Normal Topic A PI's Polygraph Opinion (Read 5223 times)
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box PI_Insight
New User
*
Offline



Posts: 2
Joined: Mar 6th, 2006
A PI's Polygraph Opinion
Mar 7th, 2006 at 5:05am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
Take this for it is worth. I use polygraphs everyday in the private and criminal defense arena. I have referred 1000's of individuals suspected of crimes, after doing the background work.

I have also taken pre-employment polygraphs. For 26 years I have been exposed to this field, and can attest to the following:

My results in the 1980's were completely accurate on pre employment polygraphs. The examiners caught my lie. A very small thing in my past that I was ashamed of.

I once beat a polygraph by stating I was a Christian, and took offense to being told I could not get through the test. He backed right off, and I got the job. This proved that the examiner lacked interview and interrogation skills.

A good polygraph examiner is educated by experience and college, well versed in culture and most importantly, knows how to correctly pose a question. Sadly, they are not trained to make a decision based on surrounding circumstances, such as evidence. Only on what the instrument says. Many times, a polygraph examiner has to let his common sense side down and base his response on the instrument. I my State, that is law.

Yes, there are many bad examiners. However, I have seen everything from murders to petit larceny resolved with a polygraph. It is a great tool when used appropriately. The messages I am reading in your threads seem outrageous to me. Certainly not how I am used to seeing things handled. Your opinions are respected as well.

Perhaps my posting will irritate many of your members. I believe seeing things from both sides is part of the evaluation process.

Bottom line: Polygraphs are very accurate in the right hands, and have been a huge tool in making America a better place. It does not equate to DNA, video and other solid forensics. It is simply a tool, in my case, to direct investigative efforts in the right direction for my clients. Time Magazine has a recent article about how the polygraph helped find Saddam Hussein. Interesting article, but who knows how much fiction is in it.

Replies are welcome, but be careful I will soon become an examiner myself, and will find my readings here valuable.

Best regards,



  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box Fair Chance
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 551
Joined: Oct 10th, 2002
Re:  A PI's Polygraph Opinion
Reply #1 - Mar 7th, 2006 at 6:26am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
PI_Insight wrote on Mar 7th, 2006 at 5:05am:
Bottom line: Polygraphs are very accurate in the right hands, and have been a huge tool in making America a better place. It does not equate to DNA, video and other solid forensics.


My sentiments exactly. There are too many wrong hands on the equipment.  The Foxes are watching the henhouse.  I agree, it does not equate in any way to actual scientific evidence of DNA, video and other solid forensics.  Please, videotape all polygraph examinations, provide a copy to the examinee and maybe just maybe, the examiner and examinee can defend the results.

Regards.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box EosJupiter
Especially Senior User
*****
Offline


But of Course ...

Posts: 483
Location: Always Out There ......
Joined: Feb 28th, 2005
Re:  A PI's Polygraph Opinion
Reply #2 - Mar 7th, 2006 at 6:37am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
PI_insight

I find this post not only honest, but thorough, and  based on your experiences. It was detailed and decisive. Worthy of serious consideration and debate. This post is a standard by which quite a few of the polygraphers that post here, should use as a guide.

From my standpoint I don't have any issues with the polygraph being used during criminal investigations where it swings a guilty person to do the right thing and come clean. Or where a sex offender is caught and brought to justice.

But what you will find here is mainly those of us who object to the use of the polygraph as a tool for determining work suitability. Employment screening is the least accurate of any type of testing that the polygraph offers. The only studies to refute this statement were done by polygraphers for polygraphers. This research does not stand the test of scientific rigor. Anything used to judge people has to work 100% of the time, with 100% validity. I state again that anything less is just a parlor trick. A toaster can pass this test, a polygraph can not, as the device is really nothing more than an opinion from a human reading it. Facts are the only real thing that can be judged and defined. Where an opinion is just that, just an analysis based on speculation from a bunch of dumb sensors. Even with numerical analysis of the charts, 1 person falsely read deceptive when they are not is wrong. Someones reputation, name and veracity destroyed is not a cost I am willing to accept. Especially if the examination results follow that person for the rest of there lives. Please read on the FBI polys. Again I liked the post and look forward to some great debates.

Regards ...
  

