digg

Join DiggAbout

Over 1500 Police Departments Use This to Question Suspects watch!

youtube.com — An expose video on Charles Humble the producer of the Computer Voice Stress Analyzer (CVSA), a tool that is used in over 1,500 U.S police departments and is sold to the U.S military in Guantanamo Bay. Can we trust a tool like this and especially when it comes from someone with his credentials?

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • tomboy501, on 03/23/2008, -5/+381He went to some 6-hour BIBLE classes at a Bible college located at some random strip mall...and suddenly gets to be a Doctor of Psychology? How does that work?

    He might as well be the Video Professor (buy my product) hawking bogus software. Except people's lives are at stake here. Those Police departments should be ashamed of themselves for even entertaining this guy.
    • classhelper, on 03/23/2008, -0/+21You can gets lots of degrees from lots of "universities," for the right price... insert something about "worth" and "paper they're printed on" I guess.
      • tkotam, on 03/25/2008, -0/+1Strip club.. Boobs... Diploma.. Cool.. I'm in!!
    • davidwasman, on 03/23/2008, -1/+47You can buy a Doctorate Degree from Universal Life Church for about $50 online. No classes needed.
    • DeviateSeptum, on 03/24/2008, -2/+58It should be illegal to call yourself "Doctor" if you don't have a degree from an accredited university. Just another type of fraud as far as I'm concerned.
      • FTLJohnson, on 03/24/2008, -29/+4It should be illegal to be lazy and make assumptions about the character of people you are working with based on outward appearance.

        Take for example Deviate here, he's acting like he's advocating that people should be protected, when what he really just advocated is not protection, but retribution after people have gotten away with lying for quite some time until they are caught. Really, what is being advocated is ANOTHER cycle of aggression, so that the punished can pay more into the courts and government, and then they can spend it bombing brown people. Do we really need to make MORE laws and violate MORE civil rights?

        As far as the first statement I made... obvious sarcasm is obvious.
      • artliquide, on 03/24/2008, -1/+7Agreed. Though, I'm thinking maybe I should skip the master's and just do 6 credit hours of Bible study "courses" to get my doctorate. Wish I'd known about that option before spending so much time and money on my B.A.
        /sarcasm

        Seriously. I'm doing 40 credit hours for a damn post grad teacher certification program, and this guy thinks his 6 hour PhD is valid? grrrr.
        • EarlOfLade, on 03/24/2008, -1/+7You can say he is the smart guy.
          He understands peoples unfounded respect and angst against asking too many "stupid" questions when confronted with someone called "Dr.". Combine that with the ingrained respect of diplomas and the general public's (including police) lack of education, and he found a market waiting to be milked and as we have seen, people more than willingly put faith and money into this characters hands.

          We don't need less control and rules and regulations...
        • btgoss, on 03/24/2008, -1/+1It's not the quantity man... it's the QUALITY!!.... sheesh.... you need you some real learnin'....
          • artliquide, on 03/25/2008, -1/+1Well yes. Of course it is. But the pocketbook feels the cost as well. Believe me, I know the difference between what I can learn on my own (addicted to internet) and what I can benefit from a college education (experts in person), but these days, $20000 debt and living in poverty can make a person resent someone who calls themselves a doctor after 6 credit hours a little enraged, you know? If I hadn't valued my education, I wouldn't have wasted so much money on it in the first place.

            Oh, and I'm a woman, not a man ;)
      • renzien, on 03/25/2008, -1/+1... fraud, if and only if the exchange of property or service is involved with respect to the false title (as is the case in video).
    • saska, on 03/24/2008, -0/+31I really wanted to see him hooked up to the system right before he was asked if he thought he was being honest for calling himself "Doctor."
      • inbred, on 03/24/2008, -0/+3"So...do you consider yourself a doctor?"
        "Uh...yes."
        "I'm sorry, but I this machine senses some deception in that answer."
    • graemee, on 03/24/2008, -7/+8What do you call the guy who finishes last class at in Medical School? - Doctor.
      • redfox2600, on 03/24/2008, -1/+5The doctor who has a lot of over archivers in his class?
    • arcangelgabriel, on 03/24/2008, -1/+5I'm happy to say that I still use the method of looking you in the eye and asking if you did it or not.
    • JointVenture, on 03/24/2008, -9/+3Rev Wright has degrees from some shady theological schools too.
      Education: Virginia Union University, 1959-61; Howard University, BA, 1968, MA, 1969; University of Chicago School of Divinity, MA, 1975; United Theological Seminary, DMin, Black Sacred music, 1990.

      have a nice day
      • rabidg00se, on 03/24/2008, -1/+14I assure you, the University of Chicago Div School is most certainly not a shady theological school.

