The Polygraph
First Prev
of 7
Next Last

“May you all come home”

Since: Mar 07

safely Bless you all

#1 Dec 15, 2010
There is so much information regarding their polygraphs that it deserved its own thread.

I'll start with the CNN interview:

http://www.edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0005/2...

QUESTION: Dr. Gelb, does the FBI have a good reputation for doing polygraph tests?

QUESTION:... polygraph tests, do they get to see the questions beforehand?

GELB: Refra -- Give me that again?

QUESTION:(OFF-MIKE)

GELB: All of the questions are reviewed with you before the test. There are no trick questions, there are no hidden questions, because you want the subject to focus on that which they perceive the greatest threat to their immediate well-being. And let me tell you, if either of these people inflicted the injuries that caused the death of JonBenet, or knew who killed JonBenet, or Patsy wrote that note, they would certainly perceive those questions as the greatest threat to their immediate well-being and fail the test; they did not.

“May you all come home”

Since: Mar 07

safely Bless you all

#2 Dec 15, 2010
Another interview

2000-05-27: Tester: Polygraph results unexplained

Tester: Polygraph results unexplained
By Christopher Anderson
Camera Staff Writer
May 27, 2000

The polygraph examiner whose tests on John and Patsy Ramsey came up inconclusive says he can't explain the results.

Gerard Toriello, of Clifton, N.J., said Friday he conducted three tests on the couple in an Atlanta law office on April 17 and 18 - the first polygraph tests the Ramseys took.

The Ramseys underwent the tests six days after Boulder Police Chief Mark Beckner Beckner announced his offer for the couple to take lie detector tests conducted by the FBI.

On April 17, Toriello tested John Ramsey for three hours. On April 18, he tested Patsy Ramsey for four hours and John Ramsey again for about two hours.

They were asked if they inflicted the injuries that caused the death of their daughter, JonBenét, in December 1996. The wording, Toriello said, was similar to that in polygraph tests the Ramseys later passed.

Toriello said all three tests he conducted came out inconclusive, based on a numerical score and using the "zone comparison" technique, the same type of test the couple later passed under a second polygrapher who re-tested the couple.

Asked why the tests were inconclusive, Toriello echoed what the Ramseys' attorney, Lin Wood, has been saying for three days: "If we knew what caused an inconclusive test, it wouldn't be an inconclusive test. We would be able to address that factor."

Reasons for inconclusive results can include anxiety, mental fatigue or physical fatigue, Toriello said.

He said both John and Patsy were taking Prozac when he administered the tests. Toriello said the medication can dull the galvanic skin responses during the test, but the results of the tests would not necessarily be affected.

The examiner can factor in the medication's affects when reviewing the charts, he said. The medication would not cause one response to be higher on one question and not on another, he said.

Toriello said he could not disclose the scores or the charts that accompany the test until Boulder police and prosecutors first have a chance to evaluate them.

After Toriello's tests, the Ramseys retook polygraph tests with Los Angeles polygrapher Ed Gelb. Patsy Ramsey's first test with Gelb had "artifacts," most likely because of her physical movement or animated gestures when answering questions, Wood said.

After three marred tests, the Ramseys went on to pass five polygraph tests by Gelb.

Those test results were quality-checked by San Diego polygrapher Cleve Backster, called the grandfather of modern polygraph techniques. Backster confirmed that the Ramseys passed the tests.

The Ramseys paid for all the tests. They say they want the Boulder police and the Boulder County District Attorney's Office to review the results.

Boulder Police Chief Mark Beckner said police are willing to look at any information that could help the case, but the results will not remove the Ramseys from suspicion.

The couple refused to take polygraph tests administered by the FBI. Polygraphs are not admissible as evidence in Colorado courts, although they are used frequently by law enforcement agencies as an investigative tool.

In a Friday interview on Larry King Live, Gelb said his tests can only determine whether someone was attempting deception when answering questions. He said the tests are 95 percent accurate.

"I don't think a polygraph has anything to do with guilt or innocence," he said.

