Ralph Yates

[David Josephs]

If you are interested in discussing the actual facts, and the contents of FBI reports are the foundations for discussion, to be proven in the details as false or reliable, I am willing to participate. If you are intent on a structureless argument assuming that all official documents are too tainted from the outset to support any argument, I am asking you for the second time, what remains aside from suspicions and groundless claims like,
"Yates passed his polygraph"?

Tom...

I for one can appreciate the careful and calculated way in which you approach the evidence... yet your initial assumptions that the FBI reports are reliable and representative of the investigation rather than primae facia evidence for the conspiracy itself is where, I believe, you begin your journey taking a step and building on thsoe steps into the wrong direction.

http://www.truenorthpolygraph.com/FAQ.html

11. What does it mean when someone "fails" a polygraph examination?Contrary to popular belief, there is no "passing" or "failing" grade to a polygraph examination. The examiner will determine whether or not significant physiological responses occurred to one or more of the relevant test questions. If significant responses did occur, it is a defensive physiological reaction in response to a question and the corresponding answer. Therefore, it is interpreted to mean deception is occurring. That deception may mean the examinee is lying. It also may mean the examinee is withholding critical or significant information regarding that question or topic. Follow-up actions to such a result vary widely, depending on the reason for the examination.


when the FBI writes in this report that "no significant emotional responses were recorded" it is SUPPOSED to mean that the subject is answering truthful IN CONJUNCTION with everything else the poloygraph operator is supposed to do in order to offer an OPINION as to the truthful ness of the subject.

The conclusion SHOULD HAVE BEEN - if Yates answered these questions without significant emotional responses in both the control and actual questions - that Yates was, or believed he was, telling the truth.








As to the FBI investigation and reports of the facts behind Yate's statement... can you show us where any of those interviewed were shown their reports and signed anything to say they were accurate? Like Yates?

"Charlie Meat Market Employees... failed to substantiate YATES picked up a check"
Who did they speak with? Did they get a signed statement? Did the person they spoke to even know YATES or was involved in checks for the company? (Like the FBI using Waldman fromKlein's Tom... he had nothing to do with the order process or fulfillment - so his info, while "from Klein's" is only as good as the source and the FBI's writing of the reports. FBI SA DOLAN claims in two Waldman both gave him the Microfilm AND kept it himself in reports from the same day...


Sorry Tom, FBI reports are simply not assumed accurate and reflective of the investigate by default... they have to be authenticated like anything else, even more so since the FBI and Hoover gained by catching the guy quickly.

The FBi saying YATES' polygraph results was not conclusive is simply not true.