Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
ExpandMyMind

Expert concludes Roy Moore wrote disputed

574 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Likely Guy
2 minutes ago, simplybill said:

I think it's notable that none of Mr. Moore's accusers have volunteered to take a polygraph themselves. If I was being called a liar and an opportunist, I would certainly offer to prove my own innocence on the same playing field that Mr. Moore chose to defend himself. It would make the accuser's claims much more believable.

If polygraphs were completely reliable you'd have a point.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Setton
11 minutes ago, simplybill said:

I think it's notable that none of Mr. Moore's accusers have volunteered to take a polygraph themselves. If I was being called a liar and an opportunist, I would certainly offer to prove my own innocence on the same playing field that Mr. Moore chose to defend himself. It would make the accuser's claims much more believable.

What, you'd take an unreliable test and let your reputation rest on that? 

Don't think so somehow. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
simplybill
2 minutes ago, Setton said:

What, you'd take an unreliable test and let your reputation rest on that? 

Don't think so somehow. 

Of course I would. If my reputation was being smeared publicly, I would definitely call their bluff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Likely Guy
4 minutes ago, Setton said:

What, you'd take an unreliable test and let your reputation rest on that? 

Don't think so somehow. 

It depends if it just happens to come out in one's favour though. Then it's"proof"!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
simplybill
5 minutes ago, Likely Guy said:

It depends if it just happens to come out in one's favour though. Then it's"proof"!

Polygraphs aren't considered 'evidence' in a court of law, but the court of public opinion would have swayed uncommitted voters after the results of the polygraph were released. And then Ms. Allred would have countered Mr. Moore's 'results' by having her clients submit to polygraphs themselves. There were 3 accusers, correct? If their results also indicated they were being truthful, then it would've been 3-against-1 in the public's eyes.

I do wish the accusers would defend their reputations by taking polygraphs. If the results indicated they were telling the truth, then it would put an end to all the speculation.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Setton
4 minutes ago, simplybill said:

Polygraphs aren't considered 'evidence' in a court of law, but the court of public opinion would have swayed uncommitted voters after the results of the polygraph were released. And then Ms. Allred would have countered Mr. Moore's 'results' by having her clients submit to polygraphs themselves. There were 3 accusers, correct? If their results also indicated they were being truthful, then it would've been 3-against-1 in the public's eyes.

I do wish the accusers would defend their reputations by taking polygraphs. If the results indicated they were telling the truth, then it would put an end to all the speculation.

Except one tiny thing. I'll write clearly for the hard of thinking:

They 

Aren't 

Reliable 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
simplybill
3 minutes ago, Setton said:

Except one tiny thing. I'll write clearly for the hard of thinking:

They 

Aren't 

Reliable 

That may be, but I'm sure there are now a lot of people thinking that Mr. Moore is innocent of the charges against him, after he willingly submitted to the stress of a lie detector test. So far, none of his accusers have done the same.

Polygraph tests are still being used in investigations, but the results aren't considered evidence in a court of law. However, if I was publicly being called a liar, I would willingly take a polygraph test to blunt my accuser's claims. That won't happen with Mr. Moore's accusers, because the purpose of their claims (by their own admission) was to prevent him from winning the election.  

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Setton
5 minutes ago, simplybill said:

That may be, but I'm sure there are now a lot of people thinking that Mr. Moore is innocent of the charges against him, after he willingly submitted to the stress of a lie detector test. So far, none of his accusers have done the same.

Polygraph tests are still being used in investigations, but the results aren't considered evidence in a court of law. However, if I was publicly being called a liar, I would willingly take a polygraph test to blunt my accuser's claims. That won't happen with Mr. Moore's accusers, because the purpose of their claims (by their own admission) was to prevent him from winning the election.  

 

And if you do that and the polygraph is wrong? 

You've just given support to the person who abused you.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
simplybill
2 minutes ago, Setton said:

And if you do that and the polygraph is wrong? 

You've just given support to the person who abused you.

I've taken a polygraph test, and believe me it was one of the most stressful things I've ever had to do. It's extremely nerve-wracking. I don't believe Mr. Moore would have voluntarily submitted to such an ordeal unless he was absolutely sure of his innocence. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
simplybill

I'm not totally convinced that Mr. Moore is innocent, and I'm not totally convinced he's guilty. I'm still watching to see who makes the next move. I know I personally would do the same as Mr. Moore is doing: I would do everything in my power to clear my reputation. His accusers aren't doing that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Setton
20 minutes ago, simplybill said:

I'm not totally convinced that Mr. Moore is innocent, and I'm not totally convinced he's guilty. I'm still watching to see who makes the next move. I know I personally would do the same as Mr. Moore is doing: I would do everything in my power to clear my reputation. His accusers aren't doing that.

They don't have anything to clear. 

Its not a crime to report one. 

Edited by Setton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
simplybill
2 minutes ago, Setton said:

They don't have anything to clear. 

Its not a crime to report one. 

That's minimalizing the emotions of a traumatized person. The gravity of the situation should be defended. If someone accuses someone of being a sex offender, and the accused responds with "You're a liar", then the traumatized accuser is thrown right back into their feelings of shame and helplessness. Ms. Allred is acting very nonchalant about her client's feelings. That's why I question the legitimacy of the accusations.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paranormal Panther

I think that Moore is as guilty as sin. I believe all but one (the Allred actress) of the women. Hannity's interview and another interview decided it for me. The judge was extremely evasive with Sean. He didn't give direct answers to direct questions. He strongly denied the worst allegation, though. The alleged victim, in that case, was quite believable. Family and friends backed up accusers' claims too. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Likely Guy
1 hour ago, simplybill said:

That may be, but I'm sure there are now a lot of people thinking that Mr. Moore is innocent of the charges against him, after he willingly submitted to the stress of a lie detector test. So far, none of his accusers have done the same.

