Covert 1,
I agree with Gino's observations and would like to add a few of my own.
With regard to your point #4 above, it is probably not a good idea to discuss one's religion with a polygrapher. I've been perusing articles on behavioral assessment in the American Polygraph Association quarterly,
Polygraph, and have found it claimed that if a subject speaks of his devoutness/religious convictions, it should be taken as a possible indication of deception. Some polygraphers may well believe this to be true. It would be prudent not to bring up one's religious beliefs during a polygraph interrogation.
With regard to your point #5, it is generally not a good idea to enter into a philosophical debate with a polygrapher. If things are going badly (i.e., the polygrapher has accused you of deception in a "post-test" interrogation) it is better to re-affirm one's truthfulness and to terminate the interrogation. Your words can be twisted against you as the following example from former FBI special agent Mark Mallah's 25 July 2001
letter to the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary illustrates:
Quote:Background- One year into the investigation and grasping for theories, the FBI first raised their suspicion that I had classified documents stolen from a briefcase inside the trunk of my wife's car. The trunk was broken into on a Friday night while my wife and I joined some friends for a social outing. A non-FBI friend had his briefcase stolen as well, and we immediately reported the theft to the police. The FBI polygraphed me (the polygraph interrogator was Mark Johnson) on this incident, which had occurred about four years prior to this polygraph.
What I said- That I was sure there were no classified documents in the briefcase because it was my regular practice not to take classified documents out of the office, and it was on a Friday night, so even if my practice was otherwise, I would have no need for any classified documents over the weekend. Johnson polygraphed me, then insisted that I was showing deception on this issue. He challenged me as to how I could be so sure about it, especially when the incident was four years ago. Did I inventory the briefcase before it was stolen, he asked? I responded that I could look out the window and see it was daylight, but if I did not actually see the sun and he asked me if I was absolutely sure that the sun was really there, then no, I could not be 100% sure of that either, but I could be as sure as I could possibly be. The same with the absence of classified documents in the briefcase, I told him.
The FBI Version- "Mallah admitted that he could not be 100% certain that there were no classified documents in the briefcase the night it was stolen. Mallah stated that he had no specific knowledge of what classified document could have been in the briefcase."
When things "go bad," politely, but firmly, terminate the interrogation.