IN - Lauren Spierer, 20, Bloomington, 03 June 2011 #29

[AbbeyR]

I think the lie detectors are red herrings. I don't know why people get hung up on the lie detectors so much. For one thing, they did take lie detector tests, and apparently passed or else we wouldn't even know they took them. If anyone is going to argue that they weren't all administered by LE and thus the results could be manipulated and aren't reliable then how does that suddenly mean a LE LD test would be the holy grail of accuracy? You can't have it both ways.

It's a fallacy they haven't cooperated with LE. They clearly did before finally seeking lawyers. JR even met with the parents and PI's. His lawyer must be awfully sure of innocence, stupid, or have no control of his client to allow such a meeting. You don't do something like that and risk your client implicating himself.

No, the reason why taking a private poly and "Passing" makes no sense is that they don't say what they were asked. I mean, imagine if you had an exam in a course, but tried to say "oh, I took my own private exam, administered by my mom, and I passed. I can't tell you what was on it, but let's just agree that it's the same thing." No, it's not. The problem is more with the questions and deciding for yourself what information to provide to LE and what not to provide.

I also disagree that they have cooperated with the investigation. As soon as I hear that from someone other than their own lawyers, I might give it some weight. It's easy to cooperate on the things you know won't get you in any trouble.

And JR's lawyer was with him at that meeting -- All he had to do was control what answers were given, just like lawyers do when their clients speak to the media, or when they prepare them for court. This is not an indication of innocence or the lawyer's belief in innocence at all, IMO. The Spierer's themselves said the meeting was not productive and they they didn't feel he was forthcoming (I'm paraphrasing, I don't have time to look for the article).

 

[AbbeyR]

And if you don't believe me, take it from Voyles himself:

“I never feel confident in any case about the truth of what clients say to me,” says Voyles. - See more at: http://www.indianapolismonthly.com/features/Story.aspx?ID=1447543#sthash.8LoD4xLy.dpuf

If you read about Voyles, you will see that there's a reason people pay him the big bucks. He is smart, knows how to spin information, and his clients talk (to the media or LE) only to the extent that it will benefit them in some way. It's not a risk -- the statements, the meeting etc. have all been in direct response to intense media scrutiny as damage control. Taking a risk would be taking an LE polygraph because they couldn't control the questions or the information. That's usually the reason people don't want to do it.

 

[AbbeyR]

It's a fallacy they haven't cooperated with LE. They clearly did before finally seeking lawyers.

BBM. Finally? You mean the next working day after Lauren went missing? That's when JR hired his defense team, isn't it? When did the others? There were public statements by CR and MB's lawyers the second their names hit the media (which was only a few days later, IIRC), and I'm guessing they hired them before that.

I asked this a while ago, but I can't find any information that says that JR's apartment was actually searched. What about his car? I know CR and JW's apartments were searched almost a month after Lauren went missing. There was criticism of Bloomington PD about this, but I wonder how long the process usually takes to get warrants, and whether or not this was held up somehow (Did the POI at 5N try to prevent these searches or agree to them?)... It's also possible that there were searches that the media didn't know about.

The only reference I can find to JR's apartment being searched is "Ray" on PT who says JR told his roommates the Police came into the apartment. Then again, he also told them he took an LE polygraph, which wasn't true.

 

[akh]

BBM. Finally? You mean the next working day after Lauren went missing? That's when JR hired his defense team, isn't it?

Yes but not before speaking and riding with the police based on the IM article you linked to:

JUNE 7, 2011

Jason Rosenbaum hires attorneys Jennifer Lukemeyer and Jim Voyles. “Once we were involved, we made immediate contact with the police,” Voyles tells IM. Lukemeyer also tells IM that, before retaining counsel, Rosenbaum gave two statements to the police, rode with them in the area where Spierer was last seen, and shared his phone.
- See more at: http://www.indianapolismonthly.com/features/story.aspx?ID=1712477#sthash.kW80q6mf.dpuf

The only reference I can find to JR's apartment being searched is "Ray" on PT who says JR told his roommates the Police came into the apartment. Then again, he also told them he took an LE polygraph, which wasn't true.