May 27, 2000
By Christopher Anderson

“May you all come home”

Since: Mar 07

safely Bless you all

#4 Dec 15, 2010
The response from Lin Wood:

Mr. Mark R. Beckner
Chief of Police
City of Boulder
1805 - 33rd Street
Boulder, Colorado 80301

Dear Chief Beckner:

I have received your letter of April 11, 2000 addressed to John and Patsy Ramsey. Prior to my actual receipt of the letter I learned of its contents by virtue of a press release issued by your office to the media. I will certainly forward the letter to Mr. and Mrs. Ramsey for their response. Since I envision that Mr. and Mrs. Ramsey may have some questions for their counsel concerning your proposal, I would greatly appreciate your responses to the following questions:

(1) I am under the distinct impression that members of the FBI have been involved in the Boulder Police Department’s investigation of Mr. and Mrs. Ramsey. Just today, a former Boulder Police Department officer, Steve Thomas, published a book for profit containing police file information, some of which is certainly consistent with my understanding of the FBI’s role in the investigation of Mr. and Mrs. Ramsey. Is my impression correct? And are Mr. Thomas’ statements in his book accurate? With all due respect, if the answer is yes to one or both of these questions, the FBI hardly qualifies as “an examiner independent from the Boulder Police Department.”

(2) Assuming the FBI has not been involved in the investigation, will you promptly provide me with all applicable FBI protocols, including protocols applicable to the review process?

(3) In recent days, and subsequent to Mr. Ramsey’s comments on Channel 9, Boulder District Attorney Alex Hunter has repeatedly stated in his national media tour that polygraph exams are extremely unreliable and that a polygraph exam of the Ramseys could seriously harm a future prosecution in this case. In view of Mr. Hunter’s well-publicized statements, I must know if it is the Boulder Police Department’s position that polygraph examinations are reliable indicators of truthfulness? If so, any public statements by the department confirming that position would be helpful if forwarded to me. Also, what is the Boulder Police Department’s position regarding Mr. Hunter’s comments about the exam possibly jeopardizing a future prosecution of the killer of JonBenét?

(4) If the Boulder Police Department does vouch for polygraph examinations as reliable indicators of truthfulness, can Mr. and Mrs. Ramsey receive a public assurance from your department and the District Attorney’s office that they will be officially and publicly cleared from the umbrella of suspicion, that they will no longer be considered to be suspects or possible suspects and that the investigation as to them will be closed when they pass any agreed upon polygraph examination?

I am confident you will concur that my questions are reasonable and I thank you in advance for your cooperation in promptly responding to them.

With best regards,

Sincerely,

L. Lin Wood
LLW/tbl

cc: Mr. and Mrs. John Ramsey
Mr. Bryan Morgan
Mr. Pat Burke

“May you all come home”

Since: Mar 07

safely Bless you all

#5 Dec 15, 2010
This is one of the most interesting interviews on the topic, made BEFORE they took their polygraph:

2000-04-28: CNN Burden Of Proof - John and Patsy Ramsey Discuss 'The Death of Innocence'





----------

(SNIP)



----------



COSSACK: Patsy, let me ask you a question. When I was a lawyer and before I would let my clients take a lie detector test, I used to made sure that they could pass their lie detector tests. I know you have very excellent lawyers, I know some of your lawyers. Have you privately taken a lie detector test? either of you? or both of you? and have you passed it already?



J. RAMSEY: You were asked the question, go ahead.



P. RAMSEY: I think that is kind of an inappropriate question, if you're so up on -- i think that's lawyer-client privilege and I don't wish to ruin that but...





----------

(SNIP)



----------



VAN SUSTEREN: Let me ask the question -- and don't mean to invade the attorney-client privilege, but this whole -- I mean, frankly, I'm with Roger and I don't care how innocent my clients are, I never want them to take polygraph tests because people can fail them who are innocent. So it's always a problem. But given that, have you -- you know, have you actually done -- have you been polygraphed on this particular issue -- either one of you at this point?



J. RAMSEY: We can't answer that, Greta. That's, I believe, is an attorney-client privilege. What we have said is we will take a fair and independent polygraph test.



It screams that the polygraphs we knew about were only the last round. Reading between the lines, it is fair to assume they had already taken polys that they couldn't pass or they wouldn't have to hedge the question.

If they didn't take any, they just would have said NO. If they had, and a polygrapher came forward, they would have been caught in a big lie publicly, so I think it's safe to assume they had taken way more polygraphs than the public will ever know about
Eva

