To learn about our experiences with Littler-Mendelson (lawfirm, Seattle, Washington), Dart Entities, Dart International Trucking, T-L Leasing, Leigh Ann Collings Tift, Mark Steven McFarland, Delann Todd Lamb, Judge Helen L. Halpert, Judge John Lawson, Paul Martin, Colleen Butler, go to the HOME PAGE of this website. You'll be amazed. Google is now shadow-banning some listings in this website.



T & L Leasing and Dart International Trucking



When I scheduled the first polygraph test with Ketchum Investigations I didn't understand the format of the test. I thought I was limited to a certain number of questions. But I learned that if the test is performed as a "statement" type, you could, theoretically, include an almost infinite number of "statements" in one document, then ask if everything in that document is true. Personally, I think such a test should be limited to no more than a couple of pages of statements at a time. At any rate, the up-side to this approach is that you can be tested on more data for less cost. The downside is that if there is even the slightest bit of deception associated with any one question, the entire test will be scored as deception. So you can ask, "Did you kill the butler in the bathroom?" Subject answers "no" and is telling the truth. Next question: "Did you steal a candy bar when you were six years old?" Subject answers "no" and is lying---he really did steal a Snickers when he was six. On this type of test, it also looks as though he killed the butler in the bathroom. So every single statement made in this type of test must be absolutely true, or you will fail the entire test. 

I didn't know what to expect when I scheduled this "statement" type test, as opposed to the standard "issue" test. I was afraid the polygraph machine was fallible. I thought it probably was accurate most of the time, but that a smart individual could trick it or fool it. I was also very much afraid that the machine might say I was lying, when I wasn't. Still, given this particular situation, when four people had concertedly plotted and conspired to strip me of all sorts of basic constitutional rights, I really had no choice but to put my fate in the hands of the machine. 

I'm sick of liars, as most of us are, and I know now, firsthand, that a polygraph examination will expose them. During the first few minutes of the test, when the examiner was setting up a baseline---a reference point from which to see what my graph would look like when I did lie, I was asked to think of a number, then answer yes every time I was asked if such and such a number was the one I was thinking of. I felt this would be a good test of the machine, and I was positive I had fooled it. I was surprised, then, when the examiner could tell me exactly what my number was. I was given the opportunity to try and trick the machine over and over. I wasn't able to fool it even once, not even marginally. Bottom line: The machine works. 

I've already made an official offer to Lamb and Mcfarland to take a polygraph regarding their allegations against me. I offered to pay them for their time away from work (even though I believe they're salaried, it could be easily pro-rated). I offered to pay for the tests, and to kick in an additional $200 each whether they passed or failed. I offered to drop criminal charges of perjury against them if they passed, and, if they passed, I promised to apologize profusely, publicly, and often to them and their employer(s). I also promised to drop upcoming civil actions against them and their employers if they passed the tests, and to stop efforts to have them charged with multiple counts of perjury. What could they lose? If they flunked the test, they got paid double for their time, they made another $200 for about an hour on the hot-seat, and nothing else would change---my criminal and civil actions against them would remain the same. If they passed, they'd get the loot, plus they'd get to see me squirm in public as I apologized to them---and I certainly would do exactly that. In addition, they could stop worrying about upcoming civil and criminal actions. So what did they have to lose? Lamb and Mcfarland have refused to respond. Their attorney has refused to respond. Lamb's and Mcfarland's employers have refused to respond.

So be it.

Polygraph Test Number 1