National Reconnaissance Office Polygraph Unit Targeted Personal Information

Posted by on

NRO LogoOn 10 July 2012, the McClatchy news service published a series of three investigative articles by reporter Marisa Taylor about polygraph screening practices at the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO), which runs America’s space-based reconnaissance activities. The articles document how NRO polygraph examiners, who are supposed to conduct only counterintelligence-scope polygraph screening examinations (that is, polygraph interrogations that are limited to espionage-related questions) were incentivized (and in at least one instance, explicitly directed) to elicit personal information far beyond the authorized scope.

In effect, NRO made its counterintelligence-scope polygraph program into a full-scope (or so-called “lifestyle”) polygraph program, even though it is not authorized by law or regulation to do so.

Taylor’s well-researched articles may be read on-line here:

In addition, McClatchey has made available on-line a memorandum from then NRO polygrapher Mark S. Phillips to the Department of Defense Inspector General documenting unauthorized practices within the NRO polygraph program. Phillips exhibited honesty and integrity that is all-too-rare among senior personnel in the intelligence community today.

Director of National Intelligence Orders Polygraph Question on Media Contacts

Posted by on

On 25 June 2012, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper announced (PDF) that he is “mandating that a question related to unauthorized disclosure of classified information be added to the counterintelligence polygraph used by all intelligence agencies that administer the examination (CIA, DIA, DOE, FBI, NGA, NRO, and NSA).”

Although Clapper’s announcement does not specify what the mandated question will be, his spokesman, Shawn Turner, told Jeremy Herb of The Hill that “officials will be asked during the lie-detector tests whether they have disclosed classified information to members of the media.”

Herb reports that both Senate Intelligence Committee chairwoman Diane Feinstein (D-CA) and House Intelligence Committee chairman Mike Rogers (R-MI) voiced support for Clapper’s announced polygraph expansion.

However, the National Research Council in 2002 concluded that ”[polygraph testing's] accuracy in distinguishing actual or potential security violators from innocent test takers is insufficient to justify reliance on its use in employee security screening in federal agencies.”

The polygraph has a dismal track record when it comes to plugging leaks. In a 1982 leak investigation, members of the National Security Council (which is not covered by DNI Clapper’s recent announcement) were instructed to submit to polygraph interrogations in the course of an investigation into who leaked classified information to the New York Times. A Marine lieutenant colonel on the NSC staff, Robert McFarlane, failed the polygraph. Twice. And it nearly destroyed his career. It was only when the Times’ publisher, Arthur O. Sulzberger, himself a former marine, confirmed to President Reagan that McFarlane was not the Times’ source, that McFarlane was exonerated. The leaker was never identified, and the polygraph served only to misdirect investigators.

It should be noted that polygraph accuracy has not improved in the 30 years since that botched leak investigation. However, knowledge of how to fool the lie detector is much more widespread nowadays. See AntiPolygraph.org’s free book, The Lie Behind the Lie Detector (1 mb PDF) for details. If anything, polygraph dragnets for leakers are less likely to succeed today than they were during the botched Reagan era investigation that nearly destroyed Colonel McFarlane’s career.

Secret Service Wants to Polygraph Agents Implicated in Colombia Prostitution Scandal

Posted by on

Norah O’Donnell reports for CBS News that the U.S. Secret Service “wants to polygraph a number of agents and officers involved” in a scandal wherein they allegedly hired prostitutes while in Cartagena, Colombia as part of President Obama’s security detail. It should be noted, however, that the unscientific polygraph is in part responsible for the selection of personnel with such poor judgment: all Secret Service agents and uniformed officers are required to undergo to pre-employment polygraph screening.

While polygraphy has an inherent bias against truthful persons, liars can easily beat the polygraph using simple countermeasures that polygraph operators cannot detect. The Secret Service would do well to terminate its reliance on this unreliable pseudoscience.

Update: ABC News reports that the Secret Service personnel suspected of consorting with prostitutes will be “forced to submit to lie detector tests.” CBS’s earlier reporting suggested that any such “testing” would be voluntary.