AOL

#6 Dec 15, 2010
Capricorn wrote:
This is one of the most interesting interviews on the topic, made BEFORE they took their polygraph:
2000-04-28: CNN Burden Of Proof - John and Patsy Ramsey Discuss 'The Death of Innocence'
----------
(SNIP)
----------
COSSACK: Patsy, let me ask you a question. When I was a lawyer and before I would let my clients take a lie detector test, I used to made sure that they could pass their lie detector tests. I know you have very excellent lawyers, I know some of your lawyers. Have you privately taken a lie detector test? either of you? or both of you? and have you passed it already?
J. RAMSEY: You were asked the question, go ahead.
P. RAMSEY: I think that is kind of an inappropriate question, if you're so up on -- i think that's lawyer-client privilege and I don't wish to ruin that but...
----------
(SNIP)
----------
VAN SUSTEREN: Let me ask the question -- and don't mean to invade the attorney-client privilege, but this whole -- I mean, frankly, I'm with Roger and I don't care how innocent my clients are, I never want them to take polygraph tests because people can fail them who are innocent. So it's always a problem. But given that, have you -- you know, have you actually done -- have you been polygraphed on this particular issue -- either one of you at this point?
J. RAMSEY: We can't answer that, Greta. That's, I believe, is an attorney-client privilege. What we have said is we will take a fair and independent polygraph test.
It screams that the polygraphs we knew about were only the last round. Reading between the lines, it is fair to assume they had already taken polys that they couldn't pass or they wouldn't have to hedge the question.
If they didn't take any, they just would have said NO. If they had, and a polygrapher came forward, they would have been caught in a big lie publicly, so I think it's safe to assume they had taken way more polygraphs than the public will ever know about
Thanks Cap, it's obvious alright. Maybe John Ramsey would be willing to strap on another polygraph and by the FBI? He couldn't possibly have a problem with that, could he?

“May you all come home”

Since: Mar 07

safely Bless you all

#7 Dec 15, 2010
Eva wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks Cap, it's obvious alright. Maybe John Ramsey would be willing to strap on another polygraph and by the FBI? He couldn't possibly have a problem with that, could he?
If it means doing anything the authorities ask, he'll have a problem! Why would it change after fourteen years and instilling the same "values" in his son?

It's a pity and yes, it is obvious to anyone. I can't imagine what other explanation there would be for her responses
nitwits or devils

Montréal, Canada

#9 Dec 15, 2010
u lie. then u build a theory based on a lie. then u go off on tangents bsed on the theory that was based on a lie and the next thing u know, the rs did it and PIG solved the case and flies 777s.

To think there are criminal, sick, perverted minds like his out there who could wind up on a jury and convict innocent people. everyone subjected to jury duty should be given a poly and a whole host of additional tests to screen for maniacs like this thing.
Capricorn wrote:
<quoted text>
If it means doing anything the authorities ask, he'll have a problem! Why would it change after fourteen years and instilling the same "values" in his son?
It's a pity and yes, it is obvious to anyone. I can't imagine what other explanation there would be for her responses
y did u tell lyn u couldn't wait to see her face when she's asked about her dad raping her and her children being raped by her husband? y do u runaway and leave it up to ur seals to answer 4 u? r u scared, PIG? Hmm?

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#10 Dec 15, 2010
nitwits or devils wrote:
u lie. then u build a theory based on a lie. then u go off on tangents bsed on the theory that was based on a lie and the next thing u know, the rs did it and PIG solved the case and flies 777s.
To think there are criminal, sick, perverted minds like his out there who could wind up on a jury and convict innocent people. everyone subjected to jury duty should be given a poly and a whole host of additional tests to screen for maniacs like this thing.
<quoted text>
y did u tell lyn u couldn't wait to see her face when she's asked about her dad raping her and her children being raped by her husband? y do u runaway and leave it up to ur seals to answer 4 u? r u scared, PIG? Hmm?
hyp•o•crite
noun
Definition of HYPOCRITE
1
: a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion
2
: a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings

pledge
Singapore
Reply »
|

U wouldn't recognize truth if it bit your ass. we do hope your mom suffered, immeasurably. keep denouncing the feelings P had you f'in pig. christians don't hyperventilate. u will, in hell with mommy.

You're such a paragon of virtue. Hope you reap what you sow.

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#11 Dec 15, 2010
Eva wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks Cap, it's obvious alright. Maybe John Ramsey would be willing to strap on another polygraph and by the FBI? He couldn't possibly have a problem with that, could he?
I’m not going to say the Ramseys shouldn’t have taken polygraphs right after the murder. They should have, though I suppose it was their lawyer who instructed them not to and what’s the use of having a lawyer if you’re not going to do what he says? Now, however, it’s too late for any polygraph, even with the world’s best polygrapher, to do any good. Too much time has passed. Polygraphs have to given shortly after the “incident” or the results can’t be trusted at all. Guilty or innocent, I think the Ramseys should have been separated and questioned on the 26th and they should have taken polygraphs.