        Also, THIS IS THE WRONG ***** TOPIC.
      • stealthc, on 03/24/2008, -0/+1Off-topic. And theological != shady.
    • DigDugDigger, on 03/24/2008, -0/+7There's too much money to be made locking people up. Law enforcement is seemingly being ran more and more like a business.
    • Fordi, on 03/24/2008, -0/+5You're lying. I can tell by the vibrations in your internets.
    • ComstockGordon, on 03/24/2008, -0/+2Whoa now, don't bring the Video Professor down to the same level as Mr. Humble.
    • steeeeve, on 03/24/2008, -0/+1I am not a big fan of regulation otherwise, but i think there should be a law, that restricts courts and police to established mainstream science and automatically declares verdicts void, if they are based on anything else or if they contain factual errors in their arguments.
    • willgill, on 03/24/2008, -1/+1Anyone notice ABC did no tests to prove it DIDN'T work? They simply automatically took the Pentagon's side in which our 5 cornered friends "questioned its accuracy". ABC dismissed all the police departments that use it, and presumably believe in it. ABC calls it a "prop" without doing any real investigative work.

      Sure, this guy calls himself a doctor, but then again, ABC calls itself a news organization.
      • theodenking, on 03/24/2008, -0/+1They were reporting on studies done by other organisations. ABC is made up of journalists not researchers.
      • relic180, on 03/25/2008, -0/+0I don't know why people INSIST on this as some sort of evidence of anything.

        Let me explain. When a person makes a claim about ANYTHING (in this case, claiming that this machine can detect lies), it is THEIR responsibility to prove this. It's NEVER the responsibility of other people to disprove the claim. That's just not how claims work. ALWAYS! Period.

        And even suggesting that "saying it doesn't work is a claim and must be proven" is ass backwards.

        First, there is nothing. Nobody has claims about anything and life is just humming along. Then, one person makes a claim about something. It has now become that person's responsibility to justify that claim, somehow, otherwise they're just babbling and whatever they said disappears. It hasn't somehow become true because nobody told them to shut the ***** up to their satisfaction.

        It's difficult for me to see how people have a hard time with this concept... it's just so damn simple.

        The "Dr." said so himself that there have been ZERO independent studies done to verify that this machine works. For the record, independent studies are basically the CORNERSTONE of how people provide proof of their inventions/research/whatever, and he has not done this. He simply says "It works super-duper good. Oh and I'm totally a Dr. too so you should believe me."
    • theodenking, on 03/24/2008, -0/+1Disgusting.
  • tenaciouslee, on 03/23/2008, -1/+258What a sham. And $10,000 for a laptop with some 'smoke and mirrors' software? Unbelievable.
    • illegalamigo, on 03/23/2008, -33/+128Sounds like a Mac...

      I'm prepared to be dugg down into oblivion.
      • MacEnvy, on 03/23/2008, -7/+80You're right, both the "Smoke" and "Mirrors" effects in PhotoBooth are awesome.
      • ophello, on 03/24/2008, -8/+1Pay $10,000 for ANY computer and itll be good
        • Fetttson, on 03/24/2008, -0/+6I'll sell you my old Pentium for $10,000. For that kind of money, it MUST be good!
        • NevaDieENT, on 03/24/2008, -0/+4I'll sell you my $10,000 Pencil... for that logic it must be amazing!!!
      • Makaveli604, on 03/24/2008, -1/+1hahah GREAT first comment.
    • h4mx0r, on 03/24/2008, -0/+21They might as well buy one of those World of Warcraft laptops
      • Lunarbunny, on 03/24/2008, -0/+2At least you can sell the beta invites on that for nearly the price of the laptop.
    • Tddupre, on 03/24/2008, -0/+3they should just use this instead http://www.smarthome.com/9512.html
    • oldgal, on 03/24/2008, -0/+10Our tax dollars at work
    • gooberguy, on 03/24/2008, -0/+13where can i torrent it
    • Fordi, on 03/24/2008, -0/+7What I found amazing:
      I've done some work in signal parsing to detect minor deviations in a user's voice. It requires at least a rudimentary FFT- the evidence of which wasn't visible on the screenshots of that dude's app.