Sanford Police Department Relied on Voice Stress Analysis in Trayvon Martin Shooting Investigation

Posted by on

A lawyer for George Zimmerman, who on 26 February 2012 shot and killed unarmed 17-year-old Trayvon Martin, has told WOFL television news that his client passed a voice stress test administered by the Sanford, Florida Police Department. Criminal defense attorney Hal Uhrig made the statement in explaining why he believed that Zimmerman, whom he had not yet met, had acted in self-defense.

However, voice stress testing (of any kind) is without scientific basis and has never been proven to work at better than chance levels of accuracy. A job posting by the Sanford P.D. indicates that the specific variety of voice stress testing it uses is the Computer Voice Stress Analyzer (CVSA), which is marketed by the so-called National Institute for Truth Verification (NITV), a West Palm Beach, Florida limited liability corporation. NITV has acknowledged in federal court that “the CVSA is not capable of lie detection” (though it claims the opposite in its marketing materials).

For more on CVSA, see ABC News Exposé of Charles Humble and CVSA on YouTube.

Polygraph Screening in Ireland?

Posted by on

On Sunday, 12 February 2012, the BBC Radio Ulster program Sunday Sequence aired a segment on polygraphy in the wake of news that “an increasing number of Irish companies are asking potential employees to take lie detector tests.” Host William Crawley spoke with polygraph operator Don Cargill, professor of forensic psychology Don Grubin, and AntiPolygraph.org co-founder George Maschke. The segment may be downloaded as a 10.3 MB MP3 file here.

FactCheck.org on Herman Cain Lie Detector Ad

Posted by on

The non-partisan website FactCheck.org has a well-researched commentary on a new political advertisement in support of GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain that touts his supposed “passing” of a voice stress “test” performed by Atlanta private investigator T.J. Ward. See “Whole Truth About the Cain ‘Lie Detector.’” For additional commentary by AntiPolygraph.org on Ward’s supposed “test,” see “CBS Atlanta Falls for Bogus ‘Lie Detector.’”

Cain Backpedals on Lie Detector, Cites “Layered Voice Analysis”

Posted by on

Republican presidential hopeful Herman Cain has backed off from his declaration at a press conference convened to address allegations of sexual harassment  that he was “absolutely” willing to do a lie detector test. In an interview with Neil Cavuto of Fox News, Cain conditioned his willingness to do a lie detector test on the willingness of an accuser to do so:

Cavuto: …There’s definitely a passion to your fans and your supporters. So, um, why not a lie detector test? You kind of offered for that in your press conference the other day. Um, put it out there, I’m taking a damn lie detector test. I’m gonna pass this with flying colors. Shut up.

Cain: Because, here again, why negotiate against yourself. When somebody comes forward, and they have a claim against me, and *they’re* willing to take a lie detector test, *I’ll* take a lie detector test. I’m not going to go and take one against anonymous, no documentation. That’s not good business…

Cain went on to cite the voice stress analysis performed by private investigator T.J. Ward:

Cain: …And here’s the other thing. There’s a private investigator by the name of T.J. Ward out of Atlanta, Georgia who has some sophisticated technology that a lot of people may not have heard about. He took my statement from my press conference–

Cavuto: I heard that.

Cain: –ran it through his software and was willing to go on record–because many law enforcement agencies use this software–and said, “Herman Cain is telling the truth.”

He did the same thing for this woman who accused me the other day when she was with Gloria Allred, and went through and said, “I’m sorry, but there were a lot of untruths in that statement.”

As AntiPolygraph.org has pointed out earlier, T.J. Ward’s “sophisticated technology”–called “Layered Voice Analysis”–is produced and marketed by a charlatan and has no scientific basis whatsoever.

The Hinterland Gazette points out that private investigator T.J. Ward has previously worked with Cain’s newly hired attorney, Lin Wood, on the Natalee Holloway case, raising the question of whether Ward’s supposed “analysis” was part of an orchestrated public relations campaign.

