guilty until proven innocent
-
So I just had my first polygraph. I must admit that I was under the impression that it would be 'somewhat' reliable but man was I in for a surprise. It kept saying I was lying about my answer when I kept telling the truth! Obviously no one believed me. The worst part is that I kept saying I didn't do something and the polygraph said I did. How are you supposed to prove that you didn't do something? At least if it was a question about whether I did something I could go back and prove it somehow. The polygrapher kept getting mad at me to because he was telling me I failed on a certain question and I cracked a smile (I thought he was just messing with me to get me to 'confess' something). Even though polygraphs aren't supposed to be 100% effective I think the "general belief" is that they are. Try to tell someone that you failed the polygraph and you were telling the truth - see how many people believe you. I guess I'm guilty until proven innocent......:mad:
Luckily polygraph results are not admissible evidence in a court of law because they have been proven so unreliable. Dumb people may think you're a liar, but well-informed people know better.
-
So I just had my first polygraph. I must admit that I was under the impression that it would be 'somewhat' reliable but man was I in for a surprise. It kept saying I was lying about my answer when I kept telling the truth! Obviously no one believed me. The worst part is that I kept saying I didn't do something and the polygraph said I did. How are you supposed to prove that you didn't do something? At least if it was a question about whether I did something I could go back and prove it somehow. The polygrapher kept getting mad at me to because he was telling me I failed on a certain question and I cracked a smile (I thought he was just messing with me to get me to 'confess' something). Even though polygraphs aren't supposed to be 100% effective I think the "general belief" is that they are. Try to tell someone that you failed the polygraph and you were telling the truth - see how many people believe you. I guess I'm guilty until proven innocent......:mad:
Apparently you can fool a polygraph by repeatedly clenching and unclenching the muscles in your buttocks or step on a thumbtack. What you do is step on the tack (clench your buttocks) when you are telling the truth, and when you tell a lie you don't. The theory is that you trigger the same responses for truth as you would when you lie. It is worth noting that professional law enforcement goes way beyond the simplistic test so this wouldn't work in that case, but for a simple bit of fun this should be enough.
declassified wrote:
Even though polygraphs aren't supposed to be 100% effective I think the "general belief" is that they are.
If people considered them reliable then tney would be admissible as court evidence. AFAIK, in most countries they aren't - so they aren't viewed that seriously, but they do make good television.
Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before.
-
So I just had my first polygraph. I must admit that I was under the impression that it would be 'somewhat' reliable but man was I in for a surprise. It kept saying I was lying about my answer when I kept telling the truth! Obviously no one believed me. The worst part is that I kept saying I didn't do something and the polygraph said I did. How are you supposed to prove that you didn't do something? At least if it was a question about whether I did something I could go back and prove it somehow. The polygrapher kept getting mad at me to because he was telling me I failed on a certain question and I cracked a smile (I thought he was just messing with me to get me to 'confess' something). Even though polygraphs aren't supposed to be 100% effective I think the "general belief" is that they are. Try to tell someone that you failed the polygraph and you were telling the truth - see how many people believe you. I guess I'm guilty until proven innocent......:mad:
declassified wrote:
I was under the impression that it would be 'somewhat' reliable but man was I in for a surprise.
