Lie detectors are for the court of public opinion

[Wiggs]

AMI should now follow The IFBB and stand behind Shawn Rhoden and reinstate his eligibility to the Mr. Olympia, where he is the reigning Mr. Olympia to defend his title. He is entitled to due process. Initially I was on board with AMI but as the situation progressed, via the lie detector test and information about the accuser, he should be free to proceed with his life uninterrupted.  What is the lie detector good for if it's not admissible in court?  what is it good for? Its for public opinion so they always reap the rewards when it's against the accused so it's time for the accused to reap the rewards and he passed the lie detector test so he should be free to move about and the sponsor of the title that he holds should stand behind him. Otherwise, get rid of lie detector tests or make them admissible.  Thats just my opinion. 

[US MUSL]

I agree with Wiggs on this one.

[SF1900]

I think its ridiculous that people are saying, "AMI/IFBB should wait until due process."

The fact is, AMI/IFBB is a business.

If I owned my own business, big or small, and one of my employees was accused of rape, they would be fired that day. Plain and simple.

I am not risking my livelihood and my ability to earn a living, so I could demonstrate some sense of justice (e.g., innocent until proven guilty). Gotta love all the people spouting this nonsense, who would likely fire their employee in an instant. I mean, would you keep an employee on who was accused of raping a child? No.

As for lie detector tests, I do not believe in them, no matter the outcome. It's bad science. They should be banned and never used again.

[Royalty]

AMI should now follow The IFBB and stand behind Shawn Rhoden and reinstate his eligibility to the Mr. Olympia, where he is the reigning Mr. Olympia to defend his title. He is entitled to due process. Initially I was on board with AMI but as the situation progressed, via the lie detector test and information about the accuser, he should be free to proceed with his life uninterrupted.  What is the lie detector good for if it's not admissible in court?  what is it good for? Its for public opinion so they always reap the rewards when it's against the accused so it's time for the accused to reap the rewards and he passed the lie detector test so he should be free to move about and the sponsor of the title that he holds should stand behind him. Otherwise, get rid of lie detector tests or make them admissible.  Thats just my opinion. 

Here is my question

...was she suspended indefinitely from her job when she was accused of committing fraud?

[IRON CROSS]

But Milton U don't believe in white man technology like DNA or detectors , REMEMBER 

Perhaps Liberian "technology" could be used ........................ ........................ ..........

[Dave D]

I think its ridiculous that people are saying, "AMI/IFBB should wait until due process."

The fact is, AMI/IFBB is a business.

If I owned my own business, big or small, and one of my employees was accused of rape, they would be fired that day. Plain and simple.

I am not risking my livelihood and my ability to earn a living, so I could demonstrate some sense of justice (e.g., innocent until proven guilty). Gotta love all the people spouting this nonsense, who would likely fire their employee in an instant. I mean, would you keep an employee on who was accused of raping a child? No.

As for lie detector tests, I do not believe in them, no matter the outcome. It's bad science. They should be banned and never used again.

Sf19oo I agree.

Lie detectors are bad science. Technology is much more advanced today, we should be able to read people's minds and access their memories for real proof. This would solve a lot of the issues with truth.

And no one should lose their job because of lies.

[Irongrip400]

I think its ridiculous that people are saying, "AMI/IFBB should wait until due process."

The fact is, AMI/IFBB is a business.

If I owned my own business, big or small, and one of my employees was accused of rape, they would be fired that day. Plain and simple.

I am not risking my livelihood and my ability to earn a living, so I could demonstrate some sense of justice (e.g., innocent until proven guilty). Gotta love all the people spouting this nonsense, who would likely fire their employee in an instant. I mean, would you keep an employee on who was accused of raping a child? No.

As for lie detector tests, I do not believe in them, no matter the outcome. It's bad science. They should be banned and never used again.

Enjoy your conference call from DOL and subsequent unemployment payments.

[SF1900]

Enjoy your conference call from DOL and subsequent unemployment payments.

 I don’t own a business, so I don’t know the logistics about hiring and firing people.

I was just making a point that no one is going to keep an accused rapist or molester in their business.