The Truth About IPP Sentences

Sex Offender Lie Detector tests may be expanded to include any suspected offenders

Unreliable and an insult to British freedoms

Unreliable and an insult to British freedoms

In a shameful bid to score political points and to boost the failing reputation of the Home Secretary, Theresa May, the government has announced that, despite the fact that the devices are so unreliable that the evidence obtained from them is not allowed to be used in court, the use of polygraph testing or “Lie Detectors”, is nevertheless to be rolled out across the UK after having been “successfully” piloted on sex offenders in the Midlands

However, TheOpinionSite.org has also been told that the use of lie detectors may eventually be expanded to include many other suspected offenders as well, particularly where no ‘real’ evidence is available.

The use of polygraph testing in the UK was authorised by the previous Labour government under Tony Blair after he was subjected to newspaper campaigns citing the allegedly “successful” use of lie detectors in the US.

In response to pressure from the News of the World and child protection groups – including lobbying from commercial companies offering to provide the tests – Blair set up a three year pilot scheme targeting sex offenders that had been released on licence.

Now, the present government has decided to force inmates to take the test even before they are released and this will inevitably be expanded to include those people who are suspected but not convicted of an offence.

However, a source close to the government has told TheOpinionSite.org that the latest move to roll out lie detector tests to the whole of the country is a largely political move attempting to improve public confidence in the beleaguered and failing Home Secretary, Theresa May and that eventually, the tests will be applied to all criminals serving a sentence of more than 4 years as police are now expected to demand the same powers as the probation service.

Mrs. May is presently under fire from all quarters over everything from failures in Olympic Games security to immigration, her introduction of the reviled “Internet Snooping” legislation (Communication Bill), the erosion of remaining civil liberties under the guise of ‘prevention of terrorism’ and the failure to deport foreign criminals.

The Prime Minister, David Cameron – also in a heap of political trouble – is said to have ordered ministers to evaluate the costs of expanding the scheme across the country. Tests currently cost between £500 – 700 each but are not regarded as being sufficiently reliable to even allow their use in a junior magistrate’s court, let alone where more serious cases are involved.

Nevertheless, it is likely that the money will be found rather than risk a potentially embarrassing fight between Downing Street and the police and probation services; Cameron will do anything to avoid even more public and media criticism for his Conservative led policies.

The test results are acknowledged as being unreliable and can be faked by the person under interrogation by following simple instructions widely available on Google and in any case, are often wrongly “interpreted” by so-called “expert” operators who report the results to the organisation paying for the service; in practice, this is the police or probation officer ‘managing’ the sex offender.

It seems though that only negative traits are sought after. Anything indicating lower risk is either ignored or questions that could specifically indicate lower risk are not asked in the first place.

TheOpinionSite.org must point out the bigger threat however that once the tests are made available nationally, it will only be a matter of time before all police forces in the UK are using the lie detector tests on everyone arrested on suspicion of having committed anything regarded by the police as being a serious offence.

One senior lawyer told us:

“A lie detector test is the perfect “blunt weapon” to use where evidence is thin and the police or probation officer decides to go on a “fishing trip” in the hope of finding something to justify their actions or opinion.”

UK police have for some time been considering using lie detector tests to help secure criminal convictions; something which is common in the United States but not in Europe.

Hertfordshire police are currently experimenting with how the tests could help solve cases and although British police have never routinely used lie detectors, ministers have been debating for several years whether they should have a bigger role in guiding officers.

The Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) has established a working group to advise forces contemplating the use of lie detectors, particularly with regard to the management of offenders convicted of sexual offences against children.

This concentration on sex offenders is due not only to the belief by the police that all sex offenders reoffend, even though their own official figures show that nothing is further from the truth but also to the fact that the police and other law enforcement agencies find it easy to get what they want if they link their demands to “child protection”.

Maintaining public fear and the perception that there is a child sex offender on every street corner is a useful device for keeping public protection unit police personnel employed and also provides the perfect excuse to demand more money from the government at a time when police budgets are being cut.

