Tuesday, February 1, 2011

Lie Detector Test for Whistleblowers

QUESTION: Sir John, do you think the whistleblowing of Heidi Mendoza is truthful?

ANSWER: Speculation is obsolete. Be careful because whistleblowing is a lucrative business if malicious -- the group around Arroyo are experts in fabrication. It has always been my position that whistleblowers should undergo electronic Lie Detector Test while answering questions of a neutral and professional private investigator.

Integrity of the whistleblower becomes questionable if the time of whistleblowing is unreasonably delayed that would seem to appear like an opportunity taken advantage in the future. I can smell high probability of political motivation in the whistleblowing when it is not executed within 36 hours from the moment the person witnessed the anomalous transaction. A "natural" good person reacts against anomaly and irregularity right away at the point of impact, and normally obeys his/her emotional obligation to report or write about it within reasonable short amount of time while the anomalous act is still fresh.

In cases of delay of whistleblowing, the remedy is a Lie Detector Test while taking the affidavit. If she is telling the truth, then she should be up to the challenge.


They say that "Heidi's mentor on integrity was her father. 'Ang pagsasabi ng katotohanan, daan sa kaginhawaan,' is her treasured saying from her father who was a police officer."

My response to this is, "Oh I hate cops when they try to confront the suspect only after five years after personally witnessing the crime being redhandedly committed."


Besides, if she is given State Witness Protection status in an extraordinarily "speedy manner", hmmmmm I can smell the hands of politics.