Author Topic: Cain passes lie detector test  (Read 27477 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

R.R.

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1128
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Cain passes lie detector test
« on: November 10, 2011, 07:08:56 PM »
Investigator: Herman Cain innocent of sexual advances

ATLANTA (CBS ATLANTA) - Private investigator TJ Ward said presidential hopeful Herman Cain was not lying at a news conference on Tuesday in Phoenix.

Cain denied making any sexual actions towards Sharon Bialek and vowed to take a polygraph test if necessary to prove his innocence.

Cain has not taken a polygraph but Ward said he does have software that does something better.

Ward said the $15,000 software can detect lies in people's voices.

CBS Atlanta's Mike Paluska played Cain's speech for Ward into the software and watched as it analyzed Cain's every word. 

If he is hiding something this thing would have spiked way down here," said Ward.  "He is being truthful, totally truthful.  He is a man with integrity and he talked directly about not knowing any incident he is accused of."

The software analyzes the stress level and other factors in your voice.  During the speech, when Cain denied the claims, the lie detector read "low risk."  According to Ward, that means Cain is telling the truth. 

During the section of Bialek's news conference where she says, "He suddenly reached over put his hand on my leg under my skirt and reached for my genitals he also grabbed my head brought it towards his crotch."

During the analysis of that section the software said "high risk statement."  Ward said that means she is not  telling the truth about what happened.

"I don't think she is fabricating her meetings," said Ward.  But, she is fabricating what transpired."

Ward said nearly 70 law enforcement agencies nationwide use the voice software, including the Forsyth County Sheriff's Office.

Ward said the technology is a scientific measure that law enforcement use as a tool to tell when someone is lying and that it has a 95 percent success rate.

After listening to Cain's speech and analyzing it, Ward said there is no doubt, Cain is innocent.

"When he directly talks about the allegations against him there is no high risk," said Ward.  "It is low risk, which tells me he is being truthful in his conversations to the public."

http://www.cbsatlanta.com/story/16002149/investigator-herman-cain-innocent-of-sexual-advances

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Cain passes lie detector test
« Reply #1 on: November 10, 2011, 07:12:58 PM »
Let the attacking the messenger commence
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Cain passes lie detector test
« Reply #2 on: November 10, 2011, 07:21:32 PM »
With a 95% success rate, my hypothetical gamble should pay off big time.  Of course, don't expect the MSM to help, by repeating this bit of information.  Instead, expect reports of how "inadmissable" in a court of law such techniques are, and similar "reporting"
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Cain passes lie detector test
« Reply #3 on: November 10, 2011, 07:29:05 PM »
  Terriffic! Now ,released from the shadow of racist attack, can coast into the White House  without further effort.

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Cain passes lie detector test
« Reply #4 on: November 11, 2011, 12:25:54 AM »
Junk science meets junk politics.

There isn't a single court in either Canada or the U.S.A. that would accept polygraph evidence, let alone this quack's, but the right-wing nutsosphere,  which had previously taken the concept of the presumption of innocence out of the criminal courts where it belonged and plastered it all over the non-criminal world of Cain's character problems, is now just as eagerly reaching for a technique which every criminal court in Canada and the U.S.A. has unanimously and emphatically rejected.

Go figure.

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Cain passes lie detector test
« Reply #5 on: November 11, 2011, 12:45:06 AM »
Junk science meets junk politics.  There isn't a single court.....

LOL.....that didn't take long

 
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Cain passes lie detector test
« Reply #6 on: November 11, 2011, 01:00:44 AM »
LOL.  Neither did your totally non-responsive response.

How would you feel if you were on trial for capital murder, and three eye-witnesses had already put you at the scene with a smoking gun in your hand and the victim's unarmed body still falling, and the D.A. asked the judge if he might just bolster his three eye-witnesses' testimony with an analysis provided by this quack  and his machine?

R.R.

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1128
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Cain passes lie detector test
« Reply #7 on: November 11, 2011, 01:01:39 AM »
And yet 70 law enforcement agencies use this technology as a tool. This ends the matter for me, and it really should for any rational human being. Cain is one of the three candidates that I am considering voting for.

BSB

  • Guest
Re: Cain passes lie detector test
« Reply #8 on: November 11, 2011, 01:02:45 AM »
The headline: "Cain passes lie detector test"

Ah, well, er, ahhhhhh, ummm, not exactly. As it turns out it's just another example of people bullshiting themselves.   
 
BSB 


Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Cain passes lie detector test
« Reply #9 on: November 11, 2011, 01:03:50 AM »
Junk science meets junk politics.

There isn't a single court in either Canada or the U.S.A. that would accept polygraph evidence, let alone this quack's, but the right-wing nutsosphere,  which had previously taken the concept of the presumption of innocence out of the criminal courts where it belonged and plastered it all over the non-criminal world of Cain's character problems, is now just as eagerly reaching for a technique which every criminal court in Canada and the U.S.A. has unanimously and emphatically rejected.

