Lie Detector Tests & Corruption: A public figure speaks out

[wondering1]

Many of you will remember the cloud of suspicion hanging over the mother of Victoria Stafford . Tara McDonald *failed* two questions asked during a polygraph exam. Much like TH, TM was vilified at the hands of MSM for poor choices and an (at times) questionable lifestyle. Although the final chapter of that tragedy has yet to be written, TM was eventually eliminated as a suspect and two accused remain in custody.

Point being, poor choices and questionable decisions do not necessarily a criminal make. History has proven this time and time again. Sadly, it appears to be repeating itself.

bbm~

How so? She hasn't been charged (so you can't be talking about LE) and certainly no one here can convict her. Plus, as I've said, I simply don't like the woman based on what I know and what I've heard. I specifically said that I wouldn't convict her based on what I know now. And so have many others. So, what? She is sadly being unfairly disliked and mistrusted. I"ve made plenty of *bad choices* in my life (ugh, I hate that euphemism -- especially when applied to a grown woman) and it is absolutely fair for people to judge me based on them. It is up to me to show that I have recognized, owned and changed my bad decisionmaking if I want people to see who I "really am" now -- not to keep doing the same ridiculous things, especially when I'm under a microscope (holy cow, the sexting for example). If I can't or won't do that than my "bad chioices" are really just who I am . . . And it is certainly fair to be judged on who you are.

 

[gitana1]

Please do not take offense, but can you tell me why you think TH is guilty and of what? Dollars to donuts your reasons will not be evidentiary but moral ones. There is not one scintilla of true evidence that has been released in this case, that indicates TH is guilty for whatever has befallen little Kyron.

There has been a plethora of innuendo tossed around; cell phone pings, bank records, mfh plots, sexting, even the possibility of a lesbian relationship have been debated ad nauseum along with white truck sightings (or not). Her personal past has been analyzed and it's been established that she is a money-hungry, sex crazy, domineering, sociopath who cannot put her masters degree to use in her profession.

But what true evidence exists that she is guilty.

What makes people suspect her?

Unfortunately for her, she "vented" about failing a polygraph to her family and they saw fit to share that with the news media.

I have zero actual evidence to show TH is guilty of anything. LE has released nothing. I don't care about money hungry, sex crazy allegations or possible personality disorders, her lack of use of her master's, etc. None of that impresses me as evidence of a reason to sway me towards guilt.
I have seen reports that have not been substantiated that would together support guilt in my mind which have nothing to do with her moral character or career path, marriages, divorces, affairs, whatever. But I won't go into those because those were not the one thing that convinced me of her guilt.
That one thing is giving up her baby by refusing to fight the RO, or the allegations therein and by trying to abate the disso. As a lawyer who has practiced primarily family law since 2002, with lots of that including DV cases, this points to TH's guilt to me.
I have posted extensively on why that is but she has seriously prejudiced her ability to regain any significant custody of her daughter. The only way I would recommend such a tactic to a client who loved his or her children and desperately wanted significant contact with their kids is if I knew my client was guilty of something criminal that could result in serious prison time. This is based on my experience as a family law attorney and the knowledge that has afforded me as to how custody and visitation works.
Essentially, IMO, no mother would give up custody and visitation rights (which TH absolutely has for now), over unproven allegations that amount to nothing more than hearsay. Kaine would have had to trot in LE investigators and present evidence to substantiate those allegations in order for him to prevail in his RO application but TH just lay down and accepted the RO and the loss of any form of contact with her baby, for whom she was the primary caregiver, allowing those allegations to remain unchallenged. That tells me she has something to hide in connection to those allegations.
People have proposed various reasons for why this may not be significant. None, from a legal or logic standpoint, make sense to me. (Like, she's just waiting for her chance to fight until some undisclosed time in the future, or that Baby K is safer with Kaine due to threats and there apparently is no way for her to have ANY contact with the child that would be safe - IMO nonsense - or that she lacks the resources to fight for custody or to have custody so she just gave it all up and thus prejudiced her ability to regain custody in the future, etc.).
What do I think she is guilty of? Either custodial interference or kidnapping and murder. I won't know until more evidence is released and/or more evidence is discovered by LE.
Let me add that when I first began reading on the Kyron thread, I left for a while because I felt that some of the things being said about TH were unfair and a huge stretch and had nothing to do with whether she is involved. I had no opinion either way regarding her involvement. The RO stuff then came out and caught my attention. TH's reaction to those allegations threw me off the fence, hard!

