Guest BFSleuth Posted August 13, 2012 Posted August 13, 2012 ^ might as well go to a soothsayer to determine the truth (my apologies to those that believe in soothsayers....)....
Guest Strick Posted August 13, 2012 Posted August 13, 2012 (edited) I saw the Ro Sahebi interview and was very impressed by what I saw. The interviewer was very skillful and really drew Justin out in a way nobody else has managed. Such a contrast to the Blogtalk shows where some of the hosts seem more interested in displaying their - oh so fascinating knowledge of ballistics - rather than interrogating Justin on the **** monkey! Look, I'm skeptical of the whole Bigfoot thing as a zoological phenomenon but, I gotta say that Justin is, as observed in the interview, either a brilliant actor or he's telling the truth. I don't think there's anything in his background that suggests thespian credentials, so I reckon there are only two realistic options. The interview didn't make him look good. He could not explain adequately why he still shot the adult Bigfoot when he had just been looking around for a film crew believing it to be a man in a suit. When Ro called him on it he looked bashful. Bashful is a tough one to act, take it from me. Giving him a few beers beers was a great touch and obviously opened the guy up. I think that even if the Sierra Kills story is a fabrication, Justin believes, on some level, that it happened. Edited August 17, 2012 by BFSleuth Rule 1A
Guest slimwitless Posted August 13, 2012 Posted August 13, 2012 (edited) It just shows Justin's not afraid take a polygraph. More importantly, he also has a witness and samples in at least three separate DNA investigations. Edit to add: He announced he was going to send something to Sykes. I don't know if that has actually happened yet. Edited August 13, 2012 by slimwitless
Guest BFSleuth Posted August 13, 2012 Posted August 13, 2012 ^ I'll certainly grant that for the majority of the population that is unaware of the invalidity of polygraph tests, the seem to have risen to the level of an accepted scientific and flawless tool for getting at the truth. As such they carry the weight of a placebo effect, and this has been documented in research. So if Justin believed at the time he was taking the polygraph that it could detect a lie, then it might tend to make him more truthful. I will also grant that polygraphs have great entertainment value and as such are used frequently by the press. It is just a shame that the invalidity of polygraphs is not more widely discussed in the media. I could go on, but what I have to say is better left for the PMP...
Guest poignant Posted August 13, 2012 Posted August 13, 2012 The next level up would be an MRI polygraph. That will really work the brain.
BobZenor Posted August 13, 2012 Posted August 13, 2012 Polygraphs are kind of like Spock's logic in Spectre of the Gun. As long as Justin thinks the bullets are real and it detects lies then the operator of the polygraph can probably manipulate him into confessing the truth. It is probably a good indication that he is being honest since it seems that most people do accept them in popular culture. They were bullied into believing it by certain legal consultants and governments requiring them to be used like when looking for spies. It always amazed me how many people believed they detected lies even when they knew perfectly well what they actually measured and some of those people even had pretty good backgrounds in biology. You can bully a lot of people into believing almost anything if you claim the banner of authority.
Guest Posted August 14, 2012 Posted August 14, 2012 Looks like the results are impending release (on BF Evidence FB page): "Justin Smeja's polygraph results coming up."
Guest poignant Posted August 14, 2012 Posted August 14, 2012 So the results are out. 100% no deception.
chelefoot Posted August 14, 2012 Posted August 14, 2012 (edited) Well... I know that these tests are not an accurate measurement of anything... but I am glad for the sake of Melba's study (and Sykes, if he did send a sample to Oxford) that he didn't fail it. If this shooting did happen, hopefully something good will come of it. Edited August 14, 2012 by chelefoot
Guest Posted August 14, 2012 Posted August 14, 2012 To say they don't count as something is wrong, The guy named ro did a good job on researching the test. the test today are a lot harder to beat than they were even 20 years ago. does it made BF real because he told the truth, no, but if fits nice in the puzzle.
Guest BFSleuth Posted August 14, 2012 Posted August 14, 2012 ^ For what it is worth, I believe what Justin is saying. However, if by "To say they don't count as something is wrong" is a statement saying that polygraph tests are in any way valuable is in my learned opinion not correct. I studied the issue as part of my college degree. There hasn't been an experiment done that can be repeated that shows they can detect deception. Not in over 60 years of research. You can read more about it on the web site for the American Psychological Association (and it is pretty damning especially when you consider that they felt a need to even have a page to explain how bad the situation is). Google "polygraph validity" and the APA web site comes up as one of the first links. Read other links as well. Without getting into issues of politics suffice it to say the polygraph industry is in my learned opinion a hoax. Any value from it is from the placebo effect - ie. people have been convinced that it works so they fear the test and may be more inclined to avoid deception. Without the placebo effect it has absolutely no value. The polygraph industry is a fraud.
Guest Posted August 14, 2012 Posted August 14, 2012 I believe he is telling the truth since the last interview so I don't care about the polygraph results. I consider them a bit pseudo-scientic anyway. That said... I think there's a question missing on that list: "did you take the body of the juvenile subject you shot back with you?"
chelefoot Posted August 14, 2012 Posted August 14, 2012 To say they don't count as something is wrong, The guy named ro did a good job on researching the test. the test today are a lot harder to beat than they were even 20 years ago. does it made BF real because he told the truth, no, but if fits nice in the puzzle. I agree. It does fit nicely and I am glad he passed it. I felt he would. And it's a much better outcome than the alternative. And I agree that Ro is doing a nice job of getting the facts out more clearly. I too wish that one question had been asked... I wonder why it wasn't? Isn't it clearly one of the big questions? I guess they believe it left the baby behind... I wonder.
Cotter Posted August 14, 2012 Posted August 14, 2012 I hope the polygraph industry isn't a member here.
Guest dxm2 Posted August 14, 2012 Posted August 14, 2012 BFSleuth, Thanks for posting the info about the lack of validity regarding polygraph tests. I had alot more faith in them before I read the article at apa.org and now I agree that it is a useless excersize. For me, the Sierra Shootings story is just too far fetched. It seems to be too large, or too unthinkable, to imagine. And like many aspects of this mystery, the answers are not simple, and the chain of events, are not easily comprehended. Again, this is just my opinion and, like the info you posted on polygraphs, I welcome new information and new evidence. Lastly, regarding polygraphs, you've forever ruined my enjoyment of watching the Maury show.
Recommended Posts