Federal Official Declares That Anyone Who Speaks Out Against Lie Detector Tests Should Be Criminally Investigated
from the insanity dept
The Obama administration's war on whistleblowers was already fairly crazy, what with its official designation of "leakers" as "aiding the enemy," but now apparently it's extending even further. Federal agents have now launched criminal investigations into some instructors who claim they can teach you to beat a lie detector test, all done under the mandate of the war against whistleblowers.Federal agents have launched a criminal investigation of instructors who claim they can teach job applicants how to pass lie detector tests as part of the Obama administration’s unprecedented crackdown on security violators and leakers.Methods for how to beat lie detector tests have been around for ages, and they are unreliable to begin with — so much so that many experts and groups have expressed doubt about polygraphs or disavowed them entirely. The National Research Council, the National Academy of Sciences, the Congress Office of Technology Assessment, the American Psychological Association, the Supreme Court — the list of doubters goes on and on, and any discussion of the question inevitably covers the ways people intentionally trick the test, to the point that these methods are practically common knowledge. Even Mythbusters has tested whether or not you can beat the polygraph, as has Penn & Teller: Bullshit! in an episode where they taught volunteers how to beat a test on camera. I wonder if these shows should now be investigated as well?
The criminal inquiry, which hasn’t been acknowledged publicly, is aimed at discouraging criminals and spies from infiltrating the U.S. government by using the polygraph-beating techniques, which are said to include controlled breathing, muscle tensing, tongue biting and mental arithmetic.
Either way, it seems like a huge stretch to claim that merely teaching potential methods for beating a lie detector should be considered a crime. At the very least, that seems to test the bounds of the First Amendment. One of the instructors targeted has already plead guilty, but to "obstructing an agency proceeding and wire fraud," while the feds are pushing for two years in jail for the other one. While some of the details are under seal, it appears that federal agents basically set up a "sting" operation, in which they induced the two people to teach them how to trick a polygraph, and in the process "admitted" to the instructors certain crimes that they were involved in. This sounds a like borderline entrapment. In fact, the report notes that the people who "sought out" the information from the two men who were investigated generally just wanted books or videos -- not the "one on one" lessons the feds set up.
The impact of all of this is creating serious chilling effects just on those who oppose the use of polygraphs in general:
Some opponents of polygraph testing, including a Wisconsin police chief, said they were concerned that the federal government also might be secretly investigating them, not for helping criminals to lie but for being critical of the government’s polygraph programs. In his speech to the American Association of Police Polygraphists, Schwartz said he thought that those who “protest the loudest and the longest” against polygraph testing “are the ones that I believe we need to focus our attention on.”The "Schwartz" quoted there is John Schwartz, a Customs and Border Patrol official who is involved in the investigations. So, yeah, that's a federal government agent specifically claiming that he wants to focus his criminal investigatory power on those who speak out against polygraph testing. If I were to take a polygraph test right now it would note that I'm telling the truth when I say that sounds a hell of a lot like a police state, where federal agents publicly declare that they're going to use their criminal investigation powers to target people who oppose a program they support. Talk about chilling effects and a massive First Amendment violation.
To have a federal official, with investigatory power, whose already involved in existing investigations flat out say that he wants to target those who speak out, is incredible. That's not the way our government is supposed to work.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: beat a lie detector, criminal investigations, federal employees, investigations, leakers, lie detectors, polygraphs
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
There's no credibility left...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: There's no credibility left...
My army of cows will destroy those filthy Indianians.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: There's no credibility left...
Once you raze the federal government to the ground, what you will have is a bunch of smaller countries.
Very Nixonian. Of course, Nixon knew that polygraphs didn't work, but his intent was to scare the FBI straight.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Do you think...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Do you think...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Do you think...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Give a man a fish, you get 35 years. Teach a man to fish, you get two.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Response to: Bt Garner on Aug 22nd, 2013 @ 12:07pm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
When should we expect Federal Officials to instigate criminal proceedings?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And the elephant in the room is...
