4 :ӕH0
0ŝL6ULMj D8e U\.8j,6|l del(%U݁ Ku0N| _G0'
qH$K|Y6v1"0_7{gg_wy?N9VPZ}u+Ve1&9] ^- ;ʎ<˱6=ʧ]+#*3{ w 뽤_7WXxx
1yLr3GW DQoJJө oPQ(脑W(!
Tj !s>ΝOJ' W #Af;O1 /N %JY?Y(QZo]. .9 q s\Lwwv8.bja7G>}OiOѭ~v0s3g.~wNl>w\xG)ޝJ &hREz:.t^7è/L#3D!jHd29/+qڛ!5a7IS$)BfA'jRrYQBU*+ԼUP6>>pxQ#D
*I&,ƅWIVY q\ i.*~9{u5vw7o<9xLL5>#\o
wu]CR;kwX^ ]l$LPf|Qho.ðJ'+y*tqVGqNd[[DO8J|>^/ M[+Zǚj2=otuB=N:ZPpvlP#u.
K͋WJ+H
cIض0<֬IT!~cF0hXǪlHKxa& 3+Fx (BN{?{%'>X陿h: 7Un>ZR(j; nUʫcMC ݪrx[( $zӁ ~ p!ecc|/^=> HV7DDc:, +Za&K2C 贩CH=D=zC8<IݏiՉt,B0j0kTҀ4`&cfx@.AW;-ܹ |4|v9p ?0dos/ܟj^ZYވ=mM,og,q6xXl4-阹]YP8{a( :߃ 95YT5QݠLG1eS$TR1Hhf\E7<>/)Yo @T ?UU a\v;v
7f~RZ$[D406i- TL4JT uMMٲ)δ]?1 Tiyϱv|{= 4ן Yi@ƌAYWUi@e #Ц+-J#h$!:g0j)y/=8L+g7=b/Yߴh+Ê%
o(88Nq+:ZMZYŅ ) .hEW7\-<xA:~>LgO,6]9%bbh%sj/>t4wO0HͨDg/C1Ѱ37 ɔdܞT遧sφ$_,`E-ED&6|yP%2z
$6<9|Q_}J|apC5ZZ G o+)%`M&\fD4-Έs"#6ƊzEligƩ9lphdS#~i={X'7%Pu-mC>iuClW (g g*(AX(
V&5Jy]ERVsy RI@->! ܊Q7;JX-ݖd/G^6 G
''8
GhL4p6_@LdCwF@ o:z) Q{Oͷ)nVr6r?B 7ޫ(URϪeoOY5bT
eU^[Ť,*bN 6YlVM
yC>m\ŮRID/F1b&$k[4wu7 d ?P:@9= }oYcNQizC:3k%;̶y8^nAJ SցtIn6=Xii`4_<@[>
ײ-x qVkه>fgX[BtڙRx !#< emQۇOv?CRkT| 'wQ* :[Ɛ-\M]BvBzm{@&{d o[l! ghT:
/_ Qg KȃR%FJQs*]`x]"Q h/QP7`.53YK}B8qV}26Ilgos˜evs:{2ځiBTuA"E*I*,!jYTO&v8XU]Hy)T[ZP;3vqYs3gVлW E>թTزWr['2hC$qZ(Oےװm"5
]gIBx Ul
|;$-8.r2%(_㈩,
\,Ttt
7Ж +U &âV2PiznLtNZ^5e
jv$ -&X>!A9popY] l/=*W)V"|o6Eo݀mmQJ/ j@J_K NV=m #_^oT*vcǑ{hL$/%m9ݬ^eA3I{gg=#,qNŶzEY.qZQk6)^/H4&F}yv@?b 19<'T]09erwuCC]!: J1#a"$}Lz< ] y|uA]lq}IׂqitB RU
r)P䯖yat"h"LiTXs3r9-9M W 4g1qpM0ќ(e5/k
6±mSrnskҴ
P`G
Bx8w;?g f5qfC SI3U4I* 1ERt=!M%QIxK 2d TT[K<Q
6GM'Nsf<;}T
9Xב8|PI37K|?[q PH)[GoΏE\Mg>GSJ@U'5phj0p 'DST/@ѐǵ4Nhk\np`W"`j6 ּL'w>㋉Ea^܌o,okŦOZtaBv?}aTNgxP(>* PiO;1:1vYa6;+B_.Hz RL9Ixob,AjύQ ?hu$.DXtl{`I-!_gZYrX
Ɔejr1cg )Ml5P]ڶn|nz{LuaZiUݮp;nc0ۺ*GGc [ PW&*`N60 @V~Q&{C
h(J},
J,e$Kpו/!2@}y5УԵu2F{C,Wi[ l[ڄ\]z XĴyio¶3TIIIg)7Wt`xZ4 <>N:NC``i`@l5FEAt*e%ه3] n %2
ݔdOKPHk ݹ;j'KCN 8{#.t2) `xM: fϕ d189蹩c21vL(uXbYt(E
Y$wBN$NoC;buBv CCTr B&4X> A1OAͳOYQ !۵Ot*3n:FFʣJ5Cퟜx꠳=ѐSK?_` J-P(+@7=98+u3'QK2DU3WͳhW]6O4^WQipP(eXZY[pn,yzUXMfy_&-KFGZ`rb˦ώmTQEC(_c*J#yu]LҊm)-6{=JFQ_~'? l&i tsn ;g~ݗ=?u3`EhWZYRZQO;4"?G5#n9P=3GM^G
@yUbq
mǰ vS}-ݯ&Ny@|2j[1_ȦRy+giCG<ٮ SD پ
`*31aYk5AvKȅ r1ʗB g2
}
؛)]@>hQob^7dŘ%✒W9:-Ӕ5[kb٦`!}lm_: DzcKk(Qi.s6ז64?OXҲS袩w|bB ?"m&o [!gcK F )d}i˰+xBm^rXӆ]7?'x9`%#-æ
ӏ9GT D1)P:
7f-L4[:-U +0vօ & sb ,1s\YzCvOh2%)-A-)}*dCUȼ(}2dFpn,</JF ?'42[ܖO^ҟdC1d9ѿ>}>˯ a7fC4 XI.q<:STeV.}҇hD X#GT??tm^CrĽ"昖Ls/ i:A⟈M#{d jZ-aŞ*M}Hm i'ǂF|㬬go#7P_ٯɵe K6ePR /| q{xL۽Se9)Q
˹Bݼ*"NSh3%w!G _6"?27=o4o|.V(VBe - uh8q6Wc_3My?;MQ0v?{*/G>6|L9'beT*HY.2Gw=PGg8#!X ބ:CP xw 24KhWnQ؉> _Oȧm\ԥޢ.[
rrml|FZ ݥXd^ikl v`\m4 6u7v = 6M^8 Z8PU)iAGߴx !T`!Q eŃSy<}WUq{=7`P1 )IEL@ E+ZRf &jG[v,hVtҎNK-UԢNKyX ܜ&D?3ݳ{w}7=lT^O%>^&0ބlP!-d`0KCseD foo>Ƽyr0x|wVqaT{my ;9R~ JiVɴdOҬDyk9Y/\FY>Gu-G3eڇ3v*h[ۿ?*ub= Ȯy\ ;.&'aGbgg6u>t&q6 Οiz"a uLƣ99/"mN^yY_ uUeXBM[zC wwe;}; 9kq} ǿVW`|J6Ka۶A0G R[q3r苝tP]ïo%v Q?=qe䃖VM:Zl1g6
o4vV fyuyi>o֢. C]H}u{ʈ }?Q(Wh^ê2rr#|lc{i 1rX=s$sq_-w\^ GOZyS,cAI.:ro:s9K|9IɽLTHwp}>$q2s4- Z1|@̨rXI69Kj ;3섢=
[m {}C ~
~د {nx(
ث /W(́ ;i
1m9oHCsŦUc:G?1Ys5ch{8hL -:sU3 x28+f_qˢp zRBd q9ˇE Ŀpdf30:X.V˽roQVJR|,-ՙ҂ {*Mo]h]DͫL'ssel&P7<5\?Z9ٕ iZwzA氯֒sMz[|S;ˌVfۜZsw7I_X=h!Mh
Y٫{T]+Kv? GrzpSu2%L;sm斶>PtFI
v MJx4%֗ZdFjs ELS/G inǾsgOt,6aozOB`/p"\ElMF^h*t ~\NǶJK v2'7 d`t @/cWPYlZ;
i%u
Z9[$,zRnJ통[^>~sZ[4**ODyky7u c,3N0}>;T}K$Uېz5I\}e՞PB~ BNB}uHB>QhG$~D~3~Op/7Uqѻ-%/W~յ[ցᢸKf7p1gu7}8;}c[ܘuc<ٱ
jX<]!nfߦL _0,82p\M}Gbhyɾty),=67Vd6`cJr"b~9ixp Hq%)
DCm~|QGӈ+h?23~+gl b2c2qSM&9VsS%_F >Γ˨BC )˘L_Eӧ)鷨OQamS MT)JߙvZ+u ~
<
ՁW5Zv
/ݟa2 Ӽ&xCE?~6s,5, {ܘ%Gqf1pzzρV)VTo9Q啤:*OSN:ݏZ3_wmo$&zTVǁnlNf GfXOb郎3թ^GwSkmgre4V$m.d Xs;oI}9}ݽEw\9{nn1D5PZ9Vt?%Dcr:?ܞ}D}mPȜ DDT {/_:cB % t]nߓ1&cutzh @yIˡ|χ32 ;uF쵚E( { |aѸ쁗wy}샬okYHǘ˵Bv~_袱yޏT{ uǾ 8 Xo 78|%NZl%n"Fpo[++ 8tLzƻqzڕ!>|acpZZ@7ʘ`'{|, zqOL͕#ó(߂G= ;i{}sh8 4Ƃ&
O}Y/ج3?Ph tBBҢ-%8|:'cjFpt[pkq[_s 0 cQA6 qq!LęB=uL&bk篑}5㉫ge)b 6kd̕nKڶu 4FllKڢ1;Kkܠ(tzyH|_k] " U:9ˊK5h =&FsWAJwRXF^}{`Zi:kU:Ug q%a.)P np=*G.jUz׃R K,J]hxէg}Qu ֏Cm?7hY &?Jj/2֯(Sc ԦbZ_iNw~姱 ne]Zh_t~ƾ
bRf~hVYWPFEؼlK#c?Π ek*dOfvGbMHJfsgrOFT#rY:̆k6ԑߞZǷp)9J#|S4nOOv^(F'z":v]MnyyCό|/<;$զ/7I-㎇mzS2DX/܌}=y/}rϨ+q7#+Vsȕ>p')Cot> J0)\2~ JgY^j;*%e LN="D =3
{%}ힳB dX"_(m^B2֛G}}?/Rj3VJΪJJ"yʜ%T0Se~m3˳>yߢ}wʏJ aNv>Dn\z.ydyK`:)v/2a_ _Wlz^v^eճoc紵g
u=
~( 7hcI,2=+ƈ_9w{t:fzچ|*X)
Ohϻ_ep;ȠtgK?.8ȁP?xw}2A<{<9cڜA#a \ 3,oH\OМR3G}PQkUϺ`Z#AۡS a`WRٕth.^3>/4Vm&]ͫ&z lOm}x' ^L ϙa^%/(a"4UvI:_]p h 1~L.J+%O^~ļVtۮ溏΄Jg͕oZ$5R*g.ɗ
o:y q)mk&" !k)/v6HOI֗ɑmp/̀"+ӚE9mO`랑b Mxb=Mvwbb%1(+6r8͌70+N>6YyJLPЭ:. 7UAoûûK$.9UOe2m]#5 SfrEZtJjT;/e&x2:)Μv"Un ^[Eޱ{KET{2,O;c >J\v;>/;/F O6sýzXسBwðjk5"g*2B}ɾIH~tBI Og9A Vג?Nʬ!_qe6Ϫ~ Gyq]R\BB)EjI1h0 ^ސH.|Lk֚ZDmZbG3fH3N ;@
߽7 gqf>,uŽOfo
c'|8c~tYwY QI|=EF[ϼ-y{Gq3ƙ%as7c_5R4p}
zGz76*p>j:ڎ`x4^F
Ǹ% M O<2
΅1p\xgRRJjI_3pQ_P
$])ǔہ>- r)"{AYK?micw7V:=8O[v*%+,cПsN%~_
~['1h͛ۉVo ۸tm*"Mqפ; a,!=; y۱"2Zc u'X^K|]XO_3=}y;IKُ \oxI7!uh0*U wI{LjYlq[5S\Cȱ;Ek c|~SP序m:FB\qF$c}/ YVo"8ظng:qc5}i~
'˳X؉-n83dFB YHܷK/*1{8N e< ߨKIkJ8{==TD$<M,)k.9
C#E\6
