IA IA - Elizabeth Collins, 8, & Lyric Cook, 10, Evansdale, 13 July 2012 - #12

[cindersoot]

Thanks! Sorry I wasn't making myself clear, though - I was thinking maybe it was someone else riding off on their bikes fast as can be, because they just "found them" and don't want anyone to witness them taking off on them.

That is an AWESOME question.:rocker:

 

[SapphireSteel]

How could a vehicle drive all around the lake on the bike/jogging trail without being noticed?

I'm sorry, I meant that a vehicle was parked in the "trap" area and the girls taken directly from there.

The trap was directly off the highway.

 

[TxLady2]

With due respect, the source you quoted is dated 1997.

I'm no expert but I would imagine that LDT's have advanced in the last 15 years, both in technology and interpretation.

:moo:

Probably so, but they are still not infallible, and they still aren't admissible in court except very rarely, because of that reason. What Grannie posted is as true today as it was 15 years ago. Nobody has developed a polygraph that is 100% foolproof yet.
There is a reason they don't call them lie detector tests anymore.

 

[Jax49]

“We really have no indication what happened other than we have two bicycles sitting down at a lake,” Abben says.

http://www.kwwl.com/story/19023342/evansdale-police-searching-for-two-missing-girls


No doubt some will argue but I read this as

Two bikes found. That's it.

A damaged bike would give an "indication of what happened" IMO.


:moo:

I think they've updated that article cause I couldn't find that quote. Anyway, now that you reminded me, it does seem that the LE spokesman did word it that way. And, I agree, it there had been significant damage that would have been an 'indication of what happened'.

 

[cindersoot]

OMG, Now 7pm central time on channel 189 OWN. Our America with Lisa Ling, about human sex trafficking in America. 9 and younger girls. My heart breaks.

 

[elmomom]

John Douglas lost all credibility for me when he declared the Ramseys innocent.

LTD's are like pregnancy tests...it's either positive (they are telling the truth), or it's not (there is deception/attempt at deception). There's no such thing as being a little bit pregnant.

:moo:

Please take some time and read up on what causes an inconclusive result on a polygraph.
Since it seems you are so unfamiliar with it, I have no need to discuss it with you further.

 

[azuredewdrop]

John Douglas lost all credibility for me when he declared the Ramseys innocent.

LTD's are like pregnancy tests...it's either positive (they are telling the truth), or it's not (there is deception/attempt at deception). There's no such thing as being a little bit pregnant.

:moo:

I respectfully disagree. It is fact that some people have been able to defy a polygraph intentionally and give a false "positive".

Also, polygraph is only as good as the person reading it/deciphering it. Human error is possible. It's not like a test that uses chemicals to weigh/measure amounts of hormone in someone's urine. Very different.

 

[Considering]

As I said before he probally knew the house across the lake was empty and probally knows his neighbors habits. It was very hot that day and homes have windows shut and air on. It was during the time people are normally working.

I thought it was cooler that day (July 13) than it had been on previous days. Is a high of 83 degrees incorrect?

http://www.wunderground.com/history/airport/KALO/2012/7/13/DailyHistory.html

 

[cindersoot]

Which open grassy area do you mean? Why do you say that there are no tire tracks on the road to the sewer lift station, or on Maiden Lane?

And how do you know it's not LE tracks?

 

[cindersoot]

I thought it was cooler that day (July 13) than it had been on previous days. Is a high of 83 degrees incorrect?

http://www.wunderground.com/history/airport/KALO/2012/7/13/DailyHistory.html

It's very humid during the summers here in Iowa, 89 degrees could be 100 depending on humidity. Air on.

 

[SapphireSteel]

I respectfully disagree. It is fact that some people have been able to defy a polygraph intentionally and give a false "positive".

Also, polygraph is only as good as the person reading it/deciphering it. Human error is possible. It's not like a test that uses chemicals to weigh/measure amounts of hormone in someone's urine. Very different.

Absolutely agree.

Which is why I took pains to point out that this particular test was conducted by the FBI.

