Official Sexual Harrassment Thread

[Gregg]

If I were falsely accused, I'd do everything i reasonably could to clear my name too, but I wouldn't take a polygraph. They are notoriously inaccurate. There are reasons why they are inadmissable in court. You have nothing to gain from taking one. If you pass, people will say you beat it. If you draw a false positive, people will believe you are guilty.no matter what happens after that.

If I were falsely accused I would do everything in my power to clear my name including a polygraph.

Unless someone has practice with fooling a polygraph I would find it hard to believe professional liars (actors) would actually volunteer to try to pass one. In fact I think that they would go out of their way to NOT take one.

In the Piven case I would really like the accuser to volunteer to take a poly.

[revo]

Latest accused: Pixar’s John Lasseter
Latest career obliterated: Charlie Rose was fired by CBS

[Hornsby]

If I were falsely accused I would do everything in my power to clear my name including a polygraph.

Unless someone has practice with fooling a polygraph I would find it hard to believe professional liars (actors) would actually volunteer to try to pass one. In fact I think that they would go out of their way to NOT take one.

In the Piven case I would really like the accuser to volunteer to take a poly.

That sets up a really bad policy that men have used for centuries: Blame the victim. Could she be lying? Sure...but to have her, and potentially all women be asked to tale a polygraph, dets the whole thing up to go back underground. Shine the light on it and see what happens...so far, most of the people who've been accused have been shown to be guilty. Is Piven guilty? I don't know, but I'm not inclined to believe a lie detector test clears him.

[Sour Masher]

If I were falsely accused I would do everything in my power to clear my name including a polygraph.

Even though you know the test, and the interpretations of the tests, lead to false positives and false negatives? You'd risk taking a test that indicates your guilt, even if you were innocent, and you'd want others to subject themselves to the same testing that has been denounced by the American Psychological Association as a procedure with little evidence suggesting it accurately detects lies?

Even the other APA--the American Polygraph Association--only claim accuracy as high as 90%, and then add the caveat that that level of accuracy is only achieved when a trained professional does the testing the right way. Many dispute that claim, but even if you accept the advocate/cheerleaders numbers, you have a 1 in 10 chance of false results.

I would not submit myself to such imperfect and inconsistent measures, that to date lacks sufficient scientific research indicating their level of accuracy and reliability, especially given the public perception that the testing is accurate and based on hard scientific evidence. I'm not taking a 1 in 10 (at best) chance on ruining my name and reputation.

Here is a good/brief rundown of the potential flaws and limitations of polygraphs including a current lack of research supporting it as a reliable measure of veracity from the APA: http://www.apa.org/research/action/polygraph.aspx

After reading that and other sources on the testing, I wouldn't want to take one if my reputation were on the line, and I wouldn't put a very high degree of faith in the results of such testing in determining the guilt or innocence of others. I'll leave such imperfect measures to Maury Pouvich and those who go on his show to find out who is a cheater.

All that said, it would be great if there were a fullproof, 100% accurate way to determine who is lying and who is telling the truth on these issues, and many others. If such a thing existed, I'd be all for its usage. It doesn't exist right now though, so we are left using our best judgment.

When multiple accusers with little to nothing to gain from subjecting themselves to public scrutiny accuse someone of wrong doing, I believe them until faced with evidence they are lying. That is not to say that there are not false accusers, and to me, they are horrible people who should be outed and punished, as they often are, because not only do they try to ruin the lives of the accused, they make it harder for all those who have truly been wronged to seek justice and from getting the widespread support and trust they deserve.

[Redbirds Fan]

I'd have to respectfully disagree...trained actors are uniquely qualified to beat a polygraph. Many of them immerse themselves into a role, sometimes to the point where they don't even want to break character while NOT on stage or filming. Now, you can call it what you wish, but pretending to be someone that your not can certainly qualify as "lying" for a living in my book. I'll take Brando's word on it as well...but yes, controlling your autonomic responses are the key.

Plenty of information out there on the internet on how to beat a lie detector test, this from the NY Times a few years back:



https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/12/m...raph-test.html

Sorry, I'll respectfully disagree based upon personal experience. I don't know how much about Brando's experience in the criminal justice system, but I've had some.

