George W. Maschke wrote on Jul 21^st, 2016 at 5:05am:

Thank you for sharing your fiancé's experience. It is a mistake for anyone accused of a crime to submit to any polygraph "test." Law enforcement agencies use the polygraph as a ruse to get suspected criminals to agree to be interrogated without a lawyer. The examinee's "failing" may be part of the interrogation plan. I would be happy to review the recording of your fiancé's polygraph interrogation along with the polygraph data and provide a written critique that might be useful in a pretrial motion. In a recent New Mexico case, post-polygraph statements made by a defendant were ruled inadmissible owing to questions about their voluntariness: https://antipolygraph.org/blog/2016/06/26/federal-judge-throws-out-fbi-post-polygraph-confession-over-concerns-about-voluntariness/ Some of the pleadings, facts, and arguments from that case may be of interest to your fiancé's lawyer. They are available here: https://antipolygraph.org/litigation.shtml#tennison My contact details are in my signature block below.

What is also alarming is the fact that, in popular literature and TV programs, the polygraph continues to be mythologized unquestioningly as that final and faithful arbiter of guilt or innocence, and the ultimate step in
determination of guilt or innocence of suspects!

I also find it alarming, as evidenced by many of the posts on AP, that the use of the polygraph on parolees and sex offenders seems to be expanding. :P