      No, I'm dead serious: to detect tremors in a voice, you REQUIRE a spectrum analysis - otherwise, you're just looking at noise. Additionally, there's two types of tremor: pitch and volume. You can't represent both over on a 2-d graph with only one data set rendered.
    • kaelyiesta, on 03/24/2008, -0/+1Its too bad we dont have much say in how we spend our taxes, even locally. Its bad enough that this fraud is making money and the cops are ruining innocent peoples lives, but we are paying for this *****. You can bet your ass that they would not get a dime from me for some unverified ***** like that if I had a choice in the matter.
    • someuser90, on 03/24/2008, -0/+0Didn't Dr. Humble also invent the "Time machine" in Napoleon Dynamite?
    • AntoniusMaximus, on 03/24/2008, -0/+1Don't forget the cake.
  • doctechnical, on 03/23/2008, -0/+69I was really hoping to see a photocopier "lie detector".
    • andersonwill, on 03/24/2008, -0/+5works everytime
    • da_bradler, on 03/24/2008, -0/+7someone has been watching the wire.
      • Chicken2nite, on 03/24/2008, -0/+3Munch did it on Homicide as well, in the first season. My guess is it was lifted from the nonfiction book, but I haven't read it yet.
      • xyqxyq, on 03/24/2008, -1/+3I've no clue what "the wire" is but I know the story about the photocopier lie detector.
        • bxblox, on 03/24/2008, -0/+5one of the greatest shows on television (r.i.p.)
          • andersonwill, on 03/24/2008, -0/+2THE greatest show on television
      • pensivewombat, on 03/24/2008, -0/+1Yeah, The Wire and Homicide are both by David Simon. I suppose he couldn't pass up using a scene that good twice.
  • dotlizard, on 03/23/2008, -5/+69i'm fairly sure it's considered inappropriate for someone with an unearned Ph.D. to call themselves Doctor -- that it's ok to add the suffix Ph.D. to their name, but not the Dr. prefix. That aside, what DOES qualify this quack to design such a system, and why on earth are our police departments gullible enough to buy them? I hate to think that the people in charge of investigating crime are incapable of doing basic consumer research before making a major purchase.
    • Sicarius, on 03/24/2008, -11/+8In America yes but in the rest of the English speaking world a person with a PhD is addressed as Dr regardless of the field of study.
      • willgill, on 03/24/2008, -0/+4-4 Diggs for a true statement? Where is Digg headed?
      • octophobic, on 03/24/2008, -0/+1100% correct: PhD = Philosophiæ Doctor.
    • dbldwn, on 03/24/2008, -1/+20I guess I have to stop calling myself Dr. Dbldwn now. That time I spent printing out a PhD of Awesomeness certificate was totally misspent.
    • PHiZ187, on 03/24/2008, -0/+16Note also, he says it almost under his breath that it is an HONORARY degree. He didn't even go through the trouble of getting an actual bogus degree, hahaha.
    • Thefatheroftime, on 03/24/2008, -1/+8Hi. Let me introduce myself. I'm an ordained minister in the Church of the Subgenius. My name is Father Time, or rather officially Reverend Doctor Father Time. That's Rev. Dr. Father Time to you lot!
    • wgasa, on 03/24/2008, -1/+8Its really not that confusing, medical doctors have the prefix Dr. and suffix M.D.(Medical Doctor), which helps identify them as doctors.
      Someone with a doctorate degree (not the same as a PhD) only has the prefix Dr. (post graduate)
      A person with a PhD. can have prefix Dr. and/or Suffix PhD. (post graduate as well)

      interesting to note that common M.D.'s only have graduate studies completed and thus are taking this Prefix (Dr.), which is normally assigned to someone with post graduate studies, without actually completing post graduate study


      ::looks back::
      man that actually does look confusing
      • rodboev, on 03/24/2008, -0/+5A PhD and a doctorate are one and the same, PhD meaning Doctor of Philosophy.
    • prleet, on 03/24/2008, -0/+0You asked why would the police department use it: you don't have the brightest of bulbs policing.
    • hotpuck6, on 03/24/2008, -0/+1unfortunately, in police departments, just like ever other place of employment, not everyone is the brightest crayon in the box. Give it enough time and enough ass kissing and those people get promoted and start making bad decisions for more and more people.
      And this my friends is how software from a fake PhD gets to hold weight in the US legal system. Hooray!
  • TomK88, on 03/23/2008, -4/+179Lie detectors don't belong in the justice system, period. They are not NEARLY accurate enough to be used for anything other than ***** and giggles. Type 2 errors are the worst possible thing a justice system can do and lie detectors can clearly lead to these errors.
    • Sicarius, on 03/24/2008, -10/+6I agree that they cannot constitute proof in a court. At least not without substantial improvements followed by scientific verification of their accuracy.
      However, I don't think that you can rule them out as a tool for Police to help them decide where an investigation should be focussed. A person showing signs of stress is more interesting than one who isn't and a machine that indicates this, albeit imperfectly, aids the speedy collection of traditional evidence. So long as they are aware it is not infallible I don't see a problem.
      • a6n28f, on 03/24/2008, -0/+10To be clear, the machine does not indicate anything. It takes a well-trained and skilled operator to interpret the results. It is more an art than a science, which is precisely why they're by and large not admissible in court. They are a tool, but only a tool - just like you said.
        • H0tKarl, on 03/24/2008, -1/+8And a well skilled suspect who understands the machines can manipulate the results.
    • adambadam, on 03/24/2008, -0/+17What is a type 2 error?
      • Xel565, on 03/24/2008, -0/+30Type I error: a true null hypothesis is incorrectly rejected