I've taken the test a half dozen times. I've been present when it was given a couple of dozen times. I've sat in on the training. I've taught courses about its use. (I was a prosecutor for fifteen years before I was a judge. Polygraphs may not be admissible in court, but they are a useful tool nonetheless when used properly. I don't know everything about them, but I have looked at them from a variety of perspectives.)

My personal opinion is that actors are some of the worst candidates to do well. It's not training so much as it is personality.

I do know this...you don't take it voluntarily unless you know you are going to pass it. One way people make sure of that is that they arrange to take it several times under controlled conditions and then only make public the instance in which they passed it. I'm not saying that is what this guy did, but it has happened before.

Doug Williams is clearly a self-promoter, and when you got to the part where he admits that he used to advise people to clench their anus to beat the test, that should have told you all you needed to know.

[revo]

Latest accuser: Gabby Douglas
Latest accused: John Conyers, Russell Simmons, Nick Carter

[Gregg]

That sets up a really bad policy that men have used for centuries: Blame the victim. Could she be lying? Sure...but to have her, and potentially all women be asked to tale a polygraph, dets the whole thing up to go back underground. Shine the light on it and see what happens...so far, most of the people who've been accused have been shown to be guilty. Is Piven guilty? I don't know, but I'm not inclined to believe a lie detector test clears him.

I did not suggest all women take a polygraph test. I suggested Piven's accuser take one as he had already passed one.

Then there is this:

The woman who has accused American Idol host Ryan Seacrest of sexually inappropriate behavior when she was his stylist a decade ago demanded a $15 million payoff for her silence, a report by TMZ claims.

TMZ claims that the woman's lawyer had a meeting with Seacrest's attorney (with Seacrest on the phone) where the accuser's lawyer read aloud a press release that he said he would send to the media unless Seacrest met her financial demands.

Seacrest has adamantly denied the claims, calling them, “reckless allegations” and saying he would “cooperate with any corporate inquiries that may result… I’m proud of my workplace reputation, and believe my track record will speak for itself. I’m an advocate for women. I will continue to support their voices.”

Seems like blackmail to me.

Again I am not defending anyone who is guilty. No due process in most of these cases. How do we/they decide who is guilty and who is not.

[Sour Masher]

I did not suggest all women take a polygraph test. I suggested Piven's accuser take one as he had already passed one.

Then there is this:

The woman who has accused American Idol host Ryan Seacrest of sexually inappropriate behavior when she was his stylist a decade ago demanded a $15 million payoff for her silence, a report by TMZ claims.

TMZ claims that the woman's lawyer had a meeting with Seacrest's attorney (with Seacrest on the phone) where the accuser's lawyer read aloud a press release that he said he would send to the media unless Seacrest met her financial demands.

Seacrest has adamantly denied the claims, calling them, “reckless allegations” and saying he would “cooperate with any corporate inquiries that may result… I’m proud of my workplace reputation, and believe my track record will speak for itself. I’m an advocate for women. I will continue to support their voices.”

Seems like blackmail to me.

Again I am not defending anyone who is guilty. No due process in most of these cases. How do we/they decide who is guilty and who is not.

Your example here makes it seem pretty easy to determine who to believe and who to be skeptical of. If multiple, credible accusers come out without financial motivation against someone, chances seem very high he is guilty. If a single accuser comes out and tries to blackmail a guy for 15 million, chances are she is the one lying/exaggerating. Of course, just because someone commits the crime of blackmail does not mean the original crime did not happen, but the person blackmailing basically ruins any chance at justice for the original crime, because the court of public opinion will see the blackmailer as an opportunist looking to cash in on the current wave of revelations. I'm okay with that outcome. If you were assaulted, your aim should be to seek justice for that assault, and to ensure others feel emboldened to come forward. It should not be seen as an opportunity to buy your silence. That silence might cost another victim in the future. Its dirty money.

[Hornsby]

I did not suggest all women take a polygraph test. I suggested Piven's accuser take one as he had already passed one.

Then there is this:

The woman who has accused American Idol host Ryan Seacrest of sexually inappropriate behavior when she was his stylist a decade ago demanded a $15 million payoff for her silence, a report by TMZ claims.