Theory into Reality !!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paste Member Name in Quick Reply Box PI_Insight
New User
*
Offline



Posts: 2
Joined: Mar 6th, 2006
Re:  A PI's Polygraph Opinion
Reply #3 - Mar 8th, 2006 at 10:21am
Mark & QuoteQuote Print Post  
I am glad to have offered a point of view that was taken seriously. It might seem strange that a PI planning on becoming a Polygraph Examiner would make this statement, but read on if interested:

I busted my tail to become a police officer candidate. With the few departments I tested with, I failed entry due to two reasons. One, I scored an 88 on my oral. I was issued a letter by LAPD that I needed to be in the 90's due to being caucasion. Rediculous! I failed a hearing test so marginally that I could not believe the notice I read again from LAPD. I appealed, reappealed and was still denied a job. This was after years of college and working as an investigator for six years. This obviously made me bitter about further attempts of seeking a career in law enforcment.

Putting the the Polygraph into the equation to become a peace officer was really never a worry. I finally was hired as a police officer and made sergeant before I became a PI. To be a cop I had to pass the following tests:

Background               Based on fact and opinion
Oral Board                 Opinion of 3 interviewers
Physical                     Based on fact
Medical                      Based on opinion and fact
Psych                        Based on computer evaluation
Polygraph                  Based on opinion

Notice there are five steps that are not "fact" based. faced with this as well as the civil service commission goal to put minorities and women behind the badge, the polygraph was the least of my worries. In my county, they allow cops to have smoked marijuana three years ago and to have used cocaine ten years ago.  Even more rediculous. One test is based on the hidden meanings behind a battery of pysch tests that are exmained by a computer program.

So looking back at my oral score of 88 and a slight hearing problem, todays standards are very low to be a police officer. And to be frank, below common sense.

This puts the pre employment polygraph into an equation to determine employment eligibilty as a minimal hurdle. Sadly, the polygraph and 3 interviewers can ruin your career after many years of  keeping out of trouble, college, physical training, expense, keeping good credit and stepping up to the plate with high hopes. Then "opinionated" testing that is not fact based ruins your life plans in a matter of hours.

Every application I filled out thereafter, I had to state the reason I did not get hired by LAPD. Generally I received a "thanks but no thanks letter"  from every police agency.

Once I became a police officer, I served diligently and honestly, and quickly learned that some of the worst and best people I ever met were cops. Many told me that they used drugs, stole and were basically using their badge to lure sex from women other than thier  wives.

After all this, I look back and say, "Gee, with all these hurdles and requirements, the polygraph really was not that important. It did not weed out the bad cops."

I am disturbed by some of the insults and unprofessional writings I see here. I am in agreement that the polygraph and oral board processes are highly questionable. I only hope that when anyone determines they are going into law enforcement, that they make sure they can meet all these testing standards before wasting years and money on preparedness. 

After all this trouble and the rigors of a six month academy, I worked with some of the worst people I have ever met. (As well as some of the best.)

Bottom line:   With all these hurdles, why do some of the worst people get through these screens and become a horrible public servant?  The polygraph is not the only unfair test of an individual's ability to live their dream of being in law enforcement. Again, it is the examiner's skill that brings truth to the polygraph. So how would you like to pass it and find out three interviewers did not like you, and your career is ruined? Or the civil service commission was meeting minority quotas, or a computer says your are not psycologically
fit? 

This is the system we live with. And even with this experience, I still use the polygraph everyday to determine where to focus my investigative efforts,with great success.

Best regards,   



« Last Edit: Mar 8th, 2006 at 11:13am by PI_Insight »  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
A PI's Polygraph Opinion

Please type the characters that appear in the image. The characters must be typed in the same order, and they are case-sensitive.
Open Preview Preview

You can resize the textbox by dragging the right or bottom border.
Insert Hyperlink Insert FTP Link Insert Image Insert E-mail Insert Media Insert Table Insert Table Row Insert Table Column Insert Horizontal Rule Insert Teletype Insert Code Insert Quote Edited Superscript Subscript Insert List /me - my name Insert Marquee Insert Timestamp No Parse
Bold Italicized Underline Insert Strikethrough Highlight
                       
Insert Preformatted Text Left Align Centered Right Align
resize_wb
resize_hb







Max 200000 characters. Remaining characters:
Text size: pt
More Smilies
View All Smilies
Collapse additional features Collapse/Expand additional features Smiley Wink Cheesy Grin Angry Sad Shocked Cool Huh Roll Eyes Tongue Embarrassed Lips Sealed Undecided Kiss Cry
Attachments More Attachments Allowed file types: txt doc docx ics psd pdf bmp jpe jpg jpeg gif png swf zip rar tar gz 7z odt ods mp3 mp4 wav avi mov 3gp html maff pgp gpg
Maximum Attachment size: 500000 KB
Attachment 1:
X