ACSOL’s Conference Calls

Conference Call Recordings Online
Dial-in number: 1-712-770-8055, Conference Code: 983459


Monthly Meetings | Recordings (4/17 Recording Uploaded)
Emotional Support Group Meetings
ACSOL’s Online EPIC Conference: Empowered People Inspiring Change Sept 17-18, 2021

Commentary

Kat’s Blog: Polygraphs and Integrity

Watching one of those forensic tv shows, a police officer was accused of murdering his wife.  All the evidence pointed to him as the killer. He took a polygraph and passed. He still went to jail. Later, re-creation of the murder scene and testimony by expert witnesses on the angles of gunshots found the officer not guilty, the murder was instead, a suicide.

Passing a polygraph in this case, as in many cases, didn’t really seem to matter. Failing a polygraph is what gets the fingers pointing and tongues wagging, “see there, he failed the lie detector test, he’s guilty for sure.” We’ve been conditioned by the media to believe that polygraphs detect lies.

The issue of polygraphs is strange. If the courts don’t believe in their reliability, if their results are inadmissible, why then are they still being used for maintenance and monitoring of registrants on probation or under supervision?  Either they’re accurate or they’re not, you can’t have it both ways.

According to the US Courts, polygraph examinations are given at the discretion of the probation officer “to ensure compliance of supervision and treatment programs.” Their purpose according to the courts is to “serve the statutory sentencing purposes of public protection, deterrence and rehabilitation”.

But if they’re not foolproof, then how are they ensuring, protecting, deterring or rehabilitating anyone? And when polygraphs are failed or inconclusive for no apparent reason, what does that do to the integrity of the registrant taking the test?

I recently heard from a registrant that had routinely passed all his polygraphs while on probation. Suddenly, he failed two in a row. Now his P.O and treatment counselors were questioning whether he was a liar. He knew he had the full trust of family and friends, yet he couldn’t help but wonder, what they were thinking, were they starting to question his integrity, did they believe the test results which he knew had to be incorrect?

The registrant was upset, and rightly so. He was angry that the integrity which he had struggled for years to rebuild, was now in question.  He hadn’t strayed from his probation or course of treatment, hadn’t re-offended or had any thoughts of re-offending. He was doing everything he was supposed to, following all the requirements and yet a polygraph result was being used to infer that he was lying, being deceitful.  In fact, his P.O.  went so far as to tell him there would be “serious consequences” if he failed the next polygraph.

Polygraphs measure and record physiological responses such as heart rate, blood pressure, breathing patterns and galvanic skin response when a person is asked and responds to questions. The polygraph examiner takes those physiological measurements, interprets the results and offers an “opinion”, somewhat subjective, regarding any deception on the test taker’s part.

Here we have a registrant, adamant that he’d done nothing wrong and a polygraph result labeling him as being deceitful.

Now, let’s add  a few strange facts into the mix.

During the same few months that this registrant failed his 2 polygraphs, several others in the same treatment group who had also routinely passed their tests, failed their polygraphs as well.

This polygraph technician routinely collaborated with another technician regarding test results.

During those few months of “failed” polygraphs, the polygraph testing company’s state contract was up for renewal but was under-bid by another company. (Later, that contract would fall through and this company would win back their contract, at the new, increased, test rate.)

The registrant with the 2 failed polygraphs had taken both failed exams in the early morning (the time had been scheduled for him, not by him.) Even though test takers are advised to get a good night’s sleep prior to taking the exam, this registrant was required to take both tests after having worked until 1AM the morning of the exam and having gotten very little sleep.

In treatment group when registrants discussed their anger and anxiety over recently failing polygraphs for no apparent reason, counselors asked what they could do to help the registrants pass their exams. (Of course, there was nothing they could do.)

Long story short, during the next round of polygraphs, most of the registrants, including the one with the 2 failed polygraphs, passed.

The test questions were the same as those asked during the previously failed tests. No one had deviated from their supervision requirements, no one had re-offended. Everything was pretty much the same, only this time people were passing their tests.

The treatment counselors and P.O.s were happy.  They told the registrants how proud they were that they had passed their exams.

Really?

Registrants being forced to take polygraphs that bring their integrity in to question, polygraphs that are scheduled with no consideration as to a registrant’s work/sleep schedule, an unusual amount of “failed” polygraph exams when state contracts just happen to be on the line?

Of course, there’s no proof that anything’s amiss here, but it all sounds a little sketchy, a little too co-incidental. It’s one of those things that make you think, “Hmmm”.

What bothers me is bringing a registrant’s integrity in to question and threatening them with serious consequences when they fail a polygraph. Polygraphs are not 100% accurate and there seems to be numerous physiological issues that can skew the results. People have lied and passed polygraphs and people have told the truth and still failed.

Registrants are assumed to be “deceitful” and threatened with “serious consequences” if they fail a polygraph.  On the flip side, when they pass the exam, treatment counselors felt that a “we’re so proud of you” comment would instantly erase the doubts of integrity and deceitfulness that had been heaped upon the registrants just weeks before?

New Year, new price increase, same old polygraph technology.

Hmmm.