The problem is that these decisions are being made on the basis of flawed “professional judgement” rather than being evidence based. This use of so-called “professional judgement” effectively allows the police and probation services to get away with anything they want as long as they deem it necessary in order to “protect children”, politicians being too afraid to argue with them.

Detective Chief Inspector Glen Channer, the head of Hertfordshire police’s child protection unit, tried to justify the use of lie detectors by saying:

“Lie detectors are a welcome addition to the force’s armoury of investigative techniques”.

He went on to say, “The devices offer a better insight into the risks posed by offenders, enabling officers to prioritise certain cases over others to improve efficiency.”

Note as well the careful use of the words, “…better insight into the risks posed by offenders”, not just “sex offenders.”

However, TheOpinionSite.org believes that all of this is self-serving rubbish delivered by the police in order to try and justify the unjustifiable.

 If the tests were really at all reliable, their results would be admissible in court, which they are not.

The fact is that the police and probation services will support the use of anything that gives them more power. This has been the case for years and whenever they have linked their demands or support to anything to do with child protection – regardless of the effects on the freedoms of others – the government has usually given in and always will, regardless of the fact that every time it does so, it strips away more freedoms from ordinary people and increases the power of the State.

As Adolf Hitler so eloquently put it in his book, “Mein Kampf”:

“The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of the children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation.”

If the British public is really sufficiently stupid or naive to believe that the use of unreliable lie detectors will be reserved solely for sex offenders on licence from prison or only for the protection of children, then that same British public deserves everything it gets.

Currently, those opposed to the release of IPP prisoners will also be thrilled by the fact that the tests are to be given to all serious offenders before they are assessed for Parole. Obviously, that includes IPP prisoners as they are all technically classified as being “dangerous” – whether they really are or not.

If an IPP prisoner fails a polygraph test, it is probable that the probation service and/or the police will attempt to block his release.

Whilst TheOpinionSite.org can accept that when tested, some offenders may reveal information that they would not otherwise have revealed, the fact still remains that just as the authorities currently ignore any risk assessment that places an offender at anything other than “high risk”, so they will equally ignore any lie detector test that suggests the prisoner is not as “high risk” as they would like.

Thanks to the Leveson Inquiry and numerous Parliamentary Committee reports – not to mention the ever increasing number of policemen arrested for perjury, handling of Class A drugs, possession of child pornography, fabricating evidence, using the Police National Computer illegally and even sexual assault – we know that many police and also many of their “professional” partners such as probation officers cannot be trusted to tell the truth.

Whilst the majority would not, there will always be some – particularly when dealing with politically sensitive cases such as child sex abuse – that will use the test results for their own ends or in order to unofficially “extend” the sentence or period of supervision of an offender.

Offenders that are satisfactorily fulfilling the requirements of their release licence may still be sent back to prison solely on the grounds that the polygraph test results show that they “may” be going to reoffend, even where there is no other evidence to suggest any such thing and no new offence has actually been committed, just as in the US.

To its eternal shame, Britain loves to slavishly follow America rather than Europe and, in doing so, not only emulates the good things of the USA but also child-like, copies the bad.

TheOpinionSite.org believes that the nationwide introduction of lie detector tests for sex offenders on licence will result in the worst kind of “mission creep” by the authorities and will inevitably lead to the use of the tests on everyone.

The danger is that if someone refuses to submit themselves to a polygraph test, their guilt will be automatically assumed, regardless of the lack of any real evidence, regardless of the effect on the individual and their family and regardless of the increased erosion of precious civil liberties, most of which have been taken away already.

It looks as if Adolf was right after all; we in Britain really are stupid enough to put up with anything in the name of “child protection”, even if to do so insidiously permeates society with the cancer of ever increasing police power and eventually makes us all liable to arrest and imprisonment for something that we have not done.

(Do you agree or not? Discuss this in our Forum)

Tags: , , , , , ,

14 Responses to Sex Offender Lie Detector tests may be expanded to include any suspected offenders

  1. john
    November 28, 2012 at 5:44 pm

    your articles all ring true ,

    i am coming up to apply to come of the register soon, now i fear i will be forced to take a polygraph ,i am low risk and never committed any offence since release.
    and the police will and could use this tool to refuse my case.
    and thats is exactly what this is for so they can look for any reason to refuse me and anyone else ,i cannot see anyone being successful in coming of the register .

    • Raymond Peytors - theopinionsite.org
      November 28, 2012 at 5:51 pm

      You may want to join our members only forum where you will find help and support. Take a look at http://theopinionsite.org/forumsp.html

      In any event, readers will be interested to know how you progress. It is hard to see how a policeman who is responsible for protecting the public can possibly also be a fair arbiter with regard to taking someone off the register. – Editor

  2. adrian
    November 20, 2012 at 7:22 pm

    anyone opposed to properly conducted polygraph lie tests need their heads read. they are highly accurate and impossible to trick. the so called tricks to fool the tests are pure bunkum. my only issue is that the appeal courts dont yet allow results into evidence, even when there was no real evidence collected or put before the court to secure the original conviction.

    i believe that anyone accusing anyone else of abusing them as a child should have to take the test themselves, because in historical cases involving alleged child abuse, the law was changed so that in this country the defendant is guilty unless he can prove otherwise. and hebis then sentenced to a fate worse than death.

    in historical cases, sometimes the polygraph is the only hope an innocent man has.

    at the very least the scientific evidence points to polygraph lie tests having a high degree of accuracy. as high as 90% or more. we are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. the proof of guilt must be beyond all reasonable doubt. what to you is reasonable?

    and now, not content with destroying the innocent whilst they live, we are conducting witch hunts against dead men.. because they have large estates and compensation can be awarded through private prosecutions..

    and who questions this? it seems that in the eyes of the public, police, cps, politicians and the media, if someone alleges abuse then it must be true. and if more people allege it.. then there must be no doubt.. no-one stops and thinks.. that these are easy prosecutions, no proof needed, much media attention in some cases, compensation on offer at difficult times.. how many are telling the truth.. how many are lying?

    its like the salem witch trials all over again, in a world obsessed with images and thoughts of sex and child abuse. and i am not just talking about genuine abusers. i am talking about the general public, and those working in law enforcement, and of course, the mainstreem news media. the only difference between then and now is that the innocent(mostly men) are truly consigned to a fate worse than death, whereas then, at least women had merciful release(by comparison) of death.

  3. davie
    September 5, 2012 at 12:16 am

    What a complete waste of time and money.

  4. mark bates
    August 16, 2012 at 10:16 pm

    I have had several polytests, the first is in the courts for assault. the tester assaulted me during the test, I was rushed to hospital for suspect organ failure, I had arms like three times bigger than normal, the tester put the arm cuff on so tight it stop mey blood surply totally, this cause me body to go into shock, I,m having to take this to court myself, as the so called great solicitors don,t want to cause a problem, the tester was sent back to america within a month so no criminal action could be taken, be aware, the test will go missing if you prove your innocent, mine has, if any one has the same problems, please put it on this page

  5. Patricia
    July 23, 2012 at 11:12 am

    I am fighting to get our son released from the dreadful IPP sentence, as he has now served over 5 years for an 18 months minimum tariff. Maybe he would be ‘safer’ left in prison,, what with all the obstructions which will be in his way to secure rehabilitation on release. This is so wrong. I thought that the crime-rate was going down. why is society scapegoating these people? Probably due to inability and unwillingness to look into its own backgarden.

    • Raymond Peytors - theopinionsite.org
      July 23, 2012 at 11:41 am

      You are not wrong, especially as when he IS released, he will have a minimum of 10 years on licence. The whole situation is tragic. As for why, it is all politics and the fact that people don’t care – except for those that make their living out of prisoners. – Editor

  6. OJ
    July 23, 2012 at 3:14 am

    This is bound to end in tears. A sociopath (and society is riddled with them) will easily pass as they never feel guilt so can lie with impunity.
    At the same time anyone (which is many) with any degree of paranoia may fail even though they tell the truth.
    This will eventually end up in the EU Human Rights court (watch the wails then) but so many will suffer in the meantime.

    On the subject of The Sun & NOTW : notice how hacks are screaming to high heaven about the 6am knock on the door from police as though it isn’t normal. For an industry that gives politicians their orders, they seem oblivious to how the police work and demand a nice invite to Bow Street when being arrested.

  7. Charles H Jones
    July 22, 2012 at 7:43 pm

    Dear Raymond,
    I have just stumbled accross your ‘THE OPINION SITE’ by sheer accident as I broused the internet seeking help against ultra corrupt ‘Transport Police’ in Liverpool.
    Such is their confidence in securing a conviction against me for an offence that never happened, they have resorted to using computer software to shape the case to suit themselves.
    During the process of a false arrest at a railway station I was injured by equally corrupt security guards contracted to Merseyrail. I ended up in the Royal Hospital where I was diagnosed as having suffered ‘knee ligament damage’. I asked the arresting officer to take action against the security guards. He said he would ‘think about it’. He sat next to me and pondered for a while then brazenly announced that he intended to say ‘he was there from the outset’. Despite my protests, he subsequently made a statemant to that effect. During my official interview at which time I was ubder caution and the interview taped, the policeman was caught in his own web of lies. He promptly stopped the interview and the CCTV footage of the incident which was being shown vanished. (I was able to point out discrepancies which would have exposed his perjury).
    This incident occurred on the 28th July 2012 at Liverpool Central
    railway station. A similar incident occured the very next night 29th July when I was abused and prevented from travelling by my accuser from the previous evening. I had to walk in the pouring rain, limping on a heavily bandaged leg and arrived at the next station (Moorfields) soaking wet in order to get home that night.
    The CCTV footage of that incident also vanished despite the assurance of Mersyrail that it had been secured for me as evidence of my treatment.
    To date I have dispensed with the services of a crooked solicitor who began to collude with the CPS and Police against me, and to that end I have formally complained to the Firm, and now the legal ombudsman, seeking redress.
    In the meantime the police have engaged in the most corrupt and overt course of CCTV manipulation imaginable. Because I am a poor man they think they can get away with it. A photograph taken of me in the police custody suite ( I wanted prompt proof that I had no injuries. (I was being accused of headbutting the security gusrd.)
    The photo later vanished from my bundle in the solicitor’s office and was replaced by a bogus image which even a blind man would accept was so. My signature in the police log was forged in order to place an item in my property that I did not have when I was arrested, but the item suits the image the police wish to portray of my accusers that would extricate them from their difficulties and also prevent me from being successful in any civil claim for damages against Merseyrail, and the police ( under investigation and dependant on the outcome of the current case still pending to keep their jobs)
    I have been betrayed by (so called) experts whom I engaged via my legal aid to evaluate the CCTV footage, Photograph and my forged signature. These characters are charlatans for I have been reliably informed by other experts of exactly how the tampering was done by the police computer expert. The problem is that I have no money to pay these people, and I cannot have a second opinion paid for by legal aid.
    I now have a new firm of solicitors, and a barrister has been engaged on the case which will be heard in the magistrate’s court in November. Yes sir the magistrate’s court The initial charges against me were that I was in posession of cannabis, headbutted a securuty guard, and that I called a woman supervisor, ‘A silly woman’ for which I was charged with a Sec5 public order offence. As a law student, I know that posessing canabis and assault are indictable offences. However the minute I exercised my right to trial by jury,the camabis and assault charges were promptly dropped. The clear inferrance is that I am to be stitched up in the magistrates’ court. Currently there are 8 prosecution witnesses including the custody sargeant, all prepared to perjure themselves to save the skins of their colleagues and merseyrail staff ready to do the same. ‘They have all been caught with their pants down’. But they have no moral compass. It’s about cliquishness and cronyism.
    I do not intend to sit back and let these corrupt characters get away with injuring me amd go away laughing, for soon they will be killing people just for the fun of it. “JUST BECAUSE THEY CAN GET AWAY WITH IT” they must be stopped dead in their tracks. My fight is for the poor and those less fortunate than myself in Liverpool and elsewhere in the United Kingdom. I hesitate to say it, but I am a well respected member of the local community and the only voice anywhere on Mweseyside who challeged the police use of Sec 44 of the Anti-terrorism Act of 2000, which was being used arbitrarilly to stop and search the children of Bootle who invariably ended up with £60 ‘on the spot’ fines for anti-social
    behaviour after being intimidated by the police. (I am also ‘BLACK’) My activities for the community lead to my being ‘Banned’ from every building an arrogant local council claims to own in the borough of Sefton. During a political meeting at Bootle Town Hall in Nov 2009, I was abused by the councillors and the local police Inspector Burnham. I was told to ‘get out, or sit down and shut up’. I subsequently sued the council and won damages for racism and a breach of my human rights.
    It is for these reasons I have come to you for help.

    Having perused your article on the advantages and dis-advantages of the polygraph test and the proposed usage of such a mechanism to determine guilt, I have no fundamental objection to its usage, which should extend to criminal cases in the courts, for the defence may also call upon ‘disclosures’ to prove innocence, should the police try to hide the reality. My logic is this: there is a story in the christian bible found in the old testament book of Esther. Its a about a man called Haman who is very powerful and self cestred. He drools over his own adulation, and importance. Woh! betides any man who fails to bow down as he passes by. He loves to abuse his power and vent his wrath upon ethnic minorities. He persuaded a good king Ahasarus to let him have his evil way with innocent people and set about building a gallows in his front garden just to hang a single man who had refused to bow as he passed by. He bragged to his wife and equally detestable cronies about his intentions, but his wickedness was rumbled to the king. He was hangrd upon the very same gallows as a warning to others. The police may very well find themselves subject to their own polygraph test machines and there will be no escape for them and their corrupt practices which has become an endemic part of a once revered and respected institution.
    If you can help me I would be grateful. Suffice to say I will happily make a periodic donation to the cause for which you fight.

  8. Jane
    July 22, 2012 at 4:24 pm

    Will the same test apply to the ‘complainant’ of alleged abuse? I think not otherwise the CPS and police wouldnt get their brownie points for all of their unsafe convictions. The legal system in this country stinks and it starts with Cameron and another money spinning idea which has more to with exploiting prisoners and the accused than protecting the public and children from sex offenders.

    • Hell bent on appeal
      October 3, 2012 at 4:54 pm

      Jane, your comments are extremely accurate and valid. I am a wrongfully convicted person and STILL await appeal, I only wish that Lie detectors were allowed to be used in court, as I would have jumped through hoops to have one done!!!!

      TEST complainants, great idea, but as you say it will never happen. CPS are hellbent on “results” to show a “good” conviction rate in order to validate the billions of taxpayers money that they waste

  9. Alex
    July 22, 2012 at 2:54 pm

    People in the UK are either blind, deaf, stupid or all three. Either way, they are a bunch of cowards to let this happen. I live in France and if they tried to do it here, there would be bloodshed on the streets. If the British do not wake up soon, they will be bowing under a 21st century Nazi regime and it will serve them right.

  10. M
    July 22, 2012 at 1:24 pm

    Brilliant article.

    I cannot believe what is happening in this country. It is absolutely frightening.

  11. Jenny
    July 22, 2012 at 12:36 pm

    Terrifying. How on earth have we come to this? How have we let it happen?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

SPAM protection: Please fill in the missing number... Time limit is exhausted. Please reload CAPTCHA.