JUNE 29, 2011

A news photographer with the Herald-Times sees police at the residences of Wolff and Rossman, and Chapman confirms to IM that Rossman’s apartment was searched. Rosenbaum’s attorneys tell IM that the police searched Rosenbaum’s apartment, too.
- See more at: http://www.indianapolismonthly.com/features/story.aspx?ID=1712477#sthash.kW80q6mf.dpuf

 

[VeryVeritas]

BBM. Finally? You mean the next working day after Lauren went missing? That's when JR hired his defense team, isn't it? When did the others? There were public statements by CR and MB's lawyers the second their names hit the media (which was only a few days later, IIRC), and I'm guessing they hired them before that.

I asked this a while ago, but I can't find any information that says that JR's apartment was actually searched. What about his car? I know CR and JW's apartments were searched almost a month after Lauren went missing. There was criticism of Bloomington PD about this, but I wonder how long the process usually takes to get warrants, and whether or not this was held up somehow (Did the POI at 5N try to prevent these searches or agree to them?)... It's also possible that there were searches that the media didn't know about.

The only reference I can find to JR's apartment being searched is "Ray" on PT who says JR told his roommates the Police came into the apartment. Then again, he also told them he took an LE polygraph, which wasn't true.

Of course LE doesn't need a Warrant if you just let them in. Were all these guys so defensive they demanded to see Warrants? I mean sure if you had a felonious amount of cocaine laid out on the kitchen table might want to demand a warrant. But otherwise, if you didn't have anything going on, and it's your friend that's missing, why not let LE in? So, it's possible LE was let in without a warrant, but I doubt it... Even so, whatever happened I think was cleaned up immediately. But sure a whole month to go over it a few dozen times... wouldn't leave much behind.

 

[Ixchel13]

They cooperated somewhat in the beginning it seems. I think we should be honest with ourselves. Once they gave statements of what happened, and saw that these statements landed them as prime POIs, do we really blame them for getting attorneys? Only an idiot wouldn't.
They were not allowed to help search for her even if they wanted to.
JR is lying about something, IMO. And so is LE.
Here's a scenario: Lauren is at JR's, and remember we all wonder, what went on for
almost an hour and a half before she supposedly left? JR's out of town guest(s) are
hitting on Lauren, she keeps insisting to leave, find her phone, get home, and, with the libido that VeryVeritas says every guy has, they stall her until finally JR (who has admitted to being drunk on vodka so doesn't want to drive/borrow a car,) gives her his field sobriety test and lets her go. Out of town friend follows her, swoops her up, slings her over his shoulder and carries her to his vehicle. During this, Lauren may have had a heart attack. Realizing she is dead, he puts her in the trunk and goes back to JR's. Then,
he blatantly goes to Runcible Spoon to establish some sort of alibi (he thinks) and tweets about corned beef. No one is searching for her yet so he leisurely drives out of town with her. This scenario has her anywhere from that point.
JR might have said he knew that his friend did not leave the apt. He could have said that he knew that his friend DID leave the apt. We don't know. LE could be misrepresenting the time
(3:38 vs. 4:38 a.m.) to either make this person feel safe, or to make this person worry.
if this person from Michigan is the prime POI, then maybe when another girl gets killed
or is missing and he is implicated, he will confess to Lauren like BSL did with Lisa and Mickey.
We don't really know what JR has told LE, or what any of the other POIs have told LE. We know what the media has reported people saying, and what LE has officially reported.
Say our LE contacted Michigan LE and supposedly this guy is under watch, I don't believe with his power and money they are really watching him. LEs' best bet is to wait til he trips up and to make him feel like they aren't watching him. To me, that is terrible! They should turn the heat up on him. By now, he has probably sold his vehicle, or reported it stolen, etc.

 

[Ixchel13]

Also, just wanted to add, as we have been saying, the Spierers' know more than we do, and they may have an idea that the named POIs may not be actually guilty of abducting Lauren. But since they aren't fully cooperating, and contributed to Lauren's demise, why should they make any move to let these scoundrels off the hook publicly? If they know more and aren't saying,
and this includes all of these kids, HT and friends included, I wouldn't.
The last call, and why won't they say who it is? could have been to JR's friend, who had possibly been over at SW watching the game with HT and gang earlier. At that point, maybe it was JR making the call and not Lauren.
Maybe Lauren left, and then JR noticed his friend had left, so he made the two calls. No messages because that would incriminate his friend IF his friend was up to something. Maybe what went on in his apt for the hour and a half made him worry that his friend was up to no good, and he did know this guy well. MOO speculation, IMO, MHO only.

