Spain Spain - Ana Knezevich, 40, from Florida, going through divorce, missing under suspicious circumstances on trip to Madrid, 5 Feb 2024

I don't recall saying they are conducting investigations of their own.
So it sounds like there is one investigation taking place by AK's family's attorney in Spain who is the head of Spain's missing persons organization.

And perhaps the FBI and Interpol are assisting Spain in their investigation, although there has been no LE statement about that, just MSM reporting based on their unnamed sources - or by Ana's family attorney or friends and family of AK.
 
So it sounds like there is one investigation taking place by AK's family's attorney in Spain who is the head of Spain's missing persons organization.

And perhaps the FBI and Interpol are assisting Spain in their investigation, although there has been no LE statement about that, just MSM reporting based on their unnamed sources - or by Ana's family attorney or friends and family of AK.
Yes, as I stated, there are at least 2 investigations that we know of according to MSM. In fact, everything we know about this case is because of MSM.

Again, there has been no LE statement regarding ANY aspect of Ana's disappearance. LE hasn't even stated that Ana is missing. We only believe she is missing due to MSM.

Also, to reiterate, David is an innocent victim. (according to MSM)
 
Last edited:
Yes, as I stated, there are at least 2 investigations that we know of according to MSM. In fact, everything we know about this case is because of MSM.

Again, there has been no LE statement regarding ANY aspect of Ana's disappearance. LE hasn't even stated that Ana is missing. We only believe she is missing due to MSM.

Also, to reiterate, David is an innocent victim.
Besides the investigation brought to the courts by AK's family attorney, what is the second investigation? You mentioned upthread that the FBI and Interpol were not doing their own investigations, as far as we know.
 
The lack of scientific validity makes these tests invalid in a court of law, however it is often used as an investigative tool by LE outside of the court setting.
How often is it used? Does LE often use any other methods of pseudoscience? I know sometimes they will consult a psychic, although I don't know if this is standard.
 
Besides the investigation brought to the courts by AK's family attorney, what is the second investigation? You mentioned upthread that the FBI and Interpol were not doing their own investigations, as far as we know.
The Madrid police are investigating as well, according to MSM.
 
If we can believe MSM, then the Madrid police are investigating. You can choose not to believe the MSM if you'd like.

"Madrid police on Tuesday said the investigation is ongoing, but did not release further details."

 
Perhaps lie detectors are not valid in U.S. courts because everyone promises to tell the truth by swearing on the Bible.
According to this information on the justice systems in Europe, oaths are required of witnesses in both Spanish and American courts. An oath to tell the truth is the same in both countries (U.S. and Spain) . An oath is required of all witnesses.

Even if a polygraph test result was admitted into the court proceedings in U.S. Court (if both defense and prosecution both agreed to do so), then this would not replace the witness' oath. They are two very different processes.

Witnesses are obliged to appear if summonsed by the court and they are obliged to take an oath or pledge to tell the truth . . .

 
According to this information on the justice systems in Europe, oaths are required of witnesses in both Spanish and American courts. An oath to tell the truth is the same in both countries (U.S. and Spain) . An oath is required of all witnesses.

Even if a polygraph test result was admitted into the court proceedings in U.S. Court (if both defense and prosecution both agreed to do so), then this would not replace the witness' oath. They are two very different processes.

Witnesses are obliged to appear if summonsed by the court and they are obliged to take an oath or pledge to tell the truth . . .

How scientific is taking an oath?
 
"At the moment, with the FBI already included in the operation, it is requested that her cell phone be traced to find out what her last position was."
Very misleading headline from this Marca sports media site.

"FBI Mobilizes to find missing American woman in Madrid."
 
It seems like they are just harassing an innocent victim like David. How standard is it?

I wonder why the FBI even bothers with polygraph tests. They might as well use Ouija boards in my opinion.

The FBI even requires polygraph tests to become an FBI agent. Seems like a waste of time + resources and a slap in the face of science, in my opinion. https://fbijobs.gov/sites/default/files/2022-05/Guide_Police.pdf
Speaking generally....

Most everybody knows polygraph are largely inadmissible... but...

It does remain a tool for LE to gage someone's reactions...

And IMO there's another benefit, more strategic, if you ask me.

Typically LE is fast to describe folks who are cooperating with an investigation and slow to call out those who are lagging. But one thing they can do is spread the word someone didn't take a polygraph.

And that has a value.

Not because of inadmissibility but because of the popular (mis) understanding of the reliability of the test.

Because for most people, right or wrong, they hear someone refused or failed a polygraph and know them whom to give the side eye.

