Posted on 11/27/2014 2:27:05 PM PST by topher
There are conflicting reports on what happened between Police Officer Darren Wilson in the shooting of Michael Brown.
One group of eyewitnesses claim that Michael Brown 'charged' Officer Wilson, leaving him no choice but to defend himself.
Another group claim that Michael Brown raised his hands to surrender.
Then there is the report by Police Officer Darren Wilson of the incident.
If it can be shown that one group or the other is LYING, it might stop the violence. It might also bring peace to this country.
RICO could be invoked as a reason to administer the LIE DETECTOR test.
Clearly, if the FBI is going to intervene, and there is an indication of possible Civil Rights violations, perhaps the first step is to find out who is telling the truth.
LOL! We've got a piece-of-cr*p president who's proven to be lying all the time, and the violence increases! The black anarchists are always proven to lie, as the violence increases because that's what they want.
He is only proving himself to be a liar from the physical evidence that anyone can read now on line. He is afraid for his life. There is no way he would agree to any lie detector test (unless they paid him money and secured his safety). There should not be a test given anyway unless he changes his story. Sad part is that the prosecutor (who did great), didn’t not go ahead to say some witnesses are lying today or saying untruths versus saying some people believe in what they saw. Because of the evidence of the gun residue, the blood trail and the alignment of the body bending down as in running towards the officer. Him and some of the others are liars. Some in the public are using no logic to defend their view / agenda.
Earlier this week, a black FOX reporter was reporting on site from Ferguson to Megyn Kelly. He bought into the Brown side, spewing biased comments. Megyn kept correcting him with the facts, while the black "reporter" argued against her. Megyn was clearly frustrated that the black reporter was so convinced of the lies and rumors heard from black "leaders" that nothing would alter his stance. That black "reporter" should be fired, stoking the flames.
> RICO could be invoked as a reason to administer the LIE DETECTOR test.
A pathological liar can pass a lie detector test. Obama certainly can. They’re not 100 % accurate. The polygraph examiners really don’t even the the machines to tell if you’re lying. All it’s there for is just to document it.
> If we were to break out the polygraph I’d suggest we start with Barack Obama and then proceed to Eric Holder. Once those two are totally vetted we’ll see where we go from there.
Wouldn’t work because pathological liars can pass them no problem.
Sometimes, they can use it against the person into making them to think the operator is getting useful information which makes the person do something harmful to themselves or even into cracking under pressure. I don’t know if I would take one alone, I would want more evidence to be presented for me, in case I didn’t do well on the test. A person giving the truth could fail. Tests aren’t 100% accurate.
Good point.
The folks who resort to riot violence have no interest in any facts. They are all emotion no matter what you put in front of them. They’re criminals looking for a reason to blame everyone but themselves for their crappy lives.
Following the time tested liberal strategy of politicians, activists and the liberal media repeating the same lies and canards over and over and over until the sheer mass and magnitude convinces people there must be some truth to what they say.
So, you advocate using an interrogation technique which is inadmissible in court...
It is also a technique which cannot be compelled.
How exactly would this mass lie detector interview process work, and how do you perceive that charges or reconciliation of the facts could be accomplished?
In any event, sorry to spill the beans, but lie detectors are worthless.
Employers and the police continue to tout them because they are effective in scaring people.
Polygraph results are inadmissible in court for a reason - unless the subject is stupid enough to consent.
Nonsense... all of it.
I have taken multiple polygraphs over the years. It is always voluntary. Furthermore, the box can easily be beaten. It is about as reliable as a Ouija board.
Recently I was asked to take one, presumptively voluntarily. The PD were not amused by the Ouija Board analogy and leaned hard. They threatened a court order, an obstruction charge, and even the loss of my library card. I simply walked out.
Its not particularly good tech and cops who rely on it are lazy and unprofessional.
The problem with a lie detector is that it can’t conclusively rule out truth or falsity as coming from a person who truly believes he saw something that in fact never occurred. An example comes from the story of the “Emporer’s New Clothes” which was a prescient speculation in group psychology! An accepted narrative becomes so ingrained in a group mindset that even falsehoods that belie the narrative are ignored or cannot be cognitively considered. A polygraph machine can not screen for that scenario as the person totally believes that what was false must some how nevertheless be true!
The Bible speaks of a coming time when God gives up sinful men to a mass delusion so that they should believe that what is false is actually the truth. Many folks are already under that sort of delusion and polygraphs wouldn’t help pierce thru the lies at all!
The direct question about what they believed they saw would be unpierceable by direct means. Questions about how they came to the belief system they had, might be more fruitful.
I am curious whether what some might have caught a glimpse of as a “surrender” and rumored around wildly, was the start of an arms-raised football style charge... remember, the “gentle giant” (now well into Mr. Hyde mode) was a football player... such an explanation could account for a lot.
But if there are multiple witnesses, there may be a chance to show that some people are lying.
According to the police officer (Darren Wilson), the 'football player' Michael Brown pinned the Officer in his car and scuffled with the policeman when the Officer was still in his patrol car.
Finally, the police officer fired a couple of shots, and the suspect fled.
The Police Officer used a radio on his chest to report 'shots fired', and requested a supervisor and all available officers to the scene.
Officer Wilson felt it was his duty to pursue Michael Brown.
For whatever reason, Michael Brown stopped 'fleeing' and turned and charged the Police officer from 35 feet away.
The officer, in fear of his life (after warning the suspect to stop), fired several shots -- two of which wounded Michael Brown.
When Michael Brown was only about 15 feet away, Michael Brown lowered his head. It was at about that point Michael Brown was hit in the head (probably because he lowered his head).
ABC posted the interview with Officer Darren Wilson on the ABC News website...
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.