DOD polygraph institute on base, and took the test. The examiner told him, YOU PASSED! He went back the next day to US Army Trial Defense and spoke to the TD attorney who told him that he was going to be court martialed. They refused to use the polygraph results. Now a friend of mine told me it was because this was during the time when all the drill sergeants were being accused and it was all political but then again, a poly should have cleared him if they are all that BATMAN says that they are. Now polycop is it right that he got screwed. i dont think it is, i think its not right.

[Bnickell]

No one knows my program logs chats, I owned a chatline for 4 years. My wife nwo was in singapore runnign it for me . If you own a chatline you have to be able to log anything that comes in private chat incase you have a problem in the channel. Then you can go talk to that person and log that chat too. It just saves you but if something is said and you have to prove it. I stopped owning the chat channel last year, I worked 2 jobs and had no time, it now belongs to someone else. BUT i never turned the logging off.  Now my neice used MIRC at her grandmothers before I got custody. She was on there all the time. After I got her she started talking on it again BUT she never logged in under her registered name. That is how I found it.

needless to say now I ahve some proof..

Bnickell

[George W. Maschke]

Bnickell,

How did the investigators looking into your neice's accusation react to your refusal to submit to a polygraph interrogation? For example, did they suggest that your refusal implies that you are guilty? If so, you might wish to refer them (perhaps in writing, so as to create a documented record) to this website, and especially to Chapter 3 of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector. Hopefully, your investigators are less inclined to make snap judgements of guilt based on the slightest of evidence than our friend Batman seems to be.

Moreover, I think any grand jury (that might bring an indictment) or petit jury (that would decide innocence or guilt) would have little difficulty understanding why an innocent person would refuse a polygraph "test," once they understand the fraudulent nature of the procedure. (Although polygraph evidence, or even the fact that a suspect refused a polygraph, is not generally admissible as evidence in a court of law, law enforcement agencies often leak such information to the press, which tends to cause prejudice against the suspect in the mind of the public -- including the pool of potential jurors. If your story makes its way into the press, to defend yourself, you might want to explain to reporters precisely why you refused the polygraph, and perhaps to refer them to AntiPolygraph.org for further information on this pseudoscientific procedure.)

[Bnickell]

The detective while he was taping suggested that not taking a polygraph my not look good.  Off the record and not being recorded he stated he does not beleive in them. But so far he is not to be trusted at this point.  Seems he has a run in with polygrahs before while serving in the US Navy a few years ago as I did also while in the Navy. He did say my neice wants to take one and he may sit her up to do so. I am positive she will prove me innocent. If it goes farther then I am hoping it doesn't I will make sure  everyone know about this site and the book... The Lie Behind the Lie Detector. While I am not being pressured into taking a polygraph needless to say it has been brought up at least 5 times.
This is the same detective who just last week had my neice call me while I was working to dig me for info to see if I will incriminate myself, as he said I sounded like a concerned father.

As I told him I'll never talk to her again if this is the game he is playing, he did asure it will not happen again. I have to be in Juvinile court Sept 5th to answer to allegations, I'm hoping the detective has found enough evidence to have it dropped.
IF not at that time I will be charged.

Bnickell