 

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...  
  • Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  • Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  • Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  • Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  • Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  • We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  • We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address.
  • Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  • Please do not post in all Caps.
  • If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links.
  • We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  • We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  • Please choose a user name that does not contain links to other web sites
  • Please do not solicit funds
  • Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  
 
16 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Polygraphs themselves are garbage and if you know what you are doing you can manipulate them however you want. I think they do however serve one good purpose and that is to extract information from the person who believes that they work. If you believe that it works you are more likely to come clean about something before you think the polygraph examiner reports that you are being deceptive. That said nothing good can come from taking a polygraph if you have a choice.

I believe they are primarily used as an intimidation tactic to coerce people to make statements that match LE’s expectations. If they want a specific response to a question (i.e. admit guilt) and your pre-exam interview answers don’t match that expectation, an unethical (i.e. the one LE likes to use) examiner will bully you during the pre-exam interview to manipulate the end result of the exam itself. After all, it’s the body’s reaction they care about during the exam questions, not the actual answers themselves, unless of course the answers admit guilt. I highly advise those required to take exams… Read more »

@Kat

All about the money and the political connections one can have. See the recent Colorado legislation there was overturned because they were gonna do away government contracted for polygraph testing because people on the board needed their income instead of having integrity when using junk science such as this.

During the time I was on supervision here in Wisconsin I took the polygraph test many times. It was explained to me that a revocation could not be initiated solely based on a failed polygraph test. A revocation could, however, be initiated for any facts that were revealed by the parolee/probationer during the pre and post interviews. In other words, once you failed the test the goal of the test administer was to get you to admit to something. They also tried during the pre-test interview to get some dirt, but the post test interview is where they pushed really… Read more »

In the 10th Circuit, even while under supervision, you can’t be forced or coerced to even answer questions that could implicate you in an offense other than one you were convicted of (See U.S. v von Behren (10th Cir., 2016)). That would amount to forced self incrimination. This doesn’t apply to answering questions about probation violations that don’t provide evidence of a new crime. Don’t be influenced by the “if you have nothing to hide, why not” argument. It is essential for citizens to assert their rights in order to reinforce constitutional boundaries on police. Otherwise they become eroded. I… Read more »

The use of polygraphs and integrity in the same sentence strikes me as oxymoronic haha.

I had to take several of these while on parole. What a joke they are. First off they are given by a company that is contracted by your treatment provider so they are on the treatment providers side to begin with. Their mission is to trip you up. One of the polys I took came out with one deception. Of course I knew I was telling the truth on the subject question. I do recall what may have caused the “fail”. At the time of answering the question my mind went to a situation that I had to work with… Read more »

Polygraphs as lie detectors are every bit as mythological as Wonder Woman’s magic lasso, coincidentally another creation of the polygraph’s inventor and who, oddly enough, denounced his own invention shortly after its use in police interrogations began to expand. Changes in heart rates, breathing rates, and movement are not standardized or standardizable, will always vary by person, environment, and circumstance, and obviously aren’t exclusive to lying. Since my probation was revoked (essentially for “failing” a polygraph and not being able to afford another), I decided to challenge everything in the RSO system, polygraphs included. I flat out tell the administrator… Read more »

Despite what certain “experts” claim no definitive scientific connection has been found between anything measured when asking questions and lying or telling the truth. In fact during many of my polygraphs I was told to lie on purpose multiple times.

Gary Ridgway the Green River Killer famously passed the polygraph in 1987 while another man who was innocent failed.

The cops released him allowing him to murder for more than another decade before being caught in 2001 on DNA evidence.

The polygraph and the Registry failed to protect society from real dangerous individuals while touting success of keeping “paper predators” in check.

Polygraphs and their machines are nothing but BS, and I can’t believe that some so-called smart people make us believe they work. I have seen these 1930s “machines”. They still look the same, packed in a little suitcase. Really, they can tell if someone is lying? Wow, I didn’t know technology has come this far. Why don’t they use them in court then, save the time of having a jury? These machines can NOT, I repeat can NOT detect lies. All they may detect is nervousness, like a blood pressure machine. My blood pressure is always through the roof at… Read more »

IMO, The intent of Polygraphs is to get people to talk and get additional confessions. The more that registrants “believe” that they are real detectors of truth, the easier it is for the interrogator managing the test is able to use it as a way to get people to give them additional information that they otherwise would not.

I have been on BOTH sides of the machine; as a DoD contractor and as a probationer. Here are some tidbits of information you might find useful… Auto Scoring: Depending upon the state body that certifies polygraph examiners; the machine may or may not, be operating in “auto score” mode. The California Association of Polygraph Examiners does not permit use of auto score mode. If you can sincerely emulate (or even have) a “Gomer Pyle” or “Forrest Gump” personality, you are more likely to pass. Since the machine detects sudden physiological changes in you body; keeping your thoughts “blank” does… Read more »

Innocent people should not take them. The chance that you will fail them does not make it worth it. However, guilty people should always take them. There’s a chance they will be wrong and say the guy passed.

Always remember the only liar in the room is the examiner. Remember when everyone thought plants had feelings and could feel pain? Where did they come up with that? In the 1960s Cleve Backster, an interrogation specialist with the CIA, conducted research that led him to believe that plants can communicate with other lifeforms. He hooked up a plant to a polygraph machine and subjected it to stimulus like tearing it’s leaves ECT. The machine gave results when the plant was yelled at or injured. He wrote his hypothesis that plants feel pain and have emotions.

My father was a cop.

He told me repeatedly that no same person would ever submit to a polygraph, regardless of their guilt. Lucky for him, he stopped being a cop before they became mandatory for cops, lol.

16
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x
.