Josh Gattis Accused of Being A Freak (again)

Submitted by MaizeBlueA2 on December 21st, 2023 at 8:37 PM

https://www.baltimoresun.com/2023/12/20/maryland-football-josh-gattis-police-investigation/

You can find/read the same article on Twitter/X, but this link says you have to be a subscriber. 

----------------------------------------------

Here is the headline: 

Woman says Maryland assistant football coach exposed himself when he was with Miami. He took a polygraph denying it.

----------------------------------------------

Basically, a custodian at Miami said that he called her into a bathroom while he was stroking it...he denies it, passed a polygraph, polygraphs are usually inadmissible in Florida because they're unreliable.

 

#FreakInSpace

MGoBoard
Football

dbockle

December 22nd, 2023 at 7:50 AM ^

Even calling it pseudo-science is charitable. I once had a conversation with an officer whose job included administering polygraphs for the state police where I lived. He flat out told me that he could administer the test in a way that gets whatever result he wants, and that he reads the file, decides if the test subject is guilty or not, then administers the test accordingly. 

Joined: 09/12/2011

MGoPoints: 1314

Buy Bushwood

December 22nd, 2023 at 9:18 AM ^

I take one every 5 years for the USG.  It's a total joke.  It's just a cop sitting behind a computer, telling you that the machine is infallible and that it says you're lying, and trying to pressure you with a Vaudeville cop routine.  I made the mistake, on my very first time, of admitting that I shoplifted some baseball cards when I was 13, and the guy spent the next 3 hours grilling me about the "major financial crimes" the machine was "pinging" on that I wasn't admitting to.  I have never admitted anything since, and always gotten by.  It's even more of a joke than I expected when I went in.  

Joined: 10/24/2020

MGoPoints: 21653

ESNY

December 21st, 2023 at 9:21 PM ^

I wonder if there is anyone comparable that crashed and burned as harm and as fast as he did. Went from an award winning assistant coach to being fired as OC one year later to flashing people one year after that.

Joined: 11/06/2008

MGoPoints: 12310

Blau

December 21st, 2023 at 9:51 PM ^

Josh Gattis? More like Josh Gettin-this.

I don’t know, it’s late and my adhd meds are wearing off. I’ll try harder tomorrow, I promise.

Joined: 01/23/2014

MGoPoints: 35254

Kewl

December 21st, 2023 at 10:02 PM ^

Polygraph’s are never admissible. (At least in most criminal courts, I don’t know about crazy places) Unless agreed upon by lawyers.  But what you say in a polygraph can be used against you.  Mostly they are unreliable because of false lying.  (Pseudo science “experts” trying to find a result that fits the narrative they want, usually police driven).  

They are used as an excuse to get you to talk, and say something that can be spun.  The worry is not about false truth but false lie (that’s why it’s junk).

Which means don’t take it any kinda way.  (But as a criminal defense lawyer, a pass is way more important than a fail, even if it’s unreliable).  

Joined: 05/06/2015

MGoPoints: 430

gruden

December 21st, 2023 at 10:27 PM ^

(But as a criminal defense lawyer, a pass is way more important than a fail, even if it’s unreliable).  

I know someone personally who had a ridiculous accusation made and a report had been filed against them.  The lawyer recommended a polygraph test, which was passed.  Lawyer said sometimes the DA will request the accused take one, administered of course by the state, in which case that falls in line with your statement.  When the test is administered by the state, it can only hurt you, not help.  In this case the defense had this person do it to simply add to the strength of their side of the case (accusation was so flimsy the detective declined to do an interview, which is rare).

Joined: 04/29/2016

MGoPoints: 6063

Kewl

December 21st, 2023 at 10:45 PM ^

You really need a guarantee from a prosecutor on how and why it will get used.  Like we will take it as certain if you pass and never prosecute. Usually before a defense lawyer is involved.

  They know it’s not reliable, they want you to take one, and fail, and try to talk your way out, and what you say then is now admissible against you.

thats the cynical take.  But a pass is good.,  (sometimes you can get a deal where you pass and they will drop everything).  Tough call with junk science.

Its fun to make fun, i just think its icky.  And kind of flies in the face of our board outrage about the things reported the last couple months that hurt our feelings.

Joined: 05/06/2015

MGoPoints: 430

Kewl

December 22nd, 2023 at 9:47 PM ^

I have no doubt it’s hard.  But it’s interpretation and not scientifically repeatable.  It’s not nothing, but it’s not solid enough to be reliable.  And courts are historically stupid on that stuff and most everyone has said, “nope.”  
 

and they can be useful, I guess I was saying get an independent examiner and not one employed by the state, and still don’t take a news headline about a test one way or the other.

Joined: 05/06/2015

MGoPoints: 430