IMO is a way for LE to say without saying, this is whom we are looking at. P.O.I.

And once published interest has an inkling that one person is the frontrunner for whom LE has sightline on, it may be just the dart to release fresh tips in so far as up until that moment the keeper of the tip did not realize its significance, fully believing in the narrative as presented.

Subliminal. If LE puts out there that they don't trust someone, those who know that someone can look st him/her more skeptically and then that someone might be niggles into contacting the tip line.

Ploy.

And if that's the case here, I hope ultimately it leads to Ana and in due course justice.

JMO
 
Speaking generally....

Most everybody knows polygraph are largely inadmissible... but...

It does remain a tool for LE to gage someone's reactions...

And IMO there's another benefit, more strategic, if you ask me.

Typically LE is fast to describe folks who are cooperating with an investigation and slow to call out those who are lagging. But one thing they can do is spread the word someone didn't take a polygraph.

And that has a value.

Not because of inadmissibility but because of the popular (mis) understanding of the reliability of the test.

Because for most people, right or wrong, they hear someone refused or failed a polygraph and know them whom to give the side eye.

IMO is a way for LE to say without saying, this is whom we are looking at. P.O.I.

And once published interest has an inkling that one person is the frontrunner for whom LE has sightline on, it may be just the dart to release fresh tips in so far as up until that moment the keeper of the tip did not realize its significance, fully believing in the narrative as presented.

Subliminal. If LE puts out there that they don't trust someone, those who know that someone can look st him/her more skeptically and then that someone might be niggles into contacting the tip line.

Ploy.

And if that's the case here, I hope ultimately it leads to Ana and in due course justice.

JMO
Also, wouldn't he [or any innocent victim] have to take the lie detector test in person? ;)
 
Also, wouldn't he [or any innocent victim] have to take the lie detector test in person? ;)
Guessing one could be administered anywhere. Results recorded by the administrator and forwarded.
 
"At the moment, with the FBI already included in the operation, it is requested that her cell phone be traced to find out what her last position was."

can you tell me the date on this article?
it's a paywall for me
 
Speaking generally....

Most everybody knows polygraph are largely inadmissible... but...

It does remain a tool for LE to gage someone's reactions...

And IMO there's another benefit, more strategic, if you ask me.

Typically LE is fast to describe folks who are cooperating with an investigation and slow to call out those who are lagging. But one thing they can do is spread the word someone didn't take a polygraph.

And that has a value.

Not because of inadmissibility but because of the popular (mis) understanding of the reliability of the test.

Because for most people, right or wrong, they hear someone refused or failed a polygraph and know them whom to give the side eye.

IMO is a way for LE to say without saying, this is whom we are looking at. P.O.I.

And once published interest has an inkling that one person is the frontrunner for whom LE has sightline on, it may be just the dart to release fresh tips in so far as up until that moment the keeper of the tip did not realize its significance, fully believing in the narrative as presented.

Subliminal. If LE puts out there that they don't trust someone, those who know that someone can look st him/her more skeptically and then that someone might be niggles into contacting the tip line.

Ploy.

And if that's the case here, I hope ultimately it leads to Ana and in due course justice.

JMO

Not discussing DK specifically.

In principle, isn’t spreading the information about someone refusing the polygraph somewhat prejudiced? The person may simply refuse a polygraph because they feel it is junk science. It is not the question of guilt/innocence, it just shows what they think of pseudoscience.

Likewise, someone refusing to consult a psychic doesn't mean they know where the body is hidden, it just means that they don't believe in psychics.

The existence of two forms of affirmation, religious and secular, in courts, is even more concerning. Wouldn't requiring a secular affirmation as opposed to religious one, in certain areas, potentially alienate certain jurors against the defendant?

JMO - LE shouldn't make mere refusal of being subjected to a non-scientific interrogation technique public or carrying any weight. Again, my post is not in support of DK.
 
Last edited:
An interesting history about the polygraph test - https://interactive.wttw.com/playlist/2023/01/03/american-experience-lie-detector

“The idea for the lie detector was that it would be a way to constrain the police themselves,” Alder says. At the time, in the early 1920s, it was common for police in America to obtain confessions via what was known as the “third degree”: torturing or beating up suspects in interrogation. The lie detector “would be a more humane kind of third degree,” Alder explains.

The article also mentions IQ tests - which, I believe, are used in United States courts.
 

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
160
Guests online
3,869
Total visitors
4,029

Forum statistics

Threads
592,524
Messages
17,970,343
Members
228,792
Latest member
aztraea
Back
Top