A Public Challenge to Frank Horvath

[beech trees]

That tired, wheezy old tactic 'the boys'? (Does he have any idea how foolish he looks attacking Dr. Richardson's credentials?) Apparently not, as he is simply the latest in a long line of 'I don't like his message, so I will attack his credentials' rubes.

Hey Einsteins, Dr. Richardson graduated from your polygraph Mecca. A Supervisory Special Agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), member of the Society for Psychophysiological Research, a graduate of the Department of Defense Polygraph Institute's Basic Polygraph Examiner Course, and formerly a practitioner of the CQT in both simulated and field-criminal investigations.

Funny how they never attack Doug Williams' credentials, only his message of useful countermeasures.

[Polycop]

Hey Beechtrees,

You said:

...Funny how they never attack Doug Williams' credentials, only his message of useful countermeasures.

Please allow me to do so.  Doug's website says:

"Is a veteran of the US Air Force, and was assigned to the White House Communications Agency where he worked in the Situation Room and served as communications advisor to Presidents Johnson and Nixon, (Presidential Service Badge # 1994). http://www.disa.mil/line/whca.html"

Which means exactly WHAT in the field of polygraph?
 
"Is a graduate of Oklahoma City University with a BS degree in Police Science."

Good for police training, means nothing to the polygraph community execpt maybe as a prerequsite to an accredited polygraph school and to eventual membership in the APA.
  
"Is a graduate of the National Training Center for Lie Detection in New York City."

That is Dick Arthurs' school.  A small private polygraph school that teaches polygraph as little more than an interrogational prop.

"Was the first person licensed by examination under the 1972 Oklahoma Polygraph Licensing Act, and was licensed by the State of Oklahoma from 1972 to 1979."

Probably true, don't really know.
 
"Administered over 3000 polygraph examinations for many law enforcement agencies including the Secret Service and the FBI."

I love this one.  According to Doug, who spent 6 years as a working examiner.  If he REALLY administered 3000 exams, he would have had to administer OVER 2 exams a day, for every work day, over six years.  That does not include holidays, vacations, sick days, training days, other other duties, (to include his supposed "supervisory duties".  All in all, HIGHLY unlikely.  Add to that his original claim of having conducted over 6000 exams, and well, I just suspect he has been taking a bit of a vacation with the truth...

Oh, and for his having run exams for the FBI and Secret Service?  You might want to know these agencies NEVER use civilian police examiners.  period.  Now Doug may have run an exam or two in cases where his PD had a common investigation with the federal government, but these agencies are highly internalized.  They don't even let other federal agencies run their exams....

"Is a ten year veteran of the Oklahoma City Police Department and held the rank of Detective Sergeant."

And he was sooo incensed at polygraph that he quit a glorious police career to take up the anti-polygraph banner.?  Boy, now THATS dedication.  Next thing you know, he will claim to have slept in his car during his crusade...

"Testified as an expert witness before the U.S. Senate and the U.S. Congress and was very instrumental in getting the Employee Polygraph Protection Act passed into law."

"Very Instrumental?"  By who's words?  Dougs?

"Was a member of the board of the Office of Technology Assessment, an investigative arm of the US Congress impaneled to study the validity of the polygraph as a "lie detector"

Oh, I would LOVE to see the letter that appointed him to the OTA board.

Has been a guest lecturer at a number of colleges and universities.  Has been featured on many national television shows including CBS 60 MINUTES, CBS NIGHTWATCH, NBC NIGHTLY NEWSWITH TOM BROKAW, CNN WORLD NEWS, FOX NETWORK'S EXPLORING THE UNKNOWN, NBC DATELINE, FOX NEWS, CNN NEWS STAND, A DOCUMENTARY FOR THE DISCOVERY CHANNEL, and will soon be featured in a documentary produced by THE LEARNING CHANNEL.
Has been featured in over 150 newspaper and magazine articles, scores of local TV news and talk shows, and over 2,000 radio talk shows."

Although I tend to doubt the numbers here, I do believe he had done all these media things.  Doug LOVES to see himself on TV.  Unfortunately that does NOT make him any kind of an "expert."

Polycop...
    

[beech trees]

It's so sad when polygraphers turn on one of their own.....

[Polycop]

It's so sad when polygraphers turn on one of their own.....

I don't really care about being accused of "turning" on Williams (if that is what you meant).  He is giving bad information to people and making alot of money doing it.  However, I did say something in my last post that I truly regret.  I made a comment about the Arthur School that was based on information I received from others, but did not know for myself.  I made the statement that they teach polygraph as a "prop" for interrogation.  I have since reviewed their curriculum and have discovered that they indeed provide a detailed polygraph training program that explores many areas in the application of polygraph as science and as an investigative tool.  I stand corrected and am sorry for any insult I may have made towards that school or any of its graduates.

Polycop... :-/

[beech trees]

I'm curious how Mr. Williams arrived at such a 'bad place' with regard to his opinions and advice on polygraphy if he is a graduate of such a fine school.

And what bad information is he giving?

[beech trees]

Well Sir George, it looks as if Mr. Horvath will not be rising to this occassion to correct the record. Obfuscation yet again, this time with a willing 'journalist'.

Dave

[George W. Maschke]

Indeed, it appears that Professor Horvath will not be publicly responding to my challenge to him to set the record straight, though I don't know what he may have privately communicated to Mr. Bauman.

As of today, Monday, 8 July, I have still not heard from Mr. Bauman <bau@desnews.com> whether he believes that the description of comparison/control questions in his article was true and accurate, and I somehow expect I won't be receiving a reply.

In addition, I sent the following e-mail to Mr. Bauman's news editor, Chuck Gates <chuck@desnews.com>, on 1 July 2002:

Dear Mr. Gates,

Some two weeks ago, I pointed out to reporter Ed Bauman a significant factual error in his article, "Polygraph tests not flawless." The error revolves around the nature of comarison (also called "control") questions. (For details, see the AntiPolygraph.org message board post, A Public Challenge to Frank Horvath.)

Mr. Bauman wrote back saying that he would look into this, and if there was an error, he'd publish a correction. On Thursday of last week, Mr. Bauman e-mailed me that he and you had agreed that no correction was necessary.

I am perplexed over how you could have reached this conclusion. Do you believe that the description of comparison/control questions in Mr. Bauman's article is true and accurate? I'm curious as to what Dr. Horvath might have told you in this regard.

In any event, it appears that the Deseret News has made a conscious editorial decision not to expose the fraudulent nature of polygraph "testing." I don't see any justification for such a decision, and would be grateful for any clarification you might provide.

Sincerely,

George W. Maschke
AntiPolygraph.org

I expect that I won't be hearing from Chuck Gates, either...

On the face of things, it appears that Professor Horvath deliberately misled Mr. Bauman regarding the nature of control/comparison questions, and that the Deseret News, having been made aware of the truth of the matter, has made a deliberate editorial decision not to expose "the lie behind the lie detector."