Report of Polygraph Results October 2007

Polygraph Tests Administered by:

Barland Polygraph
2162 East 6595 South
Salt Lake City, Utah 84121
Office/Home: 801.943.3360

– About Gordon H. Barland, Ph.D.
– Gordon H. Barland’s Curriculum Vitae

SUMMATION AND RELEVANCY OF MARC GAFNI POLYGRAPH RESULTS

In early fall 2007 Marc Gafni asked his legal advisor at the time, to initiate a polygraph test which might help him clear his name of false accusations and complaints. The complaints he was interested in refuting were of two types.

First he wanted to refute via polygraph the claim that he engaged in sexual harassment by improperly deploying his authority as well as the claim that he made false promises of marriage or otherwise engaged in deception to gain sexual relations. These were the complaints that according to public reports were filed with the Israel police by three women in Israel. One was an employee of Marc organization, the second was a friend of Marc’s also came to a number of Marc’s lectures and as indicated in the email record was in discussion with Marc about “co- creating” a study process with him. Although, as it has been indicated under separate cover, the email and instant message record which has been recovered from Marc’s computer already clearly falsifies these alleged claims, and thus there is no genuine need for a polygraph, Marc wanted to strengthen his refutation of these alleged false claims even farther through a polygraph text.

(It should be noted that on the web in several places the claim is made that Marc as accused of rape by these women. This is not true. There is ample documentation in writing that no such claim was ever made. It was stated clearly by all involved that all of the relationships at the time were mutual and consensual.)

It is important to note that the polygraph tests, to the best of it’s ability, factual questions, not questions of interpretation.

The tests on these and other questions were administered in three distinct tests by one of the leading experts of Polygraph in the world Dr. Gordon Barland. Dr. Barland’s resume is available at GordonBarland.com. He was a senior lecturer for many years at the Department of Defense of the United States and has trained police forces all over the world in administering Polygraph tests. He specializes in cases relating to sexual issues.

The truthfulness of Marc’s claims about these events was validated by the Polygraph. On all questions using the most advanced methods of testing, the examiner reported that the results indicated that Marc was telling the truth.

Please click on his name above to find the resume of Dr. Gordon Barland who administered the test. As the resume indicates Dr. Barland is an internationally recognized expert at the polygraph whose credibility is beyond reproach.

REPORT OF POLYGRAPH EXAMINATION (TEST ONE OF THREE)

Marc Gafni
October 30, 2007
For Charlotte Miller
1305 Laird AvenueSLC, UT 84105-1934

Gordon H. Barland, Ph.D.Forensic psychophysiologist
Member, American Polygraph Association
Member, American Association of Police Polygraphists
Member, Utah Polygraph Association

REPORT OF POLYGRAPH EXAMINATION

Subject: Marc Gafni
Issue: Sexual abuse allegations
Date of exam October 30, 2007
Requestor: Charlotte Miller
Examiner: Gordon H. Barland, Ph.D. File No: 07-DL26-1042b

BACKGROUND

In May, 2006 three women filed complaints with the police in Haifa, Israel, reportedly claiming that Mr. Gafni had engaged in professional sexual misconduct. According to reports of the complaints, one claimed he made false promises of marriage in exchange for sex, and another claimed he used his position as an employer to have sex.

The allegations were published on the Internet by Vicki Polin and is located at http://www.theawarenesscenter.org/Gafni_Mordechai.html. Ms. Polin is a controversial figure within the Jewish community, having appeared in 1989 on Oprah Winfry’s TV show claiming to have grown up in a family that practiced satanic rituals involving cannibalism, and that she had been offered up as a sexual sacrifice on several occasions. Additional details about Rabbi Gafni and Vicki Polin are posted on Luke Ford’s web site.

(Editorial addition; not in report).Luke Ford has been a hard core pornographer and a gossip collmnist for the pornography industry.
http://www.lukeford.net/profiles/profiles/mordecai_gafni.htm
http://www.lukeford.net/profiles/profiles/vicki_polin.htm.