 

[AbbeyR]

Yes but not before speaking and riding with the police based on the IM article you linked to:

Thanks, Akh - I do realize that the POI cooperated somewhat -- I just they did a bare minimum. I"m sure they all gave some kind of 'statement' when the police knocked on their door the day Lauren was reported missing and it makes sense that JR would have shown them the route that he claimed he watched her take home. It would have been totally weird if they didn't do this. But obviously they did not cooperate fully. Regardless of how their lawyers try to spin their fake polygraphs, LE and the Spierers both repeated over and over again how perplexing and frustrating it was to have the people who were last with Lauren refuse to talk to LE or help. No way around that.

I am gad to see that confirmation that JR's apt. was searched. It must have been that same day as the others at the end of June. (Why so long??) VV, I think in a case like this LE would want a warrant to search for legal reasons, even if they got consent.... But I'm guessing they didn't.

 

[Ixchel13]

Thanks, Akh - I do realize that the POI cooperated somewhat -- I just they did a bare minimum. I"m sure they all gave some kind of 'statement' when the police knocked on their door the day Lauren was reported missing and it makes sense that JR would have shown them the route that he claimed he watched her take home. It would have been totally weird if they didn't do this. But obviously they did not cooperate fully. Regardless of how their lawyers try to spin their fake polygraphs, LE and the Spierers both repeated over and over again how perplexing and frustrating it was to have the people who were last with Lauren refuse to talk to LE or help. No way around that.

I am gad to see that confirmation that JR's apt. was searched. It must have been that same day as the others at the end of June. (Why so long??) VV, I think in a case like this LE would want a warrant to search for legal reasons, even if they got consent.... But I'm guessing they didn't.

If my friend was missing, and I had nothing to do with it, but I had a substantial amount of cocaine and other illegal meds plus bongs, etc, I
would not let them search,and ask for a warrant. Then, I would get everything else out, hire an attorney and wait for the warrant to be served. My mega rich parents would go further, by going to court and requiring the LE to jump through hoops to get that warrant. Those parents would contact the other rich parents and they would all do the same. Those that haven't hired lawyers probably have a family lawyer on retainer. Voyles is probably the
high profile mouthpiece for JR's family team of attorneys.
Not to be irreverant to Lauren, but this is like when the Kennedy kid killed his rich neighbor girl friend named Martha Moxley with a golf club because she rejected him. JR's and DB's dads have as much money! Probably more.
Is this becoming about money? Having enough of it to stay out of jail?

 

[VeryVeritas]

If my friend was missing, and I had nothing to do with it, but I had a substantial amount of cocaine and other illegal meds plus bongs, etc, I
would not let them search,and ask for a warrant. Then, I would get everything else out, hire an attorney and wait for the warrant to be served. My mega rich parents would go further, by going to court and requiring the LE to jump through hoops to get that warrant. Those parents would contact the other rich parents and they would all do the same. Those that haven't hired lawyers probably have a family lawyer on retainer. Voyles is probably the
high profile mouthpiece for JR's family team of attorneys.
Not to be irreverant to Lauren, but this is like when the Kennedy kid killed his rich neighbor girl friend named Martha Moxley with a golf club because she rejected him. JR's and DB's dads have as much money! Probably more.
Is this becoming about money? Having enough of it to stay out of jail?

The unfortunate reality is that we do not really have justice in the USA (and I'm not sure if it exists anywhere). Everything is based on Money and/or Power. But here it is reaching extremes. Rich and powerful people prove daily that they are above the law, they circumvent the law, they make the law, they own the law. Once in a while someone is so blatently caught that even money can't get them totally off the hook but it can get them appeals, reduced sentences, special accommodations, etc... But most of the time, they are totally insulated and only pay for their crimes by losing a few bucks. To someone with hundreds of millions or more, it's inconsequential.

My range of friends and acquaintances has been from those totally broke and destitute to billionaires. We can have a society that is fair and just regardless of wealth, but only if people value something more than $$. The problem is that we as a people value $$ over everything else, and so this Plutocracy is the natural result. If the overwhelming majority would not be blinded by lust for the $ a sense of balance could return.

This sort of thing does seem to be a pendulum that swings and unfortunately is only comes back to moderation when it reaches massive excess such that it causes the collapse of the empire(or power structure of whatever size) due to the massive corruption and/or shear depravity it reaches. The cycles last years to centuries.

