{"id":3217,"date":"2001-10-22T15:30:08","date_gmt":"2001-10-22T20:30:08","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/?p=3217"},"modified":"2021-02-21T05:29:11","modified_gmt":"2021-02-21T10:29:11","slug":"7-football-players-dont-pass-polygraph-test","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/2001\/10\/22\/7-football-players-dont-pass-polygraph-test\/","title":{"rendered":"“7 Football Players Don’t Pass Polygraph Test”"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n\n\n

Brad Burke of the Peoria Journal <\/em>reports<\/a>. Excerpt:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

DUNLAP<\/strong> – Seven Dunlap High School football players on Sunday did not pass polygraph tests they hoped would salvage their seasons by proving they complied with the school’s athletic policy.<\/p>

Three other students – one boy’s soccer player and two football players, according to a source involved in the investigation – passed lie-detector tests and remained eligible for the football team’s Class 4A state playoff game Saturday against Addison Driscoll.<\/p>

Although an attorney speaking on behalf of the students’ parents did not rule out the possibility of future legal action against Dunlap’s athletic policy, both sides expressed satisfaction with the fairness of the polygraphs.<\/p>

“The review process that was of such media attention proved to be successful,” Dunlap Community School District Unit 323 Superintendent Bill Collier said in a written statement.<\/p>

“Student athletes who should not have been disciplined are not being disciplined. Student athletes who did not successfully pass the review have been disciplined.”<\/p>

The school initially suspected 15 student-athletes of attending an alcoholic party Oct. 7. Drinking or going to alcoholic functions is a violation of Dunlap’s athletic policy and is punishable by suspensions from athletic competition.<\/p>

Three student-athletes immediately admitted wrongdoing and were suspended, while two others agreed to take polygraphs but later withdrew and accepted suspensions, Collier’s statement said.<\/p>

The tests lasted nearly 45 minutes each and took place at the school, attorney Matt Jones, the parents’ legal counsel, told the Journal Star on Sunday.<\/p>

Prior to each test, a student and his parents met with the polygrapher, whom neither Jones nor Collier would name.<\/p>

The examiner described the process, listened to the students’ account of the party and constructed several questions based on their individual narratives, Jones said.<\/p>

All of the parties who were tested except one found the process fair, Jones said, adding that the disenchanted party so far has not outlined his intentions.<\/p>

There is little recourse for that party to contest the results. The courts have deemed polygraph tests inadmissible and therefore impossible to challenge, Jones said.<\/p>

The only legal action that now could transpire, Jones said, is a parent or group of parents contesting the school’s athletic policy.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n<\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Brad Burke of the Peoria Journal reports. Excerpt: DUNLAP – Seven Dunlap High School football players on Sunday did not pass polygraph tests they hoped would salvage their seasons by proving they complied with the school’s athletic policy. Three other students – one boy’s soccer player and two football players, according to a source involved …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[365],"class_list":{"0":"post-3217","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","6":"category-polygraph","7":"tag-illinois","8":"anons"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3217","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3217"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3217\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3218,"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3217\/revisions\/3218"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3217"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3217"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3217"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}