Unfortunately, inappropriate and unprofessional behavior appears to be well-tolerated within the polygraph community.  Polygraphers currently enjoy a level of insulation from oversight unparalleled in our government.  Complaining to the American Polygraph Association and/or to state polygraph associations does little good.  These agencies are often too well controlled by polygraphers to engage in impartial investigations. 

To see an example of how complaints against polygraphers often go nowhere, feel free to check out the following link. 

http://www.stoppolygraph.com/polygraph/statement3.htm

If you want to do something to help curb polygraph abuse, I suggest writing to some prominent Senators and telling them that you would like to see the protections of the Employee Polygraph Protection Act extended to ALL Americans.

Names, addresses, and a sample letter can be found here:

http://www.antipolygraph.org/get.shtml

The Lie Behind the Lie Detector has been downloaded over 5000 times.  Unfortunately, our "Get Involved" page has only been visited 330 times.  I think it is fair to assume that not everyone who visited the "Get Involved" page has decided to write letters.  Therefore, every letter counts, so please consider writing a few if you found our book informative.  Comprehensive legislation to protect police officers and all public employees (and applicants for these positions) is likely to be the only way that we will ever eliminate the polygraph scourge.


Last modification: Gino J. Scalabrini - 01/31/01 at 04:36:59


Last modification: Gino J. Scalabrini - 01/31/01 at 04:37:58

cop's wife,

As this person was hired despite the polygrapher's opinion, I retract my suggestion that he should definitely request a re-test: he should not (nor should any employee) volunteer for polygraph "testing."

Your husband's department would do well to stop assessing the honesty and integrity of applicants based on the voodoo science of polygraphy.

Last modification: George Maschke - 01/31/01 at 02:21:12

I forgot to say that the officer was hired anyway but is concerned about this and how it could come back to haunt him in the future. They aren't going to make him re-test as it would be the same examiner and would probably fail him again.
 
LOL- police depts are political machines- you ain't telling me anything we don't know. That is 50% or more of an officer's stress.

Thanks again!
cops wife

Thanks for your quick responses. I and my husband both downloaded and read the book. Wish we had found it sooner. So many of the things that were qouted this examiner said and did exactly. They evidently have had problems with this examiner. It is the only one in this area so they have to use him and rely on the background investigations. The examiner has no connection with the local dept. He works for the state agency.
Thanks for the advice Distrustful, my husband hasn't mentioned to anyone his results, other than his Chief. The only reason my husband knew of the new mans test was becuase he is doing his backgound check. 
However I am going to share this site, and we are going to complain about this examiner and many of his inappropraite comments. Thanks again!

Cops Wife

Distrustful's advice is correct.  Polygraphs are indeed "tools of convenience."  They are often used to conveniently circumvent fair and ethical hiring practices.  The examiner can easily manipulate the entire polygraph process, causing to cause a designated individual to “fail.” On the other hand, people with connections (such as your husband) often have their polygraph results discarded, or are given numerous opportunities to “re-test.”  Even with Federal Agencies, there is no uniform appeal process for "failed" polygraphs.  Those with connections, or "hooks" in police slang, are often allowed to repeat the “test” numerous times until a "pass" is achieved.  Those without connections have their letters requesting “re-tests” ignored, or at best receive additional copies of a form letter stating that the agency had “other, more qualified applicants.”

As for your husband's friend, I would advise that he read The Lie Behind the Lie Detector .  You may wish to read it as well.  It is available as a free download on this site at:
http://www.antipolygraph.org/pubs.shtml

He should certainly request a "re-test" (although there is no certainty that the department will grant it).  After already being declared deceptive, he has little to lose.  He should also consider using polygraph countermeasures to protect himself from another false positive.   

Keep in mind that if he produces a "passing" chart on the “re-test,” it is overwhelmingly likely that the polygrapher will arbitrarily accuse him of using countermeasures.   

Before a polygraph, the operator almost always asks the examinee if he/she as been polygraphed before.  If so, he often asks about the results, and tries to obtain as much detail about them as possible.  This allows him to tune the test to reach the same conclusion as the previous polygrapher, thus preserving the false appearance of validity with this “test.” After all, having a person pass one polygraph and then fail another a few weeks later on the same issues would be a tacit admission that the whole process is a fraud (which it is).   
   
Thus, even if your husband's friend is lucky enough to have a second "test" granted, and he is also lucky enough to get a different polygrapher than the first one who "failed" him, he still faces an uphill battle.

I wish him the best of luck.

cop's wife,

It seems irregular that the polygrapher at first refused to say on which questions this person "showed deception." Those questions are typically the subject of a post-test interrogation.

This applicant should read Chapter 5 of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector (503kb PDF), which discusses grievance procedures:

http://antipolygraph.org/lie-behind-the-lie-detector.pdf

He should definitely request a re-test, but he also needs to educate himself about polygraphy before submitting to a second polygraph interrogation.


Last modification: George Maschke - 01/31/01 at 00:38:25

cop's wife,

Your husband is very fortuante.  But, I think it shows that polygraphs are really tools of convienance. I have had many conversations with officers from city, county, state, and federal agencies that have stated that if a department really wants you, you will pass or as in your husbands case the results are overlooked.  Please rememeber police departmenst are political machines. Also, in most cases departments do not accept inconclusive results.  The other guy may not be so lucky.   

  Also, if I were your husband I would not advertise to people that he was hired with inclusive results.  Their may be a line of rejected applicants and attorneys knocking on this p.d.'s doors

My husband was hired by a dept. but had to take a polygraph. He has never done anything that made it a concern for him but the guy said he was trying to manipulate the machine and that he hated giving tests to people already hired...blah, blah,blah. My husbands came back inconclusive. Since the cheif knew him well he was hired anyway. Well, another man is trying to get on with the dept. he is well known to the dept. already and also is an honest person with nothing to hide. He failed his test. By the same polygrapher. At first the man refused to tell him where he showed decpetion and then said he showed it under narcotics and theft. Any advice? Should he try to take it over?
Thanks!