        Type II error: a false null hypothesis fails to be rejected.

        So basically a type I error is when you come to the conclusion that a true statement is false, and a type II error is when you come to the conclusion that a false statement is true.
        • shawn1122, on 03/24/2008, -0/+13So can we extend that to:
          Type I error: Guilty man is let free
          Type II error: Innocent man is jailed
          Or is that way off?
          • Fordi, on 03/24/2008, -0/+8You are absolutely correct.
          • chochazel, on 03/24/2008, -1/+0Other way round surely?
            The falsely accused innocent person is more likely to make a true statement that is rejected. E.g. "I didn't do it"
            When the wrongly freed guilty person says "I didn't do it!", their making a false statement that is accepted.
    • BIOHazard87, on 03/24/2008, -19/+2polygraph's are very accurate, I disagree.
      • provost, on 03/24/2008, -0/+16my dad used to administer them to people.. they are not. They merely get people to confess to things when you tell them 'well, there seems to be a discrepancy in what you are saying according to the polygraph.'
        They are purely psychological weapons used in conjunction with monitoring your body movements and facial expressions to try and figure out if you are lying.
      • foofightrs777, on 03/24/2008, -0/+6Biohazard, whats your source? Fox's "Moment of Truth"?
        • BIOHazard87, on 03/28/2008, -0/+1No, I actually think that show is completely fake, and involves mostly cheating, stop making assumptions
    • zeblith, on 03/24/2008, -1/+19I disagree. A type 2 error is a false negative. Type 1 errors, false positives, are the worst thing a justice system can do. I would rather have ten guilty men go free than one innocent man sentenced for a crime he didn't commit.
      • TomK88, on 03/24/2008, -0/+13Got my types confused. Too much statistics class lately. :P
      • pearlygate, on 03/24/2008, -1/+1dugg for using the correct type definition. Alpha > beta
    • Cattywampus, on 03/24/2008, -5/+3Dugg for the use of the term "***** and giggles"! (Ok, and the argument made sense too)
    • Light11, on 03/24/2008, -1/+7in canada, lie detectors cant even be used as evidence.
    • jer2eydevil88, on 03/24/2008, -0/+3How to defeat a lie detector.
      Officer: Did you break into 35943 Flagstone Way?
      You ignore the Officer's question and think inside your head: Did you break the glassware last night that the girlfriend was complaining about?
      Lie Detector sees what you were thinking. End of ***** test.
    • steeeeve, on 03/24/2008, -0/+0They do the same that people instinctively do when unconsciously reading body language:
      He is confident -> he must be telling the truth
      He is afraid/nervous -> he must be lying
      Of course there are so many scenarios, where this WILL go wrong, that you might as well use a horoscope.
    • dacrazydude, on 03/24/2008, -1/+0Lol, type II errors.... I haven't heard that term since high school...brings back memories
    • AmnioticEntity, on 03/24/2008, -0/+1type II error eh? i seem to remember getting those on my mac IIci running OS 7.1
      • JurisAnonimus, on 03/24/2008, -0/+1dudes, in the USA, results of lie detectors already can't be used as evidence. this is only for investigational purposes. sound like the cops were scammed with this vioce analyzer, nonetheless.
  • zephyr42, on 03/23/2008, -3/+13This is just crazy.
  • dsenman, on 03/23/2008, -4/+232It's no replacement for some good old fashioned waterboarding.
    • zephyr42, on 03/24/2008, -0/+17I'm a bigger fan of stress positions. Really gets you the answer you want the fastest.

      [/sarcasm for legal purposes]
      • spucky, on 03/24/2008, -0/+8E-meters! Bring out the soup cans of truth!
  • ufia, on 03/23/2008, -5/+61The polygraph is no better.
    • zephyr42, on 03/24/2008, -3/+13at least it's been put against science... I'll give it that
    • rolf, on 03/24/2008, -1/+14Exactly, it's a prop and is not admissable in court. That the news still treats it as legitimate in many cases (How often do you hear "So and So agreed/refused to take the lie detector test" in the news) feeds this next generation of crap pseudoscience.

