Sharing My Polygraph Experience

[uiop]

I check this board now and then and probably miss a lot of stuff, but such is life.  But since I stopped by, I have one question to Liebabycrybaby and gr8dad.  Exactly how many persons have been incarcerated due SOULY on the results of a polygraph in say, the last 20 years.  Gr8dad, provide just one example.  Liebabycrybaby, if he can't then please explain why not.  I don't want to hear about ruined lives, I just want one undisputed fact.  Simple question, name the name.  

[gr8dad]

Floyd Fay.  There is your answer.  The point is, there is a huge amount of weight put on these things throughout an investigation.  I pray that you are never wrongfully accused and subjected to a polygraph that says you are lying.  But if you are, then maybe you would understand.  You dont want to hear about ruined lives?!?!?  How rediculous is that?!?!?!?  Some people will just never get it!!!  So, tell me what corrupt law enforcement agency do you work for uiop?  The point is this instrument is continually used and the public at large is continually deceived and lied to by the very people that are suppose to protect them.  In my opinion, these people are nothing more than a bunch of save the world vigalanties

[uiop]

Floyd Fay was wrongfully convicted and later exonerated.  His conviction was by a jury of his peers and evidence in addition to the polygraph was presented.  If you reread my post, I said convicted SOULY because of the polygraph.  I would relate to all on this board that eye witnesses and jury trials have resulted in many more wrongful convictions and ruined lives than polygraphs.  Please try again and this time, instead of concentrating on trying to damage my professional reputation by suggesting I work for a corrupt agency (and therefor would also be corrupted) actually put some time and effort into answering the question.  

[EosJupiter]

Floyd Fay was wrongfully convicted and later exonerated.  His conviction was by a jury of his peers and evidence in addition to the polygraph was presented.  If you reread my post, I said convicted SOULY because of the polygraph.  I would relate to all on this board that eye witnesses and jury trials have resulted in many more wrongful convictions and ruined lives than polygraphs.  Please try again and this time, instead of concentrating on trying to damage my professional reputation by suggesting I work for a corrupt agency (and therefor would also be corrupted) actually put some time and effort into answering the question.  

uiop,

Need somemore polygraph failures,  I have been waiting for just such an occasion. I do not state that you are corrupt, just the machine and process you represent as a polygrapher. Personal attacks are not my style.

For your consumption:

Sonia Jacobs & Jesse Tafero  Florida 1978  
    Polygraph evidence contradicts real evidence, except
    district attorney disregards and uses the polygraph
    evidence. Gets capital murder conviction, Sonia is
    later exonerated, Jesse is executed, with serious
    issues still pending on the validity of the data. Jesse
    was later proven / believed to also be innocent.

Gary Gauger    Illinois 1993
    Told he failed polygraph, after lengthy interrogation
    forced to give false confession. Exonerated by real
    evidence.

Charles Goldstein   California 1980
    Inconclusive polygraph, lengthy interrogation, forced
    to give false confession after being told that an
    inconclusive was as good as a failure. Exonerated on
    real evidence.

Clarence Chance, Benny Powell  California 1975
    Jailhouse informant was key witness in this
    proceeding, Informant told he passed, but really
    failed the polygraph on his information,
    but witness information still presented to
    the court. Convictions were obtained.
   The polygraph failure was later shown to
   be  suppressed  by the state. Impeaching
   all testimony by  this witness. Both exonerated.

Peter Reilly  Conneticut  1988
    Told he failed polygraph, 8 hrs of interrogation, forced
    confession. Later exonerated on real evidence.

You wanted proof....   And there are many more examples if you need it.  Enjoy the crow !!  


Regards .....
    

[Sergeant1107]

I was denied employment at the first three law enforcement agencies to which I applied solely because I did not pass the prerequisite polygraph exam.

The lack of due process in each incident is particularly frustrating.  If it had been in a courtroom I would have at least had the opportunity to defend myself, not to mention the burden of proof that would have been upon the polygraph examiner to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that I had done the things he was saying I did.

There was no such opportunity for me in those polygraph exams.  The examiner took a wild guess and was wrong, and as a direct result I was dropped from the application process.

[uiop]

I'm sorry, perhaps you didn't read my post.  The remark regarding polygraph sending innocents to jail was made by gr8dad.  I asked for him to provide one name where polygraph results were the soul evidence used to convict someone.  Thanks for the list of cases where a trial jury considered polygraph as evidence but not souly the results of such.  So much for the crow.  I guess the point is this:  There is not a single case where the results of a polygraph have been the SOUL bit of "Evidence" (note the quotes, perhaps I'm skeptical of both polygraph as evidence and those who deride it on this board to hide their actual guilt).

I'm a skeptic.  Skeptical of UFO's, ghosts, psychics, polygraphs, polititians and persons on this site.  But I'm downright terrified of jury trials, where innocents (like those mentioned) are convicted and the guilty, like O.J are set free.

[EosJupiter]

uiop,

You will never see a sole (not soul) prosecution based on just polygraph results. And you know this already, it just makes for a good excuse, (A RED HERRING, I do believe). A prosecutors job is to get a conviction at all cost, and if it involves questionable actions and information derived from a polygraph, its just that much more ammo. The only saving grace is that 98 % of the US courts (local & federal) refuse  to use polygraph information in court. Hence the need for folks to be polygraph literate and knowlegeable about their rights, and protect themselves from a polygraphers vile charms.