Something that actually was able to tell the truth of a statement, rather than say, being based upon temperature of a room(higher temp = more sweating), how calm a person is when being questioned(someone who's guilty but is sure the cops don't have enough evidence to bust him is going to be a lot calmer than an innocent person that the cops have been interrogating for a few hours) or any number of other tiny little factors would not be able to be beat by any technique other than honesty.
Now if you'll excuse me, I have to put some cookies in the oven for the imminent SWAT assault, I heard the local team likes macadamia nut the best.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: And the elephant in the room is...
Now if you'll excuse me, I have to put some cookies in the oven for the imminent SWAT assault, I heard the local team likes macadamia nut the best.
I would recommend putting the copious amounts of elephant poop you are going to acquire into the cookies instead.
Would serve the SWAT team right.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: And the elephant in the room is...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: And the elephant in the room is...
I suggest they try auguring with the entrails of federal officials. It's similarly accurate and WAY more useful.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The second type are scary, they're absolute true believers. And like any true believer, they're dogmatic and prone to anger when confronted with actual verifiable evidence.
I'm assuming (based upon my own subjective opinion) that John Schwartz falls into the latter group.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It is very sad that this sentence might as well just stay in reporters clipboard these days. Seems like non-stop run of stories of different examples of "That's not the way our government is supposed to work."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wait ... huh?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Wait ... huh?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Wait ... huh?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Wait ... huh?
@.@
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Wait ... huh?
And rather admit that the fact someone can be trained to beat the test makes the test fairly useless, they go after those instructing how to beat the test.
It's just easier to trust the shitty test than admit the test is shitty to begin with.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Wait ... huh?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Too much faith
Maybe, but maybe not. One of the things about lie detectors is that they have a fairly high rate of false positives. The test may indicate you're lying when you're not.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The creator of the polygraph had one other well known invention- the comic book character Wonder Woman. I am not making this up.
There is no science behind the polygraph- it is beloved by inquisitors as an excuse to carry out invasive interrogations.
It is outrageous and unacceptable that this nonscientific widget is being used under the rubric of protecting our country.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Typo
Who's
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Prosecute This!
https://antipolygraph.org/lie-behind-the-lie-detector.pdf
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If the big-scary machine says you're guilty you better fess up or you'll be servin' time as big-bubba's bitch in san quentin.........
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Put the testee in a dark tent with a donkey. He's told to hold the donkey's tail and that the donkey will bray if he utters an untruth. He's then questioned, sight unseen.
The trick is that the donkey's tail is covered with soot. If he emerges from the tent with clean hands, he was trying to dodge the test and therefore was likely to be lying.
What both the donkey test and the polygraph have in common is that whatever efficacy they have (which isn't great) depends entirely on the subject believing in the infallibility of the test.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ruh-roh, they're going to have to ban...
http://craphound.com/homeland/
Way to go, US Gov, you're now banning YA ficton! What next? 1984?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Ruh-roh, they're going to have to ban...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
My science teacher explained how some explosives work, this can also help me build a bomb, he should also be arrested!
I'm totally concerned about my former teachers creating more terrorists, honest! It's totally NOT that I hate my reading teacher for making me read boring books, or that I hate my science teacher for teaching me about evolution and global warming that I consider bogus theories!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Democrasy vs. Despotism
The more news I read, the more I fear this applies.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hey Mr. Schwartz
Anyone on any kind of nerve-calming medications, anti-depressants, some pain meds, amongst other things can pass these with flying colors while lying through their teeth. Anyone can train themselves to remain calm while lying, it doesn't require any kind education to learn how.
So take your fucking polygraph and shove it up your fucking ass.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Polygraph == Ouija board
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Speak
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
There's a common saying, it's that "ignorance is bliss." Have you ever wondered why it's so ignored, so misunderstood (if understood at all) and just not taken seriously enough? Society is just too used to it and you guys are the source of the problem.
