Cuomo, now beset by Lindsey Boylan claim, once insisted Kavanaugh take lie-detector - New York Post
Cuomo, now beset by Lindsey Boylan claim, once insisted Kavanaugh take lie-detector - New York Post |
- Cuomo, now beset by Lindsey Boylan claim, once insisted Kavanaugh take lie-detector - New York Post
- Are lie detector tests for terrorists really a good idea? - Spectator.co.uk
- Luke Mitchell polygraph expert says Jodi Jones’ murderer is innocent - The Scottish Sun
| Cuomo, now beset by Lindsey Boylan claim, once insisted Kavanaugh take lie-detector - New York Post Posted: 24 Feb 2021 03:42 PM PST Gov. Andrew Cuomo called for then-Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh to face a lie-detector test over sex assault allegations against him — but wouldn't say Wednesday if he'll heed his own words in the wake of claims against him made by a former aide. During Kavanaugh's Senate confirmation hearings in 2018, Cuomo issued an official statement that called the testimony of Christine Blasey Ford — who accused Kavanaugh of drunkenly attacking her when they were high-school students in 1982 — "very compelling." "Here is one basic fact that badly hurts Judge Kavanaugh: Why won't he take a polygraph? Dr. Ford did," Cuomo said at the time. "If he does not take a polygraph test, it is the ultimate, 'he said, she said.' " Cuomo also urged then-President Donald Trump to "demand" that Kavanaugh undergo the exam and later called Kavanaugh's confirmation "a sad day for this country." Cuomo's office didn't immediately respond Wednesday when asked if he would submit to a polygraph test regarding the detailed claims made earlier in the day by Lindsey Boylan, who resigned as his deputy secretary for economic development and special advisor in 2018. In an essay posted on the Medium website, Boylan — now a Democratic candidate for Manhattan borough president — said she quit after Cuomo kissed her "on the lips" without warning in his Manhattan office earlier in 2018. She also accused Cuomo of saying, "Let's play strip poker," during an October 2017 trip on his official jet.  Former state Senate staffer Erica Vladimer — whose forcible-kissing accusations against then-Sen. Jeff Klein (D-The Bronx) helped lead to his 2018 defeat — said, "From my lay person's knowledge, polygraph tests are not 100 percent accurate." "But if you look at it in the context of an elected official — not only that, but the governor of New York — living up to and acting based on their own words then, yes, he should be taking a polygraph test," she said. "If this wasn't true, why isn't he coming out and addressing it? Why instead is he hiding behind female staffers and flight manifests?" Cuomo — who denied Boylan's allegations as "just not true" when she initially made them without detail in December — didn't hold a news conference Wednesday. But his press secretary, Caitlin Girouard, said in a prepared statement, "As we said before, Ms. Boylan's claims of inappropriate behavior are quite simply false." Girouard also released a joint statement from four current and former aides – John Maggiore, Howard Zemsky, Dani Lever and Abbey Fashouer Collins — who she said joined Cuomo for the Oct. 2017 flights on which Boylan was also a passenger. "We were on each of these October flights and this conversation did not happen," the statement said.   |
| Are lie detector tests for terrorists really a good idea? - Spectator.co.uk Posted: 23 Feb 2021 09:44 PM PST  You might have assumed that the polygraph (or 'lie detector' as it is commonly known) was something used only for entertainment on the Jeremy Kyle Show. It is, after all, little more than a relic from the 1920s when people turned to psychic mediums and truth-telling machines in the misguided search for certainty after the horrors of the Great War. So it might come as a surprise that the polygraph has been used by the penal system in England and Wales for more than a decade. The Probation Service, in fact, uses them to monitor sex offenders released on licence. In the past five years alone, 5,228 mandatory polygraph examinations have been carried out on 2,249 sexual offenders, according to the Home Office. Few people are likely to be concerned about their use on sex offenders; anything that could prevent re-offending is probably assumed to be a good thing. However, there is a new development when it comes to polygraphs that should worry everyone who cares about due process. The Domestic Abuse Bill and the Counter-Terrorism and Sentencing Bill, both in final stages of the parliamentary process, include proposals to use polygraphs to monitor certain domestic violence and terrorism offenders, and individuals who are subject to Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures. Again, you might shrug your shoulders. Does it matter if the polygraph is only used to monitor such unsavoury individuals? Yes, it does. For this development will see our criminal justice system invaded by the widespread use of a wholly unscientific and unreliable machine. So how do they work? Polygraphs measure physiological data such as heart and breathing rate, blood pressure and sweat. Their design has changed little since a century ago, when William Marston (designer of the polygraph's prototype and creator of the superhero Wonder Woman) unsuccessfully attempted to persuade a US court in the famous Frye murder trial to accept evidence from his lie detector test. The inadmissibility of polygraph testimony in criminal courts in the US continues to this day. The polygraph machine tells us nothing. There is no scientifically established link between truthfulness and physiological functions. The US National Security Council noted in 2003: 'Although psychological states often associated with deception … do tend to affect the physiological responses that the polygraph measures, these same states can arise in the absence of deception.' In other words, someone who is lying might have an increased heart rate or sweat more than normal; but this might happen to someone who is not lying but is nervous, stressed, or has some other condition. We cannot reliably conclude that someone is deceptive from their physiological arousal. Nor can we infer truthfulness if this doesn't happen. What is important is the interview and not the device. The device, in fact, is redundant, provided that the interviewee believe in the validity of the polygraph — homicide detectives in Detroit, for instance, are believed to have used their photocopier as a fake polygraph device. As polygraph operators admit, polygraphy is primarily 'a psychological procedure and only secondarily