Batman wrote on Dec 2
nd, 2002 at 1:10am:
What about the substance of the issue Anonymous? Who do we blame here for anon02's failings? In this particular instance is the polygrah examiner at fault, is it the agency doing the hiring, or does anon02 shoulder responsibility for his actions?
He chose to lie during the hiring process (regardless of what steps that process included), and he put his application in question due to his lie. So should he file against the agency? Should he jump up and down about how unfair the system is? Should he scream and yell about the big, bad polygraph examiner who had the audacity to "CUT HIM OFF"?
Or should he accept responsibility for his actions, and maybe next time try telling the whole truth, right from the start?
Apparently a novel concept for some who offer advice on this site.
Batman
Dear Batman,
I have never advocated nor endorsed lying on any part of any application. We both know that in order to pass a pre-screening polygraph that the examiner has to get the examinee to lie on the control questions in order to "pass" the test. Even knowing this, I have never endorsed an applicant to falsify applicant information.
I have never used drugs nor do I believe that any law enforcement officer should but this is my personal opinion. If the examiner in this case let his personal bias overide the actual drug policy of the FBI, it is not right.
I have signed the FBI policy many times during my application. A good examiner should ask if the applicant has ever violated the FBI drug policy after explaining it word for word to the applicant. The specific question "Have you ever used drugs?" over extends the intent of the policy. The only time that a one time use can disqualify an applicant under any conditions is if he was in a position of responsibility in government or law enforcement at the time of the incident or use of any drug within the last ten years other than "where pot had been smoked or putting a pot pipe to one's mouth."
At no time during the application process does any paperwork ask you if you have done drugs. At no time during the interview process does anyone ask you specifically if you have done drugs. An applicant is only asked if they clearly understand the drug policy and signs that they have not violated the policy.
There is more to this situation then meets the eye in this story. Without a videotape to review which came first, the polygraph accusation or the admission before the polygraph, it is a very blurry story indeed.
If the session had been videotaped one of two things would be happening right now:
A) The examiner could prove that the applicant never tried to admit to drug use or clarify his extent of usage and confessed after being interrogated (witnessed by the videotape).
B) The examiner poorly worded the question or did not allow the examinee to clarify the drug use which was within FBI policy guidelines.
I have defended polygraph examiners if what they do is within the policies of the agencies they work for. I have been attacked by opponents to my ideas comparing my argument to the "Nuremberg Defense" which did not sit well with them. I do so because as a law enforcement officer, I am obligated to enforce all laws and policies regardless of my personal opinions. I only hope that the Special Agent administering this test did not allow his personal bias to interfere with the FBI's intended policy.
Regards.