Ploygraph Tests Showed Deception

[Lorie Taylor]

www.pantagraph.com/articles/2008/09/25/news/doc48da7f723a9bd833110520.txt

Author won't divulge results of Drew Peterson polygraphs

By Associated Press

CHICAGO -- The author of an upcoming book about a former Bolingbrook police officer suspected in the disappearance of his wife says the former officer took two lie detector tests.

Derek Armstrong won’t say anything about the results of Drew Peterson’s polygraph examinations until “Drew Peterson Exposed” is released next month. But Armstrong says he insisted that Peterson take the examinations.

Peterson is a suspect in last October’s disappearance of his wife, Stacy. He denies any wrongdoing.

Armstrong says Peterson’s lawyer, Joel Brodsky, advised Peterson not to take the polygraph. He only agreed because Peterson wanted his whole story told in a book.

Brodsky wouldn’t talk about the results but says he isn’t concerned because polygraphs aren’t admissible in court.

[Lorie Taylor]

www.upi.com/Top_News/2008/09/29/Peterson_Polygraph_showed_deception/UPI-39311222736119/

Peterson: Polygraph showed deception

NEW YORK, Sept. 29 (UPI) -- Former Illinois police officer Drew Peterson says he can't explain why a polygraph suggested he deceptively answered questions about his missing wife.

Peterson, a former Bolingbrook, Ill., police sergeant, is a suspect in the disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy, in October 2007, the Chicago Tribune and the Chicago Sun-Times have reported.

Peterson, who has not been charged with a crime and has denied any wrongdoing, said Monday on the CBS "Early Show" that he passed a polygraph regarding the death of his third wife, Kathleen Savio, who was found dead in the bathtub in the couple's home in 2004.

Savio's death was ruled accidental until this year, when her body was exhumed and her death determined to be homicide, police have said.

On a polygraph exam regarding Stacy Peterson, an answer regarding her whereabouts was determined to be deceptive, said Drew Peterson, noting he took the polygraphs for a book he is writing.

Peterson told CBS he was asked, "'Do you know the whereabouts of your wife Stacy?' I answered no, and the results showed that was deceptive," Peterson said, adding that he could not explain the polygraph's conclusion.

[Lorie Taylor]

www.suntimes.com/news/peterson/1192356,CST-NWS-boling30.article

Peterson attorney: Polygraph test shaky

September 30, 2008

Drew Peterson was deceptive in answering three questions about his fourth wife's disappearance, lie detector tests showed, but his attorney said Monday he believes the polygraph -- not Peterson -- was unreliable.

"I don't trust polygraphs," lawyer Joel Brodsky said.

Peterson took two lie-detector tests for a book due out this week on the disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, and the death of his third wife, Kathleen Savio.

In a TV appearance, the 54-year-old ex-Bolingbrook cop said he doesn't know why the tests showed he was "deceptive" in answering questions about when he last saw Stacy Peterson, whether he knows where she is and whether she told him she was leaving him.

Brodsky said Peterson was truthful, noting the test didn't raise red flags about Peterson's answers to similar questions about his fourth wife.

Though Peterson cooperated with the author of Drew Peterson Exposed, that doesn't mean he's thrilled with the outcome. "It's much more negative than we would have liked," Brodsky said.

[Lorie Taylor]

www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-drew-peterson-interview-30-sep30,0,5097169.story

Drew Peterson says he can't explain lie-detector results
Failed three questions on polygraph test ahead of book release

Tribune staff report
September 30, 2008

Former Bolingbrook police sergeant Drew Peterson said Monday that he couldn't explain why a polygraph exam showed he was deceptive in answering questions about the Oct. 28 disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy.

Appearing on CBS' "The Early Show," Peterson said the test showed he was deceptive on the last time he saw his wife, if he knows where she is and if she had called to say she was leaving. Peterson said he passed all other questions on the test, which was part of an interview for a book, "Drew Peterson Exposed," due out Wednesday.

[Lorie Taylor]

www.suntimes.com/news/peterson/1202...erpts05.article

Excerpt: 'Drew Peterson Exposed'

October 5, 2008

In his new book, Drew Peterson Exposed, author Derek Armstrong writes at one point about two separate polygraph tests that the former Bolingbrook cop agreed to take amid questions about the death of his third wife, Kathleen Savio, and the disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson. The tests were administered by polygrapher Lee McCord. In an excerpt from the new book, Peterson and his attorney Joel Brodsky hear about the results of that polygraph test:

Lee McCord refers to the chart and his notes as he gives them the results. A patient Drew Peterson and a less-patient Joel Brodsky sit opposite him, waiting for the results.