      And if it's true about 1500 police departments having these -- it would be outrageous and the purchase managers need to be fired. If they needed a prop that badly, they could have constructed one for less than a hundred bucks a pop.
    • rpebble, on 03/24/2008, -0/+7I had a friend who did polygraph testing for the NSA for a long time, it's just like any other questioning technique when it comes down to it, 90% of what they were trained to do was read the person, not read the graphs. People just put way too much stock into the results of the "lie detector" testing, as if the machine output was the only thing that mattered. One of the first things they were trained to do was how people would try to cheat the system (pebbles in the shoe, etc) to get false positives during the calibration questions, so that they could know what to look out for.
    • TecK415, on 03/24/2008, -0/+1You're right. What people need to understand is that they can't use these in court! They use it as a way to get you to confess. It's disgusting... ugh. This should not be allowed!
    • ashlocke, on 03/24/2008, -0/+1As someone who has (rather easily)faked a polygraph test more than once, I can confirm this as accurate.
  • NightOwl4, on 03/24/2008, -2/+8not surprised...its ***** like this that happens everyday....that us everyday americans have no idea about.
  • Sackula, on 03/24/2008, -0/+31There is no way to prove if someone is or is not lying and people still continue to believe there is. Polygraphs, thermal imaging, and now this? Come on law enforcement, learn something from the past.
  • cplex, on 03/24/2008, -24/+4Wow, what ever happened to a good ol' fashioned polygraph test?
    • RoboHobo, on 03/24/2008, -1/+13A polygraph test is just as ridiculous as this quack’s machine.
    • inbred, on 03/24/2008, -0/+1What happened to the good ol' fashioned good cop/bad cop?
  • Niteryder, on 03/24/2008, -1/+4Get rid of it...this will lead to another constitutional crisis with bogus software at that
  • dbldwn, on 03/24/2008, -1/+77That one dude had an awesome mustache though.
    • cap11235, on 03/24/2008, -7/+4Not as nice as Stalin's, though.
      Also, in Soviet Russia, mustache has awesome dude.
      • gmiley, on 03/24/2008, -0/+7When I saw the thumbnail for the story I thought that maybe it was the mustache that police were using to question suspects. I was greatly disappointed. =(
        • dbldwn, on 03/24/2008, -0/+4They'd probably get more reliable results with a mustache-based lie detector. Who would lie to a guy with a mustache like that?!
          • bananasplit1586, on 03/24/2008, -0/+1LOL. i'd probably cry and hand a signed confession over with whatever they wanted on that. That's the kind of 'stache that shows up in my nightmares.
          • nfkiller, on 03/24/2008, -1/+1How would they test it? Advertise for free mustache rides?
    • Goya, on 03/24/2008, -0/+1agreed
    • Slick37c, on 03/24/2008, -0/+3He must have diabeetus.
      • AppleGeorge, on 03/24/2008, -1/+1I see what you did there, and it was ***** hilarious!
  • kLoWn420, on 03/24/2008, -0/+44In some cases, it's actually a crime to assert, when selling a product or service, that you have a degree or classification that you don't. It's considered false advertising. I would think that this would probably be one of those cases.
  • chrgrose, on 03/24/2008, -0/+16How could someone even THINK that this machine works? Is the level of science eduction in our justice system really this infantile?
    • pennvneff, on 03/24/2008, -0/+5Level of education in our country is this pathetic. The US is the only major Industrialized nation in the world still having debates about the validity of Creationism as scientific method.

      I smell a class action law suit coming soon.
      • chrgrose, on 03/24/2008, -0/+4Indeed. The guy reminds me of Kent Hovind, the creationist who claims to have a credible Ph.D, but its just as bogus as Mr. Humble's.

        Of course, Kent is in jail now so... heh.
    • JasonMath, on 03/24/2008, -0/+7Some people think that an E-Meter works.
  • capiCrimm, on 03/24/2008, -11/+42here's a crazy idea, when the cops try and question you shut the ***** up. Beyond the Stop and Identify statues which require you to tell them your name and address(depends on state what exactly needs to be told) you don't need to say a thing.