n*8zuJhw>LUij3_& ߳|~ | { ng!w6UgE75oN3F6R^٥SO|9ϫ^:.o8`2sqpq1=/19ûqy/ n!WʏQI܄|WTC`\yL]JNP "P}(0 g_
1 , XW5^Q {xdTTY9;4Mh4Fh4Fh4Fh4Fh4Fh4Fh4Fh4Fh4
JڜGN qx9M*كNZ9
ٲT-( e7"q5 <ڬp@{-;QNز[vQ>bn'lLa R]!`f9s)7D}TըcI#b7ngV9[Q5 \QVYO߱~V vErr7R㣯|JUUcB77~0uW1E,s~yĮ;N MwDjCW1g'iT4+smSJZ9h嘤w]BvjoSz:~M{DcuMOS#="ʖiz!H)ژXc%qɱy(垈1YlQwa_?o̶d"m˓d*&ufc,f2i3`V+RgX )kJeա ɞKnp{GJ1fLԚPl %jW%fKO$-{
vEfJ;ɔEái:Ivj=Ť3-̞DJ9֠:ik,ӊwX1c9T[NP2h,] hi
FVz-ڂ7W
SCf&XPj켾CB/gD3xB\qbӢ 8ZM }LF[ON\ dg?kGP|3P)(.03*_Lq1qGR馜%Fuqjp
Wԩt`mʂiS#J*Fၦ&[Gs`|1S ɵSX@C<"xF/'wo 8e@A+( (Wrt؏ƴc:"'EBR|!{ȷ E$sZϋ9ؾsI!.z-W !؋2Uz4ߠי;5|)Lj_>e^M]g{k;M
44}cHjG f,|Ć3:!0LB2
M @֮$[*\Sd>4NۏL7!-Z-Sns
?vyysϹԏl7\,oJ@+P:9,9SΎL1أe:auyN]Ēҟʝʝ F jFʚf64#ЌEGx y[9<Lֱ :^963aMvlE㚧JlDؚ 퀌=;P|nEBD
' | Ho7kl9&f
UF٨chMڛ,F[5MA&cx!` p`9E uaP/O5?pyX'j>|냗E*QQa'"jDk,D ؎ms y 0Zߓ1SU>7皨D'x5x"f@cg:g:ovt:;G;Y[iahGZc҆~`/{.KlRf0 x3 q`p(3`[ DK̂y%&2&J"<gE{ڮ B].H~R9a&ۈgǾ
s !Inx90 lr E55K8YEn¯Tj=?|Zr\rY]{]v{۵((x9Aӛ.'֔۳$H4edU0 iP >jcA+An9,Lߔ]*˵rm/ڸy]J'}I \WSm4B mlm6S*-.O, ~b?{aAðSB.ڿ/H-?'ݲ&T̎ @ַ跑-YlG{֎ =sb"z4(BOIg%Wح);*Z%E50(oPtt$W]vr$,m
k$$Or.q]L TB hoJt%77%~g
g%]FtDq'f4OEoa ͼӸKa@2oԿ7D/5
%1Vq
Weڮ)눋̨kuǵӵɵ
Vk~w]vUí{qiaތŪ_!!~E0H<VpzgXZIS6MһۭHZe-w30|D p[ Җ7 {#ik=I}So#Kⵛmؒ|
V8|[nE{֊ikkO`rLL%*Cd3Wʱ.᧯&d$ AF aHBBFB(eRJ%gCCM>}u 4ȾBQΪ |Dv\faHa!m C0n z<, QY5~J8-"WZJ\̕NݙY7iv/ۢ±fۗ63)XZ57vKD9ќ! RW ս)XW ^OZ]o> *"Bt{֖2a)Mf f/\8טr )Gjrx8r-Ɩ)y7)GA^َi2Ac8cL3쮽RrhLh"4RE`iL bD:+-+1y H>O` hV@4 %@h a
endstream
endobj
37 0 obj
<>/BS<>/Border[0 0 0]/PA<>/Rect[61.0 61.0 72.0 72.0]/Subtype/Link/Type/Annot>>
endobj
19 0 obj
<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/StructParents 6/Type/Page>>
endobj
44 0 obj
<>stream
BT
/Artifact <>BDC
/TT0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 5 779 Tm
(96-0785.a1)Tj
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
0 -86 TD
(file:///usr.osd.mil/)Tj
7.166 0 Td
(...)Tj
(yComputer/Desktop/DOHA%20transfer/DOHA-Kane/dodogc/doha/industrial/Archi\
ved%20-%20HTML/96-0785.a1.html)Tj
49.74 0 Td
([7/2/2021 3:59:35 PM])Tj
EMC
ET
1 g
10 596.25 591.75 169.5 re
f
/Article <>BDC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
10 36 592 730 re
W n
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 755.25 Tm
(need)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(to apply rules of evidence and procedures intended to protect lay jurors\
from being confused or improperly)Tj
ET
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 741.75 Tm
(influenced by arguments made by lawyers"\).)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(8. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Cf)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(. ISCR Case No. 95-0817 \(February 21, 1997\) at p. 7 \(discussing princ\
iple of fairness in connection with proffer of)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(partial copy of document by one party\).)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(9. )Tj
(And, in any event, the Board's decision requires the Administrative Judg\
e to consider whether an applicant seeking to)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(present polygraph evidence demonstrates its accuracy, reliability, and f\
airness. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
31.71 0 Td
(See)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
( polygraph issues 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 at)Tj
-31.71 -1.125 Td
(pages 5-6, above.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(10. )Tj
(It is not difficult to imagine a case where two polygraphs have in fact \
been conducted with contradictory results and)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(only the side with the less rigorous standards would be permitted to int\
roduce its result and its expert witness.)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
45 0 obj
<>
endobj
46 0 obj
<>
endobj
47 0 obj
<>stream
H\j0E
-EqZ3
@EG8("߹jpt<ù8_o7؍.fFwb¹&}8v1imNVpCUmf[jC[n] g88[.] ^SpTvmmwV!bzSp &: CVZٮebk,Y?4 uʪ/fkɸOlqA.{pI.B@~ / ? )SncOggO O LaAaVX+fd's r s r YpL?RfTdT:+
gYpV:+
gYT-l.)HN4./egU/ >ԃ
endstream
endobj
48 0 obj
<>stream
H|XTgv΅HS,wwnlbC5$@^)E*"v4ł"b^v]bAq Oޗ;gΙ; @HvnWBc@ q jM
g3aCh`qX̄ܪ# = A7#" LZ8
. Cy|ѱ Y].@gsL\x lDZa @y W
4 &X] 0DojWq2@f@3A QX*B ʆ(
@n5 *6 >j>S[kk} 4Z`xn aSnv؊) |`g/* oխQcw&M5WyJj[}Ԣem>iۮ}ߎ:wڭݧo~~?~ Ӑ0 5,z1G&S2mԙifgɜ;og-Y
˖Xjs6lDl۶}]-طC -9vDSϜ-s/\t
\n00k8F=d*ԊAEA4P͢Ut^,Hh+|+34apLx$TFFJUV)+=K$O(}'
K?IRtA2HϤ*V P/S+5C4ɚtBMV6Ժhij%mKmkm6Lr +&{eoQc$9ENgUr].)|MzBu(H]\)>> })%Z,?%Zc֝l(4 [ți"pʨ9`0Hf
BP!FU$lw B$iT"]nH/WjPGԙl4!M{ΜC;ڈ:C-o|ϡs9t{!R7s ^O7 jQYp>j ~%Wvxxg b#@MY
+T^p7Nf_ss{s;s[6fYp\'*p)_dZdZmJ0픻FBx`5y]~F_c;cKfDSClgm{Pb(4 4Q:VC?CoC/AkQ*Tq [/v{v|gCR*)7* {>9췙wQW0ay_L{Û-R @
LST@h? CTDGR tJ$ӊgt2:G]KtUFd # MEݥ{t #3^R^QM(+4N3(fv6W9TMP
Ide)1fȔ́cyrd
sf.̕eW^Gά ʺ̟`=' >ebW]$ fH Oħ3e2E9M9]9CLS+g)g+3s39
`ٗ,h/`뙞3XA QwܝaKݵ qꂻSh^o(7r*r)wr+<(9sE G1y\')yZ?ʳI\u9ם[eE*?/:cHc R7kF(G(>d">T8J8rI"&4J#ȧ2R&Q2SQ\SI(7塼|(EEi*@"T(ӝtg}O;^Љ9Q0TJR)*Me,?