Go figure.

Wern't you pointing out earlyer that this isn't in cort and the standards of Jurisprudence don't appl;y?

This is evidence, whether weak or strong, here it is.

In the court of Public opinion is the $15,000 software more convincing than the $40,000 woman?

R.R.

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1128
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Cain passes lie detector test
« Reply #10 on: November 11, 2011, 01:05:36 AM »
Somebody coming in here throwing around the N word is not somebody I take seriously in their criticisms of Herman Cain.

BSB

  • Guest
Re: Cain passes lie detector test
« Reply #11 on: November 11, 2011, 01:10:40 AM »
The time to get worried is when RR does take you seriously.


BSB

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Cain passes lie detector test
« Reply #12 on: November 11, 2011, 01:24:11 AM »
<<And yet 70 law enforcement agencies use this technology. . . . >>

Well, now that is the problem.  The law enforcement agencies are not entrusted with the determination of guilt or innocence in our respective countries' criminal courts nor with the determination of any issue in our respective countries' civil courts.  The courts and not the agencies of law enforcement are entrusted with assessing the reliability of all evidence, from the testimony of witnesses to the results of mechanical and other tests of all kinds.  And in their wisdom, they have decided that while they will listen to, and consider, the testimony of law enforcement officers and eye-witnesses and experts, they WILL NOT EVEN CONSIDER the results of polygraph tests or less-established techniques like this quack and his machines. 

Why not?  Because it's been shown time and again to be unreliable evidence.  End of story.

<< . . .  as a tool. >>

Sure, as a tool.  There are many examples of how this stuff could be useful as a tool.  Suppose a guilty suspect has told a hospital nurse named Emma Smith that he killed his wife.  Suppose the operator is reading off a list of names to the suspect and the needle goes haywire as soon as Emma Smith's name is mentioned.  The operator might not know why the needle went haywire, but he knows now that it might be a good idea to concentrate the investigation on Emma Smith for some as yet unknown reason.

Being useful as a tool does not translate into proof of guilt or innocence.  It's just a useful tool that can produce leads or close off dead-ends before too much time is wasted on them.

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Cain passes lie detector test
« Reply #13 on: November 11, 2011, 01:48:16 AM »
<<Wern't you pointing out earlyer that this isn't in cort and the standards of Jurisprudence don't appl;y?>>

NO.  I think it's important that we try to be accurate in representing what is said in this forum.  I did not refer to "standards of Jurisprudence" but to the standards of the criminal law.  I was referring in particular to one standard of the criminal law, which was the presumption of innocence.  I said, or meant to say that the presumption of innocence does not apply in the civil courts and should not apply in our non-court settings, such as the campaign trail, the so-called "court of public opinion" or the way we arrive at daily decisions in our own lives.   To apply a criminal standard of proof in any such instances would be evidence of sheer insanity.

<<This is evidence, whether weak or strong, here it is.>>

Yes, you are right.  It IS evidence.  It is evidence so weak that no court, criminal or civil, in either Canada or the U.S.A., will even look at it, so prone is it to error.  They don't even want to have it introduced for lawyers and experts to argue over, because they know that even under expert scrutiny, it will be unable to produce any trustworthy conclusions.  This is not MY opinion, but the opinions of our respective Federal Courts, of fifty U.S.  State Supreme Courts and of 11 Provincial Supreme Courts here in Canada.  That's a pretty huge body of judicial opinion.  As evidence, polygraphs and similar machines are only one step above reading tea leaves.

<<In the court of Public opinion is the $15,000 software more convincing than the $40,000 woman?>>

Actually, it is the $40,000 woman who was the more convincing, since any court in our two respective countries would unhesitatingly admit her as a witness, whereas none of them would allow the evidence of that quack and his $15K software.  If the public were so abysmally ignorant as to be unaware of these facts, then the 15K software would indeed be the more convincing, but I am firmly convinced that not even the American public is that fucking dumb.  (That was an easy question to answer, although clearly the answer was not what you were expecting to hear.)
« Last Edit: November 11, 2011, 01:54:04 AM by Michael Tee »

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Cain passes lie detector test
« Reply #14 on: November 11, 2011, 02:51:09 AM »
LOL.  Neither did your totally non-responsive response.

Didn't require one.  This isn't a court of law, Cain isn't on trial, criminally or civilly, the policy being referenced has a 95% success rate.  And right on "q", in the fleetest of moments, you attempted to combine both the trashing of the messenger via the "junk science" retort, with a completely irrelevant point about this not being admissible in court

Both tactics I knew would be attempted, and you were so happy to jump right on in.



"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle