Posted on 09/27/2018 3:33:49 AM PDT by servo1969
Lawyers representing a woman accusing Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of decades-old sexual assault have released a polygraph report conducted as part of an effort to establish the credibility of her claim.
"On August 7, 2018, Christine Blasey reported to the Hilton Hotel, 1739 West Nursery Road, Linthicum Heights, MD 21090, for the purpose of undergoing a polygraph examination," the report explained. "The examination was to address whether Blasey was physically assaulted by Brett Kavanaugh while attending a small party in Montgomery County, MD."
The accusations have stalled the nomination of President Donald Trump's second Supreme Court nominee, who had been slated to replace retiring Justice Anthony Kennedy.
Details included in the polygraph report, which was made public the day before scheduled Senate testimony by both Kavanaugh and Ford, have led to some criticism among supporters of the nominee.
A common concern is the dearth of "relevant questions" the interviewer asked Ford while monitoring the polygraph results.
According to the report, there were only two such questions and both related directly to her statement on the alleged assault.
The interviewer asked Ford whether "any part" of her statement was false or whether she made up any detail included in her initial report.
She answered "no" to both questions.
According to the report, the results of her polygraph test were then analyzed using three different methods, each of which determined a statistically insignificant probability of deception.
Numerous critics argued that the questions posed to Ford were insufficient to form a convincing report.
"There are literally only two questions asking if she made things up," tweeted CRTV congressional correspondent Nate Madden.
"This is even bad by the unreliable hokum standards of polygraph tests."
The questions consisted of: Is any part of your written statement false? No.Did you make any of it up? No.
Even for an inadmissible quack witch doctor snake oil unscientific polygraph report, this is bad. https://t.co/MtZbjBgSnU
-- Patrick Nonwhite (@NonWhiteHat) September 26, 2018
Wow...Not only was the only question just about the written statement, not any specifics, but th statement has multiple edits and contradictions. She started w 4 people (matching letter to Feinstein), then adjusted to 4 boys (matching account to WaPo) and a couple of girls (?). https://t.co/HKH2H9N3Yf
-- (((AG))) (@AG_Conservative) September 26, 2018
Others, including National Review editor Charles W. Cooke, found inconsistencies in Ford's story.
"Dr. Ford's polygraph letter contradicts letter she sent to (Sen. Dianne) Feinstein," Cooke wrote. "Polygraph letter says "4 boys and a couple of girls" were at party. Letter to Feinstein says "me and four others." No way to reconcile the two--irrespective of whether she's counting herself in polygraph letter."
Feinstein letter, July 30: "Kavanaugh physically pushed me into a bedroom"
Polygraph statement, August 7: "I was pushed b̶y̶ ̶t̶w̶o̶ ̶p̶e̶r̶s̶o̶n̶s̶ into a bedroom"
-- Phil Kerpen (@kerpen) September 26, 2018
Ford is set to appear on Capitol Hill on Thursday to answer questions related to her allegations.
Democrats on the Senate judiciary committee will question the witnesses directly while Republicans have tasked a prosecutor with asking the questions.
Grassley confirmed Tuesday in a statement that he has hired Rachel Mitchell, a career prosecutor with decades of experience prosecuting sex crimes, to question the witnesses.
The only thing that passing a polygraph proves is that the person taking it can pass a polygraph test not matter if they’re telling the truth or not.
That is all that is proved.
As an aside, Chuch Schumer said that Judge Kavenaugh is not under criminal investigation so there is no presumption of innocence. I hope that the people of New York who suspect even the slightest, craziest thing about Schumer remember those words during his next campaign. I’m also hoping the same thing for Gilibrand.
Mark
It does not cover state, federal or local government agencies! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employee_Polygraph_Protection_Act
Question # 4:
If you were a twee, what twee would you be? LOL.
Dr. Ford, the other accusers and every Democrat needs to be politically eviscerated, disemboweled and demolished.
I found it pretty simple to fool a police polygraph.
I was guilty. They said not guilty.
Many states, including Kalifornia and Merryland, have laws similar to the federal law.
I once failed a polygraph test. It occurred when the questioner asked (as I recall it) “have you ever been in the service of a foreign intelligence agency.” The answer was apparently ambivalent. When I was told the results I went ballistic. When the outfit came to me and said there must be some mistake, I told them to go F themselves. To make a long story short, the next test I took I passed. (I have decades of Top Secret Codeword approval) Thus, anyone who tells me that polygraphs are reliable can go...
T
I once failed a polygraph test. It occurred when the questioner asked (as I recall it) “have you ever been in the service of a foreign intelligence agency.” The answer was apparently ambivalent. When I was told the results I went ballistic. When the outfit came to me and said there must be some mistake, I told them to go F themselves. To make a long story short, the next test I took I passed. (I have decades of Top Secret Codeword approval) Thus, anyone who tells me that polygraphs are reliable can go...
T
I understand she was in with the polygrapher for 90 minutes. She was asked two questions. That gave the Soros-paid-for polygrapher over an hour to coach and prep her.
I had to take a polygraph when I was offered a job at a police department. I walked into the room, immediately was hooked up to the machines, and the questions began. There were about 10 questions, and the whole thing took about 10-15 minutes. (I passed, but the ordeal was intimidating, for sure.)
Also, my friend worked on a federal project and took a polygraph. He failed the question when they asked him if his shoes were blue. They were black. The whole test was a mess because he gets so nervous. As an ex-FBI polygrapher said on Fox, a polygraph isn’t a lie detector by any means.
Thanks for that. I try to keep up and read up on these things. Extra information never hurts :)
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.