PHa4&S8M4M4CRVSGI%Y}a,Y1ǚ
a`r:N8#g̜r6'g sqnykIK(h7ƍu \čw(p q0\Kr)w]*.e,sWkܵ:."W\r55&\r=
Y̍ 7fܜ[pKnZ
ܚp[nwNܙpTEt܍& ܓ{qo} sN3Ls\5~s 4,;αs<;FO 9 +;$" H1ߛ9j掹k9a 憹in H礿_/Q~ q~/+ *_&oI&9 7)3$n Y}Nֿ_ows]QQ\gEQĠ,ʬRpkKIWi Fs)rja CK5q<} 0I9P60JL 1LRYpudW3Hy<':5^ _H+l9RtA7N{ @{ƚ*R +yGp4hDi ?+Rԗi8KzޤnQ+&(.^ȋy59'OEdG겿\ER>sYq0
z{Q~ 9k,O7 o F^C4kx]OA {yr%/m`7=rtZS
W>wzXfn2Oےێ] v N
"Gk7_57[̝fTP dN>=OӠl0ۅ5:!t"N@_\۽N7B{.+8 p%rj^*KBr*5SY`` r5vێۮm@5yB]v@kO<" $ma"ydC\] DՃR ?$Ԅ dymdEnako`9t<$ӔReb֓kOTy/H]*iz>j 'IE
߈X= -YCY*W#;
4bi,nvr Ι}!(Q{A6"*?6`}s/ Y'F*^t g]:g䒜cF1bCJKMI 8Rbϩ;.W#ggGv%s0MU`J~HJfR4>744>=a#s0ri 1#4:-UqkxJknݧBrAH^Bv:1AT5ȝ_\cxg蜖J!C2 zu#;9$'QPXW(enKw[2S:(,zqN/-`W^f>B2eChP֘X/)]Kz
Y螂u݆c?c[ǟqy='YU
ioO:_\b镖cҡMU _qze *uoPG xu16N{7@q^9Z{R#[1#K'nI dK#}5hձL"ǘeLf\@dn7H] ']uG-dVpt FJlŅGBP}DZ}^ G^LeN}9TQWmkTrS|[=M{zNz tL=D=nQ,OwE{$=hWl_T?dD2?Wl oı}ƾ; ؗ؉GP2Ft+m O+% P j* ZRWCԅ@d[7i14jB"s` w}%Oꭠ'u*mT~F]ɛ* #83̬_ZK-PzS{J2; XD(ѻjMdyN#zJK*ՃO!F,A 8\ѽ.apϑ~xmJ3" =fЪ#&?#ABZ%UP/&LEJ^XHLw16V&poPno
0S
;X mFk\ŒU׃g NAhT8KFBlQ=@&nc`2nd/5gW0<*@Y ®$8@91
QWU1"R
? | qQDr犠;KlϼWEf&j&5,b ct8nɂ^0m ,1L-jrzYg?/^3V 3fֹgvÏs|eCHX0 7$"xZ17:{
߂& !N,~MMSuN(HAY|-7#wDyz݅(Tr1rY_+CIC,|hKMk7Wx]
Dmy}'~qo+5WcO_\O~px_7S, s8N~&
T]'ߌAuvP'@XĤ=Ą& , ' cMq\R Hj`Ĉ#Ϻ,f5'l= gA0;/u-WuV؇^gw&tT(5fxXךePdrs n l+eܺq`6gs^}?ᥛr70u9ZA}ڋw^=DdfC61
j\w_}z?X=9Z Q9^D]4v8v8NL<]umԆ8 3.%
9Yh/r:|`*!vuWA1h&~CHt*Q5HtG5N 8-/SЮrpi4ўm[C4hU.]B #qC-2L2cb A;d$
x샏mn}$ e!Oj*j_ߟէrP"
Z?rsB UVd^QӐap2LZHa@,
rRB@cc8X~zbr\YZ7^_\ΐ KdG#zg rK$ Gf37_$3r[O#9hN5Q{>`4>n
XZq-U:q5^wfԾoAGꂵ "u1ԵEK_JGVkn~{[JDj-ٹ 0}}IN K{cH~mM8w4 ˈƌHc A(EO00Ø<4 8B,c8؆a="tg6SZ kOE| > X&&N8c{;l A0[)8`/%.YhbMr6*{I B$ʘ 7Pڨ%&a'}w iiVd{c5?~^ ik'Ja
ӌPjI5UoaW,ߛGfFM(\|Y&҂dlZ)<& SW8^w1z7X!; BF}R4풬)T)IJ+2o{֮Le&kD7Oʌ<,3n{-n\taaC u 1F%/s} HVf{z-l&. vl\{U߹c} #䟇wB{1 O٭-| 9з[Eih}>pʒWO9K,f \i{*B9m}iEoQdϲc+ +dc$
vwhHA1Cn-^jm~Ebu=B\ٜ/KlΝ+Qfʤ +f&fS6sgv%)woOo RYL Vघu,(c) JuI
I
'@$Ujf:-џ{ǔc Ӕ("x ^#Hv^R_))f\"0еHS)eѧZCgK i8VP u8$ux łz毳 6j w+?O4ĖB3WF<Ŗ@E%~2.e!v死=x.%I= E 5a!y$;pt}] q81)nH"UM#od%#dg)y&aa{ 8ڃhD K\ Y&~-QA,GdoEz8.2)+T,9:i/e ysv}w> w~
4$kaM u:ByQ
hhyi ikY5
6*$ RViLĴunҦ
iQB6y~|{K[NsRD)`.dA)%*(EAIz"4Nv"z_ȡ!lD;IK!YTds
oh8%")
*GDY"h*j B4iIP5Ȫ"U=*#W{"c)svOmxB݃m2)>.9Ef\EtEk@k6Τm-!-$k%me'iֽàb˒%r-yRrǀA1aT{%L87I
V$+L
)L"! ^+b7HrI7y Y֊+7Uz0w.7-q5xoݝMaHoҌ %D
"7-nB" GCQϱϘwaK-+pޡ/hBz]z\$d\h~?s.t!s⎹G=;*E$*]V˯Pآ8"˥
("BE@=:l[r!d @Q!pRZ oY@p:g!f:\]"! ve@vQ?pvL%иv
X!%Jpߨ}h}w ~29r(!\E2U ϬJ<z<.
_
)W|R]rKL ; _^CM.K1< BvY05 2)Ӳ )Sm]?ɋ oZ:]r/~ ;Loca
pM ]1+fǻ;<8 dN0'٣u&R%k1裟4n1$v a؝;hҖ˓VΒO4'>fx Z v!)W*fyXP
hXb$ A11M:n%B;ND*x#T%W:syj/#c ~\ q8t'Í\Ŝ8a)`mLu Z&˽z>$I$ B"Hk, cRsqωWvhK+c% dUqכ;V]\!%wǣ=zv} /+ Zi ZmSWzrOVK`/o]u@NQ}VG& c֡Łh`~_r5-6һ.ͷ )/MЍ 2*`S3ɘx<"ϋYF@0/r3M|/͌Gx=c-sl\{^dyȟ' C Aյ-@|Yәm8/Cd- QjNOܗEoh@'}\ǃc.RϦ5'2MӨ03Ym jYwF__qxOP 畴W KhFX k`*=mz7#z {o@ǼZ끼ъ+W0+6AEir"u
V͡a! V
>'a'6FDK>~ɟ%FNGC- А}f Me?q2z# .vmN/?i;5VCw6q;vlϗ8Nb;8q# B
Ҍ@ڮbԢi'mb4)̬iDWCʪŤj-f;uSsSP)(~wJ 75HsSedˍjℍf{L_YKT[.AV'f
n͚;yqSYPhL1 ̚yG$֬ LUrfC9D1_T좨rw?Y ݨ )U2F E#OZ9'jH*
'(q~*$xB
AdE^Tc"%:H{`}r{KySSLʢIJ Zfɠfw9*b *a!2<P*_5]$+Hiii"bw#У07G
AS5|mk<>J%P.݅P65ļ8K
jtemvpP%l%uI_Y#˂':QU}||c(_VM4:p>\2̛Iv5?Ӵw|w|rOMf833 6^Ԟ8r"4aXFLk&ݻ5R$jۓց].|: lAHE-vd_:a G8>ZxjU(~ E2%Q{L1C5r8LI%NLvx\+ B4)ֲD1P=z\ɗq<$8ѺU\>:92FWF+zxAϿZ 1uzP~'^ż %S#jHډ:q3ҩ GRg YY0n'Wȑțڡ+ϙ:q19R*dwW0Wf
a`YIBD ͡ gx?O ɝO?eG+:.LV Eyh2a N 1wAm-1Z 89 WaKy *gbQDZiiG?8>}کb͛~g/}O>
V/
wu6Uv-#?:uj쩁( UYRKN+LpZs 6' f gAq8|3,ؖH%|}CɟW7Ec/xI&-V0".x%uhd&i!YQl;Yr_h
-"BvFG)IxƗN\. g˨M@9Uq2t;͟wN/Xz>6l ԀE`RRI ߒ̰? @
#l$b%KPZ)N Pl> 88Y$x0X_OT7&pF!PEMWԂ
ȏZj}?ZUbV)j<~gtm})n|?v Rm V?? ' FE-U%pa
3()zZKM>ci;l$ O2?e~fa.%i
TgAFѤ$֢#fd;y+$Zl5" WV%EJDP E`@J-5YM[ŭD;c#|%KR6RL`٬
$̝~b#CFlxv
oٲгb'^aM|lő}Mc{?G)Q穮k}>q!\|Xƻ.!eI&{hfs+k%B J
N ^ %ʂOV 90=8< ~Dd[:%HdS7#yIZ4D4ńdOuG@{#v8`XyfuYl 5Rm馸d98ls q=w{?UPx{/Dp//$/ Lurn27,VQb l"S &e)-cKdԫ5f_=>>;Nl}#v G18MqJiCaA[D@iJU
,=Ub0
iLZ'-*CBZ~wj r>[< 3Tf6P6o}|
"TrvC{fgc\ q>s:Kىٞ0|ža_B77o@*옥
!fCPVI鰏Lu1\"" 7P) dZ %랋oE] Ʃ}Pyr
t0p&̅WȟXA N`ar%S! ͥ^7h ҅a[6E"A5IЂ znLt:1CJc HV>n;{wuXeuHWc*j
¿[Xr):t,ll
!mJHc0:l:n:pIcMа / ~udd:< ϟ}q{'syGR+ͿmXވX_ s hyO6@tAgRȣS* ŭY-gmw _?yh`(^YnIЍ߀ΐiilF({Z p2QE 7_ bDqўV =~ I 졓 %ωOϸ`^%H`_ل ]~Ի/\d蒍 31F)ILorH ciZ@qo[#x!q8OǮý0`sv 4 )Yl[v: TSdjx{FƃqɦZZ#jsP$ H{*^|"Pnh[}nN{S rzbrXģb;3o?3y+"e)aE%5?S# F
nŴT!#++Z' Y6跲11Ȓ JEtcPY 4EͰMY g.'fcM/2l ?Ij6x *뫷&w,5\b4. DO3#trhwy.<[62cLQ%IUr7h+HA~6TU)cv&UfϘ̀uy#PBe%-M輬 Ys˲Fʸ'V 1*嘢aOLx@6d L fKWhJXbFI}ѯEMf3pѴT8 Na9ӞfkW@G^/pX fsFi3
(5iIۈvI;!k\"m2{[.{W+[4,"P$-}"H
K0Nac2WdɗC4M`u%oAj ŊI-h 꿑
A/Ҥ
B)H~u O`'_2
@Ψۂ nݣŝ P o4Q_} E
]O rN& JqWdW[gH;OlsT(wO(:
^:^?g>p^g}P;!MX@! Ny1kڪY7YQV+
)7n4E Vy{|dX#P}cD UY P,~|zV1"eAHi"m]xW]^
«~Fw3q7OiVkկ_;x0`.