They are only reliable under specific and highly controlled and ultimately non-repeatable circumstances. Ultimately it is impossible to know 100% reliably that you tell a lie or the truth. A polygraph attempts to make a decision based on unconscious behaviors that have been associated with people who deliberately lie (but are not serial liars). A) nerveousness, almost always indicates lying, or just nerveousness, but in the case of a polygraph... lying except when it is nerveousness (you get the picture). B) a change in breathing rhythm, a person who has central apnea will almost always fail a polygraph if the question period is long enough, because apnea events occur even while awake. The repitition of the questions will always produce boredom and relaxation, and increase the likelihood of an apnea event. C) Serial liars. These are the ones you really want to catch, are the one thing that a polygraph cannot catch. They are so accustomed to lying that there is no longer the unconscious autonomic behaviors associated with lying tha thte polygraph needs to catch. D) the questions matter, not just the written questions but what they mean to each person taking the test.... For instance, if you are asked if you ever stole something and you have a momentary flash-back to kindergarten when you stole a toy from a girl and broke it. There is that pang of guilt and then you answer "no." boom, you are lying you know you are lying per se, but it really has nothing to do with the question asked. Certainly you committed no crime, you will never get in trouble for that incident, but the fact that you remembered it just then and then answered contrary means you equated the incident with the word steal and then answered contrary. A skilled polygrapher has overlapping questions, and asks you to explain a few things, and must adapt the test as they are going through. You cannot do polygraphs by rote, which few businesses realize when they sign up for commercial polygraph services. So, in the end you have a polygraph test which is worth just slightly more than the paper it is written on. A good polygrapher would go back to the questions you failed and ask you about them, not tell you that you failed the question. Questions can be horribly misleading because the English language is open to interpretation, and we as a people are open to suggestion. Any
-
Apparently you can fool a polygraph by repeatedly clenching and unclenching the muscles in your buttocks or step on a thumbtack. What you do is step on the tack (clench your buttocks) when you are telling the truth, and when you tell a lie you don't. The theory is that you trigger the same responses for truth as you would when you lie. It is worth noting that professional law enforcement goes way beyond the simplistic test so this wouldn't work in that case, but for a simple bit of fun this should be enough.
declassified wrote:
Even though polygraphs aren't supposed to be 100% effective I think the "general belief" is that they are.
If people considered them reliable then tney would be admissible as court evidence. AFAIK, in most countries they aren't - so they aren't viewed that seriously, but they do make good television.
Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before.
Pete O'Hanlon wrote:
but they do make good television
This reminds me of a Simpson episode --the one when Homer finds an alien, who turned out to be Mr. Burns. When X File agent Scully is questioning Homer, they use a polygraph, and the sequence is something like this: [Scully] - This is a polygraph, it will tell us whether you are lying or not. Do you understand? [Homer] - Yes. [*The polygraph explodes*] :laugh::laugh::laugh:
Hope is the negation of reality - Raistlin Majere
-
Luckily polygraph results are not admissible evidence in a court of law because they have been proven so unreliable. Dumb people may think you're a liar, but well-informed people know better.
Independent123 wrote:
Luckily polygraph results are not admissible evidence in a court of law because they have been proven so unreliable.
Judging by the OPs name though, this was related to a govt security clearance not a criminal case. And while the legal systems rules are designed to minimize the risk of convicting the innocent, security regulations are about minimizing the risk of letting a spy in. Better that a hundred honest men be denied than one spy allowed within the gates is the operative process. As a result despite the limitations some data owners still insist on them to allow access to their holy of holies.
Otherwise [Microsoft is] toast in the long term no matter how much money they've got. They would be already if the Linux community didn't have it's head so firmly up it's own command line buffer that it looks like taking 15 years to find the desktop. -- Matthew Faithfull
-
So I just had my first polygraph. I must admit that I was under the impression that it would be 'somewhat' reliable but man was I in for a surprise. It kept saying I was lying about my answer when I kept telling the truth! Obviously no one believed me. The worst part is that I kept saying I didn't do something and the polygraph said I did. How are you supposed to prove that you didn't do something? At least if it was a question about whether I did something I could go back and prove it somehow. The polygrapher kept getting mad at me to because he was telling me I failed on a certain question and I cracked a smile (I thought he was just messing with me to get me to 'confess' something). Even though polygraphs aren't supposed to be 100% effective I think the "general belief" is that they are. Try to tell someone that you failed the polygraph and you were telling the truth - see how many people believe you. I guess I'm guilty until proven innocent......:mad:
declassified wrote:
The polygrapher kept getting mad at me to because he was telling me I failed on a certain question and I cracked a smile
BTW, if the polygrapher told you that you were lying he wanted you to fail. Period. End of discussion. There are two highly probable outcomes to telling you that you that you failed a question: 1) increased nerveousness which means you will fail 2) incredulity which will trigger emotional response and again you fail.
