Texas sex offender & mandatory polygraph

[Dan Mangan]

PCSOT is mainly about money, so things will get very interesting when the EyeDetect forces start bidding on PCSOT contracts.

Compared to polygraph, EyeDetect is way faster, much cheaper, and can be run by a technician with minimal training.

Learn more here: http://converus.com/corrections/

[Joe McCarthy]

They said that about vsa too. 

Looking at their web site, I see a few potential problems.  If you think polygraph has it's problems with abuse, if this catches on, it will be an opening of pandora's box of abuse.

[Joe McCarthy]

I agree with you, In the state of Texas (I can't and won't speak for other places, because I have no basis to make opinions on other states and how they are run) it has become a money generator.  If one were so inclined, it is easy to rig the system to make more money and go unchecked. 

I say this, because here is a FACT.  In the State of Texas, no one is checking behind us, people.  This is one of the reasons why I teach lawyers how to score charts.  I have offered to teach probation and parole departments how to score charts too.  This keeps us, as polygraph examiners accountable, and honest. 

I encourage lawyers to ask for charts and encourage probation and parole officers to want to see charts as well, in cases where the result maybe in doubt.  For instance, Tarrant County CSCD, may want to start reviewing charts themselves.  This will keep examiners in their program honest, as there seems to have been a problem in the past. 

Honestly, and here is my advise for people.  If you hear the word "inconclusive," hire a lawyer and get the charts.  Examiners in Texas are very apprehensive to give up charts or allow a insight review of charts by an independent examiner; you have to force them.  The only way to do that, is through a lawyer. 

In Texas, the word, inconclusive, should be a huge red flag.  When I went to polygraph school, my instructor would say, inconclusive is just another word for piss poor test, note often than not.  I agree with that assessment.

Now having said all that.  Here is another warning for Texas examinees.  PCSOT in Texas is largely unregulated.  If an examiner does something outside of standards, they are almost 100% of the time totally unaccountable.  There is no organization for which you can file a complaint; this, in my opinion is by design.  More on this later.

This is why I am trying to get TDLR to ask Texas lawmakers, to take PCSOT out of the hands of the industry, and into the hands of regulation and licensing, TDLR.  Also to pass laws that anyone properly licensed can perform these tests without interference.  The monopolies, and appearances of impropriety that exist in the PCSOT community have to end to retain credibility of the program.  Again more on this later

[Joe McCarthy]

Oh and I know the examiners in Texas will say something like, "we have independent quality control, encouraged through TAPE." 

Think about this, they all protect one another and have done do for years.  Also, it violates their bylaws to become adversarial to one another for any reason.  TAPE flagrantly violates it's own bylaws on a regular basis, when the bylaws don't benefit them at the time.  Lastly, the current president, is one of the people who owns that 45% inconclusive ret at Richard Wood and Associates.  So yea, go ahead and trust quality control, with an organization run by someone how has had massive problems with quality of product and quality control in the past. 

Bottom line, most examiners, (not all) in Texas avoid, truly independent quality control like the black death. 

[xenonman]

I have to admit Dan is the one with the balls. Dan I'm curious to know how much of a following you have in the APA. Me thinks you don't get too many Christmas cards from that lot.

and probably even fewer bearing the ZIP code, "20505" !  lol

[Dan Mangan]

I have to admit Dan is the one with the balls. Dan I'm curious to know how much of a following you have in the APA. Me thinks you don't get too many Christmas cards from that lot.

and probably even fewer bearing the ZIP code, "20505" !  lol

Using the past two election cycles of the American Polygraph Association as a guide, my following for the office of president-elect among the APA's active electorate is a solid 25 percent.

In other words, at least one out of four of the aforementioned members supports my platform of a bill of rights for polygraph test subjects, a countermeasure challenge series, and equality for APA members regarding educational and political opportunities.

BTW, I chose not to actively campaign this year. The reason: I lost a lot of heart when attempts to arrange an internet debate with my opponent were flatly stonewalled. Seems like some establishment honchos wanted the fix to be in -- or at least discourage a public exchange of the issues that plague the polygraph indu$try.

From my perspective, some of those troubling issues include the half-baked science behind the "test", advocacy research conducted by indu$try insiders, rampant polygraph victimization, and a "professional" organization (the APA) whose membership is mainly tradespeople -- i.e., polygraph operators without a bachelor's degree (or higher).