߃ }m>ߌ}Dn㶳~C ˳7 2)&m)pOB&>^:rX"Y!زQI L$YClmg9u=}bHi3ϡ/_Ξ~
nzyѥeeٟݓ7N!)tF]Gǔ#.EGROCzY8V
6\H9tnŰ
}>NJCqETKx / RIU\QPdLPO{ IE$.nJ&iŔY>+
PV5^V5W
M8#7.&++ijծ%miY?3$@ &Ğ6b J:0vʣI ]ZhL̴~7)t\Nѻ8FWWJ?hۧ*X oy|t*|D:uku/ӭtǤ_610Ir(&~ #fk)ĘhV=ON~(f.APmh)k3R6\(]D
4ץG ;K SoHмZRx홺M25Fz7ŗ[^4z3Dـ
FSyW֭:uA 5aOr >V|u/*`ަƚQh=|,% v'IFF|oXnL!]]=vdU !wBSO( +2xaڄpPuݺnw
s_ `3A ߄^F nx5}] oDݘ»hjP:e!L@+EZKX0^ns2ldv* Qo-ʙk(gJL
ZLky$wrF3;Y1ֳ Qeq:Y[ h\*- -4e1A`% 3 1; @@
>" 0HB :1Uj1ҋ,PhmJŏB+ [ ~m0{xl zSdW0|ܖM9S݅6(
>=b{/hU;/+|祈dNw
e\]W|!=b c!(-9P-Ňzl=ՌjKg/J^ R[ ,5.S0Mi42d~2< 2/s6x x,8۸>gcc~
/Pzʐ63oQa!V\z(FQB$EݠבT2,Pz 0* Mj¨=J )IȳE2f2hdM%i1(| Z~{ aQ^Ԭ: ˒b6 `PH<F0D_xxчJD]`"@/Kb4Ë~hyxtQJ ~yߑNB"2?$E t-R;^ER 5/$D(5]F"]BhAZfz+wkӼ&ؗ]
,|)h=VVK4Cqҡ?C'(I3KAH{9^kPTR
>i RȒ&y Ie3im6fv܆P !CG(x? G Ҩh $sW+f`܊JT r!S^sqIyRCROQ|JRR X&MKj쓺L l(Xbt.ٲ*Vy|ϒr_ Ӕj^c 6wE[ PB([Tj0"aє=>#^(q w(J*
HT J dK]nFTA-]M]gs}/_': Mlc;'> aG "躮LHͪ:SU*
e4Fǣ*I]Ptag߹Hu~OU-;M
JzR|xKtg"
vB W@}i钄%s /=SlYxĦVp N2Ɨ@+xQe`e-JŬhk|Z3fQQ<8Wu.Wev<86 GKRo ^xrk@V^\[ڏ7s+-qʁM2"֊8Tג
KF V3(W%ٚB<
8er6]xxMg\| z?@ P ¸SWUI1ޘJ@k9cq3VNLhըvP#:dA u>'{?F G R6NOfr5da.U; 3@IhUKFX(Wo " 1;!h_ 0I쉾ҽ{J 7^1Oݾɫzizw=/I~'MG '#?fy@< ,/ټ7ه[4cR*I碂úWԁv=:uv=P^U
ԁ6.ЪЊB{.=bFJiںǴk)>0Uz2x9m2nMÅP9s"v65MU fZ* _ (># ]U'gB j_Nm" ]u9s5~
hc"KWH1a>Ih Y5> ;՚I,`WQ^r5](({s x_脿M}
&wDn@Ԉl\I$#v:-%X韥ؼ.oTͷAz5`}FƌwDc<«ke| #lZzг e$PN/:Ԑڭq|*tܶHgT؇/rd WV7k
\?)#_NG
v-#(.!\c7Gxi%7Fa 7u[= S4*9u=L=^ 0ari;}ݘMkL0) Ih{tP -*"" '"t2 ?^=ZδV5Ǜ ¥8٪6Ֆ 8;]||[ѦqU6߾}x9ٖ0a4qoݶZ?-[7|'&_u(n=&]
p%<9p0G{pev B
1 4ħ ]!2\?k_}~^=^gy{] c%dXJG8EX%03GhTj: =i FKg #햠ȗuaRLKF[KKw~7Bl|s?{|瞴hPЮ[z DzRdKT_~' ỵ|c%+ǸCm:+bTF%kf1E>(2L nc1Nh= >G`?=`w90"dj O}={ljsG"dmܶ8NA. v>4WRp݉^dK@k9 Ũuq1zYj
JǿzZ 3 >֏g"o"ֳOpnk/fBa;cD9Tg˧D:g¶2}pp`) {xZ n"s֩5{pYK(T7aKse@A#DX:p|7*LY=W{o݅d~9b :zp9<q,h:P ̵#70| w Y%i#Yk>$k
*Ueq*5r˒~
V)DV)YKk9G} X66sr_& re:Z9U74Ai 26"ӈKiDb-4-g~TW6%GGw]cȉMUgьw\\ mljCL$_z%w-X*߂^k~1G2!G2<Ĩ ?<\Mn\ 1GôGa.Mh@5 sSezUsͥ:֪p Q!>SG4 Tor|꼉im5:Z(ZJ Y!甊2$1 J&aT8'y+`=vJ#oDp} "$j{ \>Bm]>?Te~?j}J,|qS<&Ggy:7sM9\*c"ÚM?:X\2TUZCUV9g'j_ٚRJtS<,*)N,QXjήO`的
!78r=$(Jge;HZkZD,A}OFvZe{j>4 \2zM]࿉T*0Aj -
}-ySY }ŻVQuQ RV4LS[ (G,WbOb5tDF]/Q 凞r 헭0y2h˨Gi,`\$.<ˌ#;lkk v`^=}3{ 8I6a ?8h
Wz`څ{3jo't+=L.n.q5EwX
<@1S` o d0计1pmOt
nȷuR_=uA1 }UCIޜr_rWMssNnL:#`.e>c.e>;y OѮ]}Z_}8o5+R4JpuSs }(^ɏ>7{BZ-VƸyye`531q1/tmN Qvi>yRP Gț-tNv;p' y2j u#*DRxsST:俨b(O~]UJp#߮n>u5 X5fu]s8OD]W9 |fS ăjdV 7x3⮅sRL:12Mҵ[_1{[AѺ\>K
nT3gȿ'hx:{j#^kK![ؑީ+z%mO H2 ƨ#P
4 PP S%N153#UC¯3GqvZx&ȞGʧ7:
b$V݁1~y`1VX 5%ؓ(YExxDpwYW /] d1G) > 3^C&ˀPlHwM f lv$@7q?6Sdo9? D[2'P6̡mhO@!QBom^Ոm
"Eϣ,# vQ=CG̥nkLä49ΝI }㶂Di(> p?LNQgKD̾iW)JD_nDC)N#pɇqO-d?7Kr1wP-dr
7&I}s&:!O@ pE,lK2 wf!ћث'<=_rd~!dRF /3^R. id45u4ׄ<*)瘑ȟ"2wt, /wԐNqN# C}U +'^-+pWpӜ
?sLkcx:7$>( ?7@ @ $5 nG[ԍ6^3Kxkya`um>Gۤ/W&v'珑Ŵk7 MQ"|87"lïfKeFlȣc$h)Q]@_zl|
~ +C^]]>ŧW(FV%[ɪf j<\-j
` P&- M˰6ȀG}u9
g j[mn`Fyo
ͺJ|$ 391Nm]oAo҃-bE L9q[@_ 8{ڏ Q@݊& ٰCX+ ~eapf0 5ͺHi Hyo }q%{z7bN?|;Oyv3P"r$ v x1lKbS !·tԨRĺCm)]GRXs>4з#z%_H ~ Lxs{$VP!ܼkN(u"_ԣcX
!VS2>
o_{%8 h<=gk~8
{
|ՙbt;(j
_آ Vi@6 9&v}jϩ:_6#&݅N tgZʻVPs j/K4M$J9pIw]^;۠x:%:#o E; \-9\ⴃfQ?͌-uzhGYi ^{Yu'k, nOB]j zDC]#>N[,F/ut C{b=lɱg !9{ bs 4o7gqYs<: C P| <MkCsxY_ |̓~O2Dw3Gl {:ysvRݞԇԬ}<&_ Yق|0V sb
`C5_Y@2p|Td]swA_Q6]w >Ȩx,ϩI{ag6ƄV$H(B3 %$]̊7H*Պ70itދ%Zsg^~FOetsC$tϒGl#qUv'G!ƜaC Ƒ˹R9&I.N%^>>CFBLsR`пW B9e;z/ A? o}ݏ5N|+N|
f=_~ofM3aƖ5q< znD r'T6,!R#$|ƾ,z,cb1903064g/1{(Z}G%\xRwpS*< Y_Fɺ`,{ G{{r|7;1q<ۍz
m "K 8z4@`:{L8|}oai8 lW缏Osg&ck,U"{VBeU<".ꎤ8"kn3. Vw1 Csd:.%IRŨ˳i@}ۨ2\2-gsQrg!.ë'$ӯף=u[A :@FPHh #D Cȴh/x/MUJ&\!Wb**-B/~17DbH܈ם Neǩhl
S06`o)#ׯaN}* #byqdI7d7U,qAlNa& v@,wr6)d*) ☼:"ɣ\vM KaSI8w$vrܩ$S> NAP <3'8|AU \Lm:hgɲ1ȒKihh/^V'Z/|'cJ?3
M86'g|/ \?h<֑gsm~OC
L }ZÓQw2? \eb+VxyzWg.2X9,/],$zH i4[z1PRwW60I*`%Ǎ["32DC+ڒd2OUy,;yN;HL261QƚiF\)2;MmhLF`XndC[6c{(Dj\tAKh5-z.qp*ުWp&?e=4n86.Eґ}S76 CDcUݩ@U!Yq*bl-CN/=H2465?#W藊 @?+e9"uO
9g3k 7N&Ʒ ֗]j 8<.k.7L-cHKlw(r_"xc<8^S~M+p.VP7>_@cL5*)Cqvnv
c@_lR0PWf Wȼ,|?*^WzQՋ|w% }'ֲo-`.9X?Ai>e֧u(E=].ϭPMK5K6֨=(N2w
}5ie=c ElAw!{3[75.|e{t>A|5{.KOНgӐwPmRi^oOh~ T<"27U1ExMdn#יs 0G:!(sHUEY k# :..:s)@= ,bX,bX,bX,bX,bX,bX,b IŸ6X .