 

[liz b.]

Hello LizB,

You wrote:
>>As an example, if I was on a hypothetical jury, and the defence lawyer introduced evidence that a missing child's uncle was a RSO, that would make me sit up, sharpen my pencil, and start taking notes.<<

OHHHH absolutely, I would be taking notes too. I would absolutely want to know where this person was the day Kyron disappeared, even as I would want to know where the step mother was. I would have to quickly line out the RSO if evidence that could possibly point to them was outweighed by things like a 90 minute drive "who knows where," a Murder for Hire pointed at the child's father, a "sending away" of their own blood related older son several months before (smacks to me of getting a possibly observant person OR one that could be potentially harmed by a MFH gone awry off of the playing field), etc.

I'm not sure whether this will ever come to trial either, but I'm not sure that it shouldn't except for that a perp covered their exits.

And you know what else would set me to wondering,Wrinkles ? If the only real proof offered for this hypothetical RSO's not being involved was that his lawyer said that he wasn't involved... And,if the hypothetical RSO worked in IT, as an involved hypothetical juror, I would wonder : did he hide files ? Did he share files with other pedophiles ? What did he really know about his little nephew's routine ? Did he share any information about Kyron with other SO's,registered or not ?

And, just so this is kept on topic : what are the results of this hypothetical RSO's hypothetical LDT ? Did he even take one ? Why not,if not ???

All JMO

 

[wondering1]

I have zero actual evidence to show TH is guilty of anything. LE has released nothing. I don't care about money hungry, sex crazy stuff or possible personality disorders, her lack of use of her master's, etc. None of that impresses me as evidence of a reason to sway me towards guilt.
I have seen reports that have not been substantiated that would together support guilt in my mind which have nothing to do with her moral character or career path, marriages, divorces, affairs, whatever. But I won't go into those because those were not the one thing that convinced me of her guilt.
That one thing is giving up her baby by refusing to fight the RO, the allegations therein and trying to abate the disso. As a lawyer who has practiced primarily family law since 2002, with lots of that including DV cases, this points to TH's guilt to me.
I have posted extensively on why that is but she has seriously prejudiced her ability to regain any significant custody of her daughter. The only way I would recommend such a tactic to a client who loved his or her children and desperately wanted significant contact with their kids is if I knew my client was guilty of something criminal that could result in serious prison time. This based on my experience as a family law attorney and the knowledge that has afforded me as to how custody and visitation works. Essentially, IMO, no mother would give up custody and visitation rights (which TH absolutely has for now), over unproven allegations that amount to nothing more than hearsay. Kaine would have had to trot in LE investigators and present evidence to substantiate those allegations in order for him to prevail in his RO application but TH just lay down and accepted the RO and the loss of any form of contact with her baby, for whom she was the primary caregiver, allowing those allegations to remain unchallenged. That tells me she has something to hide in connection to those allegations.
People have proposed various reasons for why this may not be significant. None, from a legal or logic standpoint, make sense to me. (Like, she's just waiting for her chance to fight until some undisclosed time in the future, or that Baby K is safer with Kaine due to threats and there apparently is no way for ANY contact with the child that would be safe - IMO nonsense - or that she lacks the resources to fight for custody or to have custody so she just gave it all up and thus prejudiced her ability to regain custody in the future, etc.).
What do i think she is guilty of? Either custodial interference or kidnapping and murder. I won't know until more evidence is released and/or more evidence is discovered by LE.
Let me add that when I first began reading on the Kyron thread, I left for a while because I felt that some of the things being said about TH were unfair and a huge stretch and had nothing to do with whether she is involved. I had no opinion either way regarding her involvement. The RO stuff then came out and caught my attention. TH's reaction to those allegations threw me off the fence, hard!