_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
-
So I just had my first polygraph. I must admit that I was under the impression that it would be 'somewhat' reliable but man was I in for a surprise. It kept saying I was lying about my answer when I kept telling the truth! Obviously no one believed me. The worst part is that I kept saying I didn't do something and the polygraph said I did. How are you supposed to prove that you didn't do something? At least if it was a question about whether I did something I could go back and prove it somehow. The polygrapher kept getting mad at me to because he was telling me I failed on a certain question and I cracked a smile (I thought he was just messing with me to get me to 'confess' something). Even though polygraphs aren't supposed to be 100% effective I think the "general belief" is that they are. Try to tell someone that you failed the polygraph and you were telling the truth - see how many people believe you. I guess I'm guilty until proven innocent......:mad:
What is the air-speed velocity of an unladen swallow? I don't know that! *BEEEEEEEEEEEEEPPPPPPPPPPP* Arrrrrrrrggggggghhhhhhhhhhhh!
"On one of my cards it said I had to find temperatures lower than -8. The numbers I uncovered were -6 and -7 so I thought I had won, and so did the woman in the shop. But when she scanned the card the machine said I hadn't. "I phoned Camelot and they fobbed me off with some story that -6 is higher - not lower - than -8 but I'm not having it." -Tina Farrell, a 23 year old thicky from Levenshulme, Manchester.
-
declassified wrote:
The polygrapher kept getting mad at me to because he was telling me I failed on a certain question and I cracked a smile
BTW, if the polygrapher told you that you were lying he wanted you to fail. Period. End of discussion. There are two highly probable outcomes to telling you that you that you failed a question: 1) increased nerveousness which means you will fail 2) incredulity which will trigger emotional response and again you fail.
_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
-
What is the air-speed velocity of an unladen swallow? I don't know that! *BEEEEEEEEEEEEEPPPPPPPPPPP* Arrrrrrrrggggggghhhhhhhhhhhh!
"On one of my cards it said I had to find temperatures lower than -8. The numbers I uncovered were -6 and -7 so I thought I had won, and so did the woman in the shop. But when she scanned the card the machine said I hadn't. "I phoned Camelot and they fobbed me off with some story that -6 is higher - not lower - than -8 but I'm not having it." -Tina Farrell, a 23 year old thicky from Levenshulme, Manchester.
martin_hughes wrote:
What is the air-speed velocity of an unladen swallow?
which species? what is the humidity? air pressure and time and volume of last meal? ;P http://www.style.org/unladenswallow/[^]
_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
-
martin_hughes wrote:
What is the air-speed velocity of an unladen swallow?
which species? what is the humidity? air pressure and time and volume of last meal? ;P http://www.style.org/unladenswallow/[^]
_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
I don't know that!
"On one of my cards it said I had to find temperatures lower than -8. The numbers I uncovered were -6 and -7 so I thought I had won, and so did the woman in the shop. But when she scanned the card the machine said I hadn't. "I phoned Camelot and they fobbed me off with some story that -6 is higher - not lower - than -8 but I'm not having it." -Tina Farrell, a 23 year old thicky from Levenshulme, Manchester.
-
So I just had my first polygraph. I must admit that I was under the impression that it would be 'somewhat' reliable but man was I in for a surprise. It kept saying I was lying about my answer when I kept telling the truth! Obviously no one believed me. The worst part is that I kept saying I didn't do something and the polygraph said I did. How are you supposed to prove that you didn't do something? At least if it was a question about whether I did something I could go back and prove it somehow. The polygrapher kept getting mad at me to because he was telling me I failed on a certain question and I cracked a smile (I thought he was just messing with me to get me to 'confess' something). Even though polygraphs aren't supposed to be 100% effective I think the "general belief" is that they are. Try to tell someone that you failed the polygraph and you were telling the truth - see how many people believe you. I guess I'm guilty until proven innocent......:mad:
I believe the reason polygraphs work is because you believe they do. The belief that they can register when you are lying makes you more nervous when answering statements. Combined with baseline physiological data that is collected on known truths and known lies they estimate the change in levels of stress. When they tell you something negative, they are trying to illicit a response. Remember while a polygraph may be inadmissable, any admission made to the polygrapher generally is!