9w }4WUo(Þ$bBMnL(o>Ocr Ȗ9kxcLwLvQڟ *&{?>21)hfc9b4,7q08{. v |H)FfĞ]VtGA7mkXPp
H&M bߓ@ cӤny{ >:ҪI9s~{λ~&~ҊY$(K&HJj`\q" N;,ȕ i} <&N X $ǡǐa݈>7q)k9iXBKyr 4
f a牢+da YOIٹ0V̮]yr yu.zͮ*ːzP M'#@zY=mP:KTp^P
tT͒۠F ;/kyz$8hM&KIeRU2ZAkzpc\9}xK}ֈ
n(Ӗ!|R̢ORjSRZ"zU)LՆ5Hvm~U}^ oʣ1 ޛeXFJX*aw@r>Q=bbQ,Ӷ՞-dںIGM(9ܳɨ<}@hԳ֨@|&zпy=X6}EvSV{;x\c?TDlۦM-lkg_fVsK.qOU)lU3bgAޠ>i=n wۃ6z{Qr,vT8 GP ı,_|V Qj&U`Fo{jߙkv텾\;W _ ݹQ}}s%N&ZsW <媷 ϼT'S:j;7/ٸmG/pOßrt1)vsI幮s !6dWm[ pN C}$.鞔CE7` !a1)ֵu1ȔLREGb=)"$^ILW#!MMd Fi.O'_CHCWAWRp vb
@pm.F ڑ6p+;1Kh 0Dzl`1HD.` yR )`rIRu֊@KV@@KX/.]7h% )eH L R PZZZ\\R
@ jl"6nLpvt) A]78 5kikB@ALtP+e.3- mW[%ԴwܸQ8>~i33
endstream
endobj
18 0 obj
<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/StructParents 5/Type/Page>>
endobj
49 0 obj
[51 0 R]
endobj
50 0 obj
<>stream
BT
/Artifact <>BDC
/TT0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 5 779 Tm
(96-0785.a1)Tj
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
0 -86 TD
(file:///usr.osd.mil/)Tj
7.166 0 Td
(...)Tj
(yComputer/Desktop/DOHA%20transfer/DOHA-Kane/dodogc/doha/industrial/Archi\
ved%20-%20HTML/96-0785.a1.html)Tj
49.74 0 Td
([7/2/2021 3:59:35 PM])Tj
EMC
ET
1 g
10 36 591.75 729.75 re
f
/Article <>BDC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
10 36 592 730 re
W n
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 756 Tm
(and the risk of burdensome sideshows that polygraph evidence could engen\
der.)Tj
ET
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 730.5 Tm
(To be sure, the instant case is not squarely addressed either by the DoD\
Directive on polygraphs, which is concerned)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(with government administered polygraphs or by the Supreme Court, in US v\
.)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(Scheffer, which had a )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
40.075 0 Td
(per se)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
( bar of)Tj
-40.075 -1.125 Td
(polygraph evidence to confront. )Tj
13.023 0 Td
(Nonetheless, I believe that both the Directive and the Supreme Court dec\
ision are)Tj
-13.023 -1.125 Td
(instructive for our concerns. )Tj
11.524 0 Td
(The Board majority's)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(decision is now opening the door for one party to admit polygraph)Tj
-11.524 -1.125 Td
(evidence in a non-criminal proceeding when DoD has )Tj
21.826 0 Td
(not )Tj
ET
0.75 w
q 1 0 0 1 277.9082 675.75 cm
0 0 m
18.334 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
12 0 0 12 296.2422 676.5 Tm
(been able to guarantee the standard under which that)Tj
-23.354 -1.125 Td
(polygraph was)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(performed, while the other party may not admit polygraph evidence that )Tj
35.211 0 Td
(was )Tj
ET
q 1 0 0 1 438.5371 662.25 cm
0 0 m
21.662 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
12 0 0 12 460.1992 663 Tm
(administered according to)Tj
-37.017 -1.375 Td
(DoD standards)Tj
0 0 0.933 rg
9.75 0 0 9.75 87.6543 651 Tm
(\(10\))Tj
ET
0 0 0.933 RG
q 1 0 0 1 87.6543 650.25 cm
0 0 m
16.244 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 103.8979 646.5 Tm
( and while a criminal defendant may not produce such evidence. )Tj
25.99 0 Td
(Such a result)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(is, at best, anomalous.)Tj
-33.315 -1.125 Td
(Avoiding such an anomaly, in my opinion, is not a matter of usurping the\
Secretary of Defense's authority but)Tj
T*
(implementing that authority which has been delegated by the)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(Secretary to the Board.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(I do recognize that the Administrative Judge's reasoning below for rejec\
ting the polygraph was explicitly rejected by)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(five justices in the Scheffer case and could not be upheld by this body.\
)Tj
28.465 0 Td
(However, I)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(must dissent from the result of this)Tj
-28.465 -1.125 Td
(decision.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(Signed: Michael Y. Ra'anan)Tj
ET
0 G
q 1 0 0 1 16 540.75 cm
0 0 m
134.795 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
12 0 0 12 16 516 Tm
(Michael Y. Ra'anan)Tj
T*
(Administrative Judge)Tj
T*
(Member, Appeal Board)Tj
T*
(1. )Tj
(Department Counsel's reply brief is silent on the polygraph issue.)Tj
T*
(2. )Tj
(The Administrative Judge initially marked the document as "App.Ex. 'D' f\
or ID." )Tj
33.697 0 Td
(He later marked it as "Appelatte)Tj
-33.697 -1.125 Td
(\(sic\) Ex. I." )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(See )Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(Hearing Transcript at pp. 40, 392-393.)Tj
T*
(3. )Tj
(In ISCR Case No. 95-0178 \(March 29, 1996\) at p. 4, the Board ruled tha\
t "the mere fact that an applicant is given a)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(polygraph test is not )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
8.388 0 Td
(per se)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
( coercive and does not render admissions made during or)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(after it involuntary." )Tj
33.871 0 Td
(In ISCR Case)Tj
-42.259 -1.125 Td
(No. 94-1057 \(August 11, 1995\) at pp. 5-6, the Board held that DoD Dire\
ctive 5210.48 did not exclude an applicant's)Tj
T*
(post-polygraph statements to a polygrapher. )Tj
17.829 0 Td
(Those cases did not involve the issue presented by this case.)Tj
-17.829 -2.125 Td
(4. )Tj
(The term "polygraph evidence" does not include the statements made by th\
e subject of a polygraph examination. )Tj
46.303 0 Td
(The)Tj
-46.303 -1.125 Td
(oral or written statements made by the subject of a polygraph examinatio\
n are)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(not the same as the polygraph charts, the)Tj
T*
(polygraph report, or the polygrapher's opinion whether the subject's sta\
tements are truthful or deceptive. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
41.903 0 Td
(See Wyrick v.)Tj
-41.903 -1.125 Td
(Fields)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
2.5 0 Td
(, 459 U.S. 42, 48 n.*)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(\(1982\)\("Although the results of the polygraph examination might not h\
ave been admissible)Tj
-2.5 -1.125 Td
(evidence, the statements [the defendant] made in response to questioning\
during the course of the polygraph)Tj
T*
(examination surely would have been."\). )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
16.153 0 Td
(Accord)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
( ISCR Case No. 94-1057 \(August 11, 1995\) at p. 6.)Tj
-16.153 -2.125 Td
(5. )Tj
(Under the reasoning of the Supreme Court's decision in )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
23.425 0 Td
(United States v. Scheffer)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
9.831 0 Td
(, the President of the United States or)Tj
-33.256 -1.125 Td
(the Secretary of Defense could institute an absolute bar to the admissib\
ility of)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(polygraph test results in these)Tj
T*
(proceedings. )Tj
5.332 0 Td
(However, neither the Administrative Judge nor the Board has the authorit\
y to do so through an evidentiary)Tj
-5.332 -1.125 Td
(ruling.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(6. )Tj
(Even courts that have resisted admitting polygraph evidence have indicat\
ed a willingness to allow it when the parties)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(have stipulated to its admissibility. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
14.166 0 Td
(See, e.g., )Tj
3.832 0 Td
(United States v. Sherlin)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
9.443 0 Td
(, 67 F.3d)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(1208, 1216-17 \(6th Cir. 1995)Tj
(\), )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(cert.)Tj
-27.44 -1.125 Td
(denied)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
2.666 0 Td
(, 116 S.Ct. 795 \(1996\).)Tj
-2.666 -2.125 Td
(7. )Tj
(Some courts have indicated a concern that polygraph evidence may confuse\
or mislead juries. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
38.737 0 Td
(See, e.g., United States)Tj
-38.737 -1.125 Td
(v. Call)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
2.667 0 Td
(, 129 F.3d 1402, 1406 \(10th Cir. 1997\);)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
( United States v. Kwong)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
25.444 0 Td
(, 69 F.3d)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(663, 668 \(2d Cir. 1995\), )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(cert. denied)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
18.47 0 Td
(,)Tj
-46.581 -1.125 Td
(116 S.Ct. 1343 \(1996\). )Tj
(However, those concerns are based on considerations that do not apply to\
Administrative Judges.)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
T*
(See United States v. Posado)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
11.192 0 Td
(, 57 F.3d 428,)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(435 \(5th Cir. 1995\)\(noting judges less likely than jurors to give und\
ue weight)Tj
-11.192 -1.125 Td
(to polygraph evidence\). )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
9.719 0 Td
(Cf.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
( ISCR Case No. 97-0299 \(December 11, 1997\) at p. 2 \(in DOHA proceedin\
gs, "there is no)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
51 0 obj
<>/BS<>/Border[0 0 0]/PA<>/Rect[87.0 648.0 103.0 659.0]/Subtype/Link/Type/Annot>>
endobj
17 0 obj
<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/StructParents 4/Type/Page>>
endobj
52 0 obj
<>stream
BT
/Artifact <>BDC
/TT0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 5 779 Tm
(96-0785.a1)Tj
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
0 -86 TD
(file:///usr.osd.mil/)Tj
7.166 0 Td
(...)Tj
(yComputer/Desktop/DOHA%20transfer/DOHA-Kane/dodogc/doha/industrial/Archi\
ved%20-%20HTML/96-0785.a1.html)Tj
49.74 0 Td
([7/2/2021 3:59:35 PM])Tj
EMC
ET
1 g
10 36 591.75 729.75 re
f
/Article <>BDC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
10 36 592 730 re
W n
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 755.25 Tm
(questions on procedure, discovery, and evidence and . . . conduct all pr\
oceedings in a fair, timely, and orderly manner.")Tj
ET
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 741.75 Tm
(Directive, Additional Procedural Guidance, Item 10. )Tj
21.243 0 Td
(Furthermore, this decision will also require the parties to exercise)Tj
-21.243 -1.125 Td
(diligence in preparing for hearings and zealously representing the inter\
ests of their)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(respective clients in connection with)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(polygraph evidence.)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
0 -2.125 TD
(Conclusion)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
T*
(Applicant has met her burden of demonstrating error that warrants remand\
. )Tj
30.268 0 Td
(Pursuant to Item 33.b., the Board remands)Tj
-30.268 -1.125 Td
(the case to the Administrative Judge for further proceedings. )Tj
24.492 0 Td
(On remand, the)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(Administrative Judge must reopen the)Tj
-24.492 -1.125 Td
(record for the limited purpose of giving Applicant the opportunity to of\
fer the previously excluded polygraph report and)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(the testimony of the polygrapher. )Tj
13.552 0 Td
(Unless)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(the parties stipulate to the admissibility of that evidence, the Judge m\
ust permit)Tj
-13.552 -1.125 Td
(Department Counsel a reasonable opportunity to cross-examine the polygra\
pher and raise objections to the admissibility)Tj
T*
(of the polygraph evidence. )Tj
10.913 0 Td
(When deciding whether to admit the proffered polygraph evidence, the Jud\
ge must evaluate)Tj
-10.913 -1.125 Td
(the proffered evidence in light of the issues noted in this decision. )Tj
26.577 0 Td
(If the Judge)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(concludes the polygraph evidence is)Tj
-26.577 -1.125 Td
