Full name: turkeyskirt85

 Location: Dolomite, Ohio, United States

 Address:

 Website: https://martinchavez98.org

 User Description: The Polygraph Check - Does It Work_Does the polygraph test, otherwise identified as the lie detector test, function? Melvin Foster may not think so. https://martinchavez98.org Back in 1982, right after profilers thought a taxi driver might be the Green River Killer, they targeted Foster as a suspect, partly since he drove a taxi. He generously agreed to a polygraph test, which he failed.The dilemma was, he was innocent.Meanwhile, above a time period of about two to 3 many years, the Green River Killer murdered 4 dozen or far more ladies near Seattle and Tacoma, Washington. For the duration of this time, Gary Leon Ridgway was briefly a suspect, and he was offered a polygraph test. The test, carried out in 1984, determined that he was telling the truth about his innocence. He was totally free to preserve killing, and he did.It wasn't right up until 2001 that DNA proof (and other evidence) proved Ridgway was the killer. In 2003 he confessed and pleaded guilty to 48 of the murders. Melvin Foster was ultimately cleared following much more than twenty years.The police never ever could gather sufficient proof to arrest or prosecute Foster (difficult when the suspect is innocent). But unfortunately, Foster was beneath a cloud of suspicion the entire time. According to an post in the King County Journal, in 2003, Foster asked the King County Sheriff's Workplace to lastly "apologize and return his rock tumbler and all the rest of the stuff police took from his home in 1982."It would be wonderful to think that this isn't going to occur frequently, but how do we know? There are certainly many other stories about innocent individuals pointed at as guilty due to a failed polygraph check, but these are just the ones where the reality comes out. Had Ridgway not been caught, several would even now consider Melvin Foster was guilty. How a lot of other situations are left like that, with a cloud of suspicion more than an innocent man or woman? What do individuals think when you fail a polygraph check? They consider you are guilty, of course. But what about the more common "inconclusive" result. Nicely, you did not pass, so you need to be guilty or know some thing, correct? Is not that what we genuinely believe when a criminal suspect or "particular person of curiosity" in the news can not pass the check?Do you think the test at least factors out the actual criminals along with number of innocent people it wrongly labels? Consider once more. Consider the truth that several popular spies passed the polygraph tests they have been provided (Ignatz Theodor Griebl, Karel Frantisek Koecher, and Jiri Pasovsky, between others). Also take into account the fact that several hardened criminals have verified their capacity to lie and nonetheless pass the test."The US is, so far as I know, the only nation which spots this kind of extensive reliance on the polygraph....It has gotten us into a lot of problems." - Convicted spy (double-agent) Aldrich Ames, who passed two polygraph exams whilst spying for the Soviet Union. Most scientists feel there is no scientific basis for the polygraph. It is junk science. Of course, any lie detecting strategy which factors at enough possible liars will identify some of them. But what if you are telling the reality? The bottom line is that you happen to be gambling with your status if you rely on the polygraph check to demonstrate your innocence.