Posted on 09/17/2002 10:37:06 PM PDT by kattracks
Three Muslim medical students who were stopped by police on Friday and interrogated for 17-hours after allegedly making jokes and threats related to the 9-11 anniversary have declined to take lie detector tests to back up their denials.
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.
"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."
"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.
Wahid said he also feared the test may be used as evidence against his clients, explaining, "at this time we're not 100 percent confident that the FDLE or Georgia or the FBI won't be in some way trying to file some sort of criminal charges here."
While he didn't expect his clients to be charged with a crime, the CAIR lawyer said he has yet to be told officially that they're in the clear. "We haven't gotten any real assurances publicly from (law enforcement) that they're not going to pursue anything here," he told Donahue.
The three Muslim students claim tipster Stone got it wrong when she called law enforcement on Thursday to report she overheard them while dining at a Georgia Shoney's restaurant making what sounded like plans for another terrorist attack on America.
"If they mourned 9-11, what will they think of 9-13?" one of the three said, according to the earwitness. "Do we have enough to bring it down?" the same student added, Stone said. "If we don't have enough to bring it down, I have contacts. We will get enough to bring it down," a second student allegedly replied.
According to reports the next day, a bomb sniffing dog in Florida later detected the presence of explosives in one of the students' vehicles after they were detained, but the FBI released the trio Friday without charges.
The students maintained that they made no references to 9-11 while dining at Shoney's and claimed that Stone had misinterpreted the rest of their comments.
Mrs. Stone told Donahue that if she had it to do over again, she'd do the same thing.
Read more on this subject in related Hot Topics:
But these three young men ARE NOT APPLYING FOR SECURITY JOBS NOR COMMITTED ANY CRIME. In other words they have no reason to avoid proving the truth of what they said and did in Shoneys.
Things look good if they pass, and if not, who cares?
for the most part, lie detectors are just to scare people into confessing.
A modern (not like the one in the movies usually) lie detector which is conducted by a PROFESSIONAL (not just some Joe who took a week long course) is VERY VERY reliable.
In fact, from my experience, people who don't want to take them, are usually lieing.
Secondly, that stuff from the movie that was mentioned is bull$hit. That is hollywood crap. It is very VERY VERY hard to trick a lie detector, assuming you don't have a serious mental complication.
In fact, modern professionally administrated lie detectors are so accurate that the mossad, the shaback, and the CIA feel confident enough to use it on THEIR OWN AGENTS to verify truthfulness.
Don't believe anything in the movies.
Whether or not it should be allowed in court is a more complicated and seperate discussion, but as far as I'm concerned, if you're innocent, and really want to prove it, take one. If you're innocent you'll pass.
Do you have a link? I'm thinking of a career change. ;^)
I was on a jury for some guy who murdered his wife...he passed a lie detector test. Of course that was never allowed in court, but after we had convicted him, we read about it in the paper.
And for general screening, they're useful for guidance, but I wouldn't trust polygraphs in any specific instance.
http://www.fbi.gov/congress/congress01/senser071801.htm -- "As there are elsewhere in the Intelligence Community, there will be unexplainable false positives and, as we saw in the Ames case, false negatives. On balance, however, we believe the potential for damage to be done by traitors outweighs these concerns."
There was a thread a while back here on FR about detecting minute thermal changes around the eyes while lying. It's an evolutionary response, the article said, for reflexively looking for an escape route. I'll have to find out more about that; it sounds interesting. It would be great for swearing-in ceremonies for politicians.... Time for bed.
And they might be asked if America deserved 9/11 because of its Middle East policies and support of Zionism....
You're going to confuse everyone on this thread.
Good for you, Eunice. You did the right thing. The Heroes of Flight 93 would be proud of you.
That says it all as far as I'm concerned. I've heard bits of some of their TV interviews - they keep changing their story. By refusing to take the lie dectector test - they just admitted they're "afraid" whether one believes the test are reliable or not.
Would a Muslim lie?
Like being a muslim?
Islamic Concept of Al-Taqiyah to infiltrate and destroy kafir countries
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.