Child pornography lover passes his own polygraph.

[bimmergirl]

What about when someone is accused of a crime and 1 1/2 years later he hires a polygrapher, and he "passes"?

Should he be set free, OR would you be skeptical of him.  Do you think he could read your website in advance and pass a test?

Child porn on his computer agent downloaded from it via limewire and when his house raided, low and behold he had all these pictures of a 7 yo girl on his computer and videos with kids having sex with adults.  in unallocated space he had adult and child erotica and erotic stories of daddys with daughters.Trying to say he just put those used harddrives on his computer.

Now I realize this is the reverse of what most of your posters discuss.

Polygraphers chime in too!!!!

[notguilty1]

What about when someone is accused of a crime and 1 1/2 years later he hires a polygrapher, and he "passes"?

Should he be set free, OR would you be skeptical of him.  Do you think he could read your website in advance and pass a test?

Child porn on his computer agent downloaded from it via limewire and when his house raided, low and behold he had all these pictures of a 7 yo girl on his computer and videos with kids having sex with adults.  in unallocated space he had adult and child erotica and erotic stories of daddys with daughters.Trying to say he just put those used harddrives on his computer.

Now I realize this is the reverse of what most of your posters discuss.

Polygraphers chime in too!!!!

Since polygraph is an inacureate test at best it is totally possible that this child molester would have a false result from a private ( or police )  polygraph. The same test, is administered and if the industry is correct should yeild at least mostly similar results. I mean a lier should still be a lier!
But....... since the test has no real scientific basis and is used mainly to extract information from an examinee that believes in the accuarcy of a  polygraph the police administered polygraph would probably yeild better restults due to the questioning and interrogation that would likely follow.

[sackett]

"B-girl",

That is the whole purpose of this web site.  Help everyone, regardless of truth, pass their polygraph test.  This includes applicants, CHILD MOLESTERS, criminals, spies, everybody!!!  George really does not care who he assists, though he will suppose an aire of indignation when the subject is presented.

This site is all about making polygraph illegitimate in order to do away with the polygraph process.  He enlists the assistance of a few whiners who suposedly had false positives, then, Bam!  There you are!  "All these people" (about 4-5 of them, were falsely ID'd as liars (without any proof whatsoever mind you), so polygraph must be stopped!

Then all the spies can get in...  

Sackett

[George W. Maschke]

What about when someone is accused of a crime and 1 1/2 years later he hires a polygrapher, and he "passes"?

When a person takes a polygraph under conditions of attorney-client privilege, the attorney can shop him around to polygraphers until he passes one. Then the "passed" polygraph can be trumpeted, while any "failed" ones are not mentioned.

Should he be set free, OR would you be skeptical of him.

Such pseudoscientific nonsense as polygraph "testing" should not influence decisionmaking in this regard.

Do you think he could read your website in advance and pass a test?

Yes.

[T.M. Cullen]

"All these people" (about 4-5 of them, were falsely ID'd as liars (without any proof whatsoever mind you), so polygraph must be stopped!

We get new people coming to this board all the time claiming recent "false positive" results.  Here are just two from this week alone.

https://antipolygraph.org/forum/index.php?topic=3964.msg29910#msg29910
https://antipolygraph.org/forum/index.php?topic=3962.msg29869#msg29869

In Sackett's world you have to prove you are not lying.  I think it should be the other way around.  If you accuse someone of lying, YOU  should have to PROVE it.


TC

[pailryder]

bimmergirl,

Between pictures and polygraph, I would choose pictures.  Be extremely suspicious, and if you don't know, I am a private examiner.

[sackett]

It seems to me that the number of people on this board complaining about their false positive results has constantly been about 4-7, depending on the day of the week.  Considering there are thousands being examined daily, this really does not seem to be a signficant sampling of reported false positives.  Could some of them be truely, false positives, sure.  But to over inflate the readership to bolster your claims of innacuracy is self grandiosity, nothing more.  BUT, in order to sell your position, you have to promote, I guess.

As for people posting "all the time", How does anyone who reads this board know these are not the same 3-4 people posting "the same old story under different names, in order to make the it all sound legitimate?  This board is hardly scientific.  So the claim that there are ALL THESE FALSE POSITIVES seems self bloviating.  Sort of like your inability to prove a false positive or that countermeasures taught in this on-line book could really be used by a reader.

Theory is not reality.


