Polygraph is a fraud

[Mr. Truth]

Next life, when faced with a choice of something stupid to do, can I pick something else?

[orolan]

Only if I can, too

I don't suppose you could tell me via private message what state your conviction was in, could you? I'll keep it to myself.

[OkieBoy]

To both Orolon and Mr. Truth,
Unquestionably, the polygraph is psuedo-science...a bogus tool used to ilicit confessions.
Now...let me play devils advocate.  I have sat in groups and listen to sex-offender after sex-offender who has failed his polygraph admit to more molestations or brutal, inhuman sex acts of that nature.  If it hadn't been for the psuedo-science of the polygraph, they would have never admitted these incidents.  Some of the gentlemen had their probation revoced and were thrown in jail, where I believe the belong (if they can't keep from re-offending) and some where given second chances.

If we take the polygraph away completely and say, just ask nicely these offenders if they are re-offending, do you really think they will tell the truth?
Where do we draw the line?
Is saving a little girl from getting ass-raped by her father less important that banning an un-scientific, bogus, piece of fakery like the polygraph?  

That is the question I ask, after sitting through these groups and seeing this.  For myself, choosing never to get drunk at a frat party and "whip it out", is an easy choice.  But it seems that poeple who molest can't seem to make this choice so easily, maybe because of some deep level of addiction.  Sure, we are violating their rights with the polygraph.  But what other interrogation method works?
What about those drugs that you hear about in Spy movies that make people confess to things?  Could we use those on violent sex offenders such as molesters?

-OkieBoy

[Mr. Truth]

OkieBoy,

I agree with to some degree about using the polygraph, because what else is there? Part of me did not want to vent about the polygraph because of the reasons you mentioned. On the other hand, if someone wants to reoffend in a big-time manner, the polygraph isn't going to do squat to deter that. The admissions I heard about in group settings had to do with contact (sleeping over at a girlfriend's house where children were present, alcohol usage, use of pornography, etc.).

It's a tough call, but sooner or later, everyone is going to find out what a fraud the test is. If you believe the test works, and you go in intentionally lying, and are scored deceptive, then you deserve to get whacked for lying or violating terms and conditions/treatment contract.

I happen to believe the use of the polygraph does more harm than good, considering all of its uses. I don't know what the alternative is, but if we as a society can settle for using the polygraph as a tool, why don't we take it one step further and use rubber hoses on the soles of the examinee? Obviously, that isn't going to happen, but that's the thing with rights, civil or otherwise: you always need to fight to preserve them. It's okay that we use this less than perfect (not even close to perfect) device because the payoff is we catch some people. Unfortunately, innocent people get caught up in and are needlessly punished or harmed.

[OkieBoy]

Ok, let me continue playing devil's advocate.
You said, "I happen to believe the use of the polygraph does more harm than good."
In the case of hard-core, habitual sex-offenders, the group that I mentioned it is hard to see how else they are going to be scared into at least trying to tell the truth...how can the polygraph do more harm than good?
You sound like you had/have a pretty decent group, but I have seen several hard-core child molesters confess in the past six months soley because they succuumbed (spelling?) to the psuedo-science of the polygraph.
Doesn't the end justify the means in the case of little children being spared?

-Okieboy

[orolan]

OkieBoy,

Is saving a little girl from getting ass-raped by her father less important that banning an un-scientific, bogus, piece of fakery like the polygraph?

No, it isn't. Curious what your opinion would be if you were falsely accused of committing a new offense more severe than indecent exposure on the basis of a failed polygraph, though. Would you sacrifice your freedom so the machine could remain in use to save the children?

Doesn't the end justify the means in the case of little children being spared?

Not always. Should we err to the side of caution and demand the castration of every labeled sex offender, to be sure no new crimes are committed? Some, like you, wouldn't need it, but we can't be 100% sure. So let's do them all. The end justifies the means :-/
I'm surprised that there are hard-core violent child molesters in your group. It is quite rare for a multiple-victim habitual violent offender to get a probation sentence. Most get a prison sentence and are then committed to an institution when and if they get paroled.

