Beech,


Quote:

The article was referenced not to bolster my assertion that retired Philadelphia Police Lt. Brown passed a pre-employment polygraph exam, it was cited to explain the man's malfeasance and to point out the absurdidty of using the polygraph in a pre-employment setting to help determine future behavior.

That doesn't sound like an attack necessarily on polygraph.  It sounds more like you don't believe in the entire screening process.  You're saying that past behavior might not be a predicting factor for future behavior.  Not something I would completely disagree with--especially when it comes to "did you smoke marijuana 10 times or 11 times"... as if the eleventh time makes you a potential crook, but the first ten indicate good character.  Of course it would be nice to know if someone is an undetected felon or is affiliated with terrorist/foreign intelligence agencies (hopefully zero is the cutoff for those).  Either way, this argument is an overall suitability for employment in a sensitive positions issue--NOT a poly issue.  You have given one (of many I am sure) example of someone who might have beaten the poly or, quite possibly, had absolutely no prior history of deviant behavior, and still went bad.

Mark it down on the calendar.  I found something on which I agreed with Beech Trees. Don't get too excited though, because I'd like to add that he seems to just love pointing out every bad cop in the world as evidence that cops and polygraph(er)s are BAD.

Regards, my worthy nemesis, and good day.