Need a C# Consultant? I'm available.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know. -- Ernest Hemingway -
So I just had my first polygraph. I must admit that I was under the impression that it would be 'somewhat' reliable but man was I in for a surprise. It kept saying I was lying about my answer when I kept telling the truth! Obviously no one believed me. The worst part is that I kept saying I didn't do something and the polygraph said I did. How are you supposed to prove that you didn't do something? At least if it was a question about whether I did something I could go back and prove it somehow. The polygrapher kept getting mad at me to because he was telling me I failed on a certain question and I cracked a smile (I thought he was just messing with me to get me to 'confess' something). Even though polygraphs aren't supposed to be 100% effective I think the "general belief" is that they are. Try to tell someone that you failed the polygraph and you were telling the truth - see how many people believe you. I guess I'm guilty until proven innocent......:mad:
-
Pete O'Hanlon wrote:
but they do make good television
This reminds me of a Simpson episode --the one when Homer finds an alien, who turned out to be Mr. Burns. When X File agent Scully is questioning Homer, they use a polygraph, and the sequence is something like this: [Scully] - This is a polygraph, it will tell us whether you are lying or not. Do you understand? [Homer] - Yes. [*The polygraph explodes*] :laugh::laugh::laugh:
Hope is the negation of reality - Raistlin Majere
A true Simpson moment! :D
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
My first real C# project | Linkify!|FoldWithUs! | sighist -
declassified wrote:
The polygrapher kept getting mad at me to because he was telling me I failed on a certain question and I cracked a smile
BTW, if the polygrapher told you that you were lying he wanted you to fail. Period. End of discussion. There are two highly probable outcomes to telling you that you that you failed a question: 1) increased nerveousness which means you will fail 2) incredulity which will trigger emotional response and again you fail.
_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
But it always worked in the movies! :omg:
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
My first real C# project | Linkify!|FoldWithUs! | sighist -
But it always worked in the movies! :omg:
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
My first real C# project | Linkify!|FoldWithUs! | sighistpeterchen wrote:
But it always worked in the movies!
Actually there is a wonderful scene in an old TV show Barney Miller when they were giving a lie detector test and to prove it worked put it on one of the "serious" cops. He said he was from a galaxy far far away and the machine didn't flinch a bit.... the guy giving the test had a priceless look on his face. That was a great program. hilarious. :-D Lie detectors work, per se, but in the end they only judge probabilities. Just because you have a 1 in 100 chance of winning doesn't mean that you automatically win if you buy 100 tickets. You can increase the probability of being right in evaluating an individual, but you can never be sure.
_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
-
martin_hughes wrote:
What is the air-speed velocity of an unladen swallow?
which species? what is the humidity? air pressure and time and volume of last meal? ;P http://www.style.org/unladenswallow/[^]
_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
El Corazon wrote:
which species? what is the humidity? air pressure and time and volume of last meal? ;P
The correct counter question is African or European?.
Michael Martin Australia "I controlled my laughter and simple said "No,I am very busy,so I can't write any code for you". The moment they heard this all the smiling face turned into a sad looking face and one of them farted. So I had to leave the place as soon as possible." - Mr.Prakash One Fine Saturday. 24/04/2004
-
Pete O'Hanlon wrote:
but they do make good television
This reminds me of a Simpson episode --the one when Homer finds an alien, who turned out to be Mr. Burns. When X File agent Scully is questioning Homer, they use a polygraph, and the sequence is something like this: [Scully] - This is a polygraph, it will tell us whether you are lying or not. Do you understand? [Homer] - Yes. [*The polygraph explodes*] :laugh::laugh::laugh:
Hope is the negation of reality - Raistlin Majere
I love it-this cheered me up a little.
-
declassified wrote:
I was under the impression that it would be 'somewhat' reliable but man was I in for a surprise.