That's what I keep coming back to, as well. ITA with when you would give that advice. I just posted above about not *liking* her, but this is the main reason I think there is a good chance she is guilty of something significant.

 

[Kat010]

.

(clip)
Your defense of Terri tells me you care about fairness.

(clip)

.

Repeating again and I do not know any other way to state it: I am not defending TH. I am not concerned about her public image.

Repeating: it is possible to have tunnel vision.

Repeating: it is possible to move to "protect" someone or something, like say, a school.

Repeating: it is good to question and even investigate in order to find out if therer is a mistake (or mistakes), a protection of something for what someone deems a "good reason" or actually is corruption--which is your word.

As for proving every opinion on this board--that's a tall order. I think I'll wait to prove any of my questions or opinions until everyone who believes that TH did a horrible crime proves it here. That will meet the criteria you laid down for this thread and my questions and opinion--and that of others. After all, words about her and DeDe also may travel, per your concerns about posts about the investigation traveling.

Unfortunately, we here on WS can't "prove" anything. We can only adhere to the rules, speculate, comment, question, etc.

And I'm fairly sure, especially based on the Oregonian article I linked today, that LE is coming under more fire than posts on crime-related websites. I'm also sure that they're used to it. I'm pretty sure they don't need "protection" from posters.

And I'm again going to ask again, following up on a prior request, that the standards of the website be observed and that we comment on material, and not continue to challenge other posters directly. I believe that's covered very well in our guidelines.

TIA.

 

[KopDog]

If you believe that TH tried to hire a hit man to off her husband that goes beyond being imperfect. JMO

agree - that would absolutely prove she is not your normal imperfect creature. not sure what i think about the MFH plot. You have to think that if they really had evidence, that they would at least be able to (and want to) arrest TH. Why haven't they? Seems like a good way to squeeze her if they really think she is guilty (think child endangerment arrest of casey anthony almost immediately). she apparently called 911 when confronted by landscaper. I thought the GJ was meeting on that charge...but then you hear about the principal and others that must mean they are meeting on missing Kyron. I guess it is absolutely possible they are hearing 2 cases. i read on other blogs that the landscaper is in jail already??? who knows.

 

[1Chump]

Maybe because for LE there is no other possibilities and they know they have the right person there investigating in connection with it.

IMO, that is the number one reason why innocent people are sitting in jail convicted of a crime they did not commit. LE locks in on a person and only sees the evidence that supports their theory or in some cases "make" the evidence to fit their theory. Even when DNA proves the person convicted did not commit the crime, many in LE refuses to believe it because other circumstantial evidence shows they did it.

 

[gitana1]

Great post, thanks.

And yes, the "viewpoint" (for lack of a better word) of the testee (is that a word?? LOL) does factor in to it. Which is why sociopaths, who don't feel guilt, so easily pass LDTs.

During our presentation, we learned that my boss, a very honest, church-going, and well-loved guy who was totally reliable, probably could not pass a LDT. Why? If they asked him "have you ever taken someone else's money" and he suddenly remembered that he'd borrowed money from me and hadn't repaid it, his own sense of ethics would compute that as "yes" but chances are he'd say "no", intellectually understanding that the question was about deliberate theft.

There's a lot of power in the words used, and our reactions to them.

Let alone the physical things. I also was told that I'd have a hard time passing a LDT. I have a very rapid heartbeat (that's just me) and I'm prone to palpitations--which increase under stress. No big deal, that's just how I'm wired--until the palps get really big.

If I were in the stress of a LDT, my already quick heartrate would speed up. And I'd have palpitations, which would then worry and stress me even more..and so on. According to the expert who presented to us, I should never take a LDT.

There are so many variables involved in a LDT. Can a machine pick up physiological reactions? Sure thing. So can humans--body language, sweating, etc.

But can a machine filter those reactions in terms of the testee's background, health, subconscious, and understanding of the connotation of the precise words used? Not always, IMHO.

Here's one major question that I have--there's a very large culture that thinks Americans are stupid for our insistence on telling the truth. I've read quotes that say that lying is an accepted part of their business dealings and culture.

So, could anyone from that culture actually *fail* a LDT, because they'd have no guilt over "lying"? Hmmm. Darned if I know.

