Angela Eagle refuses to take ‘lie detector’ test over allegations of threats and homophobic abuse

Paul Davies and Angela Eagle [Composite: Liverpool Echo].

Paul Davies and Angela Eagle [Composite: Liverpool Echo].

Nice move, Paul Davies.

Angela Eagle’s supporters might be right in saying that polygraph tests are not considered reliable evidence in most European judicial systems, but nobody is taking anybody to court (yet).

Instead, the vice-chair of the suspended Wallasey Labour Party has managed to make Ms Eagle refuse to take a lie detector test.

Now, how does that make her look ?

Reliable or not, it seems logical that Ms Eagle fears an adverse report if she is hooked up to a polygraph and asked whether claims of abuse, bullying, homophobia and threats at a Wallasey CLP meeting are true or lies.

Such a fear would indicate that her claims are false. Otherwise, why would she have reason to expect such a reading?

A member of the suspended Wallasey Labour party has challenged his MP to take a lie detector test over claims of threats and homophobic abuse.

Paul Davies has denied the allegations about a recent party meeting and says he would hook himself up to a polygraph if Angela Eagle and her supporters would.

However, a source close to the Wallasey MP said they stood by the claims and dismissed the suggestion of a lie detector test saying “polygraph tests are only extensively used in Britain on the Jeremy Kyle show”.

Source: Suspended Wallasey Labour Party member challenges MP Angela Eagle to take a lie detector test – Liverpool Echo

ADVERT




Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

17 thoughts on “Angela Eagle refuses to take ‘lie detector’ test over allegations of threats and homophobic abuse

  1. Rusty

    Maybe Angela eagle should be on the jeremy kyle show, just another lier to be exposed! As soon as jeremy corbyn wins the leadership contest miss eagle will be history.

  2. John

    Paul Davies should contact Jeremy Kyle to arrange or Eagle and Davies to have lie detector tests live on TV. How can Eagle object to that if she is innocent?

  3. Jeffrey Davies

    used in Britain on the Jeremy Kyle show”. yep thats whot shes got a show hmmm honesty with these blair babies seems like the indian man was right pale faces speaks with forked tongue

  4. Dez

    Totally brill way to flush out the actual truth from the spin. If controversial statements were backed up by those making such statement then having the courage to take a polygraph test then the public would really know what was going on once the spin and lies are removed. This for MPs, Store and sportswear supermarket owners, bankers, local politicians, judges, Tony Blair, Clinton etc etc etc A new career for Jeremy Kyle me thinks!!. The world would become a different place and the public would know just who to believe…..providing those operating the lie detector can be trusted…..ho hum

  5. Rose

    This blog, once interesting and informative, is becoming more and more like a bad episode of Jeremy Kyle. Come on, Mike. How utterly stupid is it to bring lie detectors into the matter? Might as well connect Jeremy Corbyn up to a polygraph and ask him if he thinks he can win the 2020 election. Or whether he thinks himself fit to be Prime Minister. Honestly.

    1. Mike Sivier Post author

      You only mentioned Jeremy Kyle because you saw him referenced in the article, didn’t you? How silly.
      Bear in mind that I’m not the one proposing the test – and that Ms Eagle is the one who’s afraid of it.
      Your comment about Jeremy Corbyn is a false argument, of course – trying to connect two separate things in order to boost your case. We’re all far too knowledgeable to countenance that nonsense here.

      Incidentally, I can’t help but notice a trend in a certain kind of commenter. They start by claiming the blog used to be good and then try to pretend that it has descended into silliness. So tell me – do you have a script? If so, who gave it to you? And will they be modifying it to make it less obvious?

      1. Rose

        I’m happy for readers of this blog to decide which of us is the glove puppet and/or following a line, Mike. But as I believe that you and your readership previously poured scorn on local authorities and government departments which introduced lie detectors to filter benefit claimants, innocent or not, when speaking on the telephone, am more than a little disappointed to see spurious devices resurrected on this blog to simply to take a pop at Angela Eagle. Poor show, Mr Sivier. A cheap tactic and a very poor show in respect to a serious matter in my honest opinion. Mike Sivier: The Jeremy Kyle of the Blogosphere. Feels good does it?

      2. Mike Sivier Post author

        I can’t say I really care whether you insult me with silly comparisons.
        Your comparison between people using lie detectors on the telephone and the polygraph test is risible. I can’t actually recall the article you mention as reference but there would be a huge difference. How would a telephone lie detector test work?
        Considering your comments, I think I’m happy to let the readers decide, too.

  6. Joan Edington

    Better still, have the entire HoC wired up to polygraphs and every speaker being made to plug in before opening their mouths. Well, maybe not. The vast majority of MPs would soon find out how to beat the machine and normal (dis-)service would be resumed.

  7. David Richardson

    A complete waste of time because 1) polygraphs are no more reliable than rolling a die and 2) she has already been proven to be a liar on these matters by direct witness reportage and other reliable means.

    1. Mike Sivier Post author

      If polygraphs are so bad, why are they used on Jeremy Kyle’s show, and why are the people using them asked to abide by what they say?

      1. John

        That’s entertainment!
        Kyle should never be taken seriously at all.
        It is all meaningless “puff”.

      2. Mike Sivier Post author

        I tend to agree.
        Still, the ‘lie detector’ proposal isn’t intended to provide court-level evidence, and everybody knows it. So, what’s the harm – unless Ms Eagle really is lying and fears that she’ll be exposed?

  8. mohandeer

    I think I can spot the difference between a spoon and a ladle. Rose will be out of a job when Corbyn is returned as party leader and the liars and cheats are exposed and deselected.

Comments are closed.