Florida Post-Conviction testing

[orolan]

Thanks, beech trees, for the response to Mr. Shitty. My sentiments exactly. Obviously just a lurker trying to stir something up.
Fair Chance, neither test was videotaped. Under Florida Polygraph Association rules, the examiner is required to either record the audio or videotape it. This is part of the problem with the examiner releasing the documents, etc. I don't recall seeing a recorder, and he will neither confirm nor deny the existence of a tape. There also is a rule stating that only 4 exams can be given in one day, but I know I was #6 for the first one, because I went last.
I haven't done much lately, due to the holidays, but I'm about to get it rolling again. I'll keep everybody posted.

[Batman (Guest)]

Orolan,

Found your initial posting on this thread interesting.  I'm curious as to why you were required to undergo post-conviction sex offender polygraphs in the first place.  What exactly were you convicted of, if you don't mind my asking?

Also, what was your motivation, other than trying to discredit the polygraph process, for doing what you did during your first post-conviction exam in April 2000?

Batman

[StanTman]

Jim.
I think your story is very interesting. It appears though hat you read a little to much science fiction when you were growing up. Where did you get it? If you made it up entirely yourself then I think you really need some type of counseling .
Come On George can't you find anything more credible than this clown. This just makes us all look like a bunch of idiots.

[Skeptic]

Jim.
I think your story is very interesting. It appears though hat you read a little to much science fiction when you were growing up. Where did you get it? If you made it up entirely yourself then I think you really need some type of counseling .
Come On George can't you find anything more credible than this clown. This just makes us all look like a bunch of idiots.

"StanTman",
Since I think it's safe to assume you're of the "pro-polygraph" persuasion, I can't think of much that doesn't make "you all" look like a bunch of idiots.  You certainly don't seem to need much help from us.

But that's just my opinion

Skeptic

[orolan]

Been kind of busy, so haven't been able to keep up. Batman, I picked up a girl who had run away from home because her father had found out she was sleeping with my little brother. She was 15, he was 17. I had discussed her sexual activity with her, specifically to tell her to stop. In Georgia, that is a crime if the child isn't yours or your not a mental health professional. BTW, I notified her mother the following morning of her whereabouts. It took the father a week to convince the police to come to my house in Florida and get her (and me, too). The girl denied that I had done anything "wrong", but that doesn't matter either in these days, because she is too "immature" to know what she is saying. As for discrediting the polygraph test, it was a mutual decision between myself and my attorney to rattle some cages, because we disputed the State's right to order me to take the test. We couldn't go to court to stop it, because the Florida authorities would have merely refused to continue my supervision, forcing me to leave my home and job to go live in a state I didn't want to live in.
To StanTman, you are the idiot. On Friday, January 24th, 2003 the Grievance Committee of the American Polygraph Association opened discussion of my complaint against the examiner. Do you think I would file such a complaint for something I fabricated? Oh, but you don't believe that either, do you. Why don't you ask them yourself. The chairman's name is Dan Sosnowski, and his e-mail is SOS4911@aol.com. He may not tell you anything, but never fear. I will be posting the actual text of my complaint on my website that I am putting together on Angelfire. Stay tuned. And if you want to be legitimate, then register here instead of being a guest.
To Skeptic, thanks for the reply to StanTman. My sentiments exactly.

[sie]

A confession to a crime requires that a crime be committed to do any good. This was the basis of our reasoning, that while I could admit to possessing child pornography, it would do no good if none could be found. Does that make any sense to you?

It makes no sense to me.

As I stated once before, you decided for whatever reason to cut your losses and copped a plead. Your choice. Playing this kind of game is foolish and reckless. Your making a joke out of the seriousness of your/this kind of offense.

Just for the record, I too am a registered sex offender and telling by your posts you have a lotta work my friend. Yeah, I'm an opponent to polygraph screening but not because I may be wrongly accused of deception and denied access to my family. Rather, what scares me is the offender who is wrongly deemed  nondeceptive, released from supervision and reoffends. This gives everyone a black eye.

What scares the shit out of me is the proponents of polygraph refuse to acknowledge the limitations and vulnerability of the "Art". This poses a real threat, as far as I'm concerned, to the publics safety.

Because I've tryed to argue the issues put forth by this site, two polygraphers refuse to test me and I've come real close to being kicked out of the sotp. Now ain't that a bitch?

[orolan]

Sie,
I fail to understand your reasoning. The issues surrounding the polygraph examination have absolutely nothing to do with the seriousness (or lack thereof) of my underlying offense. In your eyes you see me playing a game, but to me this is no game. This is serious business, carefully planned and executed, and about to come to some closure.
I would ask you this question about your concerns regarding polygraphs and deceptive / innocent people: Is a person more likely to avoid detection by using the countermeasures touted on this site or by admitting to numerous acts known to be illegal or immoral? My method certainly would not allow a true sex offender to be released so he/she could re-offend. You can bet on that. The main reason this worked for me is a fundamental one - that I am NOT a pedophile,  child molester or sexual deviant. This fact had been determined by my therapist some 18 months prior to my first poly.
I chose not to use the countermeasures approach, because it is too difficult to prove that they were performed, by either the examiner or the examinee. Written answers, polygraph charts and police reports, on the other hand, cannot be disputed, as they are tangible objects. This is necessary, because I can't file suit on the basis of my own admission that I wiggled my toes during a question to skew the result. I would be laughed out of the courtroom within the first 5 minutes. That suit will be filed by the middle of next week, and I will be providing a copy of it to an esteemed member of this site for his personal perusal and comment.
I am sorry that you are having troubles with polygraphers due to the information you get from this site. Be careful there.
If I may ask, what was your offense and sentence?

[sie]

Is a person more likely to avoid detection by using the countermeasures touted on this site or by admitting to numerous acts known to be illegal or immoral?  

Sorry, I just can't follow the logic of admitting to something illegal or immoral specially from someone on sex offender probation. But if the approach has or is working for you I wish you the best of luck.

If the charges against you can be proven to be false, i would seek a post conviction overturn.

As for me, I'll continue to argue that the reliance on the polygraph in the decision making process of releasing someone from supervision poses a threat to public safey. My aguement focuses not only on the polygraphs vulnerability to countermeasures as discussed on this site but also its lack of scienific validity recently put forth by the National Academy of Science.

[orolan]

Sie,

I fully understand where you're coming from. The method I chose to use is quite radical, not to mention risky. But it worked. I have managed to discredit a polygraph in a manner that the examiner will have a tough time explaining.

No possibility of having the conviction overturned. It is an undisputed fact that the girl was in my house for several days. The conviction is based on "discussing illicit sexual acts", which is very hard to prove or disprove. I freely admitted to discussing this girl's sexual activities and her need to stop them. The ability to argue that the discussions were not illicit is very difficult.

On the polygraph itself we are in agreement. Reliance on this flawed machine causes serious problems on both sides. Some of my fellow probationers are a definite danger to society, and I certainly would not want them to be released on the basis of a polygraph. Fortunately, there is only one therapist in this area, and she doesn't rely on the polygraph results to make her decisions. This is caused in part by my experience with the poly.