"To the question 'On Sunday October 28, 2007, did you last see your wife Stacy in your home before going to bed after coming home from work?' you answered Yes. This is a deceptive answer."

He waits for a reaction. He sees none.

"To the question 'Did you have any involvement in the physical removal of your wife Stacy from your home on Sunday October 28, 2007?' you answered No. There is no deception."

Still no reaction.

"To the question 'Did you in any way physically harm your wife Stacy during the time she disappeared?' you answered No. There is no deception."

Peterson stares at the chart.

"To the question 'Do you know the whereabouts of your wife Stacy?' you answered No. This was a deceptive answer."

"To the question 'Did you receive a phone call from your wife Stacy on the evening of October 28th, 2007, telling you that she was leaving you?' You answered Yes. This was a deceptive answer."

"To the question 'Did your wife Stacy call you on Sunday, October 28th, 2007, and tell you that if you wanted the car it was parked at the Clow Airport?' you answered Yes. There was no deception."

Peterson nods. "Thank you."

In another excerpt, the author examines the results of the polygraph tests:

On the key questions of whether he harmed either wife, the answers seems to be conclusively no, he did not harm them. Assuming we accept the researched statistics on polygraph reliability, there is between an 86 percent and 98 percent likelihood Drew Peterson is not guilty.

His ordeal of "trial by media" was perhaps unnecessary.

Of course two questions remain. He may not have harmed either wife, but why is he being deceptive regarding the less important questions regarding seeing Stacy after he went to bed the morning of Oct. 28, 2007 and whether she called to tell him she was leaving? My theory is a personal one. There is some ego involved here. He has given his timeline and explanations of events as he remembers them. The polygraph might point to errors or deliberate oversights on two key points, but his pride or ego won't allow him to clarify.

I propose this theory after having spent a lot of time with this enigmatic man. He strikes me as a misunderstood man, a good father, a moral enigma, but not a killer. Is he a liar? Perhaps in areas that might affect the opinion of his children.

In Peterson's world, his children are everything.

Did Peterson distort the truth on these two key points of seeing Stacy and her calling to say she was leaving him because this truthful answer would be less appetizing to his children? I think this might be the case, but it's only my opinion. A plausible one, but not definitive.

[Lorie Taylor]

www.prnewschannel.com/absolutenm/te.../?a=930&z=4

Author of 'Drew Peterson Exposed' Releases Audio Tapes of a Suspect’s Unguarded Moments on the One Year Anniversary of Stacy Peterson’s Disappearance

Having spent 168 hours interviewing Peterson, Derek Armstrong can share some shocking insights and observations; reveals his thoughts on whether or not Peterson is a cold-blooded killer or just a major suspect.

kunati.com - October 20, 2008

(PRNewsChannel) / Chicago, Ill. and Toronto, Ontario / Even before he did a single interview for the new book Drew Peterson Exposed, author Derek Armstrong insisted that Drew Peterson take a polygraph. He was not the first person to make that request, but he was the only one able to convince Peterson to take one.

That polygraph, which has become the latest twist in the case of Peterson, a former Chicago-area police sergeant accused in the disappearance of his fourth wife Stacy, has been referenced on NBC’s Today show, CBS’ The Early Show, Nancy Grace and many others.

Now Armstrong, who tape-recorded his exclusive conversations with Peterson, is available to talk about the lie detector test, discuss his observations of Peterson and will even release audio excerpts from never-before-heard broadcast quality recordings.

In unguarded moments, in grueling 12-hour sessions, Peterson is heard to say things such as “…post-mortem depression” relating to Stacy and “…She comes up dead or something, they're going to be looking at me.”

Author Armstrong says, “I had Drew Peterson’s full cooperation in writing this book—unprecedented access he and his lawyer now regret—and spent more time with him than anyone outside his inner circle,” says Armstrong. “Polygraphs, timelines and now audio tapes of unguarded moments with a suspect in a sensational crime allowed me to form an opinion on some important questions. Is he a killer? A sociopath? Can he fool a polygraph?

“The discrepancies in the timeline, the deceptive answers in the polygraph and these audio clips are compelling reasons for him to remain the main suspect.

“I was sort of a fly on the wall and now I’m buzzing.”