From an expert: <<<The most important thing to know is that polygraphy is not an exact science. In fact, to the extent that it is a science at all, it is one in its infancy and one which frequently produces incorrect results.>>>

http://www.wikihow.com/Cheat-a-Polygraph-Test...
Eva

AOL

#12 Dec 15, 2010
Derek Jeter Fan wrote:
<quoted text>
I’m not going to say the Ramseys shouldn’t have taken polygraphs right after the murder. They should have, though I suppose it was their lawyer who instructed them not to and what’s the use of having a lawyer if you’re not going to do what he says? Now, however, it’s too late for any polygraph, even with the world’s best polygrapher, to do any good. Too much time has passed. Polygraphs have to given shortly after the “incident” or the results can’t be trusted at all. Guilty or innocent, I think the Ramseys should have been separated and questioned on the 26th and they should have taken polygraphs.
From an expert: <<<The most important thing to know is that polygraphy is not an exact science. In fact, to the extent that it is a science at all, it is one in its infancy and one which frequently produces incorrect results.>>>
http://www.wikihow.com/Cheat-a-Polygraph-Test...
Since the Ramseys always did what their lawyers told them, I suppose it's safe to say their lawyers told them to go on tv the day after Jonbenet's funeral?

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#15 Dec 15, 2010
Eva wrote:
<quoted text>
Since the Ramseys always did what their lawyers told them, I suppose it's safe to say their lawyers told them to go on tv the day after Jonbenet's funeral?
I suppose it is. Don’t really trust lawyers myself. They give some odd advice at times.
learnin

Pomona, KS

#16 Dec 15, 2010
Capricorn wrote:
This is one of the most interesting interviews on the topic, made BEFORE they took their polygraph:
2000-04-28: CNN Burden Of Proof - John and Patsy Ramsey Discuss 'The Death of Innocence'
----------
(SNIP)
----------
COSSACK: Patsy, let me ask you a question. When I was a lawyer and before I would let my clients take a lie detector test, I used to made sure that they could pass their lie detector tests. I know you have very excellent lawyers, I know some of your lawyers. Have you privately taken a lie detector test? either of you? or both of you? and have you passed it already?
J. RAMSEY: You were asked the question, go ahead.
P. RAMSEY: I think that is kind of an inappropriate question, if you're so up on -- i think that's lawyer-client privilege and I don't wish to ruin that but...
----------
(SNIP)
----------
VAN SUSTEREN: Let me ask the question -- and don't mean to invade the attorney-client privilege, but this whole -- I mean, frankly, I'm with Roger and I don't care how innocent my clients are, I never want them to take polygraph tests because people can fail them who are innocent. So it's always a problem. But given that, have you -- you know, have you actually done -- have you been polygraphed on this particular issue -- either one of you at this point?
J. RAMSEY: We can't answer that, Greta. That's, I believe, is an attorney-client privilege. What we have said is we will take a fair and independent polygraph test.
It screams that the polygraphs we knew about were only the last round. Reading between the lines, it is fair to assume they had already taken polys that they couldn't pass or they wouldn't have to hedge the question.
If they didn't take any, they just would have said NO. If they had, and a polygrapher came forward, they would have been caught in a big lie publicly, so I think it's safe to assume they had taken way more polygraphs than the public will ever know about
Absolutely. They took multiple tests to get used to beating the lie detector test...prozac and all. After taking multiple tests to get to the point of being able to fool the detectors, then, they were ready to go public. The whole frickin affair, with the Ramseys, stinks to high heaven.....

“May you all come home”

Since: Mar 07

safely Bless you all

#17 Dec 16, 2010
learnin wrote:
<quoted text>
Absolutely. They took multiple tests to get used to beating the lie detector test...prozac and all. After taking multiple tests to get to the point of being able to fool the detectors, then, they were ready to go public. The whole frickin affair, with the Ramseys, stinks to high heaven.....
It takes the wind out of their sails. So now we know that they apparently took polygraphs before they officially stated they did or even would. Now you have some secret polygraphs, and several polygraphers whose results they didn't and couldn't use and finally Gelb, who gave them practice tests three times and they finally passed!

Is the public expected to believe after all of that, they were really passing a polygraph, with their own paid examiner, who was recommended by another polygrapher who worked alongside Gelb to pass them?

