Kavanaugh accuser's polygraph results conclude her account is 'not indicative of deception'

[DonViejo]

Source: Politico



By ELANA SCHOR 09/26/2018 03:07 PM EDT

Attorneys for Christine Blasey Ford on Wednesday released a copy of a polygraph test that she took in August regarding her sexual assault allegation against Brett Kavanaugh, with a conclusion that her account of the episode is "not indicative of deception."

Ford sat for the polygraph after relaying her account of the high school-era party where she claims Kavanaugh tried to force himself on her with his friend Mark Judge -- whom the GOP has declined to subpoena for testimony -- in the room.

"Blasey stated that when Kavanaugh put his hand over her mouth that this act was the most terrifying for her," states the polygraph examiner's report, dated Aug. 10 for an Aug. 7 examination. "She also stated that this act caused the most consequences for her later in life."

Republicans have sought Ford's polygraph results ahead of her scheduled Thursday testimony against President Donald Trump's Supreme Court nominee, while those who believe the 51-year-old professor's assault allegation have pointed to her submission to a polygraph test as evidence of the veracity of her account. However, the American Psychological Association has said there is little evidence polygraph tests can effectively separate true from false accounts, and the examinations are not admissible in criminal trials in some states.

Read more: https://www.politico.com/story/2018/09/26/kavanaugh-accuser-polygraph-results-844071

[dameatball]

1. This is not bad news, but I basically have a distrust of polygraphs. I do believe she is truthful.

If polygraphs are accurate, we should just have them at every debate and every press conference.

[truthisfreedom]

2. I think the nails in this coffin might stick.

Nomination may be dead.

[Archae]

3. So?

Polygraphs are useless.

Remember Robert Hanssen? Guy who sold out to the Soviet Union, for money?

He passed those 'tests" easily.

I'm not being critical of Kavanaugh's accusers, I simply say that polygraphs are useless for finding out truth or lies, that's why they are banned from courtrooms.

[RhodeIslandOne]

8. He was also a CIA guy

I would expect he could pass one regardless.

[Dave Starsky]

4. Polygraphs are bullshit.

But I guess it's hard to pass one if you're a completely unskilled liar.

[7962]

5. I'm glad others are pointing out the fallacy of the polygraph.

Theres a good reason their results are NOT allowed in a court

[Raven123]

6. So by the Rand Paul standard, she is truth teller. He should vote against Kavanaugh

[Danascot]

7. I read an article saying that Kavanaugh supports polygraphic evidence

It's not exactly the Times or the Post but ...

The summary at the end states:

1. Brett Kavanaugh thinks polygraphs are important tools for measuring the credibility of witnesses and criminal defendants.

2. “Polygraphs are not admissible in court” is an utterly, utterly ludicrous argument when you’re discussing Brett Kavanaugh, who thinks polygraphs are not only useful but critical in everything from high level government jobs to reasonable safeguards against sex crimes.

3. Brett Kavanaugh is a douchebag. And also a poor writer who thinks he’s a good writer, and I really hate those people.

4. When deciding whether people should be given high level government positions, it’s reasonable and probably a good idea to subject those people to polygraphs, at least according to Brett Kavanaugh.

https://www.gardenweb.com/discussions/5490123/amusing-fb-post-on-kavanaugh-and-polygraphs