polyfool wrote on Mar 16^th, 2005 at 6:19pm:


Again, with respect to my post I never specifically said that I sleep better at night because the FBI catches murderers through their polygraph.

I sleep better at night because the FBI has chosen to use the polygraph to catch those one or two people who confess to activity, through the interrogations contained within the polygraph process, which make them unsuitable for FBI employment.

Murdering people was just an example. It could be anything else really. Drug use, prostitution, or the like. Really any activity which the FBI did not know about pre-polygraph, which had they known, would either cause them to deny the person's employment or cause them to deny the employment based on the person's lack of candor during the paperwork phase.

I apologize for causing so much confusion through my post. Again, murder was just an example. Any knowledge of disqualifying activity gained through the polygrapher's interrogations is a more general thought which I was trying to convey through the use of a the murderer example

And don't worry, I won't be losing any sleep as long as the FBI keeps using polygraphs, and those pesky interrogations 

Randy

Randy,

It's great that you've been doing some soul searching on the use of polygraphs in pre-employment screening. Hopefully, it hasn't kept you lying awake at night. I do believe the gist of this site is to stop its use for screening purposes or at the very least, push for laws to establish regulations, so there is a more level playing field regarding them. In my post, I was specifically referring to pre-employment screening. In regards to criminal investigations, it is true that some crimes would go unsolved without the poly. It is the belief that it works which prompts the guilty to confess. Indeed, if a person is not willing to give it up, the tool is useless--any honest investigator would tell you that. However, there are criminal cases in which it is misused. I know you cited the Dave Letterman kidnap plot attempt to back up your support of the poly. Allow me to counter. I'm sure you are aware of the convicted sex offender who confessed last week to abducting and killing the nine year-old girl in Florida. He did so after taking a poly, saying you don't have to tell me the results- I already know them. He then spilled everything. This was two days after the child's poor grandmother "raised red flags" to investigators on a couple of questions during her poly. It was reported in the media that the father and grandfather passed their polys, but grandma was dragged through the mud because she'd raised those "red flags." She was interviewed by all the networks and asked repeatedly about the questions investigators had asked her. She said she had no idea what they were talking about--those red flags. Lucky for her, inestigative leg work caught up in time to zero in on suspect John Couey or she would have spent more time under a cloud of suspicion. Can you possibly imagine what that must have been like for her? That should never have happened.  Do you see the danger of the poly even when it's used in criminal investigations? Its limitations should never be forgotten by anyone. Sure it can bring the guilty to confess, but it can also implicate the innocent. In addition, there have been cases in which suspects confess to crimes they didn't commit without ever taking the poly. It's a complicated issue. I never truly believed that someone would confess to a crime they didn't commit. That is, until I found myself caught up in the wrath of a paranoid nut job FBI polygraph examiner. Now, I can understand it more easily.      

Randy,

Just when I think you might be making a little sense, you go and disappoint me. You stated in your earlier post that you were referring to use of the polygraph in criminal investigations. Now, we're back to debating its use for screening purposes. You're welcome for the second example of the poly being used to elicit confessions--I would have thought a smart guy like you would have thought of it himself. Look, I'm not saying the poly doesn't serve a purpose in criminal investigations WHEN its used ethically and its limitations are not overlooked. A good investigator will always look at the big picture as well as how all the pieces of the puzzle come together. However, a poly for screening purposes is very different from one used in criminal investigations. The scope of a criminal poly is more clearly defined--the questions are more specific. Investigators know what they're looking for. However, we see they have shortcomings as well or grandma wouldn't have raised those red flags. If investigators keep leaking stuff like that to the media, they're going to undermine the use of polygraphs themselves. Sooner or later, everyone will get in on the big secret. Screening polys are not specific and many of the questions are open to interpretation. For example, one relevant question in a pre-employment poly could cover several things--not one specific detail as in a criminal investigation. Also, examiners don't know what they're looking for in a screening poly--they're fishing. I disagree with your statement that raising red flags are part of any investigation. What kind of BS is that? I bet if you were grandma, you wouldn't feel that way. Randy, I know that the FBI poly is part of an investigation. I'm curious to know what your experience is with the poly? Indeed nothing is guaranteed 100%, but if your butt were on the line, would you gamble with 50/50 odds? That's the accuracy rate of the polygraph and the FBI's pre-employment poly failure rate. If I'd known known that, I never would have agreed to submit to one.      

yatittle wrote on Mar 26^th, 2005 at 6:52pm:


Randy,
The problem is that when people are being truthful and even when they don't confess and remain adamant (since they don't have anything to hide) , they are still branded a liar. 
I feel that what goes around comes around, and someday, you will go through a humiliating experience where you will find yourself weeping along with the *gasp* liberals.  

At one point, (just last week) I naiively believed in the polygraph.  I even avoided sites like this one because I felt that it might provide me with an  unfair advantage.   Well guess what?  I just found out this week (through the polygraph)  that I am a habitual drug user.

But hey, listen, if it makes you sleep better at night, why not utilize the tool on the criminals alone instead of on job applicants?