http://www.statenews.com To MSU police Detective Anne Stahl, a racing heart, sweaty hands or a high blood pressure could be the difference between an innocent man and a criminal. Stahl is MSU’s only polygraph analyst, likely the first at MSU in at least 50 years. Her work, which is sought out by police departments throughout Mid-Michigan, relies on the physiological reactions an individual’s body has to the stress of lying and can be key in criminal investigations. en-us Gryphon 2.2.3b-tsn (woodward)/Foundry5 Mon, 13 Jul 2009 15:52:22 -0400 webmaster@statenews.com http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/41840 Seems like a waste of money to me. Why don’t the MSU Police focus their time and resources on cases that occur on campus instead of helping the other police departments in the area. How about trying to catch the guy who stole my backpack last year. Thu, 09 Jul 2009 10:33:30 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/41840 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/41855 What a load of horse hockey !! A polygraph is nothing more than an interrogation prop. The polygrapher is an interrogator nothing more. Bottom line is, its your right to refuse it in all circumstances. If your told you failed a polygraph, its nothing more than being lied to anyways. An invalid pseudo science at best. Thu, 09 Jul 2009 12:12:02 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/41855 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/41862 Your story could have been more comprehensive if it had mentioned that Lt. Charles Becker was an expert polygrapher/interviewer for MSU Police during the late 1940-1950s. He assisted other agencies, as well. Also, Dr. Frank Horvath, retired professor of Criminal Justice at MSU, is recognized worldwide as a preeminent researcher of polygraphy issues. Yes, Mr. Styx, it is a prop, but it is often more than that when used by an expert interviewer/observer of behavior. Thu, 09 Jul 2009 13:11:56 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/41862 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/41867 I am glad that it can help generally speaking, polygraphs that is…However I would have to believe that if a person is a Psychopath, that they have NO feelings, so NO physiological reactions would be given from that person. I believe that a Psychopath doesn’t have the same concience as everyone else..they do not register GUILT. Thus making polygraphs ineffective. Thu, 09 Jul 2009 14:54:17 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/41867 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/41870 Everyone should understand that a polygraph test cannot be used in a court of law anywhere either for or against you. So its not a ‘tool of law enforcement.” No one can force you ever to take one and I would advises a client never to do so. Thu, 09 Jul 2009 15:34:01 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/41870 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/41872 Is it used so that the police can ask further questions, as well as to let the person go who passes the polygraph? Thu, 09 Jul 2009 16:33:46 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/41872 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/41893 In the hands of a true expert (typically intelligence officials), the poly is a very useful tool that does detect deception on almost everyone in the population. pathological liars on the other hand typically do not show up so it cannot be used in a vaccuum/as the only tool. Nonetheless, with most people, as long as its a true expert giving the polygraph, they can be very effective. Fri, 10 Jul 2009 12:04:39 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/41893 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/41899 Thank you for the information Sparty, very interesting indeed. Fri, 10 Jul 2009 20:45:56 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/41899 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/41902 Sorry Sparty, in case law what ever so called ‘Expert’ You may call to give testimony. There are 100 others that can/will/have counter what ever your Expert calls deception- is wrong. Case Law time after time as tossed any and all use of this use of this so called lie dector as unreliable/usless. This has been in front of the US Supreme Court plenty of times and is not allowed being judged as unreliable and faulty. Its just one so called Expert against another. Most people who are called to give testimony against a poly are them selfs ex experts and know its very unreliable and filled with faults. Fri, 10 Jul 2009 22:20:26 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/41902 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/41918 Spoken like true believers in BS. Polygraphers can be beat by countermeasures and those that can and do know to counter SA (statement analysis) techniques, and know how to counter KA (Kinesic Analysis) techniques. Reed, Honts and Walters knowlege is always a good trick to have up your sleeve. Makes interrogators go crazy !!! Besides if you know the polygraph is just a trick, no fear or anxiety, renders the machine useless, F3’s won’t even register. Better science beats schlock everytime. Sun, 12 Jul 2009 01:22:52 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/41918 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/41919 I always learn something new, when I take the time to read the Statenews. The Blogs are insightful. Sun, 12 Jul 2009 05:15:22 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/41919 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/41924 ..tell the truth! Sun, 12 Jul 2009 11:48:32 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/41924 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/41933 I think its very funny how all of you dismiss the poly. As someone who actually had to undergo one for a security clearance, I can promise you that, while perhaps most police are not trained up to be good at it, true experts (i.e. the FBI, CIA, NSA) are able to tell if you are honest. Also, so called evasion techniques are available but are well known by experts and are easily noticeable if you know what to look for. Sun, 12 Jul 2009 22:26:48 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/41933 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/41934 For your post. Sun, 12 Jul 2009 22:37:59 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/41934 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/41993 Wait : 07/12/09 @ 10:26pm Well you keep right on believing that and be a trusting sheep. And your (so called) experts have been beaten by trained individuals. Agency doesn’t matter. And trusting what comes off the internet for countermeasures is also a recipe for disaster. Its plainly obvious that its frontloaded so fools believe they can really beat it. Original techniques and methods plus the element of surprize is the key. But you go right ahead, remember that polygrapher (interrogator) in any form is not there to help you. Mon, 13 Jul 2009 15:52:22 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/41993