See also Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mordechai_Gafni http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Awareness_Center

Regarding the 2006 allegations, Rabbi Gafni denies engaging in any illegal sexual activity. He denies having used his authority as an employer to induce an employee to have sex, or having made a false promise of marriage or other forms of deception to induce a woman to have sex or sexual contact. He requested a polygraph examination to substantiate his denials. The examination was conducted on October 30, 2007 in the DaVinci Suites in Salt Lake City starting at 1:15 p.m. and ending about 7:30 p.m., with several breaks for refreshments and the bathroom.

MATERIALS REVIEWED

The following materials were reviewed prior to the examination. They were provided by his Salt Lake City attorney, Charlotte Miller. Neither the three complaints, nor any police reports are available for review.

– Chronology of Gafni life; New and Old (no date).
– 14 pp.Email and Instant message record and Anaylysis regarding Complaints. (no date).
– 65 pp. Report by psychologist Cindy Lou Golin, Ph.D., March 14, 2007.
– 3 pp. Report by psychiatrist Joseph H. Berke, dated 12 December 2007.

PRETEST INTERVIEW — ADMINISTRATIVE PORTION

I explained the procedure to Mr. Gafni at the outset, advising him of his rights vis-à-vis the polygraph; that there is always a possibility of error in any diagnostic procedure; that the entire exam is being digitally recorded, and that the results are confidential. He signed an informed statement of consent regarding the polygraph.
During the pretest interview, I reviewed Mr. Gafni’s medical and psychological background to see if there was anything which would make him unsuitable for examination today. There was nothing which would preclude testing.

NUMBERS TEST

Prior to discussing the matter under investigation, I conducted a blind numbers test, in which I instructed Mr. Gafni to choose one of five numbers, three through seven. He wrote the number on a piece of paper while my back was turned and concealed it beneath his leg. I told him I would ask him whether he wrote the number one, two, etc., through seven. He was to answer each question “no,” thereby lying about which number he had selected. This acquaints him with the testing procedure and provides a chart which portrays his normal level of reactivity, both when telling the truth and when lying. Despite some distortions caused by movement, I correctly determined that his selected number was “6.” This indicates that his body reacts normally. I cautioned him not to move on subsequent charts.

PRETEST INTERVIEW — INVESTIGATIVE PORTION

Mr. Gafni had a long list of questions he wanted resolved on the polygraph. I told him that many of the questions were too nebulous to test, and it would take multiple tests to resolve those issues that were suitable. We decided to have the primary focus of the first examination covering the events which occurred two to three decades ago. The details of that examination are in a separate report.

After informing him of the postive results of the examination in which we covered the events of several decades ago, Mr. Gafni requested that I conduct a second series of questions regarding his interactions with the women in Israel. I asked Mr. Gafni to describe the situation in his own words. He said he has never seen the complaints filed with the Israeli police, but he has never engaged in illegal or inappropriate sexual activity with any of these women or any other woman in Israel. All sexual contact was consensual and mutual. He emphatically denied promising marriage to Ms. X or anybody in order to have sexual intercourse with them. He denied using his authority as an employer to entice anybody into having sexual contact. He said he could not have used his employer influence to have sexual contact with Ms. X because when that started, and for several months thereafter, she was not in his employ. Moreover, it was she who initiated the sexual activity on a number of occasions by sending him instant messages containing salacious verbal and pictorial content, and that she had consistently indicated her pleasure with their sexual contact.

EXAMINATION

I conducted a multi-issue Utah Zone Comparison test with four relevant questions. I thoroughly reviewed all questions with Mr. Gafni prior to conducting the first chart to ensure he understood what each question meant, that he agreed to have each question included in the test, and that they were worded in such a way that he could answer each with a simple yes or no. The relevant questions on this test were:
The following relevant questions were asked in the mixed issue Utah Zone Comparison test format:
– Did you make any false promises to Ms. X to have a sexual relationship with her?Answer: No.
– Did Ms. X initiate several of your sexual encounters? Answer: Yes.
– Did you deceive Ms. X in order to have sexual relations with her? Answer: No.
– Did Ms. X tell you that her sexual encounters with you were positive and desirable? Answer: Yes.