(admissible, he should give Department Counsel a reasonable opportunity t\
o cross-examine the polygrapher and present)Tj
T*
(rebuttal evidence. )Tj
7.357 0 Td
(Finally, the Judge must)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(issue a new decision that sets forth findings and conclusions as require\
d under)Tj
-7.357 -1.125 Td
(Items 35 and 25 of the Additional Procedural Guidance.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(Signed: Emilio Jaksetic)Tj
ET
0.75 w
q 1 0 0 1 16 516 cm
0 0 m
113.32 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
12 0 0 12 16 491.25 Tm
(Emilio Jaksetic)Tj
T*
(Administrative Judge)Tj
T*
(Chairman, Appeal Board)Tj
T*
(See dissenting opinion)Tj
ET
q 1 0 0 1 16 414 cm
0 0 m
108.662 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
12 0 0 12 16 389.25 Tm
(Michael Y. Ra'anan)Tj
T*
(Administrative Judge)Tj
T*
(Member, Appeal Board)Tj
T*
(Signed: Jeffrey D. Billett)Tj
ET
q 1 0 0 1 16 312 cm
0 0 m
120.645 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
12 0 0 12 16 287.25 Tm
(Jeffrey D. Billett)Tj
T*
(Administrative Judge)Tj
T*
(Member, Appeal Board)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
T*
(Dissenting Opinion of Administrative Judge Michael Y. Ra'anan)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
T*
(The majority's decision in this case is quite troubling. )Tj
21.621 0 Td
(I fear that this decision will have unfortunate and preventable)Tj
-21.621 -1.125 Td
(repercussions.)Tj
T*
(I start from the legal environment in which this decision is placed. )Tj
26.743 0 Td
(The Department of Defense is not normally permitted)Tj
-26.743 -1.125 Td
(to introduce polygraph results into DOHA proceedings even though the)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(Department's polygraphs are performed under a)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(set of intricate standards designed to ensure fairness, accuracy and rel\
iability \(see, DOD Directive 5210.48\). )Tj
43.512 0 Td
(Earlier this)Tj
-43.512 -1.125 Td
(year the Supreme Court, in US v)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(Scheffer, concluded that a )Tj
/TT2 1 Tf
24.021 0 Td
(per se)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
( bar against polygraph evidence )Tj
15.383 0 Td
(was constitutional)Tj
-39.404 -1.125 Td
(and did not abridge a criminal defendant's right to put on a defense. )Tj
27.228 0 Td
(In that case the defendant was seeking to)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(introduce)Tj
-27.228 -1.125 Td
(the results of a polygraph administered by DOD under DOD standards as ex\
culpatory evidence in a criminal case and)Tj
T*
(the Supreme Court said no.)Tj
ET
q
10 36 592 730 re
W n
BT
12 0 0 12 16 39.75 Tm
(It is also worthy of note that in Scheffer, the Court acknowledged the c\
ontroversy regarding reliability of polygraphs)Tj
ET
EMC
Q
endstream
endobj
16 0 obj
<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/StructParents 3/Type/Page>>
endobj
53 0 obj
[55 0 R 56 0 R]
endobj
54 0 obj
<>stream
BT
/Artifact <>BDC
/TT0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 5 779 Tm
(96-0785.a1)Tj
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
0 -86 TD
(file:///usr.osd.mil/)Tj
7.166 0 Td
(...)Tj
(yComputer/Desktop/DOHA%20transfer/DOHA-Kane/dodogc/doha/industrial/Archi\
ved%20-%20HTML/96-0785.a1.html)Tj
49.74 0 Td
([7/2/2021 3:59:35 PM])Tj
EMC
ET
1 g
10 36 591.75 729.75 re
f
/Article <>BDC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
10 36 592 730 re
W n
BT
0 g
/TT1 1 Tf
12 0 0 12 16 755.25 Tm
(See, e.g., United States v. Williams)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.941 0 Td
(, 95 F.3d 723, 728-29 \(8th Cir. 1996\); )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(United)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(States v. Galbreth)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
25.554 0 Td
(, 908 F.Supp. 877,)Tj
ET
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 741.75 Tm
(882-83 \(D. N.M. 1995\);)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(\(5\) has there been a showing that there is validity and reliability to\
polygraph examinations? )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
37.128 0 Td
(United States v. Gilliard)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
9.777 0 Td
(,)Tj
-46.905 -1.125 Td
(133 F.3d 809, 812-15 \(11th Cir. 1998\); )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(United States v. Posado)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
25.443 0 Td
(, 57 F.3d 428, 433-34 \(5th Cir. 1995\); )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(United States v.)Tj
-25.443 -1.125 Td
(Dominguez)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(, 902 F.Supp. 737, 738-39 \(S.D. Tex. 1995\); )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(United States v. Galbreth)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
32.692 0 Td
(, 908 F.Supp. 877, 878-81, 890-91 \(D.)Tj
-32.692 -1.125 Td
(N.M. 1995\);)Tj
T*
(\(6\) has there been a showing that the polygraph examination in questio\
n was conducted by a qualified polygrapher,)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(using proper techniques, in a proper manner? )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
18.327 0 Td
(See, e.g., United States v. Miller)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
12.885 0 Td
(, 922)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(F.Supp. 495, 503-04 \(D. Kan. 1996\);)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
-31.212 -1.125 Td
(United States v. Galbreth)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
10.165 0 Td
(, 908 F.Supp. 877, 881-82 and 888-89 \(D. N.M. 1995\); )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(United States v. Lech)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
30.748 0 Td
(, 895 F.Supp. 582,)Tj
-40.913 -1.125 Td
(586 \(S.D. N.Y. 1995\); )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(United States v.)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(Urquidez)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
19.443 0 Td
(, 356 F.Supp. 1363, 1365-67 \(C.D. Cal. 1973\);)Tj
-19.443 -2.125 Td
(\(7\) is the proffered polygraph evidence complete? )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
20.241 0 Td
(See, e.g., United States v. Williams)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.941 0 Td
(, 95 F.3d 723, 730 \(8th Cir. 1996\);)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
-34.183 -1.125 Td
(Conti v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
17.331 0 Td
(, 39 F.3d 658, 662-63 \(6th Cir. 1994\),)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
/TT1 1 Tf
(cert. denied)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
20.081 0 Td
(, 115 S.Ct. 1793 \(1995\);)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
-37.412 -1.375 Td
(United States v. Galbreth)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
10.165 0 Td
(, 908 F.Supp. 877, 889 \(D. N.M. 1995\).)Tj
0 0 0.933 rg
9.75 0 0 9.75 328.3223 558.75 Tm
(\(8\))Tj
ET
0 0 0.933 RG
0.75 w
q 1 0 0 1 328.3223 558 cm
0 0 m
11.369 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 528.75 Tm
(This listing is illustrative and not intended to be exhaustive.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(Even if an Administrative Judge concludes that polygraph evidence is adm\
issible, the Judge must still consider what)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(weight can be reasonably given to that evidence. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
19.687 0 Td
(See, e.g.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
3.332 0 Td
(, ISCR Case No. 97-0727)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(\(August 3, 1998\) at p. 4 n. 1 \(even)Tj
-23.019 -1.125 Td
(when evidence is admitted without objection, Administrative Judge still \
must weigh that evidence and consider what)Tj
T*
(weight reasonably can be placed on it\).)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(It is important to emphasize the nature and scope of the Board's decisio\
n in this case. )Tj
34.199 0 Td
(The Board is )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
5.416 0 Td
(not)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
( holding that)Tj
-39.614 -1.125 Td
(polygraph evidence must be admitted into evidence in DOHA proceedings. )Tj
30.353 0 Td
(The)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(Board is )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
5.416 0 Td
(not)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
( expressing any opinion as)Tj
-35.768 -1.125 Td
(to what weight, if any, can or should be given to any polygraph evidence\
that is admitted into evidence. )Tj
41.655 0 Td
(The Board is)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
-41.655 -1.125 Td
(not)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
( changing its position or rulings)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(concerning the polygraph-related issues addressed in the cases cited in \
footnote 3 of)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(this decision. )Tj
5.527 0 Td
(The Board merely concludes that the Administrative Judge erred in exclud\
ing the polygraph evidence)Tj
-5.527 -1.125 Td
(offered by Applicant on the basis that it goes to an ultimate issue that\
the Judge has to decide, and the current state of)Tj
T*
(the record does not )Tj
7.886 0 Td
(provide an proper alternate basis upon which the Board can)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(affirm the Judge's exclusion of the)Tj
-7.886 -1.125 Td
(polygraph evidence.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(The dissent warrants some remarks. )Tj
14.607 0 Td
(First, the Supreme decision in )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
12.221 0 Td
(United States v. Scheffer)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
9.831 0 Td
( does not have the)Tj
-36.658 -1.125 Td
(significance the dissent suggests. )Tj
13.47 0 Td
(Although the Supreme Court noted the controversy)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(surrounding polygraphs, the Court)Tj
-13.47 -1.375 Td
(did not pass judgment on the accuracy, reliability, or fairness of polyg\
raph tests.)Tj
0 0 0.933 rg
9.75 0 0 9.75 400.9023 291.75 Tm
(\(9\))Tj
ET
q 1 0 0 1 400.9023 291 cm
0 0 m
11.369 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 412.271 287.25 Tm
( )Tj
(In a highly divided decision, the)Tj
-33.023 -1.125 Td
(Court upheld the right of the President of the)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(United States, acting pursuant to statutory authority, to promulgate a )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
45.852 0 Td
(per se)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
-45.852 -1.125 Td
(bar to the admissibility of polygraph evidence in court martial proceedi\
ngs.)Tj
T*
(Second, as noted in footnote 5 of this decision, the Secretary of Defens\
e has the right to institute a absolute bar to the)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(admissibility of polygraph evidence in these proceedings. )Tj
23.272 0 Td
(Alternatively, short of a)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
/TT1 1 Tf
9.803 0 Td
(per se)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
( bar, the Secretary of Defense)Tj
-33.075 -1.125 Td
(could amend the Directive to regulate or restrict the use of polygraph e\
vidence in these proceedings.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(Third, the dissent alludes to an "anomalous [result]" that would arise i\
f Department Counsel is barred from offering)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(polygraph evidence due to DoD Directive 5210.48 while an applicant is no\
t )Tj
30.52 0 Td
(barred)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(from offering polygraph evidence.)Tj
-30.52 -1.125 Td
(Short of usurping the authority of the Secretary of Defense or infringin\
g the right of applicants to offer evidence in their)Tj
T*
(behalf, the Board cannot unilaterally rectify)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(that anomaly. )Tj
23.436 0 Td
(And, in any event, if DoD decides that the lack of symmetry)Tj
-23.436 -1.125 Td
(concerning polygraph evidence is troublesome, then the matter can be add\