Sackett

[notguilty1]

"B-girl",

That is the whole purpose of this web site.  Help everyone, regardless of truth, pass their polygraph test.  This includes applicants, CHILD MOLESTERS, criminals, spies, everybody!!!  George really does not care who he assists, though he will suppose an aire of indignation when the subject is presented.

This site is all about making polygraph illegitimate in order to do away with the polygraph process.  He enlists the assistance of a few whiners who suposedly had false positives, then, Bam!  There you are!  "All these people" (about 4-5 of them, were falsely ID'd as liars (without any proof whatsoever mind you), so polygraph must be stopped!

Then all the spies can get in...  

Sackett

Sackett, In this country if you accuse some one and say they are a liars then, YOU need to prove it NOT the other way around. You should have learned that when you got your GED.

I know in your world King Sackett sits in ultimate judgement of all that come before you. Hell....... you judged me as a liar over the net and you've claimed that simply hearing someones answers to certain questions will tell you they are lying ( the armored car driver statement come to mind) without even being hooked up to a poligraph.
You continue to claim that there are only 4-5 people who have had bad experineces with polygraph ....... there are thousands of people who come here for information and get it "unfiltered" by the site.
People can make up thier own mind. Even without your nonsense.

[sackett]

"B-girl",

That is the whole purpose of this web site.  Help everyone, regardless of truth, pass their polygraph test.  This includes applicants, CHILD MOLESTERS, criminals, spies, everybody!!!  George really does not care who he assists, though he will suppose an aire of indignation when the subject is presented.

This site is all about making polygraph illegitimate in order to do away with the polygraph process.  He enlists the assistance of a few whiners who suposedly had false positives, then, Bam!  There you are!  "All these people" (about 4-5 of them, were falsely ID'd as liars (without any proof whatsoever mind you), so polygraph must be stopped!

Then all the spies can get in...  

Sackett

Sackett, In this country if you accuse some one and say they are a liars then, YOU need to prove it NOT the other way around. You should have learned that when you got your GED.

I know in your world King Sackett sits in ultimate judgement of all that come before you. Hell....... you judged me as a liar over the net and you've claimed that simply hearing someones answers to certain questions will tell you they are lying ( the armored car driver statement come to mind) without even being hooked up to a poligraph.
You continue to claim that there are only 4-5 people who have had bad experineces with polygraph ....... there are thousands of people who come here for information and get it "unfiltered" by the site.
People can make up thier own mind. Even without your nonsense.

Did you require proof before you assumed I only had a GED?  Did Cullen require proof to call me a liar and all examiners liars during polygraph testing?  Did you require proof to assume every other poster here really was telling the truth before posting as a so called false positive?  When did you ever require "proof" before spouting your opinion of polygraph or endorsing the opinions of other angry posters?  How much polygraph research have you really read up on, or is it just what is posted on this "anti" board that fuels your anger?  

No, you are only "entitled" to presentation of proof when accused in a court of law.  Does a boss need "proof" to fire you for wrongdoing? No.  A simple suspicion is all that is really needed.  Does a wife need "proof" or mere suspicion to accuse you of infidelity? Does a mother require "proof" or mere suspicion that a child has done something wrong?  No.  Does a civil court need "proof" before finding a judgement?  No, only a preponderance of the presented evidence!

You see, "notguilty1", you assume too much.  There is nothing that requires "proof" before a person can be considered withholding information.  Polygraph adds to that suspicion and aides in indentifying the less than forthcoming.

FYI, I do not "sit in judgement", I evaluate all available information, including the results of a polygraph test to identitfy those less than 100%  forthcoming.  George makes a good point.  A polygraph examiner should never enter the test assuming anything, I certainly try not to.

As for your indignation due to your own ignorance of human nature... there is really nothing for me to say.


Sackett      

[T.M. Cullen]

How much polygraph research have you really read up on, or is it just what is posted on this "anti" board that fuels your anger?  

Sackett,

In another thread, you claimed there was all kinds of research to show the accuracy of the polygraph.

I asked you to cite some examples.  You never did.  

TC

P.S.  The NAS reviewed what was there, and reported it's findings which you consistently ignore.  

[notguilty1]

"B-girl",

That is the whole purpose of this web site.  Help everyone, regardless of truth, pass their polygraph test.  This includes applicants, CHILD MOLESTERS, criminals, spies, everybody!!!  George really does not care who he assists, though he will suppose an aire of indignation when the subject is presented.