of a physiological nature'. So, the polygraph 'test' is essentially an interrogation tool. But it does not detect anything meaningful. Psychological pressure, however, tends to reduce the value of the information extracted. As criminologist Cesare Beccaria noted when discussing oppressive investigation methods, we only get information about 'the force of the muscles and the sensibility of the nerves' of the accused person rather than a truth-conducive statement. Lacking reliable scientific evidence, the Home Office has to rely on figures from the American Polygraph Association — an industry trade body — to justify claims of 'accuracy'. Even so, a 'failed' test can be disclosed to the police to justify action. The answers given during a test may well mean that a person becomes subject to stricter licence conditions or even recalled back to prison. How much are polygraphs used in the police force? In England and Wales police are discouraged, but not banned, from using the tests within investigations. We sent Freedom of Information requests to 46 police forces asking how many used polygraphs: 37 forces would neither confirm nor deny their use and only five, including Police Scotland, directly denied their use. Some forces stated that they do not use polygraphs in an 'overt' capacity, without clarifying what this means. Therefore it cannot be ruled out that the polygraph is being used in investigatory work. We know that polygraph testing of suspected sexual offenders has already been officially trialled by the police. Our research also found that polygraph tests were being used as a bail condition in relation to community sentences, for which there is no statutory basis. It seems the polygraph is slowly seeping into all aspects of our justice system. We rightly expect and require the police and the state only to take intrusive and coercive action when there are reasonable grounds for doing so. How can the output of the polygraph, which is inadmissible in criminal courts in England and Wales, qualify as 'reasonable grounds'? Some might argue that probation is different and, therefore, standards can be lower. But probation is an integral part of the penal system, and should be subject to the same basic standards required by the rule of law, respect for rights and procedural safeguards. There is also the issue of false negatives: people can lie and appear on the polygraph to tell the truth. Indeed, if a polygraph finds 'no deception indicated', then it could allow controls on the offender to be reduced. In written evidence to parliament, we argued that the Counter-Terrorism and Sentencing Bill suggests that the polygraph's assessment of truthfulness or deceptiveness of the individual could be used to determine whether Terrorist Prevention and Investigation measures are continued, expanded or discontinued. Public officials who have to take difficult decisions about who might pose a terrorist threat may welcome a machine that appears to give them a sense of certainty, and that is understandable. But it is a false sense of security. Finally, the absence of independent oversight and regulation, both in respect of scientific validity and the deployment of the polygraph, gives cause for concern. We have a situation where the American Polygraph Association, a body with an inherent interest in promoting the agenda of its own members, applies its 'standards' and training as part of the polygraph regime. It's the equivalent of putting CCTV camera manufacturers in charge of overseeing the use of facial recognition. Dr Kyriakos N. Kotsoglou is senior lecturer in law at Northumbria University. Dr Marion Oswald is vice-chancellor's senior fellow in law at Northumbria University and associate fellow of the Royal United Services Institute  |
| Luke Mitchell polygraph expert says Jodi Jones’ murderer is innocent - The Scottish Sun Posted: 25 Feb 2021 01:00 PM PST A LIE detector expert who carried out a test on Jodi Jones' killer Luke Mitchell maintained that he is innocent. The 14-year-old was butchered to death in Easthouses, Midlothian, in 2003 with her boyfriend Luke, who was also 14 at the time, caged for life for the brutal killing.  3 He has always maintained he was innocent. The convicted killer undertook a polygraph test with Terry Mullins in 2013 hoping to gain public support and passed the test in which he denies being involved with the murder. The expert was interviewed on James English's Anything Goes podcast in 2019 and was asked about his findings. Jodi Jones' killer Luke Mitchell says he was framed and forced to confessEx-cops 'can prove' Jodi Jones' killer Luke Mitchell is innocentJodi Jones' murderer Luke Mitchell's GoFundMe deleted as appeal for £10k to 'discover truth' violates termsIn the podcast, Terry was asked if he believed that Mitchell had killed Jodi. He said: "Absolutely not." Terry also carried out a polygraph test on Luke's mum Corrine Mitchell and he said he believes that she hadn't interfered.  3  3 He added: "I stand by Luke's test. "I feel dreadfully sorry for Jodie's family, a dreadful thing to have happened. "All I would say is Luke did not do this. "He is a victim as well, I stand by him 100% in everything and always have done." Murder in a Small Town continues on Channel 5 tonight and explores the murder of Scots schoolgirl Jodi Jones.
Road tragedyTwo teens dead after horror dirt bike smash in Wishaw as cops probe incident
SCOTTISH SUN SAYSSNP dominance shows state of rivals but Salmond saga could dent Yes vote
FRESH HOPENicola Sturgeon says Scotland WILL exit lockdown quicker 'if the data allows'
KILLER DOUBTEx-cops say it's 'physically impossible' Luke Mitchell murdered Jodi Jones
ROAD SMASHScots teen feared dead & other 'fighting for life' after horror dirt bike crashThe new two-part documentary started last night and includes an interview with Mitchell who claims he was framed and told to confess. The programme started with Mitchell telling how he found Jodi while searching for her with other locals — including her family — after she disappeared 18 years ago. It also features a pair of retired detectives who claim he is innocent and was convicted after a series of blunders by cops. US Army drill sergeant Jessica Mitchell gunned down in her car three years after her brother was shot dead We pay for your stories and videos! Do you have a story or video for The Scottish Sun? Email us at scoop@thesun.co.uk or call 0141 420 5300  |
| You are subscribed to email updates from "what is a polygraph test" - Google News. To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, United States | |
Comments
Post a Comment