And besides, lie detectors do not work. They work, they just don't work on one hundred percent of people a hundred percent of the time. Get over it, stop denying it and learn to face to facts every once in a while. I knwo that cognitive dissonance is hard for you to deal but it's not the end of the world. So suck it, bitches.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Whatever happens next you can be sure that Chad Dixon is absolutely getting shafted because the feds need him to make an example of.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The sad thing is, there's a whole bunch of that going now.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
legal problems
Also, a good part of the reason that lie detectors work at all is that subjects have bought into the fiction that the devices work. So, studying the efficacy of lie detectors, or even speaking about the results of those studies could be construed as a crime if you tell someone who is about to undergo a lie detector exam. I don't see how the law can separate this aspect from teaching methods to defeat the tests.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So lemme get this straight
This sounds exactly like the America in the 21st century I've come to know and loathe. I do not find this surprising in the least.
More points for the "most open and participatory administration in history" (that's from whitehouse.gov).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
1. Obtain a USD $0.25 coin - a "quarter" of a dollar
2. Stand in front of subject to be tested
3. Place "quarter" on your thumb
4. Release your thumb upwards
5. Find the "quarter"
6. Analysis stage. If the "quarter" displays the face of George Washington, a true patriot, the test subject is likewise a true patriot. If the "quarter" instead shows the White House, the subject has been distributing the administration's secrets and should be punished accordingly. If the "quarter" lands in any other configuration (edge, etc.) the test subject is a WIZARD and should be TERMINATED IMMEDIATELY.
We may safely dissolve the Federal and State court systems, secure in the knowledge that this test approaches 50% accuracy. This is more than any other method available on the market today.
"Quarter Flip Method" (c) 2013, you no use.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
(see link: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130820/00514824248/federal-official-declares-that-anyone-who-spe aks-out-against-lie-detector-tests-should-be-criminally-investigated.shtml#c666)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Correction and Comments
I'd like first to correct a factual error in this Techdirt post. It states: "One of the instructors targeted has already plead guilty, but to 'obstructing an agency proceeding and wire fraud,' while the feds are pushing for two years in jail for the other one."
Actually, it is the one who pled guilty, Chad Dixon, for whom the feds are pushing for a two-year jail sentence. The other, Doug Williams, who runs Polygraph.com, has to date not been charged with any crime. Earlier this week, Oklahoma City News 9 aired an interview with him.
U.S. Customs and Border Protection Special Agent John Schwartz's remark that those who "protest the loudest and the longest are the ones that I believe we need to focus our attention on" suggests that the motivation for this criminal investigation, dubbed Operation Lie Busters, is political, and constitutes retaliation for speech the government doesn't like.
If you agree that it should not be a crime to teach others about how to pass a polygraph "test" (a pseudoscientific procedure that is inherently biased against the truthful), then please consider downloading a copy of AntiPolygraph.org's free e-book, The Lie Behind the Lie Detector (1 mb PDF) and sharing it with friends. The information about polygraph countermeasures that some in the U.S. Government would like to suppress is to be found in Chapter 4.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
regaining unconsciousness
keep our kids safe and off the street.
Then they put away the prostitutes,
keep married men cloistered at home.
Then they shooed away the bums,
then they beat and bashed the queers,
turned away asylum-seekers,
fed us suspicions and fears.
We didn't raise our voice,
we didn't make a fuss.
It's funny there was no one left to notice
when they came for us.
Looks like witches are in season,
you better fly your flag and be aware
of anyone who might fit the description,
diversity is now our biggest fear.
Now with our conversations tapped
and our differences exposed,
how ya supposed to love your neighbor
with our minds and curtains closed?
We used to worry 'bout big brother,
now we got a big father and an even bigger mother.
And you still believe
this aristocracy gives a fuck about you.
They put the mock in democracy
and you swallowed every hook.
The sad truth is
you'd rather follow the school into the net
'cause swimming alone at sea
is not the kind of freedom that you actually want.
So go back to your crib and suck on a tit
go bask in the warmth of your diaper.
You're sitting in shit and piss
while sucking a giant pacifier,
a country of adult infants.
A legion of mental midgets,
a country of adult infants,
a country of adult infants.
all regaining their unconsciousness
�There are a lot of bad people out there. . . . This will help us remove some of those pests from society."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
lie det. test
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
lie detector
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Teaching people how to get away with lying
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Teaching people how to get away with lying
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
polygraph evidence
that's the only reason they are unacceptable as evidence in court.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]