TMZ claims that the woman's lawyer had a meeting with Seacrest's attorney (with Seacrest on the phone) where the accuser's lawyer read aloud a press release that he said he would send to the media unless Seacrest met her financial demands.

Seacrest has adamantly denied the claims, calling them, “reckless allegations” and saying he would “cooperate with any corporate inquiries that may result… I’m proud of my workplace reputation, and believe my track record will speak for itself. I’m an advocate for women. I will continue to support their voices.”

Seems like blackmail to me.

Again I am not defending anyone who is guilty. No due process in most of these cases. How do we/they decide who is guilty and who is not.

Sometimes the pendulum has to swing the other way to get to the middle. This may indeed be one of those times. I believe that the fact that Piven passed a polygraph means nothing. They're simply not accurate enough to be foolproof, or anywhere near. As RB pointed out, sometimes several tests are given to get the desired result, and they can be beaten if you know what to do. So no, she shouldn't have to take a polygraph IMO....it's simply is blaming the victim, again.

With the Seacrest story...there are people out there who are scammers, no doubt about it. But just because a person demands money doesn't mean it didn't happen...it's pretty much an unprovable at this point.

ETA...Sour masher made most of my points well before me, and more eloquently.

[nullnor]

i think actors like Scientology because it helps teach them to control their emotions and acting better. i think that is what Scientology does. that's the allure for actors towards it. i think we should give Scientologist lie detector tests. i bet a ton of them would pass.

[nullnor]

i would think you could train a dog to tell when someone is lying. better than a mechanical lie detector test. someday i'd like to see dogs or even some other animal if one can do it, employed in the court system as experts.

seriously tho. i know they allow them in there now as comfort when people are giving testimony. so i think that's a start.

[Hornsby]

They keep piling up:

Two more women have told HuffPost that Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) touched their butts in separate incidents. These are the third and fourth such allegations against Franken in the past week. Leeann Tweeden, a radio host, wrote last week that Franken had kissed and groped her without her consent during a 2006 USO tour. On Monday, Lindsay Menz accused Franken of groping her at the Minnesota State Fair in 2010.

The two additional women, who said they were not familiar with each others’ stories, both spoke on condition of anonymity. But their stories, which describe events during Franken’s first campaign for the Senate, are remarkably similar — and both women have been telling them privately for years.

In a statement to HuffPost, Franken said, “It’s difficult to respond to anonymous accusers, and I don’t remember those campaign events.”

The first woman, who spoke to HuffPost on condition of anonymity because she’s worried she’ll be harassed online for making the allegation, said Franken groped her when they posed for a photo after a June 25, 2007, event hosted by the Minnesota Women’s Political Caucus in Minneapolis.

“My story is eerily similar to Lindsay Menz’s story,” the first woman said. “He grabbed my buttocks during a photo op.”

The second woman told HuffPost that Franken cupped her butt with his hand at a 2008 Democratic fundraiser in Minneapolis, then suggested the two visit the bathroom together. She spoke on condition of anonymity out of fear that the allegation could affect her position at work.

“My immediate reaction was disgust,” the second woman said. “But my secondary reaction was disappointment. I was excited to be there and to meet him. And so to have that happen really deflated me. It felt like: ‘Is this really the person who is going to be in a position of power to represent our community?’”

“I can categorically say that I did not proposition anyone to join me in any bathroom,” Franken told HuffPost.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/al-franken-two-more-women-groping_us_5a15a455e4b09650540ec295?ncid=tweetlnkushpmg00000067

[Fresno Bob]

there are not 4 women that can credibly claim that I've grabbed their ass or tits non-consentually

[nullnor]

one time i was making out with my GF and making moves on top of her and in the middle of it i noticed she was crying. i was like omg and jumped off and asked if she was ok. i act tough, but im about as gentle as they come. but sometimes mistakes are made. i don't think i've ever really even hit someone before.

..one time i called the wildlife clinic for a mouse with a stuck penis.

[TranaGreg]

there are not 4 women that can credibly claim that I've grabbed their ass or tits non-consentually

"5" is "not 4".

just pointing that out.

I've been working with lawyers too much ...