ressed by the Secretary of Defense. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
44.039 0 Td
(See)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
-44.039 -1.125 Td
(discussion)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(in preceding paragraph.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(Fourth, the dissent alludes to the "risk of burdensome sideshows that po\
lygraph evidence could engender." )Tj
42.891 0 Td
(The Board's)Tj
-42.891 -1.125 Td
(decision explicitly recognizes that risk and specifically lists it as a \
factor that the)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(Administrative Judge must consider)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(when faced with a proffer of polygraph evidence. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
20.019 0 Td
(See)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
( polygraph issue 2 at page 5, above. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
15.939 0 Td
(See also)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
( polygraph issue 1 at)Tj
-35.958 -1.125 Td
(page 5, above. )Tj
6.025 0 Td
(Of course, this decision will)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(require Administrative Judges to perform their responsibilities to "rule\
on)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
55 0 obj
<>/BS<>/Border[0 0 0]/PA<>/Rect[328.0 556.0 339.0 567.0]/Subtype/Link/Type/Annot>>
endobj
56 0 obj
<>/BS<>/Border[0 0 0]/PA<>/Rect[401.0 289.0 412.0 300.0]/Subtype/Link/Type/Annot>>
endobj
15 0 obj
<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/StructParents 2/Type/Page>>
endobj
57 0 obj
[59 0 R 60 0 R 61 0 R 62 0 R 63 0 R]
endobj
58 0 obj
<>stream
BT
/Artifact <>BDC
/TT0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 5 779 Tm
(96-0785.a1)Tj
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
0 -86 TD
(file:///usr.osd.mil/)Tj
7.166 0 Td
(...)Tj
(yComputer/Desktop/DOHA%20transfer/DOHA-Kane/dodogc/doha/industrial/Archi\
ved%20-%20HTML/96-0785.a1.html)Tj
49.74 0 Td
([7/2/2021 3:59:35 PM])Tj
EMC
ET
1 g
10 36 591.75 729.75 re
f
/Article <>BDC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
10 36 592 730 re
W n
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 755.25 Tm
(believes is)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(relevant and material to a defense to the government's case against the \
applicant.)Tj
ET
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 729.75 Tm
(This case presents the issue of the admissibility of polygraph evidence \
in DOHA proceedings. )Tj
37.908 0 Td
(Because of the unique)Tj
-37.908 -1.375 Td
(nature of polygraphs, the novelty of the issue to DOHA proceedings,)Tj
0 0 0.933 rg
9.75 0 0 9.75 346.5918 717.75 Tm
(\(3\))Tj
ET
0 0 0.933 RG
0.75 w
q 1 0 0 1 346.5918 717 cm
0 0 m
11.369 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 357.9604 713.25 Tm
( and the need)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(to achieve judicial economy)Tj
-28.497 -1.125 Td
(whenever practical, the Board will provide guidance to the Administrativ\
e Judge and the parties about the kinds of)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(issues that need to be considered on remand in this case. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
22.771 0 Td
(See also)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
( Directive, Additional Procedural Guidance, Item 33.b.)Tj
-22.771 -1.125 Td
(\("If the case is remanded, the Appeal Board shall specify the action to\
be taken on remand."\).)Tj
0 -2.375 TD
(Nothing in Executive Order 10865 or the Directive addresses the issue of\
the admissibility of polygraph evidence.)Tj
0 0 0.933 rg
9.75 0 0 9.75 563.5234 648.75 Tm
(\(4\))Tj
ET
q 1 0 0 1 563.5234 648 cm
0 0 m
11.369 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 630.75 Tm
(Furthermore, Department of Defense Directive 5210.48 \("DoD Polygraph Pr\
ogram,")Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(December 24, 1984\) limits the use)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(of polygraph test results by the Department of Defense to make a decisio\
n adverse to a person, but is silent on the issue)Tj
T*
(of whether a person can offer polygraph test)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(results as a defense to a proposed adverse action by the Department of)Tj
T*
(Defense. )Tj
(Moreover, the once universal bar against the admissibility of polygraph \
evidence in federal court proceedings)Tj
T*
(is no)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(longer intact. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
7.693 0 Td
(See generally)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
5.414 0 Td
(, John E. Thomas, "Admissibility in Federal Criminal Case of Results of \
Polygraph)Tj
-13.107 -1.125 Td
(\(Lie Detector\) Test -- Post-Daubert Cases," 140 ALR Fed 525 \(1997\). \
)Tj
28.263 0 Td
(To the extent that)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(federal court decisions can be)Tj
-28.263 -1.125 Td
(relied on as persuasive authority in these proceedings, they do not prov\
ide a definitive answer to the issue of whether)Tj
T*
(polygraph test results are admissible. )Tj
15.052 0 Td
(However,)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(federal court decisions on the admissibility of polygraph test results)Tj
-15.052 -1.125 Td
(provide valuable insight and guidance on the issue.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(Applicant's right to a hearing with the opportunity to present evidence \
on her behalf does not include a right to have)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(polygraph test results admitted unconditionally. )Tj
19.33 0 Td
(Even in criminal cases, where the)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(defendant faces the possible loss of)Tj
-19.33 -1.125 Td
(life or liberty, a defendant does not have a constitutional right to sub\
mit polygraph test results in his or her defense.)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
T*
(United States v. Scheffer)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
9.831 0 Td
(, -- U.S. -- , 118 S.Ct.)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(1261 \(1998\); )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Castillo v. Johnson)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
22 0 Td
(, 141 F.3d 218, 221-22 \(5th Cir.)Tj
-31.83 -1.375 Td
(1998\).)Tj
0 0 0.933 rg
9.75 0 0 9.75 46.9961 444.75 Tm
(\(5\))Tj
ET
q 1 0 0 1 46.9961 444 cm
0 0 m
11.369 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 58.3647 440.25 Tm
( )Tj
(The right to due process under Executive Order 10865 and the Directive d\
oes not give Applicant a greater)Tj
-3.53 -1.125 Td
(right to present)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(polygraph tests results than a criminal defendant has under the Fifth an\
d Sixth Amendments of the U.S.)Tj
T*
(Constitution. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
5.445 0 Td
(Cf.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
( ISCR Case No. 96-0277 \(July 11, 1997\) at p. 3 \(applicant's right to \
confront)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(adverse witnesses is not)Tj
-5.445 -1.125 Td
(more expansive than the right to confrontation protected by the Sixth Am\
endment of the U.S. Constitution\). )Tj
43.409 0 Td
(Although)Tj
-43.409 -1.125 Td
(Applicant does not have an absolute right to submit)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(polygraph test results on her behalf, that does not mean she has no)Tj
T*
(right to offer such evidence. )Tj
11.496 0 Td
(Of course, absent a stipulation by the parties concerning the admissibil\
ity of the polygraph)Tj
-11.496 -1.125 Td
(evidence or a)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(waiver of objection by Department Counsel, Applicant has the burden of e\
stablishing its admissibility and)Tj
T*
(meeting any valid objection raised by Department Counsel.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(Even in those jurisdictions that have a rejected a)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
19.327 0 Td
( per se)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
( bar to the admission of polygraph evidence, the federal courts)Tj
-19.327 -1.125 Td
(have not simply let it be admitted routinely into evidence. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
23.355 0 Td
(See, e.g., United States v.)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(Cordoba)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.942 0 Td
(, 104 F.3d 225, 228 \(9th)Tj
-37.297 -1.125 Td
(Cir. 1997\); )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(United States v. Posado)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
14.193 0 Td
(, 57 F.3d 428, 436 \(5th Cir. 1995\). )Tj
(Because of the unique nature of polygraph)Tj
-14.193 -1.125 Td
(evidence, the courts have recognized the need to)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(consider various issues raised by polygraph evidence, when the parties)Tj
0 -1.375 TD
(have not stipulated to its admissibility.)Tj
0 0 0.933 rg
9.75 0 0 9.75 201.3203 267.75 Tm
(\(6\))Tj
ET
q 1 0 0 1 201.3203 267 cm
0 0 m
11.369 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 212.689 263.25 Tm
( )Tj
(Those issues include:)Tj
-16.391 -2.125 Td
(\(1\) are the results of the polygraph test relevant and material to the\
issues of the case? )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
34.515 0 Td
(See, e.g., United States v.)Tj
-34.515 -1.125 Td
(Pettigrew)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
3.888 0 Td
(, 77 F.3d 1500, 1515 \(5th Cir. 1996\); )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(United States v. Kwong)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
24.444 0 Td
(, 69 F.3d 663, 668)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(\(2d Cir. 1995\), )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(cert. denied)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
18.47 0 Td
(,)Tj
-46.802 -1.125 Td
(116 S.Ct. 1343 \(1996\); )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(United States v. Posado)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
18.999 0 Td
(, 57 F.3d 428, 432-33 \(5th Cir. 1995\); )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(United States v. Lech)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
23.887 0 Td
(, 895 F.Supp.)Tj
-42.886 -1.125 Td
(582, 585 \(S.D. N.Y. 1995\);)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(\(2\) is the probative value of the proffered polygraph evidence outweig\
hed by the amount of time and resources that)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(would be needed to decide its admissibility? )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
17.968 0 Td
(See, e.g., United States v. Gilliard)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.608 0 Td
(, 133)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(F.3d 809, 815 \(11th Cir. 1998\);)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
-31.577 -1.375 Td
(United States v. Urquidez)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
10.276 0 Td
(, 356 F.Supp. 1363, 1367 \(C.D. Cal. 1973\);)Tj
0 0 0.933 rg
9.75 0 0 9.75 347.3242 146.25 Tm
(\(7\))Tj
ET
q 1 0 0 1 347.3242 145.5 cm
0 0 m
11.369 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 116.25 Tm
(\(3\) has the party proffering the polygraph evidence given the other pa\
rty sufficient notice to adequately prepare to)Tj
T*
(respond to the proffered polygraph evidence? )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
18.437 0 Td
(See, e.g., United States v. Gilliard)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
13.608 0 Td
(, 133)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(F.3d 809, 812 and 816 \(11th Cir.)Tj
-32.045 -1.125 Td
(1998\);)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
( United States v. Croft)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
11.527 0 Td
(, 124 F.3d 1109, 1120 \(9th Cir. 1997\);)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
( United States v. Williams)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
25.666 0 Td
(, 95 F.3d 723, 730 \(8th Cir.)Tj
-37.192 -1.125 Td
(1996\);)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(\(4\) has there been a showing that a proffered witness is qualified to \