But then when in US History have we ever had a time when all people were treated just and fairly? It's never existed. It's always a matter of who is getting screwed and who is getting away with something. That's the nature of POWER. And money is just liquid Power.

I really don't care how rich anyone is in this case, I just want Lauren found.
But I will admit one thing, the case is not personal enough for me that if I were threatened, would keep pursuing it. If Lauren were my gf or my sister, nothing would stop me. I know when rich people mean businesses, when they are bluffing and when to back off. If you want to go head to head, then you have to have some serious alliances. Choose your battles carefully. As of now, I can only assume that they are feeling quite safe and WS's is no threat to them - but I'm certain they watch it and post here.

With vast wealth you can rest assured that they could be helping find Lauren with it, rather than create a defensive wall. What better defense could there be that to pitch in to find the real perp (or at least frame someone else)? So this is curious too. If you can hire $1,000 per hr lawyers, wouldn't it be prudent to hire your own PI's for a whole lot less to get this poo of your shoes?

One more thing. Even people I've known with a few hundred thousand of net worth know that you don't want your kids to ever have any kind of record whatsoever, not even a speeding ticket. They will do anything to keep that kid out of LE computers. It makes me wonder how these POI's wind up with laundry list of citations and such. Could it be that there were more significant things before which they wiggled out of and this is what's left? The rich and powerful know how to clean their tracks, get records expunged / purged / lost, etc...

 

[akh]

One more thing. Even people I've known with a few hundred thousand of net worth know that you don't want your kids to ever have any kind of record whatsoever, not even a speeding ticket. They will do anything to keep that kid out of LE computers. It makes me wonder how these POI's wind up with laundry list of citations and such. Could it be that there were more significant things before which they wiggled out of and this is what's left? The rich and powerful know how to clean their tracks, get records expunged / purged / lost, etc...

Let me get this straight. You've declared them rich and powerful. Then have explained how the rich and powerful know how to clean their tracks, get records expunged, lost, etc. Then mentioned how the parents in these rich and powerful families don't even want their children even having a speeding ticket.

Then you admit these people DO have smudges on their record

"It makes me wonder how these POI's wind up with laundry list of citations and such".

But even though that simple fact runs counter to your entire theory on the rich and powerful and the imbalance of justice that exists in this country it still ends up feeding into your theory on their guilt?

Could it be that there were more significant things before which they wiggled out of and this is what's left?

I believe LS had a PI on her record... could it be that her past is much more shady than we realize and her parents had her record cleaned leaving just this and hiding a much more darker truth? What? That is crazy. Yes it is. And so is the above. Sure, anything is possible but there needs to be some shred of evidence before we are able to make a declarative statement that is so conspiratorial. There is nothing in the public record that we know of supporting this and the existing record runs counter to the theory in the first place.

 

[Ixchel13]

Let me get this straight. You've declared them rich and powerful. Then have explained how the rich and powerful know how to clean their tracks, get records expunged, lost, etc. Then mentioned how the parents in these rich and powerful families don't even want their children even having a speeding ticket.

Then you admit these people DO have smudges on their record

But even though that simple fact runs counter to your entire theory on the rich and powerful and the imbalance of justice that exists in this country it still ends up feeding into your theory on their guilt?

I believe LS had a PI on her record... could it be that her past is much more shady than we realize and her parents had her record cleaned leaving just this and hiding a much more darker truth? What? That is crazy. Yes it is. And so is the above. Sure, anything is possible but there needs to be some shred of evidence before we are able to make a declarative statement that is so conspiratorial. There is nothing in the public record that we know of supporting this and the existing record runs counter to the theory in the first place.

All these kids involved were a little naughty--you see kids who worked with
special needs kids, kids volunteering for duty in dirt poor Guatemalan villages, kids going down to help any way with Hurricane Katrina--and those same kids have PIs and even DWIs. It is not uncommon for these citations to be in the daily paper every day.

I call them kids cause I'm sooo old.

 

[Snapfade]

No, the reason why taking a private poly and "Passing" makes no sense is that they don't say what they were asked. I mean, imagine if you had an exam in a course, but tried to say "oh, I took my own private exam, administered by my mom, and I passed. I can't tell you what was on it, but let's just agree that it's the same thing." No, it's not. The problem is more with the questions and deciding for yourself what information to provide to LE and what not to provide.

