October 28, 2005
EXCLUSIVE: Gary Ridgway passes polygraph! Offers to help find the real Green River Killer

EXCLUSIVE to Sound Politics: A newspaper article that confirms the validity of polygraph tests:

Ridgway came to the attention of police in 1983 because his pickup resembled one connected with one of the disappearances. In 1984, he took and passed a polygraph test.
More killings occurred after his release in 1986, 1990, 1998, and, by Ridgeway's own account, 2001.

Meanwhile, Ron Sims' official campaign surrogates have been heard this week saying that polygraph tests "have an accuracy rate that any bank would envy", or something like that.

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at October 28, 2005 09:15 AM | Email This
Comments
1. Good one, Stefan! To be honest, I don't understand much about this thing with Ron Sims and David Irons, since I live in Pierce County and have no stake in who gets elected to office in KC.

Ron Sims seems to be the favorite of the left, and David Irons is favored by the right. Goldy is all over this one, doing some pretty good damage to Irons. I like the fact that you're balancing things out by working-over Sims. Isn't he the guy who was in the initial Democratic pool of candidates for the 2004 election for governor? As I recall, he wanted to enact a state income tax for WA. For us Libertarians, that's a non-starter! The results of the primary (i.e., Gregoire got the nomination, not Sims) showed that even the Dems really weren't interested in what Sims was selling!

Posted by: Libertarian on October 28, 2005 09:36 AM
2. Awesome post Stefan! Didn't I hear polygraph isn't allowed in court any longer because of the high level of inaccuracy? I know people like Mr. Irons, they have an added stress factor in their lives...constantly watching their children for signs of insanity they may have inherited from their relatives.

Posted by: dl on October 28, 2005 09:41 AM
3. PERFECT!

I had been trying to think of a whitty response after I read that this morning. I could not have said it any better.

It just goes to show the desperation the Libs are feeling with Sims sinking and to what lengths they will go to to win.

When you are losing an argument (or election) change subjects.

Thanks again.

Posted by: Foothills Freak on October 28, 2005 09:44 AM
4. Only popping off because Orbusmax said it was okay to visit the village idiot's web page.

And the idiot claims that his review of the Irons thing was his independent idea and had nothing to do with Sims. Well then, who paid for the polygraph, except for a Sims surrogate?

This village idiot operates on pure emotion caused by too frequent inebriation at the local bar.

I am glad you called the value of the polygraph into question. From what I have heard of the person being asked the questions, in her state of mind, she may be telling her truth which may be different from the real truth.

Posted by: baffles on October 28, 2005 09:49 AM
5. This is the Polygraph Guy who tested the crazed, old, son-hating Battle-Ax:

Polygraph Testimony

Richard Peregrin, who administered Patsy Jones’ initial polygraph test in conjunction with Comte’s psychological evaluation, testified that the polygraph showed Patsy Jones was being deceptive in response to questions regarding sexual touching of KR. Dr. Clifford referred Patsy Jones to John Ketchum for a second opinion.

Ketchum administered three polygraph examinations. He testified that the results of his first examination showed a passing response (i.e., no deception) to a question regarding whether Jones spread open KR’s vagina for pleasure. He also noted an inconclusive response to whether she spread open KR’s vagina for hygienic purposes. In the third polygraph examination, in response to questions regarding whether she ever spread open or penetrated KR’s vagina for pleasure, Jones’ denials showed no deception.

Interesting they requested a 2nd opinion that clearly contradicted Peregrin, hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm?

Posted by: Mr. Cynical on October 28, 2005 10:19 AM
6. Is this our Polygraph Guy—

“Indeed, the testimony of the Guild’s own expert witness, Mr. Peregrin, made it clear that the Deputy’s having passed the test was no assurance that he had not been involved in the fraudulent activity in question.”

Peregrin said that even though his client’s guy passed the polygraph, was no assurance he wasn’t guilty.

Posted by: Mr. Cynical on October 28, 2005 10:20 AM
7. Polygraphs have been used more as a lawyers tool to cast doubt or guilt upon an opponent. The reliability is highly suspect.
Goldstein praises Mr. Peregrin as something of a leading Polygraph Expert. But when it comes down to it, even Mr. Peregrin ADMITS it is very unreliable and his own results have been contested by other polygraphs REPEATEDLY.
The Polygraph Test Industry has been glamorized by the Maury Povich/Jerry Springer TV smut….sensationalism.
Goldy would rather discuss this than the most recent developments in Ron Sims KingCo Elections, the impact of CAO on rural property owners, and Sims complete lack of leadership in the KingCo Transportation crisis…..you know, things that really matter.
You will not EVER see a thread on HA before the November 8th discussing any of the MANY issues Sims is vulnerable on.
Fortunately, it doesn’t matter because everyone who posts and reads HA already knows who they will vote for with PERHAPS one exception (although I don’t know who that is)!
The reality is Goldstein has not changed a single vote….although perhaps in his mind he has.
HA is a purely partisan LEFTIST PINHEAD Blog with a few of us calling BS on the knuckleheads. That’s it.
Goldy is a self-absorbed smut peddlar and Sims butt-boy…perhaps in more ways than one!. That’s all–

Posted by: Mr. Cynical on October 28, 2005 10:24 AM
8. Polygraphs have never been admissible in a court of law. When law enforcement uses a polygraph, it is PURELY an investigative tool. That's why no one reading these words should ever agree to a polygraph WITHOUT your counsel's approval...and you'll never get that.