Professional therapists are making great strides in the treatment of sex offenders. Many of them, as I stated before, see no value in the polygraph. I know one here locally who won't even look at the results. She just throws the file away. Thing is, her success rate is around 91% in putting offenders back out into the community without them re-offending.

[OkieBoy]

Orolon,
Interesting question you pose,
>>>Would you sacrifice your freedom so the machine could remain in use to save the children?

I really can't answer it right now.  It is something I must ponder.  If I knew for sure that my freedom was weighed against the innocence of young children, then the logical answer would be Yes, I would sacrifice my freedom.  But the emotional, more human answer would be No.  Given the question, I can't truly say what my answer would be.

>>>It is quite rare for a multiple-victim habitual violent offender to get a probation sentence. Most get a prison sentence and are then committed to an institution when and if they get paroled.

My state doesn't consider sex-crimes, habitual or not, an "insanity" and so sex criminals are never sent to institutions.  Many of the gentlemen in my groups have served 20 years or so in prison and are on parole or probation.  Many of them are looking at ten to twenty years probation, with maditory therapy and polygraph testing the entire time.

And I agree with you that modern therapy has taken great strides.  Cognitive Behavorial therapy in particular seems the best method when approaching sex crimes.  But sadly, many cognitive behavorial therapists have fallen prey to the belief in the psuedo-science of the polygraph.

  

[Saidme]

Orolan

Regarding your comment about the therapist.  Where does she come up with the figure 91%?  How can she truly know whether or not her clients are re-offending unless they're caught?  Basically you're saying 9% of her clients have been caught reoffending.  The other 91% is not known.  Correct?

[Canadian Crusader]

Saidme,

You made a good point regarding the 91% claim by Orlan.  However you are asking a question analogous to one you have never answered before when asked.  Correct me if I am wrong.

How can you claim a cetain perentage accuracy rate regarding your poly when your only verification would be corraborating confessions or hard proof?

[Saidme]

CC

Precisely my point.  The anti folks use data and information to fit their own agenda, regardless of how factual.  I can only base accuracy on my personal experiences.  So when you ask me how accurate polygraph is, my answer to you would be:  it's very, very, very accurate.  I couldn't even begin to give you a number nor would I.  

[Anonymous]

Saidme,
  
You write:

...The anti folks use data and information...I can only base accuracy on my personal experiences....

We rest our case and checkmate, pal.  

[orolan]

Saidme,
I know the therapist, the community and its LE professionals, and have interviewed nearly 200 of the offenders.
So I'll stand by the 91% "clean" rate.

I can only base accuracy on my personal experiences

[LadyDarkflame]

thank you for the info, and also, thank you for the referal to SOhopeful.  I've written them and am waiting to hear back.  

[OkieBoy]

 
>>>I can only base accuracy on my personal experiences.

What Saidme said right there is the universal proof that all psuedo-science, spiritual, or religious claims are given as proof.  There is only "personal experience".
What does someone say when you ask them for proof that Jesus, Bigfoot, Aliens, or pyramid crystal power exists? "personal experiences."  No hard-core scientific studies or proof using the scientific method.  Just personal experience.

[Mr. Truth]

So when you ask me how accurate polygraph is, my answer to you would be:  it's very, very, very accurate.  I couldn't even begin to give you a number nor would I.

That's okay, there are those who will and have done that for you (NAS report, to name one). "Very, very, very accurate?" You mean, you can be more "accurate" than the roughly 80% accuracy rate of the software (using Polyscore as an example)? How can that be? Subjectivity on your part? Is that what allows you to pump out reports saying "It is the expert opinion of this examiner..." saying an examinee was deceiptful? Because you are so sure you and your "instrument" are so "very, very, very accurate," can you tell us how many people you've bent over with a false positive/deception indicated report?

My personal experience, which happens to be just as valid as yours, is that the polygraph is far, far, far from being very, very, very accurate.