I have a client who is a very moral person, very ethical, lives a good life. But, he has a serious anxiety disorder. I mean, this guy is a nervous wreck. I don't know how he functions. He is also always riddled with strong, Catholic guilt. So he took a LDT test once in connection with a theft at his place of work. As a result of that test, they investigated him. (This is not what I was representing him on BTW, it happened years before I knew him). He was also asked to resign. He never stole a darn thing, though.
I think LDTs can be unreliable which is why they are not admissible. But I do think that they can be used as a tool, not only to try to determine if someone may be hiding something, but also as a pressure tool and I have no problem with that unless the subject is mentally disabled in some way, or a minor, etc.
In this case, if TH failed polys, that might have given LE added info about her mindset or announcing to her that she failed could have been a pressure tactic. In fact, she may have passed. I am not sure but can't LE lie about the results? I know that was discussed here but I seem to recall cases of false confessions where one of the tactics employed to get the confession was lying about LDTs or something similar. Either way, the LDT results would add to my belief of a person's guilt or innocence but not on their own. There must be something else besides LDT results for me to form an opinion.
One last thing. Although I know they are unreliable, I would take one in a heartbeat of asked to by LE in connection with a missing child case. Marc Klass, John Walsh share my opinion. I would want them to do as much as possible to rule me out and focus on the real culprit.

 

[Steely Dan]

IMO, that is the number one reason why innocent people are sitting in jail convicted of a crime they did not commit. LE locks in on a person and only sees the evidence that supports their theory or in some cases "make" the evidence to fit their theory. Even when DNA proves the person convicted did not commit the crime, many in LE refuses to believe it because other circumstantial evidence shows they did it.

Do you believe that LE focused too much on KC?

 

[CathyinTexas]

If no medical details were given, I don't think the teacher would be in the wrong to mention to a volunteer (who, apparently, the school arranged to be in the classroom with the students--and, it sounds to me that it was in the capacity of being a teacher's aide or substitute) that a child went to the dr. moo

How about saying he had an excused absence, or that he would be absent today, without stating what for? But to tell a volunteer/aide that he probably went to get a drink or to the bathroom indicates she did not think he had an excused absence due to a doctor's appointment, imo.

 

[Steely Dan]

I have a client who is a very moral person, very ethical, lives a good life. But, he has a serious anxiety disorder. I mean, this guy is a nervous wreck. I don't know how he functions. he is also always riddled with strong, Catholic guilt. So he took a LDT test once in connection with a theft at his place of work. As a result of that test, they investigated him. (This is not what I was representing him on BTW, it happened years before I knew him). He was also asked to resign. he never stole a darn thing, though.
I think LDTs can be unreliable which is why they are not admissible. But I do think that they can be used as a tool, not only to try to determine if someone may be hiding something, but also as a pressure tool and I have no problem with that unless the subject is mentally disabled in some way, or a minor, etc.
In this case, if TH failed polys, that might have given LE added info about her mindset or announcing to her that she failed could have been a pressure tactic. In fact, she may have passed. I am not sure but can't LE lie about the results? I know that was discussed here but I seem to recall cases of false confessions where one of the tactics employed do get the confession was lying about LDTs or something similar. Either way, the LDT results would add to my belief of a person's guilt or innocence but not on their own. There must be something else besides LDT results for me to form an opinion.
One last thing. Although I know they are unreliable, I would take one in a heartbeat of asked to by LE in connection with a missing child case. Marc Klass, John Walsh share my opinion. I would want them to do as much as possible to rule me out and focus on the real culprit.

IIRC, the SCOTUS ruled that LE can lie to suspects during interrogations. I'm not sure how I feel about that. It has led to innocents being locked up.

 

[gitana1]

BBM:

It was..."..Oh no, there's only 5...where's Kyron?"...asked by the "substitute" who was actually a volunteer. And after the teacher replied with the bathroom probability, "she" said..."oh...ok...I'm leaving then". There is confusion here in that we don't really know whether this was after the group came back from touring the other classes or when they were forming groups to begin.

