Slashdot Mirror
Feds Seek Prison For Man Who Taught How To Beat a Polygraph
George Maschke writes "In a case with serious First Amendment implications, McClatchy reports that federal prosecutors are seeking a prison sentence for Chad Dixon of Indiana, who committed the crime of teaching people how to pass or beat a lie detector test. Some of his students passed polygraphs and went on to be hired by federal agencies. A pleading filed by prosecutors all but admits that polygraph tests can be beaten. The feds have also raided and seized business records from Doug Williams, who has taught many more people how to pass or beat a polygraph over the past 30 years. Williams has not been criminally charged. I'm a co-founder of AntiPolygraph.org (we suggest using Tor to access the site) a non-profit, public interest website dedicated to exposing and ending waste, fraud, and abuse associated with the use of lie detectors. We offer a free e-book, The Lie Behind the Lie Detector (1 mb PDF) that explains how to pass a polygraph (whether or not one is telling the truth). We make this information available not to help liars beat the system, but to provide truthful people with a means of protecting themselves against the high risk of a false positive outcome. As McClatchy reported last week, I received suspicious e-mails earlier this year that seemed like an attempted entrapment. Rather than trying to criminalize teaching people how to pass a polygraph, isn't it time our government re-evaluated its reliance on the pseudoscience of polygraphy?"
http://www.csicop.org/si/show/polygraphs_and_the_national_labs_dangerous_ruse_undermines_national_securit/
...richie - It is a good day to code.
Polygraphs are one reason I left classified work for greener pastures. I believe they are nearly worthless, used just as much to harass as anything else.
In my last classified job, my employer hired a new security officer. After several months on the job she was sent for her polygraph. She returned the same day, the test unadministered because she had a heart problem. The problem was manageable, but it made it impossible for an "accurate" test. Despite this she remained in her job. With access to far more material than myself and others--sensitive material covering many programs--she was excused. Obviously the intelligence community doesn't believe in polygraphs either. I'm glad to be out of that world.
"Love is a familiar; Love is a devil: there is no evil angel but Love." --William Shakespeare ('Love's Labors Lost')
I appears he gave a few specific people methods on how to avoid the feds on specific (federal) crimes they had committed, that in itself could be (and was) considered aiding.
The prosecution is using it as a religious platform for their pseudoscience saying that any negative speak of their golden cow (polygraph tests) is an affront to god and country.
Essentially the government is trying to frame the issue that anyone that does anti-poly is a child molesting terrorist so they can control the discussion and then control debate on they laws surrounding it.
having 'flunked' a lie detector test many years ago for a stupid shit job at radio shack, where i was 100% truthful, i know from my personal experience they are shit...
on top of that, a couple of guys who I KNOW were lying, scamming, stealing, doping, snorting, salesdroid types, PASSED their lie detector tests from the same operator, in the same timeframe, for the same shit radio shack job...
they went on to become managers...
They're generally inadmissable as evidence or at least require both sides agree to them as evidence here as well, however they still see use for job screenings and parole.
He already plead guilty. Ironically the summary lies, he fell for entrapment, providing a lie for an undercover investigator to purportedly get a federal job dishonestly. Wire fraud is in there too. Sorry, I read the article.
There's nothing first amendment related, you can tell people to befriend the examiner, control their breathing, put antiperspirant on their fingers, and be anxious for early control questions so you seem less anxious for later questions.
If he'd simply responded, "I can't provide answers you should give" instead of, "tell them X", he'd have been fine.
I do feel for the poor guy, he's literally poor, had a failing business and was trying to generate side income to support his family/kids by charging people for what is in the wikipedia article on polygraphs, and obvious to anyone who had parents they lied to.
Actually, it sounds more like they should have hired the guy to help them out.
It has. Once a government reaches a certain "size", it becomes The Operating System for the country.
Nothing, not even the citizens that it used to serve, is as important as the Federal Government and its needs.
You will note ancillary evidence: citizens become taxpayers; money from citizen becomes the Federal Government's money then Congress' or the President's money; then a giant slush fund for Federal Government employees, appointees, officers; Law Enforcement Agencies (local, state, and Federal) becoming armies for particular fiefdoms; destroying the citizens that it was founded to protect for small, illogical, inconsequential actions (that is, assuming powers, privileges, and rights that it was never given). The evidence is written throughout human history: Babylon, Egypt, Rome, Germany, China, USSR, etc., etc.
No psychologist worth their salt puts any stock in polygraphs, it's law enforcement that loves them. Psych 101: a good test should be reliable and valid. Polygraphs do not meet the criteria.
My high school friend Ricky Ames never thought much of polygraph tests. In 1986 and '91, he passed two of them while spying for the Russians.
I once learned to self-regulate my brain waves (EEG), or at least to produce alpha waves at will. The autonomic nervous system responses measured in polygraph tests (chiefly GSR, pulse rate and breathing rhythm) would be easier to self-regulate than brainwaves. Try it at home.
Instead of 10 years of yoga (see, for example, Delmonte, M. M. (1984). Electrocortical activity and related phenomena associated with meditation practice: A literature review. International Journal of Neuroscience, 24, pp. 217-231), instead search on "GSR biofeedback and relaxation" and check out the GSR2 Biofeedback Relaxation System for $70 on Amazon.
Think of something you forgot to do, get a genuine pang of guilt, and watch the response. Now you know where you don't want your mind to go. If you can't convince yourself in your heart that you are a good little girl/boy (good that you forgot), and you can't zen out on pleasant scenes, then do mental arithmetic.
A lot of people in physiology have measured all these responses. I have no experience with polygraph testing per se. As the CIA found out with Ricky Ames, the tests are hard to do well. Still, I bet that if I had all the time in the world -- and some experience as an actor and toastmaster -- I could surprise and trick out most test evaders. But, in routine use with routine false positives, where's any justice for the victims of fallible technology and foolish policy?
Many are destined 2reason wrongly; others, not 2reason at all; and others, to persecute those who do reason. Voltaire
Most successful salespeople (i.e. the ones who have made many millions) never lie, because it'll ruin their reputation. If you'll notice, a good sales person is always keeping you on your toes, asking you questions, and eliciting answers from you. If they're really good, they'll never have to answer anything on their own, instead coaxing you to answer for them.
I'm not a salesperson... I hate sales people, and I hate dealing with them. But if you mimic what they do, it helps with your own business dealings. For example, Sales 101 is to never quote a figure, always get the other person to quote a figure. At a minimum, you never give an opening quote. But if you're really good, you'll arrive at a deal without ever having given a solid figure of your own.
A simple way to try this is at a car dealership. If he's old school he says, "what will it take to get you in this car?" Instead of trying to low-ball him (which is precisely what he's expecting), throw the question back in his face. "What do you think is a fair deal?" It'll be a really awkward moment, but in any event once you get him to quote a number, you just work your way down from there.