I guess some will believe it because it is Ramsey and the excuses will be exasperating and probably amusing at some point

“WAX ON”

Since: Jul 10

WAX OFF

#18 Dec 16, 2010
A lot of work here Capricorn, so thank you for looking all that up and posting it. When you wait that long to take a poly to begin with you have skewed the results, but when you practice and practice, then the results are worthless. I can't imagine they were happy that all the information came out about all the previous ones either.
Capricorn wrote:
<quoted text>
It takes the wind out of their sails. So now we know that they apparently took polygraphs before they officially stated they did or even would. Now you have some secret polygraphs, and several polygraphers whose results they didn't and couldn't use and finally Gelb, who gave them practice tests three times and they finally passed!
Is the public expected to believe after all of that, they were really passing a polygraph, with their own paid examiner, who was recommended by another polygrapher who worked alongside Gelb to pass them?
I guess some will believe it because it is Ramsey and the excuses will be exasperating and probably amusing at some point

“May you all come home”

Since: Mar 07

safely Bless you all

#19 Dec 16, 2010
DrSeussMd wrote:
A lot of work here Capricorn, so thank you for looking all that up and posting it. When you wait that long to take a poly to begin with you have skewed the results, but when you practice and practice, then the results are worthless. I can't imagine they were happy that all the information came out about all the previous ones either.<quoted text>
Sometimes it's good to re-read old stuff because I too, had not realized that they had taken polys before they admitted to taking polys with the polygraphers they made public

It seems they were practicing for a long time before they actually went and took them. I can only imagine how many times they took one and how long and how many "practice runs" they had.

I cannot understand why anyone would not find that at least, suspicious
Eva

AOL

#25 Dec 16, 2010
Derek Jeter Fan wrote:
<quoted text>
I suppose it is. Don’t really trust lawyers myself. They give some odd advice at times.
LOL!!!! You don't trust lawyers huh? You IDI have been whining for years that FW made the Ramseys go on tv because their appearance was a total disaster and of course you all need someone to blame for John's forgiveness of a killer and his only need to know why. Now, it's the lawyers fault? Odd advice? sure, sure;) Haddon and associates didn't get the big offices by advising their clients to blab. C'mon Deter, you can do better than this!

“May you all come home”

Since: Mar 07

safely Bless you all

#26 Dec 16, 2010
Eva wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL!!!! You don't trust lawyers huh? You IDI have been whining for years that FW made the Ramseys go on tv because their appearance was a total disaster and of course you all need someone to blame for John's forgiveness of a killer and his only need to know why. Now, it's the lawyers fault? Odd advice? sure, sure;) Haddon and associates didn't get the big offices by advising their clients to blab. C'mon Deter, you can do better than this!
Notice how all the IDI posters haven't commented on this thread and its contents, save for the pathological dementia displayed.

Where are all the excuses for the private tests that they couldn't pass and the explanations for the multiple tests with multiple polygraphers?

It's awfully quiet except for the post menopausal comments from the loony bin
Eva

AOL

#29 Dec 16, 2010
Capricorn wrote:
<quoted text>
Notice how all the IDI posters haven't commented on this thread and its contents, save for the pathological dementia displayed.
Where are all the excuses for the private tests that they couldn't pass and the explanations for the multiple tests with multiple polygraphers?
It's awfully quiet except for the post menopausal comments from the loony bin
They'll think of something, give it time. They'll say they have a life, or something to the effect, to divert the discussion back to just how terrible the RDI for thinking such heinous thoughts about the Ramseys way of doing things. We'll be reminded not everyone takes a polygraph, not everyone obeys their lawyers, not everyone falls to pieces when their child lays dead in their basement, "we all grieve differently" and so on.
As for that sad person who finds amusement by taking the hat of a violent crime, let's be kind. It's hard for some people this time of year when they realize they have nobody and nothing to show for their miserable lives. They lash out in hopes of getting attention, preferring bad attention over good because it lasts longer. Christmastime is a lonely time, even for the despicable.
Curious C

United States

#32 Dec 16, 2010
Capricorn wrote:
<quoted text>
Sometimes it's good to re-read old stuff because I too, had not realized that they had taken polys before they admitted to taking polys with the polygraphers they made public
It seems they were practicing for a long time before they actually went and took them. I can only imagine how many times they took one and how long and how many "practice runs" they had.
I cannot understand why anyone would not find that at least, suspicious
Capricorn, thanks so much for all that. I think your research shines an even brighter light on the Ramseys. These people obviously decided to hop polygraphers till they could get a passing grade. It's sick!

“Sandy Stranger killed JonBenet”

Since: Jan 08

Not Boulder, Co.

#34 Dec 16, 2010
Sally wrote:
It worked, lmao, Sally:)
Meaning they lied their way out of prison. I thought you were an IDIot.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 7
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

JonBenet Ramsey Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
What I believe is close to what happened 3 hr undrtheradar 109
Seriously? 3 hr Sig 220
News Laurence L Smith Releases Updated Version of 'T... 5 hr nerma 3
history of abuse... or her story of abuse 7 hr nerma 27
Celine 1:1 quality sunglasses celine fashion ha... 18 hr Coppy 1
small or sma4 Sun rainbow 45
Possible clue to John's initial lack of involve... Aug 1 rainbow 114
More from around the web