Yes, I am aware of that "only 5" quote. What I meant is that if a teacher responded with, "Calm down, calm down", how can that teacher later forget the question posed that apparently was said with enough alarm for the teacher to reply with "calm down, calm down". You know what I mean?

 

[citigirl]

That's what I keep coming back to, as well. ITA with when you would give that advice. I just posted above about not *liking* her, but this is the main reason I think there is a good chance she is guilty of something significant.

I have to say, when gitana made that argument, it sealed it to me that Terri was involved. I really did not put much stock in her "failure" of the lie detector test. LE will tell you that it is not 100% reliable. They just use it to narrow down suspects. From what I understand, it is kind of hard to pass one if you are guilty, but it is easier to fail one if you are not.

I still do not feel that I have seen enough evidence to prove that she was the main cause of Kyron's disappearance. But she is involved enough to be looking at jail time, IMO.

 

[gliving]

Do you believe that LE focused too much on KC?

I'm lost. Who's KC?

 

[CathyinTexas]

Yes--that's what I was thinking, too. They would know the entire school--even the basement... Someone could have been planning and waiting for the opportunity...

Someone posted awhile back that there were stairs going down into the basement, or bottom floor and there was an outside exit from that area also. If there were projects outside, as we heard that the groundskeepers saw children outside without adults, couldn't Kyron have walked outside on his own alone, or have been lured out there, as someone also suggested?

 

[CathyinTexas]

Well, honestly, yes, I would consider suing for that. She/he has no business discussing any health related issues with a volunteer, not even the fact that there was an appointment. I admit though that I may be biased in this, seeing as I work in healthcare, and privacy is a big deal.



Also, having seen the repercussions at one school where I volunteered as a nurse, of a students privacy being violated, I can't abide the sharing of information with anyone not needing to know for legitimate purposes.

There are ways of stating to another adult that you (teacher) are aware that Kyron left, and will not be there the rest of the day. Or he left with his Mom, etc. Instead she said he may have gone to the restroom, which makes it obvious to me that she did not think he left. His personal effects were still at the school.

 

[eyes4crime]

i live in Chicago and agree with you 100% and it is probably those 2 cases (that have been in the news lately) - that have given me pause to not rush judgement just because the step mom turned out to not be a perfect human being when we got a closer look at her life.

Hi there fellow Chicagoian

Pretty sure these two cases have changed me forever in the way I cast a guilty verdict. I really did get this eerie feeling as Kyron's case moved along that it was a little to similar to the Fox case. I never once thought either man was guilty and I'm aghast that people here continue to believe of their guilt. Our tax dollars at work once again! moo mno

 

[2goldfish]

Hi there fellow Chicagoian

Pretty sure these two cases have changed me forever in the way I cast a guilty verdict. I really did get this eerie feeling as Kyron's case moved along that it was a little to similar to the Fox case. I never once thought either man was guilty and I'm aghast that people here continue to believe of their guilt. Our tax dollars at work once again! moo mno

I thought of the Fox case all through this thread too.

end of the day: we do not know what LE knows. for bettter or for worse for TH.

 

[Steely Dan]

I'm lost. Who's KC?

KC is the Websleuther's abbreviation for Casey Anthony. That and ICA.

 

[CathyinTexas]

Well said.

And then the tidal wave picks up steam: a desire to close the case quickly, a suspect at the ready, tons of soap opera drama, ego (always a big player in big cases with LE/DA), the behind-the-scenes influence of TY (a "brother in blue"), the "don't talk" instructions by the church lady, and KH's "don't talk" instructions to co-workers, the constant public focus on TH, the leaks, the busy busy busy Source family, the pressers in which KH & DY attacked TH (and later they admitted that despite the early appearances and assurances of LE providing info that they didn't base all their statements on LE--along with an almost reprimand from LE at one point denying that they'd provided the info alluded to), and and and and ...

and.

Then there's the LDTs, the searches, the media, the squawking of TV heads like NG, and things wind up getting repeated as fact when they're not fact at all. Which is one reason that I appreciate WS--we provide links along with analysis based on fact, not hysteria.

Though I have watched NG for a long time, I am apalled at how many times she states something as fact when most of us in the public already know the true facts, which aren't what she is reporting!