Bob McCarty Writes

Nearly two weeks have passed since I published a post (“Is Tech ‘Turf War’ Putting U.S. Troops at Risk“) about my attempts to learn about the effectiveness — or lack thereof — of the military’s use of the Preliminary Credibility Assessment Screening System. Today, I wonder if officials at U.S. Central Command will continue the Army’s practice of stonewalling me when it comes to answering questions about the use of the hand-held lie detectors in combat zones.

The subject is important to me, especially when I consider a comment I received from an active-duty member of the Special Operations community who’s obviously familiar with the issues at stake:

“The bottom line is that the upper levels of command owe us a product that works. The CVSA has been tested under combat conditions and truly works!  What more proof do they want?”*

In an e-mail message received from Dave Foster, an Army civilian public affairs officer at the Pentagon, I was told not to anticipate hearing anything “until tomorrow at the earliest and perhaps early next week.”  “Tomorrow,” in this case, was 10 days ago, and “early next week” was one week ago.  After nothing came by either deadline, I sent a follow-up message to Foster Thursday evening.  Again, no response.

In yet another message to Foster, I asked this morning if I should take the Army’s stonewalling as an indication that I should resort to filing a Freedom of Information Act request.  That produced a response from Foster in which he indicated he was out of the office taking care of an ailing family member and advised me to “Take such action as you deem appropriate.”

Soon after, I took Foster’s advice and contacted Lt. Col. Lee Packnett, another Army PAO at the Pentagon, whose name had been given me April 9 by Chris Fausett, vice president of polygraphy at Lafayette Instrument Company, manufacturer of the PCASS.  Until today, I had deemed it unnecessary to establish contact with more than one person on the uniform-wearing side of the matter.

In an e-mail sent to the colonel at 9:47 a.m. Central, I explained the 11-day history of my exchanges with Foster and asked him to respond to the same set of PCASS-related questions I had asked Foster.  Soon after, I received a message from Colonel Packnett.  He explained that I should contact Air Force Maj. John Redfield, a public affairs officer at CentCom, since “The Army (only bought the equipment) Central Command is the user.”

In other words, Packnett referred me to the folks from whom Foster was awaiting answers from “in theatre.”

A few minutes before 11 a.m. Central, I sent a message to Major Redfield that included the following list of questions, slightly modified from the ones sent 11 days ago to officials at the Pentagon:

Q1: How many of the initial-purchase PCASS devices were deployed and in which countries were they deployed?

Q2: How frequently was the PCASS device used in the field during the past year?

Q3: After one year of use, does CentCom consider the PCASS device effective?  If so, please explain why.  If not, why not?

Q4: Does CentCom have plans to continue, expand or otherwise modify the use of PCASS devices in the field?  If so, please describe.  If not, why?

Q5: Has the use of the PCASS device been credited with directly saving any American lives or thwarting any enemy operations?

Q6: Is there anything else noteworthy about the PCASS?  Please explain.

Only 11 minutes later, I received a promising response from Major Redfield:

I will have to locate the PCASS expert within the headquarters here and see what information I can get.  I will see if I can get you an update by the close of business today.  At the very latest, I will tell you what I have by Tuesday morning (April 21, 2009).

The major’s message leaves me feeling cautiously optimistic.  Stay tuned…

*NOTE: CVSA is an acronym for Computer Voice Stress Analyzer®, a technology its manufacturer says was used in Iraq and Afghanistan and led the Defense Department to create the PCASS system.

* * *

UPDATE 4/21/09 at 10:25 a.m. Central: I received an e-mail from Major Redfield just more than an hour ago.  He explained that he is “still looking” for a PCASS expert within CentCom headquarters.

UPDATE #2 — 4/21/09 at 4:35 p.m. Central: No information from Major Redfield who, I imagine, is running into brick walls (i.e., Army brass who don’t want to discuss the sensitive subject).

UPDATE #3 — 4/21/09 at 4:55 p.m. Central: I received a message which seems to indicate, at a minimu, that Major Redfield is trying to get answers for me.  “Mr. McCarty, answers are coming, now that I’ve got the right source,” he wrote.  “I’m just not sure how quickly I will have the response.  I don’t believe it should be more than a couple of days.”

UPDATE #4 — 4/24/09 at 4:15 p.m. Central: Major Redfield at CentCom public affairs sent me yet another e-mail, saying, “Mr. McCarty, the PCASS folks inform me that they need one more business day to finish coordinating the response.  They say they will have it to me by noon on Monday.” I replied by saying, in part, “This is killing me, John.  As a former USAF PAO and corporate public relations veteran, I can’t help but think I’m smelling a big, fat rat (i.e., a “cover up”).  It’s simply taking too long to get answers.” More on Monday.  I hope.