This site is all about making polygraph illegitimate in order to do away with the polygraph process.  He enlists the assistance of a few whiners who suposedly had false positives, then, Bam!  There you are!  "All these people" (about 4-5 of them, were falsely ID'd as liars (without any proof whatsoever mind you), so polygraph must be stopped!

Then all the spies can get in...  

Sackett

Sackett, In this country if you accuse some one and say they are a liars then, YOU need to prove it NOT the other way around. You should have learned that when you got your GED.

I know in your world King Sackett sits in ultimate judgement of all that come before you. Hell....... you judged me as a liar over the net and you've claimed that simply hearing someones answers to certain questions will tell you they are lying ( the armored car driver statement come to mind) without even being hooked up to a poligraph.
You continue to claim that there are only 4-5 people who have had bad experineces with polygraph ....... there are thousands of people who come here for information and get it "unfiltered" by the site.
People can make up thier own mind. Even without your nonsense.

Did you require proof before you assumed I only had a GED?  Did Cullen require proof to call me a liar and all examiners liars during polygraph testing?  Did you require proof to assume every other poster here really was telling the truth before posting as a so called false positive?  When did you ever require "proof" before spouting your opinion of polygraph or endorsing the opinions of other angry posters?  How much polygraph research have you really read up on, or is it just what is posted on this "anti" board that fuels your anger?  

No, you are only "entitled" to presentation of proof when accused in a court of law.  Does a boss need "proof" to fire you for wrongdoing? No.  A simple suspicion is all that is really needed.  Does a wife need "proof" or mere suspicion to accuse you of infidelity? Does a mother require "proof" or mere suspicion that a child has done something wrong?  No.  Does a civil court need "proof" before finding a judgement?  No, only a preponderance of the presented evidence!

You see, "notguilty1", you assume too much.  There is nothing that requires "proof" before a person can be considered withholding information.  Polygraph adds to that suspicion and aides in indentifying the less than forthcoming.

FYI, I do not "sit in judgement", I evaluate all available information, including the results of a polygraph test to identitfy those less than 100%  forthcoming.  George makes a good point.  A polygraph examiner should never enter the test assuming anything, I certainly try not to.

As for your indignation due to your own ignorance of human nature... there is really nothing for me to say.


Sackett      

My assumption that you have a GED is just that due to the ignorance you display here.
As for my and TC's proof of examiners lying we have it, as the general public does. Each and every time you tell us that the test is 95-98% accurate YOU KNOW THAT IS A LIE!! and claimed to bolster the idea in the unsuspecting examinee that it is.
Also, My opinion without proof does not keep you from a job. Fortunatly the legal system has understood the BS nature of Polygraph and therefore, my false positive was just a waste of taxpayer money.

[pailryder]

ng1

When an examiner makes the claim that polygraph accuracy is 99% he as mistaken as you are to claim 50 50 or coin toss accuracy.  They overstate you understate.  Have you, yourself, reviewed the latest research in order to form your own opinion?  Or like Mr Cullen do you have to ask someone else where to find the information?

[T.M. Cullen]

Or like Mr Cullen do you have to ask someone else where to find the information?

That is a little misleading.

Sackett made the CLAIM that there was a ton of research showing that the polygraph is very accurate (or words to that effect).  I called him on it, and asked him to cite this alleged research.  He didn't.

TC

[harlequinn]

Does a civil court need "proof" before finding a judgement?  No, only a preponderance of the presented evidence!

What does a criminal court need? Only a preponderance of the presented evidence? Or does it require more?

[notguilty1]

ng1

When an examiner makes the claim that polygraph accuracy is 99% he as mistaken as you are to claim 50 50 or coin toss accuracy.  They overstate you understate.  Have you, yourself, reviewed the latest research in order to form your own opinion?  Or like Mr Cullen do you have to ask someone else where to find the information?

Fair enough, I am soley going on my experience and those similar ones one on here accually had 2 polygraphs one + and the other -
When I failed my test I cmae to the logical conclusion that if the test was supposed to be accurate and it failed (misereably) I had  to assume that the result was pure chance.
Examiners and the Polygraph industry routinely claim 95-98% accuracy ad it has become basically public knowledge ( though false)
If the test is based on a process of collecting data that has not been proven to accuratly detect deception then a 50/50 accuracy is not as far off than the 95-98% that the industry claims.