They are only reliable under specific and highly controlled and ultimately non-repeatable circumstances. Ultimately it is impossible to know 100% reliably that you tell a lie or the truth. A polygraph attempts to make a decision based on unconscious behaviors that have been associated with people who deliberately lie (but are not serial liars). A) nerveousness, almost always indicates lying, or just nerveousness, but in the case of a polygraph... lying except when it is nerveousness (you get the picture). B) a change in breathing rhythm, a person who has central apnea will almost always fail a polygraph if the question period is long enough, because apnea events occur even while awake. The repitition of the questions will always produce boredom and relaxation, and increase the likelihood of an apnea event. C) Serial liars. These are the ones you really want to catch, are the one thing that a polygraph cannot catch. They are so accustomed to lying that there is no longer the unconscious autonomic behaviors associated with lying tha thte polygraph needs to catch. D) the questions matter, not just the written questions but what they mean to each person taking the test.... For instance, if you are asked if you ever stole something and you have a momentary flash-back to kindergarten when you stole a toy from a girl and broke it. There is that pang of guilt and then you answer "no." boom, you are lying you know you are lying per se, but it really has nothing to do with the question asked. Certainly you committed no crime, you will never get in trouble for that incident, but the fact that you remembered it just then and then answered contrary means you equated the incident with the word steal and then answered contrary. A skilled polygrapher has overlapping questions, and asks you to explain a few things, and must adapt the test as they are going through. You cannot do polygraphs by rote, which few businesses realize when they sign up for commercial polygraph services. So, in the end you have a polygraph test which is worth just slightly more than the paper it is written on. A good polygrapher would go back to the questions you failed and ask you about them, not tell you that you failed the question. Questions can be horribly misleading because the English language is open to interpretation, and we as a people are open to suggestion. Any
El Corazon wrote:
Questions can be horribly misleading because the English language is open to interpretation
I told the polygrapher before the test started that one of the questions was worded very wierd and that I didn't know how to answer. The question: "Are you now withholding the full extent of all drug use or sales?" [me] "I dont know how to answer that - I know I haven't used or sold drugs - should I say 'yes' or 'no'?" [him] You should tell the truth [me] I know but what I am saying is that I dont know what 'yes' or 'no' means to that question - can you replace the word 'withholding' with 'divulging' so that I can answer it confidently? [him] "no, 80,000 people have answered that question before you - suddenly you don't know what it means?" [me] thats right - i get accused all of the time for misinterpreting what people are saying So on the polygraph I had to convince myself to answer "no" - even though my automatic response is "yes". Then wouldn't you know - I answered "yes" once on accident. He practically flipped over in his chair like he had just captured osama bin laden. "I knew it" he said. You failed. A part of me still feels like he is just messing with me and that I really passed - because I did tell the truth. My question is "when I said yes on accident did it register as deceptive?"
-
El Corazon wrote:
Questions can be horribly misleading because the English language is open to interpretation
I told the polygrapher before the test started that one of the questions was worded very wierd and that I didn't know how to answer. The question: "Are you now withholding the full extent of all drug use or sales?" [me] "I dont know how to answer that - I know I haven't used or sold drugs - should I say 'yes' or 'no'?" [him] You should tell the truth [me] I know but what I am saying is that I dont know what 'yes' or 'no' means to that question - can you replace the word 'withholding' with 'divulging' so that I can answer it confidently? [him] "no, 80,000 people have answered that question before you - suddenly you don't know what it means?" [me] thats right - i get accused all of the time for misinterpreting what people are saying So on the polygraph I had to convince myself to answer "no" - even though my automatic response is "yes". Then wouldn't you know - I answered "yes" once on accident. He practically flipped over in his chair like he had just captured osama bin laden. "I knew it" he said. You failed. A part of me still feels like he is just messing with me and that I really passed - because I did tell the truth. My question is "when I said yes on accident did it register as deceptive?"
declassified wrote:
My question is "when I said yes on accident did it register as deceptive?"
No, any natural reaction will register as truth, any non-natural or hesitant answer will register as a lie. If the lie is accidental it will not register as a lie, it will register as truth. If you believe the lie, subconsciously convinced yourself of it, it will register as true.
_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
-
So I just had my first polygraph. I must admit that I was under the impression that it would be 'somewhat' reliable but man was I in for a surprise. It kept saying I was lying about my answer when I kept telling the truth! Obviously no one believed me. The worst part is that I kept saying I didn't do something and the polygraph said I did. How are you supposed to prove that you didn't do something? At least if it was a question about whether I did something I could go back and prove it somehow. The polygrapher kept getting mad at me to because he was telling me I failed on a certain question and I cracked a smile (I thought he was just messing with me to get me to 'confess' something). Even though polygraphs aren't supposed to be 100% effective I think the "general belief" is that they are. Try to tell someone that you failed the polygraph and you were telling the truth - see how many people believe you. I guess I'm guilty until proven innocent......:mad:
declassified wrote:
I guess I'm guilty until proven innocent
Have you ever read the book 'The innocent man'? It tells the true story of a man back in the 80's accused of crimes he didnt commit. But he was considdered guilty until proven innocent. Im reading it at the moment... good book
"There are three sides to every story. Yours, mine and the truth" ~ unknown
