Mision-Poly:


I too want to become active in helping to educate an unaware public about the abuses of the so-called lie detector.  I love your idea about the fliers, HOWEVER, I strongly urge you NOT to encourage people to write on public restroom stalls.

This is a serious debate.  The writings and research are difficult reading for even an educated mind to make its way through.  To try to create awareness of an issue through petty vandalism only demeans the absolute validity of the argument.

Batman,

As I recall, you cheerily embraced the tradition of public restroom graffiti in another message thread.

Bnickell,

Check with your lawyer, but I believe that polygraph "evidence" is only admissible in Ohio in cases where both the defendant and the prosecution stipulate to its admissibility. A common ploy used by prosecutors who don't have a case is to invite a suspect to take a polygraph test. The suspect is told that if he passes, no charges will be filed. As a "minor detail," the suspect is told that before the polygraph test, he must sign an agreement stipulating that the results of the test (the polygrapher's opinion) will be admissible as evidence in court.

Innocent suspects, hoping to clear themselves of suspicion, have agreed to such terms, only to find themselves falsely accused of deception. One such person was Floyd "Buzz" Fay of Perrysburg, OH. Based largely on polygraph "evidence," he was wrongly convicted of a murder he did not commit, and was sentenced to life in prison. Only because of the diligence of his public defender, Adrian Cimerman, who solved the crime and obtained a confession from the getaway car driver, did Mr. Fay regain his freedom after serving two years of his life sentence. You'll find more about this case at pages 264-267 of David Lykken's book, A Tremor in the Blood: Uses and Abuses of the Lie Detector (2nd edition, Plenum Trade, 1998).

In Ohio, you also have at least one judge who seems to believe in polygraphy and would like to expand the admissibility of polygraph "evidence." See my 30 Sep. 2000 letter to Judge Robert S. Kraft of the Hamilton Co. Court of Common Pleas. (I received no reply from Judge Kraft.)

One way you can help to put an end to polygraphy is to tell everyone you can about the information you've learned on this website. Polygraphy depends on public ignorance for its survival. When enough people come to realize that it's a fraud, the polygraph house of cards will collapse.

damaged,

I read the article you speak of. It is disturbing that the department involved apparently decided to conduct a polygraph dragnet rather than a serious investigation, and actually relied on the polygraph to exculpate those who "passed."

As you're no doubt aware, anyone can beat a polygraph "test," and to rely on it to include or exclude suspects is just plain stupid. Similarly, no adverse inference should be inferred against those who refuse to submit to such nonsense.

Perhaps we could work together to help more people to learn the truth about polygraphs, especially in your home town, where your reputation is on the line. For example, I'd be happy to write a letter to the editor of the newspaper that published the article (and also to the reporter who wrote it). And I'd be happy to speak about polygraph issues with any print, radio, or television reporters who contact you about this matter. (Check your private messages, where you'll find my phone number.)

One thing you can do to help protect your reputation is to refer those who might question your refusal to be polygraphed (for example, members of your city council, and the officers of your department) to this website. In particular, they should see Chapter 3 of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector, which exposes polygraphy for the fraud that it is. (You might want to print out a few copies; if you put the PDF file on a floppy disk and take it to a copy shop like Kinko's, they can print it out double-sided and put a spiral binding on it.) Those who have read it should understand why a truthful person would refuse to submit to one of these asinine "tests."

In addition, if you would like to make a formal public statement about your polygraph experience (that is, the consequences of refusing to be polygraphed), we'd be happy to publish it on the AntiPolygraph.org Personal Statements page. See, as an example, former FBI Special Agent Mark Mallah's statement.