Doug Williams Polygraph Trial Discussion Thread

[xenonman]

The risks to one's life and liberty do indeed appear considerable!

[George W. Maschke]

A user of the link-sharing site Reddit recently posted the link to the Bloomberg video report on Doug Williams' plight. The post presently has 221 comments and may be of interest to AntiPolygraph.org readers:

https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/4yhuuo/til_douglas_williams_an_administrator_of_lie/?sort=old&limit=500

[George W. Maschke]

On 21 November 2016, Doug Williams filed a pro se motion to amend the terms of his supervised release so as to allow him to engage in polygraph-related activity to the extent that it is not "intended or part of a scheme to defraud the United States or tamper with witnesses."

Williams' motion may be downloaded here:

https://antipolygraph.org/litigation/doug-williams/doug-williams-motion-for-modification-of-the-terms-of-supervised-release.pdf

I think his motion is reasonable and should be granted.

[Aunty Agony]

I agree that his motion is reasonable and should be granted.

However the weakest branch of Williams's argument is the assertion that his disclaimer ("...I will not give you a practice test if you tell me you plan to lie...") is "sufficient to prevent his involvement in any alleged scheme to defraud the Government or the tampering with any witness". The facts in evidence prove that this is not true. The disclaimer was on display and in effect when Doug was entrapped into violating its provisions.

Actually, the fact that he was so badly entrapped should be sufficient to deter any further violations. He set up a rule to protect himself and came to grief only from not following it. He won't do that again.

If Doug gets a chance to support this motion with oral argument, perhaps he should lean on the idea that he takes the appropriate lesson from his conviction and sentence. Justice department functionaries love to hear how their work straightens people out.

[Wandersmann]

I think his motion is reasonable and should be granted.

There are huge First Amendment issues in Doug's favor.  The fact that he's already published a book on this matter is important.  Journalists have gotten away with espionage because of First Amendment protection, not that I'm equating Doug to anything bad.   I think the government goons painted themselves into a corner with their entrapment.  As I recall it was stipulated in the trial or some other legal proceeding that teaching about the evils of the polygraph and the specifics of the junk science is legal.  For them to continue to suppress his efforts to speak simple truth would help bring to light what a bunch of Stalinist style thugs these polypunks really are.  I think this case may eventually help bring them down.  Doug is truly a political prisoner.   

[Doug Williams]

George, thanks for your support and I hope the judge agrees with you that my request is reasonable and should be granted.

[George W. Maschke]

However the weakest branch of Williams's argument is the assertion that his disclaimer ("...I will not give you a practice test if you tell me you plan to lie...") is "sufficient to prevent his involvement in any alleged scheme to defraud the Government or the tampering with any witness". The facts in evidence prove that this is not true. The disclaimer was on display and in effect when Doug was entrapped into violating its provisions.

Doug added this disclaimer after the Operation Lie Busters raid on his office and home. This is a point that the prosecution raised on the second day of Doug's trial:

SA Robbins testified that after the 21 February 2013 raid, Williams made changes to his website, including removal of the claim that he could teach a person to pass the polygraph "lying or not" and the addition of a "terms of service" statement clarifying that he would not train anyone who told him that they intended to lie, and that any in-person training customer who made such a statement would forfeit the fee and not receive training.

[Aunty Agony]

Doug added this disclaimer after the Operation Lie Busters raid on his office and home. This is a point that the prosecution raised on the second day of Doug's trial:

My mistake, I missed that.

In that case, the argument is not weak at all. It is quite in line with what any DOJ likes to see.

[George W. Maschke]

On 10 February 2017, the U.S. Department of Justice filed a brief in opposition to Doug Williams' motion that he be allowed to engage in polygraph-related activities during his upcoming period of supervised release:

https://antipolygraph.org/litigation/doug-williams/doug-williams-united-states-opposition-to-defendants-motion-for-modification-of-the-terms-of-supervised-release.pdf

As noted on the blog, the Department of Justice effectively concedes that polygraph countermeasures are effective.

[Doug Williams]

As Dr. Maschke correctly states, this marks the first time that the government has admitted that I can teach a person to pass the polygraph test regardless of whether they are telling the truth  or lying.  I have said for almost forty years that if I can teach a person to control every tracing on the polygraph chart and ALWAYS pass, nervous or not, lying or not, no matter what, that is prima facie evidence that the polygraph is not a "lie detector".  It defies logic that the government continues to use the polygraph while at the same time admitting it is worthless.  I have much more to say in my reply to the government which Dr. Maschke will post when it is filed.