Well, Goldy and the trolls can go ahead and agree to a polygraph. Might take them out of circulation for awhile.

Posted by: Danny on October 28, 2005 11:01 AM
9. Yeh I say we send Sims in for a Polygragh test. A few of the questions I would like asked are:

1st question: Did you intentionally steal land from the rural King County land owners against their will?

2nd Question: Do you think the people in Rural King County who had their land stolen, would ever vote for you again?

Posted by: GS on October 28, 2005 11:06 AM
10. Polygraphs work only if the subject is aware of being deceptive. If the subject is convinced that they are telling the truth, the polygraph will be inconclusive. Also polygraph don't prove the positive, i.e. they don't prove someone is telling the truth. They only tell if some is possibly being deceptive. Even then a persons being nervous etc.. will throw off the polygraph.

Bottom line a polygraph is only indicative that someone may be being deceptive. Nothing more.

Posted by: JCM on October 28, 2005 11:23 AM
11. Libertarian: "...since I live in Pierce County and have no stake in who gets elected to office in KC."

Make no mistake, everyone in the State is affected by the outcome of this particular King County race. As Stefan has so ably documented on this site, no less than the entire electoral process is at stake. Had it not been for the mismanagement of KCE, Dino Rossi would be our Governor, we wouldn't be voting on a Gas Tax initiative (as there would have been no increase), etc. etc.

Don't believe for a minute that this race is only local in its impact! We in Eastern Washington have been chafing for a long time under the dominance of Westside politics...primarily concentrated in King County.

Posted by: Patrick on October 28, 2005 11:32 AM
12. Libertarian - It would be folly to ignore the implications of a sims reelection. KC is the largest, most powerful, most influential county in Washington state (nationally, it is the US's 12th largest!), and it is the "big stick".

To paraphrase the saying; "As goes King County, so goes the state".

The ability for sims to do harm is immense, while the risk of Irons doing harm is little. It isn't just a difference of opinion as to what constitutes "good", it is a recognition that, under sims's regime, KC is going to ruin, and will drag the state down with it.

There might be a better Republican candidate that could have been run, but Irons will do fine as KC executive, and it would be hard to find a worse executive than ron sims...

Posted by: alphabet soup on October 28, 2005 11:43 AM
13. In deciding whether or not to believe Mrs. Irons, it's really not her who I would want to take a polygraph test. I'd like to see David Goldstein submit to a Polygraph test as to wether or not he has any connection with the Sims campaign, discussed this matter with them prior to publication, etc.

And I'd like to see David Goldstein issue a report on his personal finances and take a polygraph test as to whether he has received any donations from any Democrat political sources that are significant and would put him in a position where he could spend less time worrying about covering his mortgage and more time worrying about how to go after conservative politicians with whom he disagrees.

Somehow, I don't think David Goldstein is going to submit to a polygraph, yet he uses his autoverbal polygraph to assure us again and again on his website that he is not a liar. Interesting, huh!

Posted by: Jeff B. on October 28, 2005 12:07 PM
14. Does that mean the big newspapers aren't going to keep the fantasy alive by airing the polygraph results? Even they have more scruples than the "Insensitive One".

Posted by: swatter on October 28, 2005 12:24 PM
15. Polygraph tests are total bunk and those that administer them will tell you as much. Defeating them requires little more that a passing familiarity with their operating principles and a few mind games to screw up the readings.

The true purpose of using a "lie detector" is to confuse suspects and induce confessions or to cast a pall of guilt over someone.

Posted by: H Moul on October 28, 2005 01:39 PM
16. Polgraph results a bank would envy didn't ronnie boy say that about the election too!!

Posted by: Laurie on October 28, 2005 03:07 PM
17. Somehow, I don't think David Goldstein is going to submit to a polygraph, yet he uses his autoverbal polygraph to assure us again and again on his website that he is not a liar. Interesting, huh!

I AM NOT A CROOK!!!

Posted by: South County on October 28, 2005 03:07 PM
18. Libertarian,

Thanks for proving once again why the dumb-a$$ Loser-libertarian party, is irrelevant.
Your analysis is worthless and immaterial but humorous.

Keep it up . . . honk-honk!!

Posted by: Amused by liberals on October 28, 2005 10:39 PM
19. If a lie detector test supported your point of view you'd be using stats touting their reliability. That's reality in your world. I thought you guys were against situation ethics?

Posted by: Apache Fog on October 29, 2005 08:23 AM
20. headlice, why don't you leave the thinking to folks better suited to it?

Posted by: alphabet soup on October 29, 2005 11:48 AM
21. I just think it's sad that Dave Irons' parents love left-wing politics more than their own son and daughter.

Posted by: Misty on October 30, 2005 04:40 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?