Re: Santa Has Always Creeped Me Out

"ponyduck" <laberry@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:107bb21a57qrejm6n01fd8m1el8542op1t@xxxxxxxxxx
Your last statement is another of those things that I tend to take
issue with. People seem to dismiss the polygraph results out of hand
just because they were administered by people hired by the Ramseys.
And the same criticism extends to John Douglas as well, as evidenced
by your statements above.

Yes. I don't know the answers to your questions below; I don't even know
the names of the polygraphers who have such stellar reputations. My
complaint about the Ramseys or any other subject selecting and paying a
profiler and/or a polygrapher is just that it's not generally done that way.
AFAICT, neither John Walsh nor Mark Klaas hired his own polygrapher; why
should the Ramseys or anyone else? I think the profiler or polygrapher
should be currently employed in the field (not "former") and should be
independent: the choosing and hiring taints the process and makes the
report suspect, IMO. If Michael Jackson had paid a profiler or a
polygrapher, and that person had said MJ was as pure as the driven snow,
would that opinion have held any weight?

Linda

It just seems a stretch to me to believe that everyone hired by the
Ramseys, no matter what his record shows of honesty, competence &
integrity, suddenly becomes biased & mercenary, willing to sacrifice
reputation, willing to compromise personal values, etc., just for the
sake of some cash. Now I'm not saying people are not capable of it--I
just don't think it's conceivable that every person hired by the
Ramseys, to a man, has fallen victim to this trap.

The two polygraph examiners, for example, are both highly regarded
experts in the field, respected by their colleagues. One at least
used to work for the FBI. People who have known & worked with him for
20-30 years speak only of his honesty, integrity & competence. Why
would he suddenly, in this case, go counter to all the attributes he's
exhibited throughout his whole career? It would have to be money--and
a lot of it. I doubt it is any kind of personal friendship or loyalty
to the Ramseys--he probably never met them before. So again, it goes
back to being strictly financial. So did the Ramseys pay him enough
to pervert him so thoroughly? I don't know, but IMO it seems
unlikely.

All the talk I've ever heard from experts regarding the polygraph
results tends toward, could the Ramseys have beaten the test? not
whether or not the examiners themselves compromised the results.
I would accept people's rejection of the polygraph results if they
based their arguments on the length of time between the crime & the
polygraph--that it gave plenty of time to arm the Ramseys with the
ability to defeat the polygraph.

In other words, I would accept an argument placing the onus of
deception on the Ramseys rather than the administrators of the test.

--pony


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Santa Has Always Creeped Me Out
    ... He's a profiler for the FBI - one of founder of the first team to ... just because they were administered by people hired by the Ramseys. ... The two polygraph examiners, for example, are both highly regarded ...
    (alt.true-crime)
  • Re: Santa Has Always Creeped Me Out
    ... People seem to dismiss the polygraph results out of hand ... just because they were administered by people hired by the Ramseys. ... I highly doubt John Douglas would risk his rep as head of the FBI ...
    (alt.true-crime)