[Wandersmann]

It defies logic that the government continues to use the polygraph while at the same time admitting it is worthless.

You are correct Doug.  It defies logic and anyone with half-a-brain can see not only the logic but the PROOF in the anti-polygraph message.  Our problem lies 100% with corruption.  Corrupt lobbyists, politicians, and bureaucrats.  Let's find one honest man or woman somewhere in authority to start turning things around. 

[Joe McCarthy]

As Dr. Maschke correctly states, this marks the first time that the government has admitted that I can teach a person to pass the polygraph test regardless of whether they are telling the truth  or lying.  I have said for almost forty years that if I can teach a person to control every tracing on the polygraph chart and ALWAYS pass, nervous or not, lying or not, no matter what, that is prima facie evidence that the polygraph is not a "lie detector".  It defies logic that the government continues to use the polygraph while at the same time admitting it is worthless.  I have much more to say in my reply to the government which Dr. Maschke will post when it is filed.

Doug, and I say this with all due respect, the "ALWAYS pass" thing, come on.  They don't "ALWAYS" pass.

Now that being set aside.  I am glad that you are well, and you got out of a very difficult time in your life.  I take no joy in someone else's misery.

Actually, check that.  There are a few I would take pleasure in seeing miserable, you are not one of them.  We may disagree about a lot, but you've never taken things to a personal level with me. 

[Doug Williams]

You are correct Doug.  It defies logic and anyone with half-a-brain can see not only the logic but the PROOF in the anti-polygraph message.  Our problem lies 100% with corruption.  Corrupt lobbyists, politicians, and bureaucrats.  Let's find one honest man or woman somewhere in authority to start turning things around.

Yes, greed and corruption are at the root of the problem with the polygraph.  Perhaps a phone call and letter writing campaign to Pres. Trump would be effective.  I cannot believe he would allow this to continue if he was made aware of the waste, fraud and abuse in the government polygraph program.

[George W. Maschke]

On 21 February 2017, Doug Williams filed a reply to the U.S. government's opposition to his motion that he be allowed to engage in polygraph-related activities during his upcoming period of supervised release:

https://antipolygraph.org/litigation/doug-williams/doug-williams-reply-to-governments-opposition.pdf

As noted on the blog, Williams argues forcefully (and, I hope, effectively) why his freedom of speech should not be curtailed.

[Doug Williams]

As Dr. Maschke correctly states, this marks the first time that the government has admitted that I can teach a person to pass the polygraph test regardless of whether they are telling the truth  or lying.  I have said for almost forty years that if I can teach a person to control every tracing on the polygraph chart and ALWAYS pass, nervous or not, lying or not, no matter what, that is prima facie evidence that the polygraph is not a "lie detector".  It defies logic that the government continues to use the polygraph while at the same time admitting it is worthless.  I have much more to say in my reply to the government which Dr. Maschke will post when it is filed.

Doug, and I say this with all due respect, the "ALWAYS pass" thing, come on.  They don't "ALWAYS" pass.

Now that being set aside.  I am glad that you are well, and you got out of a very difficult time in your life.  I take no joy in someone else's misery.

Actually, check that.  There are a few I would take pleasure in seeing miserable, you are not one of them.  We may disagree about a lot, but you've never taken things to a personal level with me. 

You are quite correct Joe, they don't ALWAYS pass - not because they didn't produce a perfect "truthful" chart, but because polygraph operators often disregard the fact that the person did in fact produce a chart that should be scored as "NO DECEPTION INDICATED".  It is an unfortunate fact that all too often polygraph operators call a person deceptive and "fail" them even though it is obvious from the chart tracings that they had told the truth - or at least what passes for the truth on the polygraph.  But I can teach a person to do what they need to do to ALWAYS produce a "truthful" chart.  It is very simple to teach a person to produce a reaction on the control questions and show no reaction on the relevant questions, but you are right, I cannot guarantee them that the polygraph operator will accurately report what he/she sees on the chart.  I have taught thousands of people to "pass" the test and for the past 10 years I have used the AXCITON computerized polygraph instrument and in the last several years have used the scoring software which ALWAYS shows a reading of NO DECEPTION INDICATED.