I also disagree that they have cooperated with the investigation. As soon as I hear that from someone other than their own lawyers, I might give it some weight. It's easy to cooperate on the things you know won't get you in any trouble.

And JR's lawyer was with him at that meeting -- All he had to do was control what answers were given, just like lawyers do when their clients speak to the media, or when they prepare them for court. This is not an indication of innocence or the lawyer's belief in innocence at all, IMO. The Spierer's themselves said the meeting was not productive and they they didn't feel he was forthcoming (I'm paraphrasing, I don't have time to look for the article).

so why would DR take a polygraph then? Do you think his lawyer advised him to? or did he ignore lawyer and do the right thing because he's not guilty of anything? OR did LE have a need to clear him of any wrong doing and make it public knowledge that he passed the polygraph?

keep coming back to the possibility that one or more of these boys were a C.I. for law enforcement

 

[CoolJ]

How do we know LS was barefoot and without a cellphone? Is the only "evidence" of this from the stories that have come out of the mouths of the PsOI's?
I think her cellphone(s) has more to do with this story than what we realize. Depending on how Involved this group is/was in the on campus drug trade, you gotta think burner phones are playing a part here somewhere.

 

[Ros]

How do we know LS was barefoot and without a cellphone? Is the only "evidence" of this from the stories that have come out of the mouths of the PsOI's?
I think her cellphone(s) has more to do with this story than what we realize. Depending on how Involved this group is/was in the on campus drug trade, you gotta think burner phones are playing a part here somewhere.

I would assume that the last videos (from Smallwood and the alley) show that LS was not wearing shoes. Also, her shoes were found at Kilroy's, which is also where her phone was found.

 

[Ros]

I have always been puzzled about why, if she died in or near 5N, her body was hidden so that it has not been found after more than a year, rather than simply placed outside somewhere that it would be quickly found. It would seem that her body might have had some sort of incriminating evidence. However, how much of that evidence could still be left after all this time? Could a cause of death still be determined? Why not anonymously tell her parents where her body could be found? Does the location of her body incriminate someone? Does the condition of her remains incriminate someone, even after nearly two years?

 

[akh]

No, the reason why taking a private poly and "Passing" makes no sense is that they don't say what they were asked. I mean, imagine if you had an exam in a course, but tried to say "oh, I took my own private exam, administered by my mom, and I passed. I can't tell you what was on it, but let's just agree that it's the same thing." No, it's not. The problem is more with the questions and deciding for yourself what information to provide to LE and what not to provide.

Whoa... I about missed this. Where do you get that all anyone was given was just a blanket statement that they passed a private poly?

That wouldn't be typical. For one thing the examiner will create a summary at the end of the test after he reviews the data. It would be an informative document or documents with background on the test, the questions asked, etc.. Anyone reading the summary would know a significant amount about the test after reading this summary. It's not unusual for a videotape of the test to be turned over. And certainly it wouldn't be out of the question for the full test data to be turned over so that it could be examined by law enforcement's own examiner.

If the test subject didn't pass the test, or was in any way questionable, the more likely outcome would be the results would be buried and no mention of this test would ever be heard. Nobody except for the examiners, the attorney, and the subject would even know the test was taken.

In fact, I doubt LE is all that torn up about not being able to administer the test themselves and especially have the same problems with a private test that some of you seem to have. Their problem would be more in lacking some pre or post test questions that they'd like to get on the record while the subject is more comfortable while thinking they're talking off the record/not being tested.

Now, exactly how it has went down in this case I have no idea. But neither do you. But I do have a fairly good idea what would be the normal way it would happen and unless you know something whereas this case has been handled differently then I think it's safe to assume no attorney told LE their client passed a LD test and left it at that. That's not the way it would normally work and that would be counter productive and call into question why even take the test in the first place without that further disclosure. In fact, without supporting documentation it would likely be more damaging than just keeping silent about the test.

The Spierer's themselves said the meeting was not productive and they they didn't feel he was forthcoming (I'm paraphrasing, I don't have time to look for the article).

Personally, I don't see the Spierer's as being all that objective in any of this and understandably so.

I also want to disagree with some of you that say "The Spierers know much more than we do" and things along those lines. I seriously doubt the police have shared much info at all with the Spierers beyond what has been reported in the media. The only difference being I think the Spierers have a better handle on what has been 'bad' reporting and misquotes. I'm sure that public information has been cleared up for the Spierers by LE and direct access in some cases.

