Mike,

My advice to anyone suspected of a crime is to refuse the polygraph, get a lawyer, and not speak with police without your lawyer present.

Polygraph "testing" is a fraud, and it's used by police as a pretext for interrogating suspects without a lawyer present. Interrogation tactics can be highly manipulative, and innocent suspects have been coerced into making false confessions. Your prior agreement to submit to this bogus test is not binding. You should get a criminal defense lawyer. Any such lawyer worth his salt will advise you to refuse the polygraph, and you can refer the police to your lawyer when next they contact you.

For more on why you should not speak with police regardless of whether a polygraph is involved, see these presentations by law professor James Duane and police interrogator George Bruch:

i was accused of a crime and went down to the station for interrogation... I answered there questions and asked if im willing to take a polygraph..i responded " sure no problem" but did not sign anything,,, they will be calling me in a week. Now i see taking the test is not in my best interest. WHat do i tell them when they call and ask for me to come down? I skimmed through the book but ran into a conflict .....

Complete Honesty
A second approach is to be completely honest with your polygrapher.
Tell him that you know the lie behind the lie detector. Explain to
him that you understand that the true purpose of the “stim test” is
to dupe you into believing in the validity of polygraphic lie detection.
Tell him that you understand the trickery behind “control” question
“tests”—whether probable- or directed-lie. Explain that you understand the difference between “control,” relevant, and irrelevant questions and that you have studied and know how to employ polygraph
countermeasures. Give him a printout of this book to prove it in a
way that he will not be able to later deny. Explain to him that you
are not a suitable candidate for polygraphic interrogation, and request
that your polygraph “testing” be waived.

then it says


If you’ve been polygraphed before, you can mention it. But don’t
tell your polygrapher that you’ve read this book or that you’ve
done research on the Internet and visited such websites as
AntiPolygraph.org! If you admit to having researched polygraphy,
your polygrapher will become suspicious. His next questions may
well be, “Why have you educated yourself so much about the polygraph? Do you have something to fear from it?” Instead, provide a
general answer to his question about what you know about polygraphy,"


what do i do?

Your decesion is best resolved by a private exam with an experienced examiner.  The exam results would be confidential, only released to you and your attorney.  Having done a number of similiar tests, I will warn you this is one of the most difficult for both subject and examiner.  But, polygraph, with all its flaws, is still one of the only ways to attempt to prove a negative.  Do not risk exposure to an LEA exam.

I think your decision to refuse the polygraph is a wise one. Should you need to justify your decision in court, you can explain that since the time you initially expressed your willingness to take a polygraph, you have learned about the unreliability of polygraphy. In doing so, feel free to mention this website. Chapter 1 of our e-book, The Lie Behind the Lie Detector (and the sources cited therein) provides a thorough debunking of polygraphy. You may wish to provide the court a printout.

Other documentation you can cite in support of your decision to refuse the polygraph includes Professor William G. Iacono's article, "Forensic 'Lie Detection': Procedures Without Scientific Basis":

https://antipolygraph.org/articles/article-018.shtml

If your lawyer were to contact former FBI scientist and supervisory special agent Dr. Drew C. Richardson through this website, you may also obtain a customized and signed copy of his "Evaluation and Opinion of CQT Polygraphy:

https://antipolygraph.org/articles/article-028.shtml

It is not "being uncooperative with the process" to refuse a polygraph. Rather, it's being rational. Those who would rely on such pseudoscientific nonsense as polygraphy in such a serious matter as this are guilty of exercising extremely poor judgment.

I have been accused of sexual abuse against my daughters by a bitter Ex-wife. there has been a police investigation and forensic interviews with the kids, three social service investigations, and I have submitted to a phsyco-sexual evaluation and in all cases it was unfounded but she keeps pushing and now her attorneys and the Child family investigator want me to take a polygraph which I had asked them to do in the beginning and they said the case was to complex and they preferred the phsyco-sexual test instead. I am now refusing to take the polygraph and the courts have upheld my right to do so but are warning me that it may be viewed as being uncooperative with the process. I asked my attorney what that means and she said I was "being squezed" and that failure to take it means my character will be impuned in court and I could loose my kids to foster care. I have raised them on my own for a year and a half now, and it all comes down to this! come on what the hell is wrong with these people. anybody out there know if they can do that?