    I feel no sympathy for people who admit to crimes they haven't committed.
    • TomK88, on 03/24/2008, -1/+40There are people who simply don't know the laws. Should you not feel compassion for these people who are being extorted by law enforcement officials, especially children?
      • pennvneff, on 03/24/2008, -0/+13Yes let's make easier for lazy cops to throw people in jail, that's always worked out for the best.
      • Peko, on 03/24/2008, -0/+7We have seen plenty of video now on the intarwebs that shows cops as objective people who never ever abuse authority.
        Never ever.
        Ever.
    • ElectroBot, on 03/24/2008, -0/+10What if they were coerced to provide a false confession through intimidation/threats by police officers?
      • 13B1303, on 03/24/2008, -5/+2Then they are pussys who don't know the first thing about the legal system. Court is where you plead your case. The police station is where you get jacked around while someone waits for you to slip up.
    • HonestAbe, on 03/24/2008, -1/+14Look at the kid in the video. His sister was just killed, he was dragged in front of a lie detector in the middle of the night, and when they told him he was lying, he believed them. If you just saw someone you loved killed, you wouldn't be in a very stable mental state, either.
    • bethehammer, on 03/24/2008, -2/+3ignorance is no excuse for getting yourself into a ***** situation - capiCrimm is right - just say "I want my lawyer" then shut the ***** up till they get there
    • sandbird, on 03/24/2008, -0/+6IANAL... but the way I've had it explained is that if the police are interrogating you, it usually means they don't have enough evidence to get you on. They'll say they have everything on you, but if they do, then they can convict you without you saying a thing. They'll threaten you, your family, your dog, your co-workers, everything. They'll do anything they can to get you to say things that are not in your best interest. That's why rule #1 is to demand an attorney and then shut the hell up, no matter what they say.
    • Branyers, on 03/24/2008, -1/+4If the cops are under enough pressure to arrest a suspect, they can and will break an innocent person down.
      • Ogopogo, on 03/24/2008, -0/+2the 'shut up and don't say anything' sort of works sometimes. Depends on how interested they are in you. It just takes 'em a few days to get you in front of a judge and do an 'identity' hearing. Once the judge rules on who they think you are, the train continues to roll along. I've had cops then threaten to break my wrists in order to get fingerprints. They just tell the judge the prisoner 'was resisting' and did it himself.
        People shouldn't get the idea that the "I have nothing to say" gambit will work out all that well for you once you've been arrested. Still worth doing though, since it does slow them down, ***** them off and gives you a great education on how the system really works.
  • kinerry, on 03/24/2008, -2/+30Wow, ***** this guy, seriously