Polygraph tests are still being used in investigations, but the results aren't considered evidence in a court of law. However, if I was publicly being called a liar, I would willingly take a polygraph test to blunt my accuser's claims. That won't happen with Mr. Moore's accusers, because the purpose of their claims (by their own admission) was to prevent him from winning the election.  

 

Quick question: did Roy Moore say he was taking the test before he announced the results?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
simplybill
6 minutes ago, Paranormal Panther said:

I think that Moore is as guilty as sin. I believe all but one (the Allred actress) of the women. Hannity's interview and another interview decided it for me. The judge was extremely evasive with Sean. He didn't give direct answers to direct questions. He strongly denied the worst allegation, though. The alleged victim, in that case, was quite believable. Family and friends backed up accusers' claims too. 

Those types of behaviors are why a polygraph is useful in determining deception. There's no wiggle room in answering the direct questions of the interviewer. A polygraph is not 100% reliable, but the results are generally sufficient for a professional interviewer to form an opinion on deception vs. truthfulness. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
simplybill
Just now, Likely Guy said:

Quick question: did Roy Moore say he was taking the test before he announced the results?

I doubt that he did. It's no secret that polygraphs are not 100% reliable, so he wouldn't want the possibly skewed results to be the final judgment of his honesty. His accusers would use the same discretion, if they were to submit to a polygraph.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Setton
52 minutes ago, simplybill said:

That's minimalizing the emotions of a traumatized person. The gravity of the situation should be defended. If someone accuses someone of being a sex offender, and the accused responds with "You're a liar", then the traumatized accuser is thrown right back into their feelings of shame and helplessness. Ms. Allred is acting very nonchalant about her client's feelings. That's why I question the legitimacy of the accusations.  

Or you could make them do a test.

Which implies you don't believe them.

Yeah, that'll be great for the victim's mental wellbeing.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paranormal Panther
1 minute ago, simplybill said:

Those types of behaviors are why a polygraph is useful in determining deception. There's no wiggle room in answering the direct questions of the interviewer. A polygraph is not 100% reliable, but the results are generally sufficient for a professional interviewer to form an opinion on deception vs. truthfulness. 

He should take one. The interviewer should include all of the accusations and allegations. Don't limit it to the yearbook. He's likely telling the truth about that one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Likely Guy
Just now, simplybill said:

I doubt that he did. It's no secret that polygraphs are not 100% reliable, so he wouldn't want the possibly skewed results to be the final judgment of his honesty. His accusers would use the same discretion, if they were to submit to a polygraph.  

Re: The bolded. So if he failed no one would have heard about it.

Possibly damned if you, definitely damned if you don't in the case of the accusers then.

Roy claims he passed, so that's all in the court of public opinion now.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Likely Guy

Meh, doesn't matter.

He was unelectable on so many other levels I'm surprised that the results were even that close.

The court of public opinion is closed.

Edited by Likely Guy
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CrimsonKing
Just now, Likely Guy said:

Meh,doesn't matter.

He was unelectable on so many other levels I'm surprised that the results were even that close.

The court of public opinion is closed

Yeah and the fact is...he lost!

I'm a bit suprised to see this thread is still going :wacko:

Far too many people in a small town all recounted the same "ways" of the man...i don't feel bad for Roy one bit!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
simplybill

I don't get the impression that Mr. Moore is acting like a guilty man. Compare him to Harvey Weinstein or Anthony Weiner, who checked into rehab, or others that admitted their behavior and offered apologies. Mr. Moore, on the other hand, has steadfastly maintained his innocence the entire time. His coworkers and friends have testified to his good character.

If legitimate proof is uncovered that shows some substance to the accusations, then I'll decide if he actually has been deceptive. At this point, the only evidence offered is a couple of Christmas greetings.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
simplybill
32 minutes ago, CrimsonKing said:

Yeah and the fact is...he lost!

I'm a bit suprised to see this thread is still going :wacko:

Far too many people in a small town all recounted the same "ways" of the man...i don't feel bad for Roy one bit!

This really bothers me. This was a man who was convicted without evidence, and people are shrugging their shoulders and saying "oh well".

He's been accused by questionable witnesses, his reputation has been sullied, and his career has been destroyed. There was no evidence other than a couple of Christmas greetings. In my opinion, the election process should have been delayed until the accusations were proven true or false. I really don't want to see our country going in this direction. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CrimsonKing
2 minutes ago, simplybill said:

This really bothers me. This was a man who was convicted without evidence, and people are shrugging their shoulders and saying "oh well".

He's been accused by questionable witnesses, his reputation has been sullied, and his career has been destroyed. There was no evidence other than a couple of Christmas greetings. In my opinion, the election process should have been delayed until the accusations were proven true or false. I really don't want to see our country going in this direction. 

Well he hasn't really been "convicted" of anything as he still walks freely...

There has also been MANY people from his former neighborhood who remember him "creeping" at malls,movie theaters,ect.

I would normally agree with you on "delaying" until guilt or innocence is proven,but WAY to many people remember the guy as a creep...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
simplybill
2 minutes ago, CrimsonKing said:

Well he hasn't really been "convicted" of anything as he still walks freely...

There has also been MANY people from his former neighborhood who remember him "creeping" at malls,movie theaters,ect.

I would normally agree with you on "delaying" until guilt or innocence is proven,but WAY to many people remember the guy as a creep...

Mr. Moore was twice elected Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court. No one said a word about his alleged creepy behavior. It apparently wasn't important enough to mention until he announced his candidacy for an important Senate seat. That's a red flag, in my opinion. Until someone presents evidence other than hearsay, I'll continue to suspect that this was all a political ploy.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.