give )Tj
29.102 0 Td
(testimony about the reliability of polygraphs?)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
59 0 obj
<>/BS<>/Border[0 0 0]/PA<>/Rect[346.0 715.0 357.0 726.0]/Subtype/Link/Type/Annot>>
endobj
60 0 obj
<>/BS<>/Border[0 0 0]/PA<>/Rect[564.0 646.0 575.0 657.0]/Subtype/Link/Type/Annot>>
endobj
61 0 obj
<>/BS<>/Border[0 0 0]/PA<>/Rect[47.0 442.0 58.0 453.0]/Subtype/Link/Type/Annot>>
endobj
62 0 obj
<>/BS<>/Border[0 0 0]/PA<>/Rect[201.0 265.0 212.0 276.0]/Subtype/Link/Type/Annot>>
endobj
63 0 obj
<>/BS<>/Border[0 0 0]/PA<>/Rect[347.0 144.0 358.0 155.0]/Subtype/Link/Type/Annot>>
endobj
14 0 obj
<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/StructParents 1/Type/Page>>
endobj
64 0 obj
[66 0 R]
endobj
65 0 obj
<>stream
BT
/Artifact <>BDC
/TT0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 5 779 Tm
(96-0785.a1)Tj
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
0 -86 TD
(file:///usr.osd.mil/)Tj
7.166 0 Td
(...)Tj
(yComputer/Desktop/DOHA%20transfer/DOHA-Kane/dodogc/doha/industrial/Archi\
ved%20-%20HTML/96-0785.a1.html)Tj
49.74 0 Td
([7/2/2021 3:59:35 PM])Tj
EMC
ET
1 g
10 36 591.75 729.75 re
f
/Article <>BDC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
q
10 36 592 730 re
W n
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 755.25 Tm
(For the reasons that follow, the Board concludes the Administrative Judg\
e gave a legally unsustainable reason for)Tj
ET
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 741.75 Tm
(excluding Applicant's proffered polygraph evidence. )Tj
21.284 0 Td
(Because )Tj
3.582 0 Td
(the handling of the case)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(on remand will result in a new)Tj
-24.865 -1.125 Td
(decision, which could moot or otherwise affect Applicant's other appeal \
issue, it would be premature for the Board to)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(address Applicant's non-polygraph appeal issue.)Tj
0 -2.375 TD
(At the hearing, Applicant offered a report of a polygraph examination sh\
e underwent.)Tj
0 0 0.933 rg
9.75 0 0 9.75 426.5195 690.75 Tm
(\(2\))Tj
ET
0 0 0.933 RG
0.75 w
q 1 0 0 1 426.5195 690 cm
0 0 m
11.369 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 437.8882 686.25 Tm
( )Tj
(Applicant also indicated that)Tj
-35.157 -1.125 Td
(she intended to call as a witness the private polygrapher who performed \
the)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(polygraph examination \(Hearing Transcript)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(at pp. 40, 379\). )Tj
(Department Counsel objected to the polygraph report and to allowing the \
polygrapher to testify,)Tj
T*
(claiming: \(a\) the proffered polygraph)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(evidence would impermissibly introduce evidence that went to the "ultima\
te issue")Tj
T*
(in the case; and \(b\) surprise \(Hearing Transcript at pp. 18-20, 380-3\
83\). )Tj
28.908 0 Td
(Applicant's counsel responded by arguing)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(that a)Tj
-28.908 -1.125 Td
(day earlier Department Counsel knew that Applicant would be offering evi\
dence of a polygraph through a witness, and)Tj
T*
(that absent a showing of actual prejudice to the Government, Applicant's\
)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(right to a full and fair hearing should result in)Tj
T*
(admission of the polygraph evidence \(Hearing Transcript at pp. 19-20, 3\
84\).)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(Responding to Department Counsel's claim of surprise, the Administrative\
Judge ruled that the polygrapher could)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(testify, but Department Counsel would not be required to cross-examine t\
he)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(polygrapher that day, and Department)Tj
T*
(Counsel would be allowed additional time to prepare for cross-examinatio\
n of the polygrapher \(Hearing Transcript at)Tj
T*
(pp. 385, 386\). )Tj
(The Judge further ruled the)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(polygraph report would not be admitted and the polygrapher would not be)Tj
T*
(allowed to testify as to the issue of the truthfulness of Applicant or t\
he results of the polygraph examination because the)Tj
T*
(Judge)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(had the ultimate responsibility to decide whether Applicant was truthful\
or credible \(Hearing Transcript at pp.)Tj
T*
(385, 386, 388-90, 392\).)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(The Administrative Judge has the authority to rule on evidentiary matter\
s during the hearing. )Tj
37.407 0 Td
(Directive, Additional)Tj
-37.407 -1.125 Td
(Procedural Guidance, Item 10. )Tj
12.496 0 Td
(Those rulings are subject to review to determine)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(whether they are consistent with)Tj
-12.496 -1.125 Td
(pertinent provisions of Executive Order 10865 and the Directive \(Additi\
onal Procedural Guidance, Item 32.b.\) and)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(whether they are arbitrary, capricious, or contrary to)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(law \(Additional Procedural Guidance, Item 32.c.\). )Tj
41.484 0 Td
(In reviewing a)Tj
-41.484 -1.125 Td
(Judge's evidentiary rulings, the Board recognizes the practical need to \
give some latitude to the Judge, who often must)Tj
T*
(make)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(evidentiary rulings under the pressure of an ongoing hearing and without\
the luxury of being able to take those)Tj
T*
(rulings under advisement.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(Even if the Board concludes that an Administrative Judge made an erroneo\
us evidentiary ruling, such a conclusion is)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(not dispositive. )Tj
6.361 0 Td
(As a matter of judicial economy, the Board can affirm an)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(evidentiary ruling by a Judge on any proper)Tj
-6.361 -1.125 Td
(basis supported by the record, even if the basis was not the one relied \
on by the Judge. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
34.769 0 Td
(See, e.g., LaBarre v. Shepard)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
(, 84)Tj
-34.769 -1.125 Td
(F.3d 496, 500 \(1st Cir. 1996\);)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
/TT1 1 Tf
(American Home Assurance Co. v. American President Lines, Ltd.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
38.469 0 Td
(, 44 F.3d 774, 779 \(9th)Tj
-38.469 -1.125 Td
(Cir. 1994\); )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
(Metallurgical Industries, Inc. v. Fourtek, Inc.)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
22.801 0 Td
(, 790 F.2d 1195, 1207 \(5th Cir. 1986\). )Tj
(For the reasons)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(that)Tj
-22.801 -1.125 Td
(follow, the Board concludes the Judge made an erroneous ruling with resp\
ect to the proffered polygraph evidence, and)Tj
T*
(the state of the record below does not present the Board with any basis \
to)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(affirm the Judge's ruling on an alternate)Tj
T*
(ground.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(In DOHA proceedings, the Federal Rules of Evidence serve as a guide. )Tj
28.713 0 Td
(Directive, Additional Procedural Guidance, Item)Tj
-28.713 -1.125 Td
(19. )Tj
(The Board has cautioned against a strict application of the Federal Rule\
s of)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(Evidence in these proceedings. )Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
44.486 0 Td
(See, e.g.,)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
-44.486 -1.125 Td
(ISCR Case No. 97-0202 \(January 20, 1998\) at p. 2. )Tj
(Even assuming solely for purposes of deciding this appeal that the)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(Judge could apply the Federal Rules of)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(Evidence strictly to the polygraph evidence proffered by Applicant, the \
Judge's)Tj
T*
(reason for excluding that evidence is contrary to Federal Rule of Eviden\
ce 704. )Tj
31.989 0 Td
(In Rule 704, apart from an exception)Tj
-31.989 -1.125 Td
(that)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(has no relevance to DOHA proceedings, "testimony in the form of an opini\
on or inference otherwise admissible is)Tj
T*
(not objectionable because it embraces an ultimate issue to be decided by\
the trier of)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(fact." )Tj
36.089 0 Td
(Therefore, even under a strict)Tj
-36.089 -1.125 Td
(application of the Federal Rules of Evidence, the Judge erred by excludi\
ng the proffered polygraph evidence on the)Tj
T*
(basis that it went to an ultimate issue to be)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(decided by the Judge.)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(The Board has considered whether the record below presented any proper b\
asis for the Administrative Judge to exclude)Tj
0 -1.125 TD
(the proffered polygraph evidence. )Tj
13.799 0 Td
(If such a proper basis existed, the Board could)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(affirm the Judge's challenged ruling on)Tj
-13.799 -1.125 Td
(alternate grounds. )Tj
7.414 0 Td
(The Board has found none in the record below. )Tj
19.105 0 Td
(The question is not whether the Boards likes or)Tj
-26.52 -1.125 Td
(dislikes polygraph evidence. )Tj
11.664 0 Td
(The question is)Tj
/Span<>> BDC
( )Tj
EMC
(whether --- within the parameters of Executive Order 10865, the Directiv\
e,)Tj
-11.664 -1.125 Td
(and applicable principles of law -- an applicant has the right to seek t\
o present polygraph evidence that he or she)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
66 0 obj
<>/BS<>/Border[0 0 0]/PA<>/Rect[426.0 688.0 437.0 699.0]/Subtype/Link/Type/Annot>>
endobj
12 0 obj
<>
endobj
67 0 obj
<>
endobj
9 0 obj
<>
endobj
10 0 obj
<>
endobj
11 0 obj
<>
endobj
79 0 obj
(file:///usr.osd.mil/Home/OSD/OGC/JosephLM/_MyComputer/Desktop/DOHA%20transfer/DOHA-Kane/dodogc/doha/industrial/Archived%20-%20HTML/96-0785.a1.html)
endobj
78 0 obj
<>
endobj
80 0 obj
<>
endobj
68 0 obj
[19 0 R/XYZ 0 635.0 null]
endobj
69 0 obj
[18 0 R/XYZ 0 449.0 null]
endobj
70 0 obj
[18 0 R/XYZ 0 424.0 null]
endobj
71 0 obj
[18 0 R/XYZ 0 385.0 null]
endobj
72 0 obj
[18 0 R/XYZ 0 319.0 null]
endobj
73 0 obj
[18 0 R/XYZ 0 226.0 null]
endobj
74 0 obj
[18 0 R/XYZ 0 160.0 null]
endobj
75 0 obj
[18 0 R/XYZ 0 107.0 null]
endobj
76 0 obj
[19 0 R/XYZ 0 726.0 null]
endobj
77 0 obj
[19 0 R/XYZ 0 687.0 null]
endobj
4 0 obj
<>
endobj
xref
0 81
0000000000 65535 f
0000000016 00000 n
0000000141 00000 n
0000003657 00000 n
0000177657 00000 n
0000003535 00000 n
0000003590 00000 n
0000003751 00000 n
0000003778 00000 n
0000176465 00000 n
0000176774 00000 n
0000176816 00000 n
0000176277 00000 n
0000004717 00000 n
0000167351 00000 n
0000156553 00000 n
0000147268 00000 n
0000142078 00000 n
0000134203 00000 n
0000099019 00000 n
0000003881 00000 n
0000003927 00000 n
0000003976 00000 n
0000004290 00000 n
0000004066 00000 n
0000004098 00000 n
0000004130 00000 n
0000004162 00000 n
0000004194 00000 n
0000004226 00000 n
0000004258 00000 n
0000004931 00000 n
0000004956 00000 n
0000009666 00000 n
0000009715 00000 n
0000009750 00000 n
0000010260 00000 n
0000098700 00000 n
0000045416 00000 n
0000045683 00000 n
0000010709 00000 n
0000010982 00000 n
0000011468 00000 n
0000046297 00000 n
0000099219 00000 n
0000100986 00000 n
0000101443 00000 n
0000101719 00000 n
0000102217 00000 n
0000134417 00000 n
0000134442 00000 n
0000141754 00000 n
0000142289 00000 n
0000147482 00000 n
0000147514 00000 n
0000155907 00000 n
0000156230 00000 n
0000156767 00000 n
0000156820 00000 n
0000165738 00000 n
0000166061 00000 n
0000166384 00000 n
0000166705 00000 n
0000167028 00000 n
0000167565 00000 n
0000167590 00000 n
0000175954 00000 n
0000176362 00000 n
0000177237 00000 n
0000177279 00000 n
0000177321 00000 n
0000177363 00000 n
0000177405 00000 n
0000177447 00000 n
0000177489 00000 n
0000177531 00000 n
0000177573 00000 n
0000177615 00000 n
0000177023 00000 n
0000176858 00000 n
0000177184 00000 n
trailer
<]>>
startxref
177829
%%EOF