Perhaps the APA should change their motto from "Dedicated to Truth" to "Dedicated to the Almighty Buck."

[Joe McCarthy]

I have to admit Dan is the one with the balls. Dan I'm curious to know how much of a following you have in the APA. Me thinks you don't get too many Christmas cards from that lot.

and probably even fewer bearing the ZIP code, "20505" !  lol

Using the past two election cycles of the American Polygraph Association as a guide, my following for the office of president-elect among the APA's active electorate is a solid 25 percent.

In other words, at least one out of four of the aforementioned members supports my platform of a bill of rights for polygraph test subjects, a countermeasure challenge series, and equality for APA members regarding educational and political opportunities.

BTW, I chose not to actively campaign this year. The reason: I lost a lot of heart when attempts to arrange an internet debate with my opponent were flatly stonewalled. Seems like some establishment honchos wanted the fix to be in -- or at least discourage a public exchange of the issues that plague the polygraph indu$try.

From my perspective, some of those troubling issues include the half-baked science behind the "test", advocacy research conducted by indu$try insiders, rampant polygraph victimization, and a "professional" organization (the APA) whose membership is mainly tradespeople -- i.e., polygraph operators without a bachelor's degree (or higher).

Perhaps the APA should change their motto from "Dedicated to Truth" to "Dedicated to the Almighty Buck."

I always regret doing this; but being fair, independent, and unbiased, in in an industry where that should be the order of the day, is like poising one self in a dark suit.  It goes you a warm feeling, but no one really notices.  Now all humor aside.

Dan, with all due respect, you did some avoiding too. 

Both sides are avoiding having a truth discussion about the issues.  Both sides want to have their discussion about the issues, not a discussion about the issues.

Just my independent and unbiased take.

[Dan Mangan]

Joe, I seriously doubt the APA wants anything to do with a public discussion that includes the truth about the real-world accuracy of the "test".

As I've said many times before, polygraph is mainly about one thing -- money.

Meanwhile, the APA boasts this claim, as posted on their web site: APA examiners are able to attain accuracy rates exceeding 90 percent.

[Joe McCarthy]

I don't entirely disagree, and you know that.  If anyone knows that money is a huge factor in the PCSOT market, it's me.  Live my hell for a year, then you will have come thing to complain about. 

[Joe McCarthy]

Because people just don't know when to not kick a sleeping dog, I have been more vocal, again, as of late.

Also, because I have to prepare for yet another inevitable battle with these people, I started looking through what I have started to call my , J Edgar Hoover, files.  While going though all these documents, and scanning them so they can be electronically distributed and published, should anything happen to me in the future, (NOTE: the picture of my car outside my office, posted by someone I can only assume, is from the Texas Polygraph Industry,  still has me very security conscious and vigilant) I came across a very interesting document that was buried in a folder labeled, "other discovery."

It appears to be some sort of internal document from the old Texas Polygraph Examiners Board. According to the fax header; and the transmission of this fax was December 21, 2007. 

I'll just drop this here, let anyone read it who wants to, and then discuss.  This document does bring up a lot of interesting questions, and should make for some interesting discussion. 

[Dan Mangan]

Joe, this soap opera is going on ten years. It's time for you to let it go.

The nativist Texan polygraph indu$try bastards won.

The outcast Masshole Irish dumbass lost.

Yes, the Texas system might be rigged.

If so, you're right; they're wrong.

So what. It's bidne$$.

You can't change it.

Move on.

I have.

[Joe McCarthy]

Ok, I'll find another way to work it out.

You're right, this has lost it's effectiveness. 

What they do seems to work, maybe I'll start there.

Thanks Dan

[Dan Mangan]

Joe, when I said "move on," I meant in a philosophical, work-related or geographical sense.

I did not mean that it's time to change how you're fighting your war.

That war is over.

They won, you lost.

It's time to get over it.

Looking ahead, it appears you have three options:

1. Accept defeat and continue operating in your current capacity.

2. Change occupations, so you are removed from the oppression you are experiencing.

3. Move somewhere with a friendlier business climate.

Stop wasting your time and energy on a fruitless endeavor. Life is too short.

[Joe McCarthy]

Dan, a line was crossed that can not be ignored, or go unanswered.


"I hate them for making hate necessary, and I'll do what I can to end it."
Michael Collins

Nuff said

[Dan Mangan]

Things didn't turn out so well for Michael Collins.