Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 09/17/2002 10:37:06 PM PDT by kattracks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: kattracks
I wouldn't take one, either; they're completely unreliable. Some states, to my knowledge, still have statutes and processes in place where the police departments can decline to investigate a rape complaint if the rape victim doesn't take and pass a lie-detector test. Would you want your mother or sister or daughter to depend on the "accuracy" of a lie-detector test in such a case? Polygraph tests are useful almost exclusively if the subject actually believes that they work and is thereby motivated to confess. Otherwise, they're just bad sci-fi.
2 posted on 09/17/2002 10:50:01 PM PDT by toenail
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: kattracks
"While the young men were willing to take a polygraph.... we didn't want them to take a polygraph at this time," said the students' lawyer, Khummar Wahid, in an interview Tuesday night on MSNBC's "Phil Donahue Show."

BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

6 posted on 09/17/2002 10:57:31 PM PDT by freebilly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: kattracks
"Wahid said he also feared the test may be used as evidence against his clients,

Where did this numb nuts go to law school?

9 posted on 09/17/2002 11:03:00 PM PDT by Michael.SF.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: kattracks
Lie detector test or not, the one question I'd like answered (and probably the cops, too) is what set off the dogs? Are the dogs lying?
31 posted on 09/18/2002 12:17:13 AM PDT by etcetera
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: kattracks
"If she had it to do over again, she'd do the same thing. "

Good for you, Eunice. You did the right thing. The Heroes of Flight 93 would be proud of you.

32 posted on 09/18/2002 12:25:45 AM PDT by Savage Beast
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: dennisw; Alouette; Thinkin' Gal
>The refusal came after their accuser, Georgia resident Eunice Stone, said she'd be willing to submit to a lie test to prove her story, challenging them to do the same.

Would a Muslim lie?

36 posted on 09/18/2002 3:44:34 AM PDT by 2sheep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: kattracks
You can pass a lie detector test. There are more than enough publications describing procedures. You can also practice lying. If you have a client who will be taking a lie detector test. You hire your own expert to prepare the witness. Lie detectors are a tool of intimidation for the uninitiated.

The idiot three may not be terrorists but they are definitly guilty of being a**h**es. (hope this is sanitized enough)
37 posted on 09/18/2002 3:45:05 AM PDT by Greeklawyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: kattracks
"There's some scientific problems with taking a polygraph," complained Wahid, who is part of a legal team representing the three students assembled by the Council on American Islamic Relations.

Yes I agree that there is a valid reason for this man not wanting his "clients" to take a lie detector test. There IS a problem that could place them in peril. The problem is that the lie detectors detect LIES.

Eunice is putting her money where her mouth is. Why don't they?

44 posted on 09/18/2002 5:16:15 AM PDT by PleaseNoMore
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: kattracks
The more I listen to these 3 stooges (and they are all over TV), the more convinced I've become that it was a setup for whatever reason:
1. to test police response
2. to disrupt
3. to get on TV
4. to make a fuss to discourage others from reporting suspicious behavior. Now Eunice is being called a liar and racist and other names.
45 posted on 09/18/2002 5:28:49 AM PDT by Dante3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: kattracks
I have been hoping all week for this turn of events. I don't blame anyone for not taking the test. I one had trouble with on during a job application. (got the job anyway).

But it's perfect for the publicity in this case, which is political rather than criminal.

46 posted on 09/18/2002 5:38:40 AM PDT by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: kattracks
Paging Dr. Howard...Dr. Fine...Dr. Howard...
63 posted on 09/18/2002 9:55:40 AM PDT by mhking
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: kattracks
jmichel@larkinhospital.com

This is the e-mail addy, in case anyone wants to write to Larkin Hospital and tell them your thoughts.
81 posted on 09/19/2002 12:00:29 AM PDT by Gracey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: kattracks
Well in my opinion I think the woman was telling the truth Here is what happened IMO.....the men were royally pissed off at being "singled out" as terrorists everywhere they went after 9/11 because of their ethnicity. So they decided to get even by giving people something to really sweat about. I don't think they counted on the woman taking serious action and they thought they would continue on with the rest of their day like nothing ever happened. She would have to be a mental nutcase to go after 3 men for absolutely no reason right after a pleasant breakfast with her son. Those people are out there though.

My opinion on polygraphs is that they are very good. I think they're correct 90% of the time, if not more. Personally I think incorrect results are false negatives in favor of liars.
86 posted on 09/19/2002 1:50:51 AM PDT by MadisonA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: kattracks
The refusal came after their accuser, Georgia resident Eunice Stone, said she'd be willing to submit to a lie test to prove her story, challenging them to do the same.

Hmmm, I believe this woman's telling the truth, and the three muslim types are liars.

90 posted on 09/20/2002 11:21:10 PM PDT by The Great Satan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson