Daniel Cormier on Jon Jones’ polygraph: ‘Ted Bundy passed a polygraph test’

HI SCOTT NEWMAN said:
Yeah I know in US courts it doesn't hold in court and they don't allow it. But maybe in other countries its allowed in court, I don't know. They say its not accurate enough but I know very little about lie detectors and how they work.
Click to expand...
Yea, I assume me too.

I always heard it was like 99% accurate. And thats when given by a credible administrator. But yea who knows.

As someone who had run ins with the law when I was younger, my lawyers always told me NOT to take one, while the prosecutors and even detectives insisted. Seems like a pass is viewed as a ppssible "error", while a fail is just always a bad look.
 
15589229.gif
 
He also took how long to take one ? Been practicing for months I assume
 
I love how this story comes out 2 day before D.C. Fight Jon jones such a fucker lol he really trying to ruin D.C. Career
 
Willy Lump Lump said:
And humans with biases arent?

I agree they shouldn't be the defining piece of evidence, but imo they should be used.

Edit: when I say humans, Im referring to juries
Click to expand...
The over effectiveness of the criminal justice system is a completely separate matter.

The effectiveness of polygraphs have been debated for years. They can be useful but they are by no means definitive and can be fooled.
 
what a drama queen.....Comparing Jones to a serial killer is a bit much....
 
There seems to be scientific evidence about very high reliability of polygraphs BUT
the important factor is who does that polygraph.

With Jones it can only be a publicity stunt. We dont know how many he took until he passed, dont know who tested him. Hell we dont even know if he passed one. Only his word & that of his management who are chronic liars.
 
Once a cheater, always a cheater. He wasn't clean since his teenage years. Cocaine and steroids have been as common to him as milk and cereal.

All his "wins" are nullified. He will always be a never-been.
 
GreatSaintGuillotine said:
The over effectiveness of the criminal justice system is a completely separate matter.

The effectiveness of polygraphs have been debated for years. They can be useful but they are by no means definitive and can be fooled.
Click to expand...
Absolutely. I was simply replying to the post calling them fickle, and ?unreliable?, I believe.

The results being used as evidence, imo, are no different than witnesses testimony. Neither are 100% reliable
 
MastiffMike said:
He declared 8 substances one time, but said he wasn't taking ANYTHING the other 8+ times (no prescription/non-prescription medications, no supplements, etc.). And each and every time a fighter has a sample collected they are required to fill out this form and sign it declaring that it's correct and complete.

So even IF he could find a supplement tainted with turinabol (there isn't one), and even IF he could produce the container and receipt, it wouldn't really matter since he already claimed he was not taking ANY supplements.
Click to expand...
Yea I honestly don't understand what his argument will be.

Oooooooooo I forgot I was taking this supplement (label will read DO NOT TAKE IF A PROFESSIONAL ATHLETE WHO IS TESTED MAY CAUSE FALSE POSITIVE).
 
Willy Lump Lump said:
Absolutely. I was simply replying to the post calling them fickle, and ?unreliable?, I believe.

The results being used as evidence, imo, are no different than witnesses testimony. Neither are 100% reliable
Click to expand...
Sure I can see that point of view.

I just think people are too quick to see a polygraph test and be "Oh Jon, you repeat offender and horrid human being, all is forgiven"

There are known ways to trick the test and the test has limitations on what kind of people it works on. It is an imperfect method. Some experts will say it's 90% accurate while others will say it can be as low as 70%.

Regardless, USADA can still smack him with a 4 year or more regardless of the results. People are are putting too much faith in the test.
 
GreatSaintGuillotine said:
Sure I can see that point of view.

I just think people are too quick to see a polygraph test and be "Oh Jon, you repeat offender and horrid human being, all is forgiven"

There are known ways to trick the test and the test has limitations on what kind of people it works on. It is an imperfect method. Some experts will say it's 90% accurate while others will say it can be as low as 70%.

Regardless, USADA can still smack him with a 4 year or more regardless of the results. People are are putting too much faith in the test.
Click to expand...
Yea. Like I said before, passing does very little inthe public eye. Ppl passing are usually viewed with skepticism(like now).

A fail is different. Its used as proof or evidence.

I get it tho. If its not 100%, then why use it, as it van sway opinions. But back to my point.. so can witness testimony...which is also not 100%, in fact manipulated by who's witness it id (persecution, defense)

Edit: nobody should be putting any faith in the test, and it shouldn't be used in USADAs ruling. (If its not to be used in court either)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,980
Messages
55,459,107
Members
174,787
Latest member
Freddie556

Share this page

Back
Top