Slashdot Mirror


Polygraph E-Book at Issue in Federal Civil Suit

George Maschke writes "The question of whether a patient in the state of Iowa's Civil Commitment Unit for Sexual Offenders (CCUSO) may read AntiPolygraph.org's free e-book, The Lie Behind the Lie Detector, was at issue in a recently-decided federal civil suit (Willis v. Smith, et al.). The CCUSO relies heavily on polygraphs in its treatment program. The e-book in question provides relevant information that the directors of the CCUSO don't want patients to know. See, The Lie Behind the Lie Detector at Issue in Federal Civil Suit."

6 of 36 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Forum post clearly biased. by MarkusQ · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Biased, perhaps, but only in the sense that a textbook that presents the facts is "biased" towards the truth. "Lie detectors" as about as reliable as phrenology or handwriting analysis--e.g. not at all.

    --MarkusQ

  2. i can see it now... by St.+Arbirix · · Score: 4, Funny

    Polygraph administrator: Have you read "The Lie Behind the Lie Detector"?

    Subject: No.

    Polygraph administrator: Crap.

    --
    Direct away from face when opening.
  3. YRO issue? by WarPresident · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If the person is incarcerated, I don't see it as a violation of their rights. The real issue here is the "therapy".

    The use of a lie detector to verify the veracity of a subject's responses has been proven, time and again, to produce false positives and false negatives in abundance. Also, there are simple tricks that can be used to "game" a lie detector. The administrator of the test can "game" the lie detector as well.

    Let's put this in a different perspective. I were an Iowan (Iowite?), I'd be worried about a supposedly "cured" sex offender coming to live in my neighborhood. It's one thing to have the sex offender believe in the Tooth Fairy (Lie Detector), but it's insane for a sex offender's treatment/release to be based on what that Tooth Fairy says about the sex offender.

    --
    Here come da fudge!
  4. Re:*My* Rights Online? by shaitand · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "I see that, but it doesn't change anything - he still has, as a felon and involuntary resident, fewer rights than the rest of us."

    Last I checked once you serve your time for a crime you no longer have less rights than the rest of us (unless you were released early under the condition you agree to have less).

    As an involuntary resident he has the same rights you would have if you were elderly and your children felt you were senile and had you committed. People are involuntarily committed when they are believed to be a danger to themselves OR others; being convicted of a crime is not a requirement.

    If the treatment center has the right to use something akin to palm reading in their treatment AND to stop their paitients from finding out why it is akin to palm reading, that applies to EVERYONE committed there; not just ex-cons.

  5. Re:Forum post clearly biased. by MarkusQ · · Score: 3, Insightful

    In truth, lie detectors are based on recordable behaviors of humans when exposed to stimulus, namely the sweating or increased breathing. Psycholgists love to talk about that, it's an observable phenomenon.

    The problem with "lie detector" tests comes when the result is inconclusive. Does this indicate a lie, or the truth? Neither.

    No, the problem is that eating chilli can cause the same symptoms, as can the posibility of sex or failure of an air conditioner. Just because fire trucks have the "recordable behaviour" of showing up at fires, we can not conclude that the fire station is perpetually in flames.

    --MarkusQ

  6. Easy way to mess with the "Man" by sleepingsquirrel · · Score: 4, Funny
    I always thought it would be fun to get a list of employees at the CIA, NSA, FBI, etc. and send a hardcopy of "The Lie Behind the Lie Detector" to a large number of them. Then their next annual polygraph test might be fun...
    • Examiner: So Johnson, do you have anything you'd like to tell us before we begin?
    • Employee: Well, er, I got this package in the mail...
    • Examiner: And? (starts to take notes, fiddles with knobs on polygraph)
    • Employee: ...and it contained a copy of this book you see...
    • Examiner: (eyebrows raise) Go on.
    • Employee: Well, it had the title like "The lie behind the lie detector" or something.
    • Examiner: (shit! Fourth one today!) Did you read it?
    • Employee: Uh, no.
    • Examiner: But how can we believe you now , since if you did read it you would know how to beat the machine? You could simply lie to us and tell us you didn't read the book.
    • Employee: I guess you'll just have to believe me.
    • Examiner: But if we believed you in the first place, we wouldn't have had to test you with the polygraph, now would we?
    • Employee: Er, um...
    • Examiner: So logically, we have to fire you.
    • Employee: What?!? How can you fire me for simply getting a book in the mail from some nut on the internet?
    • Examiner: I feel for you Johnson, but them's the breaks. My hands are tied. Better luck next time.