That said, I think the PI's likely have shared everything in their files. But I have my doubts that LE has shared any information with the PI's. I doubt the PI's have seen any video that LE has unless that video was somehow kept/copied by the owners of the cameras/recording equip and the PI's received a copy from a secondary source. It's POSSIBLE LE allowed the PI's to see the video(s) but it's far from a sure thing to assume. It's slightly more likely someone in LE summarized the videos for the PI's.

The PI's info would mainly come from interviewing whatever witnesses of their own they could dig up. Possibly (probably) following in Tony Gatto's footprints as well as digging around forums and facebook for some kind of info. But of those kind of witnesses, how fruitful is it really when the case seems to be no closer to a resolution after all this time? Particularly when we heard from the PI's last summer and it really wasn't like anything important was further along.

So while the Spierers would have more info than the general public, and better, more direct info... I doubt it's 'much' more. IMHO Nothing game-changing as far as the central players are concerned.

 

[akh]

I have always been puzzled about why, if she died in or near 5N, her body was hidden so that it has not been found after more than a year, rather than simply placed outside somewhere that it would be quickly found. It would seem that her body might have had some sort of incriminating evidence. However, how much of that evidence could still be left after all this time? Could a cause of death still be determined? Why not anonymously tell her parents where her body could be found? Does the location of her body incriminate someone? Does the condition of her remains incriminate someone, even after nearly two years?

My guess:
Due to the internet, news, and of course shows like CSI, Law and Order, etc. people doubt there's any such thing as an anonymous submission. Think about it- phones can be traced. Email and internet postings can be traced. Video is everywhere so if they can trace the person to a certain area at a certain time then they can begin looking thru security videos and unless you're someone with no connection to the case at all then you'll risk being recognized in the area which could then begin to tie you right back to the device that sent the message.

Put it in the mail and there will be fingerprinting and DNA testing done on the letter while searching it for trace evidence that could somehow tie it back to the sender. Let alone for the envelope or letter to be of a type that's only available from select places and made from a certain production run that ends up getting you on a security camera or a salesman picking your photo out of a collection of PsOI's photos.

And that's just the realistic scenarios... who knows what is real or imagined that someone would worry about that might trace something back to them.

 

[AbbeyR]

so why would DR take a polygraph then? Do you think his lawyer advised him to?

Lawyers have no problem with clients doing things that don't incriminate them. I think it was in DR's interest to cooperate with the investigation and it wasn't a risk.

Akh, yes - in a private poly the hand selected questions and answers are provided to LE. LE has in no way indicated that that is an acceptable alternative to an LE polygraph or anything else about it. So telling the media they have passed a poly is a totally meaningless statement and that statement does not tell us anything about 'cooperation' (other than that they will not take a real polygraph, as asked).

 

[akh]

Lawyers have no problem with clients doing things that don't incriminate them. I think it was in DR's interest to cooperate with the investigation and it wasn't a risk.

Akh, yes - in a private poly the hand selected questions and answers are provided to LE. LE has in no way indicated that that is an acceptable alternative to an LE polygraph or anything else about it. So telling the media they have passed a poly is a totally meaningless statement and that statement does not tell us anything about 'cooperation' (other than that they will not take a real polygraph, as asked).

But it is a real polygraph. It should answer (as much as a LD can answer anything) the main question which is whether or not the subject was involved in the disappearance. What it does do is limit the questions to questions on point rather than make it an anything goes Q/A session.

It tells LE the same thing their LD test would tell them about the question at hand.

There is no difference in a "private" polygraph and a LE enforcement polygraph on technical merits.

This whole LD test angle is a red herring that like most else is getting things nowhere except feeding misconceptions about the case. It's a perfect example of that when you say

(other than that they will not take a real polygraph, as asked)

. Real polygraph?

And it's not LE making a big deal out of the private poly versus a LE poly... Certainly not in the public realm anyway. In fact it is entirely possible these private polys and their results are why LE hasn't acted more vigorously towards those that have passed the tests. They could be taking them more seriously than people on this forum want to believe.

And then ultimately we are talking about something that is an inexact science at best. Just because the test indicates you were likely truthful or likely lying doesn't mean the machine's data led to a wrong conclusion.