Regards ...

[uiop]

Eos,  a sincere thanks for the correction of soul vs sole.  An additional thanks for quickly figuring out my point as to polygraph "Evidence" not being the single item used by attorneys trying to convict.  However, it was not a "red herring".  My question was specifically directed towards gr8dad who stipulated persons had been sentenced to jail based on polygraph results, the inference being that nothing else but a polygraph examiner and his words were used as "Evidence".

Now that that has been cleared up, I'm back to other things.  I wish you and all other well meaning critics of polygraph good fortune.  

[1904]

If you've been a frequent visitor to this forum, no doubt you've read some of my posts. I often talk about how George et. al talk a big game, but that they have no actual experience using the machine they hate so much. Theory is theory, and there is theory on both sides.  However, there is no substitute for experience.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Af1OxkFOK18

Edited to fix link to media file. -- AntiPolygraph.org Administrator

Holy Mother of Jelly,
Who is that man and why is he so irritating. All that 'have..need..more...less.."BS.
soory LBCB - I got halfway through and had to stop. If ever the circus was short
of a human cannonball - I know where they should look.

What a crock of HS.

If you had a point to prove, you let yourself down using the narrow eyed squirrel man.

[1904]

Floyd Fay was wrongfully convicted and later exonerated.  His conviction was by a jury of his peers and evidence in addition to the polygraph was presented.  If you reread my post, I said convicted SOULY because of the polygraph.  I would relate to all on this board that eye witnesses and jury trials have resulted in many more wrongful convictions and ruined lives than polygraphs.  Please try again and this time, instead of concentrating on trying to damage my professional reputation by suggesting I work for a corrupt agency (and therefor would also be corrupted) actually put some time and effort into answering the question.  

Obviously, a spelling test was not one of the hiring criteria in your case.

Newsflash: Since when was a polygraph examiner accorded the staus of 'Professional'
-- and I mean in the real world sense. Your neighbours in the rusty trailer dont count.

[EosJupiter]

1904,

The actor you find so irritating is a gentleman by the name of "Bruce Campbell", he is king of B movie horror films "Evil Dead" and some recent TV shows, "Xena, Warrior Princess". He is actually quite funny and the movies do provide a mild diversion from the mundane. But using him as a point maker well I agree that is a stretch. I do find your posts most entertaining, as I am sure that our resident polygraphers find you irritating. Keep up the good work. I am sure that your posts are causing massive purchases of antacids in the polygraph community. Buying stock in P & G and other product manufacturers I think would be a good move.

Best Regards ...

[1904]

Hi EoJ,

It's a tough job (irritating p/g examiners), but somebody's gotta do it.
I miss Palerider, he seems to have taken a sabbatical.
Or maybe attending a reunion at the College of Lingua Franca, where he
majored in 'Cliche's & Impressive Words' but diddent doo to welle in
'Spellyng and Grammah'

[ecchasta]

.... I guess the point is this:  There is not a single case where the results of a polygraph have been the SOUL bit of "Evidence" ...[/quote]

No one pointed out that not even in theory can polygraph be the sole evidence in a conviction.  After all, there has to be something in evidence that provoked the polygraph test in the first place.  That evidence may be circumstantial or it may be testimony from a liar, but it is evidence nonetheless.

A polygraph exam can, however, be the principal evidence (as in the tragic cases cited above)

[1904]

Huh? I dont think that can happen in the 1st World.
I do think that some people post hard luck p/g stories
merely to 'stir the pot a bit'.

Did you know that the GSR ( ) component of the p/g can be manipulated by
mental CM's.....?

There was/is a computer game named MIND DRIVE. It comprised different
MIND games like MIND SKI , WORM etc.

works like this: You attach a fingerplate which is plugged into pc and the selected game starts. EG - SKI; A skier proceeds slowly down a hill; you
(the player) have to try and avoid obstacles in your path by using mind power.

The WORM game  - on same principle - a fuzzy worm in a maze. After several fun weeks of playing mind drive, most of the family could get the worm through
the maze and avoid all the skiing obstacles.

I'm sure you can still get the game - if you can - play it. It's amazing
what you can do with your mind.

So, if your mind power can conquer MIND DRIVE games, it should be able to
will the GSR trace up and down at selected intervals.

Once you have mastered the technique, challenge the VD Princess to test
you and detect your CM's. (VD = verbal diarrhoea = palerider )

[flbcm850]

I took my CVSA exam this morning and after 2 weeks of extreme nervousness, I can say that I passed with flying colors, without using ANY countermeasures whatsoever... there were at least 4 or 5 questions that I did not answer truthfully and the machine detected no signs of deception at all. I just went in and did not let myself get nervous before the exam and then just answered the questions as quickly as possible without even thinking about the question. I decided whether or not the investigator was asking a "yes" or "no" question as soon into the question as possible and then I just blocked out the rest of the question and answer quickly in a monotone voice. No breathing techniques used at all. I can't believe how easy that exam was. It's amazing what a joke it really is. I must say that I did not believe all the posts written by others saying how easy it was, but now that I have actually experienced it myself, I can say with confidence that no one should have any trouble passing this exam!