I would like to know the statistics of the "false positive" LDT's, and if they too were conducted by the FBI or Sherrif Joe down at the ranch.

:moo:

 

[hollyblue]

Total precipitation that day: 0.01 inches

http://www.almanac.com/weather/history/IA/Waterloo/2011-07-13

Barely enough to dampen the grass and certainly not enough to wet the ground.

From what Ollipop has said, Maiden Lane has a base of gravel that is overgrown with weeds. He took pictures of tire tracks but those tracks consisted of pressed down vegetation. Certainly not enough to get a tire impression from.

I'd been wondering how the Cedar Valley was lucky enough to get enough rain to notice when all we got was some spitting rain that wasn't enough to cover concrete fully with rain drops. Turns out that the answer was, they didn't.

No wonder Mr Carpenter was watering his lawn.

Correct.

I think the tire tracks were from a family member. I've heard two stories. DC took his truck there and backed it in the area where the tracks were found and story number two was of DM taking an ATV to the area. Ollipop, iirc, stated the tracks would be too wide for an ATV, but I think the mention of a gator was used. Do we know if any of the depts of Evansdale have a gator? For the grounds or maintenance?

If I've stated something erroneously, please correct me....as this was discussed at the beginning of their missing. Tia

 

[callyn]

post deleted

 

[SapphireSteel]

Probably so, but they are still not infallible, and they still aren't admissible in court except very rarely, because of that reason. What Grannie posted is as true today as it was 15 years ago. Nobody has developed a polygraph that is 100% foolproof yet.
There is a reason they don't call them lie detector tests anymore.

There is now new technology in LDT's, as I suspected. This, lifted directly from the International League of Polygraph Examiner's FAQ -

Can I beat the polygraph?
No, you cannot. If you know you are lying, the polygraph will detect the lie. Any qualified polygraph examiner, who graduated from an ILPE and/or an APA accredited polygraph school, will certainly detect deception. Furthermore, the computerized polygraph approved by the ILPE has a phenomenal accuracy rate of nearly 100 percent and is used in conjunction with highly effective polygraph accessories allowing a polygraph examiner to detect countermeasures an examinee may resort to in an attempt to influence the outcome of the polygraph examination.

http://www.theilpe.com/faq_eng.html

 

[palaminodee]

Rewinder available? ( I need a rewind about the #1214 call, see my post #1230 too! thank you!)

 

[LaylaD]

I thought it was cooler that day (July 13) than it had been on previous days. Is a high of 83 degrees incorrect?

http://www.wunderground.com/history/airport/KALO/2012/7/13/DailyHistory.html

If you look at the week view, it shows highs in the 90s for the days leading up to the 13th. This summer, a high of 83 is on the cooler side....

 

[TxLady2]

John Douglas lost all credibility for me when he declared the Ramseys innocent.

LTD's are like pregnancy tests...it's either positive (they are telling the truth), or it's not (there is deception/attempt at deception). There's no such thing as being a little bit pregnant.

:moo:

I disagree. Do some research on it. Talk to some polygraphy experts. They are definitely NOT 100% pass or fail with most people. You are aware that someone can lie when answering one question and tell the truth with another one?? Liars will occasionally tell the truth, and even a broken clock is right twice a day.
Besides, if they were all that accurate and foolproof, any judge would allow the results in as evidence and they hardly ever do, it's extremely rare.

 

[SapphireSteel]

I disagree. Do some research on it. Talk to some polygraphy experts. They are definitely NOT 100% pass or fail with most people. You are aware that someone can lie when answering one question and tell the truth with another one?? Liars will occasionally tell the truth, and even a broken clock is right twice a day.
Besides, if they were all that accurate and foolproof, any judge would allow the results in as evidence and they hardly ever do, it's extremely rare.

I did, here it is -

http://www.theilpe.com/faq_eng.html

 

[TxLady2]

Lord have Mercy! I gotta take a break, for some reason my husband is hungry. The nerve!

 

[Wishbone]

I did, here it is -

http://www.theilpe.com/faq_eng.html

Here's a website that will debunk all the positives theilpe.com has to show.......


http://antipolygraph.org/index.shtml