RESULTS:

I ran a total of four charts. I found no persuasive evidence of countermeasures, and the charts were capable of being scored. I evaluated the charts using the Federal 7-position numerical scoring system with the Federal multi-issue decision rules. Mr. Gafni scored +3 or higher on every question No deception indicated (NDI).

I also used the PolyScore algorithm (ver. 6.0) to analyze the charts. This algorithm was developed by the Applied Physics Laboratory of Johns Hopkins University under a series of contracts from the Department of Defense. The algorithm evaluated the charts as No Deception Indicated (NDI), and calculated the probability of deception as being .02 on a scale ranging from 0.00 to 1.00.

CONCLUSION

In my opinion Mr. Gafni answered the relevant questions truthfully. This opinion is tempered by the fact that I had no access to the original complaints or police investigative reports.
Respectfully submitted,
Gordon H. Barland, Ph.D.

Continuation of Summation of Polygraph Reports

The second set of issues that Marc wanted to refute is not legal in nature but reputational.

On the website run by Vicki Polin {who made the claim on the Oprah Winfery show that she was involved in a satanic cult that sacrificed babies and has claimed that she was repeatedly raped on Torah scrolls} and on other website run by gossip columnist for the pornography Industry Luke Ford, there are two women who were interviewed by Ford.The way these claims are reported on the web is that Marc is a “confessed child molestor”. This is obviously a malicious slander the most sick kind of which one sadly expects to appear on hate sites the likes of which are run by bloggers such as Ms. Polin and her associates. It is such an atrocious lie that it deserves no response.
It is obviously categorically false. {Child Molestation refers to sexual contact with pre-pubescent children.}

It is claimed as that he committed statuatory rape, meaning that he has sexual intercourse with a minor. Marc’s claim is that the stories on the web are false or deeply distorted in both tone and substance. Marc’s refutation of the both the core content and tone of the web stories was validated by polygraph as well.

The facts are: In regard to the first story, that Marc was in his ninteenth year at the time, just out of highschool. The woman was in the first year of highschool.
He never had sexual intercourse with the minor in question. They never has oral or anal sex and that he did not penetrate her vaginally through masturbation.
Marc further states that his experience of the relationship as well as that of the woman was that it was loving andbeautiful. This is entirely different then the way it was described thirty years later on the web where she makes the claim that at the time it was a horrifying experience for her.

He brings evidence that she shared with him the loving nature of the experience at the time — and thus falsifies her retroactive story on the web which she told decades after the interaction in question — by asserting that she send him a letter after the relationship was over saying that he was her one true love and that they were meant to spend their lives together. If this were to be the case then it would be clear that the relationship was interpreted negatively by this woman significantly after it was over.

Furthermore Marc claims that in the second story posted on the web, which took place when Marc was in his early twenties and her youth advisor, in which both sides, according to the web report, agree factually, that there was neither sexual intercourse, oral or anal sex or penetration, happened entirely differently from the way it was described twenty five years later on the web. This is evidenced according to Marc in a way that is verifiable by the fact that it was she who in fact act Marc to have sexual intercourse with her at the time of their engagement and Marc refused. If this were to be the case it would strongly refute the tone and character of the story as currently reported on the web.

There was also a threat that was relayed to Marc via a third party last year that if he attacked the women’s stories they would accuse him of being a consumer of child pornography. Marc insisted to be tested on this as well.

The results of all the tests on all of the aforementioned issues was positive, that Marc has told the truth about all of these issues. The polygraph supported the truth of Marc’s assertions in all of these matters. All of these reports are retained by Marc’s legal counsel in Israel and the United States.