    Another Xtian university degree mill
    • bxblox, on 03/24/2008, -0/+3There are nondenominational degree mills if you prefer them.
  • CarGuy, on 03/24/2008, -0/+4that makes me sick
  • fivo7, on 03/24/2008, -1/+16dr of bible studies,you must be kidding me
    • bigt8dogg, on 03/24/2008, -0/+16I love it... "What did you actually STUDY there?" "The bible". And you got a Ph.D in Psychology for studying the bible... HOW???
    • Branyers, on 03/24/2008, -0/+8And he was made a Ph.D. after only 6 hours of course work. Takes about 120 hours to get a B.S. from an accredited university.
  • hobbitsareneat, on 03/24/2008, -9/+14Watching that kid in the holding room was nuts.. how can you not know if you killed your sister or not?
    • RoboHobo, on 03/24/2008, -1/+25I'd cut him a little slack considering the enormous amount of stress he was under. Finding your sister dead and being hauled to the police station for questioning seems pretty traumatic. I've known people to say some pretty crazy ***** during intense situations.
    • GorfTron, on 03/24/2008, -0/+11Where were the parents, why no lawyer? Kids gotta know their rights too. NO LAWYER? No questions answered!
      • lindasue, on 03/24/2008, -0/+2even knowing your rights isn't sometimes enough to withstand the assult of police questioning, especially for kids.
    • DanielLee, on 03/24/2008, -1/+0This is what I found interesting, that he actually doubted weather or not he did it, then confessed to doing it with a "I guess I must have". Is our reality really that open to doubt? Especially on something as serious at this.
  • MrTeQ, on 03/24/2008, -8/+2ok ok already.. you got me, I dugg it.
  • radiopayola, on 03/24/2008, -0/+6Haha... great piece. The host at the end said what I was thinking as I watched it. They should have had his machine running during the interview.
  • hendriks, on 03/24/2008, -0/+106I want to kick this guy in the nuts. I lived five years in a dark & lonely lab to get a Ph.D. How dare he call himself dr??? Charletan!
    • kinstray, on 03/24/2008, -0/+20Ahem: You'll find that's 'Charlatan', good Doctor!
      • OhSn4p, on 03/24/2008, -0/+2so wellwritten. you must be a doctor... at the very least from a strip mall bibleschool
      • hendriks, on 03/24/2008, -0/+4Obviously it's a science Ph.D., not an English literature one, LOL!
    • cheekdog, on 03/24/2008, -0/+13hmmm...i bet you really love it when movie stars who barely finished high school are given "honorary Ph.D.s"??? i'm with you,,,,i'm finishing up my 2nd Master's and the whole thing makes me crazy.
      • norcalscan, on 03/24/2008, -3/+2and you have time for digg comments? :)
    • mcla0181, on 03/24/2008, -0/+4I just wanted to join the club... *outraged* PhD student here...
  • DeviateSeptum, on 03/24/2008, -34/+2This "Doctor" is an asshole. But you know who are also assholes? The morons that confess to crimes they didn't commit. Personally I have no sympathy for them.
    • d4ni, on 03/24/2008, -1/+9You somehow believe they do it on purpose? The boy in the video who confessed the crime he did not commit was 14 years old at the time, and he was interrogated at night. Then some high tech machine (he doesn't know any better) tells him he is lying. Obviously that has an impact on such a kid. Apparently a huge impact. Confessing you stabbed your sister to death while you did not, wow. His brain got messed up there. Anyway, that does _NOT_ make him a moron.
    • DeviateSeptum, on 03/24/2008, -9/+1The 14 year-old does not qualify as a child in my book and has no excuse for his error. I don't give a flying fart what legal process they use. If you didn't kill your sister, you didn't kill your sister. I cannot comprehend anybody becoming uncertain about that fact under any tactics. Period. The kid in the video said that he wanted to just get out of that room (this is the refrain these false-confessors always have). So he confesses to a murder he didn't commit? Um, there's consequences to that far worse than staying in the damn room. God... the mere thought of somebody cracking that badly under a couple hours of duress makes me want to puke. Throw him in jail so he can't breed. I can imagine perfectly well what it'd be like to be questioned like that and I can guarantee that under no circumstances would I lose my mind in the situation. Freakin' Rambo on the electro-bed in Part II would look like a giant vagina compared to me in the same situation. Those that break are weak and pathetic and I despise those qualities.
  • BUrAph, on 03/24/2008, -12/+7Let me get this straight: the kid confessed to killing his sister..in order to be allowed to leave the police station sooner? What?!
    • paidhima, on 03/24/2008, -0/+11Not to leave the police station sooner - to leave the room. This wasn't a matter of convenience. The kid just wanted out of that stressful situation. It's a pretty standard tactic to get information out of people. Unfortunately, it can just as easily lead to false confessions and information from innocent people so stressed out they're willing to do or say anything to get the hell out.
    • NOFXY, on 03/24/2008, -0/+9which is why torture doesn't work.
    • steeeeve, on 03/24/2008, -1/+0People do not react logical in extreme stress situations
  • MrESaulved, on 03/24/2008, -0/+16I'm still scratching my head over the poor kid who 'confessed' to stabbing his sister to death while she slept in bed. When in fact, he demonstrably did not.

    Human motives are curious and untrustworthy things, avoid avoid avoid.
    • liquidpele, on 03/24/2008, -0/+7They kept him up for hours after Midnight. The kid was so tired by the questioning, there was no way he was thinking clearly. Give him a break. Police use that tactic to get (sometimes false) confessions all the time. But you can't make them not use the tactic because it works really well for actual criminals too...
    • stealthc, on 03/24/2008, -0/+1If they ever charge me with ***** like that, and I know nothing I say will demonstrate my innocence to their satisfaction, I'm just going to shut up. If I don't answer their questions, they can't tell me I lied.

      I can understand why this kid confessed. They put him under such mental strain he doubted his own memory. He trusted the authority figure more than his own brain. Didn't you ever read the end of 1984? Under enough strain, 2+2 can equal anything.
  • itsatrapadbar, on 03/24/2008, -1/+2embarrassing
  • tehmacuser, on 03/24/2008, -10/+6Ya? His Bible "University" can't beat my doctorate in Douchebag Detection from the University of Noodle Studies

