Truth Wins Out’s Wayne Besen has challenged Alan Downing to take a lie detector test following claims that he engaged in sexual misconduct with two male clients:
In light of his public denial, Truth Wins Out offered to pay for both a polygraph and a No Lie MRI for Downing, so he can prove his alleged innocence. … We believe that Alan Downing is not telling the truth and that his brain would light up like a Menorah if he took a No Lie MRI.
I’m not convinced either lie detector test is the way to go. No evidence exists that the polygraph is reliable, and investigations into the validity of MRI (or fMRI) method of lie detection, despite having generally positive results, are still at an early stage.
Of course, Besen’s motivation is equally or mostly to get the allegations out in the open, which is fair enough. But if Downing is guilty of this unsavory sexual abuse, a court–not a machine–will do the work of proving it.
Regarding this–
–just to preempt any fuss over whether I’m unfairly judging Wayne here, I’m not really bothered if that’s his motivation. Like I said: fair enough. It just struck me that getting the story exposed was more important than the mechanics of the challenge. Especially since it pretty obviously won’t ever happen!
Dave — here’s the link to the The Jewish Week article.
As far as getting the news out of yet another ex-gay therapist horror story, a public call to lie detector testing is more than fair enough. All good stuff.
It just wouldn’t work for actually detecting lies.
A court will not do the work of proving anything, because no illegal activity is said to have occurred.
The obvious thing about the denial is that it’s not a denial at all:
So, Downing hasn’t denied the central facts exposed by his former clients, only the supposed “malicious intent” motivating them and TWO to come forward.
@Mike A , you’re probably right; not sure why I ran with that thought about the legal aspect. My underlying point, however, was that there are better ways of establishing the truth about what happened. But: what Grantdale said.
I can see use of the MRI to test the veracity of a claim of orientation change for a study, but there are good reasons they are not used as evidence of guilt in a court of law. I couldn’t honestly fault someone for not taking one, innocent or guilty. And I can’t say I would believe the machine either way. But as Grantdale said, Downing didn’t really deny it happened only that the intent was not malicious.
At the very least, this sounds like the usual snake oil that accompanies so many in this bizarre little arena. I doubt a legitimate mental health professional would find such actions reasonable which leaves the motive open to question.
Caveat Emptor. If you seek out someone who promises they can do what can’t really be done, don’t be surprised by what you end up with. “Sexual orientation change” is pretty much the bottom of the barrel as these things go.