Twoblock,
Wow, you're line of questioning really shows a distrust for law enforcement. Not offended, since TV shows, news, and perhaps your own experiences with the wrong person, could perpetrate such views. I'll try to address al of your questions.
Quote:1. Since LE personnel possess a punitive mentality (not knocking LE), do any of you honestly know any polygraphers who are shy of this trait? Doesn't this trait preclude an honest test?
I hope we are all free of a punitive mentality -- not just in poly but as investigators. Perhaps I am a poor misguided idealist but I stil believe that effective LE demands you are a neutral seeker of truth. Seeking punitive action is for prosecutors, judges, and juries to handle. I'd cause myself undue stress and become a cynic if I worried about what punishment came as a result of my investigation. Only rookies get upset if a perp gets a light sentence or gets off. You do your job and move on. But, yes, someone with such a personality wherein they saw themselves as the punisher may lead to bias against all prospective examinees.
Quote:Since specific issue (criminal) polygraphs cannot be required and lawyers advise their clients not to submit to one, why do you think criminals would volunteer to take one?
Actually lawyers often ask me to perform exams on their clients. Exculpatory in nature, the attorney would not allow a post exam interview if other than DI results occur. Perpetrators often volunteer, hence my gainful employment with many DI exams. Some may think agreeing to an exam is enough to end it, others, thinking it won't work, come in thinking they can be calm and get by undetected. I think this also answers your final assertion that I will have no business. Additionally, I have yet to see much attention to the NAS report in the pop media (I saw a little blurb on CNN HN, nothing else, even on TV news websites I found nothing--of course I am isolated from much of our U.S. news media)
Quote:3. Do you think an innocent person can be jacked up (your term "stimulated") to a point where it is impossible for them to pass a polygraph? Isn't this part of the game you play?
The only pretest stimulation I work on is for the person who is truthful to the relevant issue. The perpetrators who committed the relevant offense, need no assistance in being stimulated to that issue. Which brings me to another point. Many outh there seem to think LE tries to trick anyone into being impicated so they can solve a case. Take the DC area sniper as an example. Lots of pressure to solve it, but would LE have anything to gain by framing someone to get a solve. The next incident would just create more discrediting of the agency. LE has a great amount of motivation to get it right, in regards to polygraph or otherwise.
Quote:4. Since 12 of Batman's idiots occasionally screw up, do you think you are singularly qualified to hold a person's life or livelyhood in your hands? This is a big problem for me.
I am neither judge or jury and would never want to be. I would probably resign before I would allow someone to make me such. The exam is vountary, the results are inadmissible, and regardless of what I collect as a result, the suspect is entitled to due process. I am sworn to be a defender of the constitution and the rights of all, not just the victims of crime.
Quote:5. Have ANY of you ever decided deception/non-deception before you administer the actual test? If so, do you think that test is fair?
I may have had some ideas, but I still give everyone the same test. There is no manipulation, psychologically or otherwise, to get the result I may expect. I have been surprised by NDIs and after the exam treated the examinee just like the innocents who I believed from the start. That has also worked in reverse on numerous occasions, often a more difficult situation for me personally. I can only speak for myself. Contrary to popular belief examiners are individuals. And, I am quite isolated from other examiners, being the only one supprting a large geographic area.
Hope these answers were helpful.