CBS Atlanta Falls for Bogus Lie Detector

Posted by on

T.J. Ward demos Layered Voice Analysis for CBS Atlanta's Mike Paluska

 

On Wednesday, 9 November 2011, CBS Atlanta aired an interview with private investigator T.J. Ward, who used a computer program to analyze recorded statements by Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain and Sharon Bialek, who alleges that Cain made a sexual advance on her when she sought his help getting a job. According to Ward’s software, Cain “is being truthful, totally truthful” in denying Bialek’s claim, while Bialek “is fabricating what transpired.”

Ward claimed his software cost $15,000 and has an accuracy rate of 95%. While CBS Atlanta did not disclose the name of this software, a link on Ward’s website indicates that it is Layered Voice Analysis (LVA), a program developed by Amir Liberman’s Nemesysco, Ltd., an Israeli company. This software was completely discredited by Swedish linguists Anders Eriksson and Francisco Lacerda in a 2007 article titled “Charlatanry in Speech Science: A Problem to Be Taken Seriously” (International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law, Vol. 14, No. 2). For more on LVA, see “Nemesysco Founder Amir Liberman Is a Charlatan.”

Not that it matters (LVA being pseudoscientific flapdoodle), but it is perhaps worth observing that private investigator T.J. Ward had chosen the setting for analyzing a male voice when conducting his analysis of Sharon Bialek’s remarks:

CBS Atlanta should have done its homework before running with a “news” story based on emperor’s-new-clothes technology.

Herman Cain Would Absolutely Do a Lie Detector Test

Posted by on

During a press conference convened yesterday to address allegations of sexual harassment, Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain declared that he would “absolutely” be willing to take a lie detector test, though he quickly added, “but I’m not going to do that unless I have a good reason to do that.”

Cain’s declaration came in response to the first question asked during the press conference, which was posed by CBS News West Coast correspondent Steve Futterman. It is disconcerting that a “serious” journalist would ask such a frivolous question (lie detector “testing” has no scientific basis), but it is emblematic of the mythical status of the polygraph in American pop culture.

Because the myth of the lie detector is so deeply entrenched in the American psyche, it would have been very difficult for Cain to have rejected the suggestion of a lie detector test and pointed out its unreliability. Instead, Cain went on to add that he had discussed his willingness to take a lie detector with his staff and with his attorney, who evidently failed to dissuade him from such foolishness.

If Cain does submit to a polygraph test, it is likely to be arranged by his lawyer under terms of attorney-client privilege. If Cain doesn’t pass, the public will never hear about it, and his lawyer can have him polygraphed by someone else until he does pass. Then his lawyer can announce to the world that Cain has passed a polygraph denying the sexual harassment allegations against him.

Apart from the fact that only the result of a passed polygraph will be made public, it’s worth noting that while polygraphy is inherently biased against the truthful, liars can pass the “test” using simple countermeasures that polygraph operators have no demonstrated ability to detect. For an in-depth explanation of how to pass a polygraph whether or not one is telling the truth, see AntiPolygraph.org’s free book, The Lie Behind the Lie Detector.

The following is the portion of Herman Cain’s press conference that dealt with the lie detector (transcription by AntiPolygraph.org):

Steve Futterman: Mr. Cain, Steve Futterman with CBS News. I’d like to ask you a two-part question. First of all, do you think it is appropriate for a candidate’s character to come under a microscope in a campaign? And secondly, you are basically now in a he said/she said situation. She’s saying something; you’re saying something. They’re both diametrically opposing each other. As distasteful as it might be, would you be willing to do a lie detector test to prove your honesty in something like this–

Herman Cain: Yes–

Futterman: Sure, go ahead…

Cain: Yes, I absolutely would, but I’m not going to do that unless I have a good reason to do that. I have, look, that was one of the first comments I made in watching this to my staff. I’ve also shared that with my attorney. Of course I would be willing to do a lie detector test. Secondly, I believe that the character and integrity of a candidate running for president should come under a microscope: with facts, not accusations.