    Dr Tehmacuser, at your service.
  • tehmacuser, on 03/24/2008, -11/+0Ya? His Bible "University" can't beat my doctorate in Douchebag Detection from the University of Noodle Studies
    • lickmylovepump, on 03/24/2008, -0/+2don't duplicate posts that suck.
  • pennvneff, on 03/24/2008, -1/+65Someone call Scientology, this guy has obviously stolen their E-Meter technology.
  • directedition, on 03/24/2008, -0/+8I honestly don't understand how lie detectors are admissible evidence. They only detect stress. If you're being questioned by the police for murder and facing lethal injection, what else but guilt could possibly stress you? right?
    • macplenty, on 03/24/2008, -1/+0From what I understand (it may differ state to state) but lie detector tests are not admissable as evidence. Since I am not a police officer, I cannot tell you what they are actually used for. The cynic in me believes they are used simply for coercion, such as the case with the 14 yr old in the video. They may also exonerate many suspects. It's probably a mix of both.
  • AiNiji, on 03/24/2008, -6/+1Why is this the only fraud the news can cover?
    I know of a special someone who out-dicks this dick.
  • xero69, on 03/24/2008, -1/+14Another fine reason to never answer police questions without an attorney present.
  • theskyisblue, on 03/24/2008, -1/+8not surprised... the feds and other low end law enforcement agencies get false admissions all the time. it's all over history. when you are locked in a cell in an unknown location with a bunch of overzealous and insecure assholes torturing you and beating the living ***** out of you, you would confess to anything. Torture is a good method to get people to admit to anything. This "voice analyzer" is just another prop to get people to confess to crimes they possibly could not have done in order for our law enforcement to look like they are doing their job and so the government can claim they are "keeping people safe."
  • likwidfuzion, on 03/24/2008, -0/+26I find it rather ironic his last name is Humble.
  • Krumm, on 03/24/2008, -0/+5Any police tech support people on Digg want to supply a torrent so we can all check it out?
    • defaultusername, on 03/24/2008, -0/+2Was thinking the same thing. The website has the product featured as a laptop, but the software can't be that large. It looks like a glorified spectrogram. As a Ling major I'd be interested in seeing how exactly the software analyzes speech.
  • krisscofield, on 03/24/2008, -2/+33Seems about as scientifically solid as an E-Meter.
  • LoneRanger85, on 03/24/2008, -10/+3Although people call him doctor, and although I hear he performed more than his share of physical examinations, I don't believe Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was a gynecologist.
    • Barbrady, on 03/24/2008, -1/+4He was cheating on his wife so he did inspect at least a couple other vaginas.
  • lukemandese, on 03/24/2008, -3/+79If the computer detects any african descent in your voice, you will be immediately jailed.
    • da_bradler, on 03/24/2008, -0/+22if it detects an Irish decent in your voice, you will be immediately charged with a DUI
    • ZeroIce, on 03/24/2008, -8/+1If it detects any Caucasian in your voice, you will be immediately charged with identity theft.
    • Broelke4, on 03/24/2008, -1/+1There could have been a pun there using "dissent".
    • WolverineBlue, on 03/24/2008, -0/+3Error: please insert African into drive Jail:\
  • zl0t, on 03/24/2008, -5/+0Who can they use it if they don't know that it works :S
  • Deguello, on 03/24/2008, -0/+6There is NOTHING...that can detect lies. There are too many variables in the process and it is just snake oil...The sad thing is that someone is going to be placed under suspicion of a crime, or not get a job because of this hogwash.... If your really interested in how easy "lie detections" machines can be beat, look here...
    https://antipolygraph.org/pubs.shtml

    I am not affiliated with them, just passing info along.
  • Devaney, on 03/24/2008, -0/+2May "truthiness" live on forever.
  • borez, on 03/24/2008, -0/+4We have similar devices in use in the UK. They are used by some benefits offices and insurance companies to catch out cheats. These are utterly ***** ridiculous and are costing honest people a lot of money.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2007/sep/18/scie ...
  • rowlodge, on 03/24/2008, -4/+4if he can fool the police and the goverment into buying it for $10,000 he deserves it.
    • Ogopogo, on 03/24/2008, -1/+4that's why police departments reject applicants with IQ's that are too high.
  • dizilbdog, on 03/24/2008, -0/+4Hmm I went to Hebrew School, and uhm now I"m a Doctor No wait Lawyer yeah... What's frighting is that this guy believes that his schooling is real and honest...
  • Barbrady, on 03/24/2008, -0/+4This thing is right up there with the lead analysis that the FBI and others used for years to convict people and has been proven to be inaccurate and worthless.
  • marcus1060, on 03/24/2008, -0/+5Haha.
    Reminds me of Futurama, and the college at the county fair.
  • lastoch, on 03/24/2008, -1/+9Bible studies? I would've had a PhD by the age of three.
  • scottellis, on 03/24/2008, -0/+11I've heard it works better when they use the testicle clip upgrade package.
  • bdpf, on 03/24/2008, -1/+1Questioning a child, not an adult without a guardian or parent there? Is it legal?
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 138 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.