retcopper wrote on Mar 24^th, 2006 at 4:35pm:


Listen - few reasonable people would question the effectiveness of the polygraph as an interrogative tool. I agree it can be tremendously useful when used as part (not all) of an investigation - particularly on ignorant thugs who couldn't tell the difference between an fMRI and a colander (see below). 

No question: the polygraph community has successfully built up this unflappable mythos that polygraphs somehow transcend the human mind to get to the truth. We all know that's not the case. The polygraph works best when the party being polygraphed believes it works best. If the examiners who browse this site disagree with that, you're either fools or facetious. 

That said, I agree the polygraph has a place in society. I'm realistic enough to realize that the polygraph community, top to bottom, is a multimillion dollar one - from the equipment, to the schools, to the lucrative government work. This profession, like any other, puts food in mouths, and is a source of pride for the many folks who practice it. 

But it's important to make sure that the poly's role in society is a limited one - one where 1) its use is "incident-specific" - for example, crimes where the GKT (which is less flawed than the CQT) can be used. And where 2) the benefit of passing is equal in weight to the potential harm of failing. In the criminal context, this is generally the case: if you pass, you're not exactly exonerated - the investigation continues if you're a suspect. If you fail, the information is inadmissible. 

Use of the polygraph in a pre-employment screening situation is a gross misjudgment on the part of the government, however. Passing means the background check continues - you gain little of value other than continuing in the security screening. Failing, however, in many cases means a lifetime ban from reapplying with the agency (often incongruous with the agency's own screening policies), and sometimes a compete ban from sensitive gov't work. This is also the case for current gov't employees. You pass, you keep your job. Fail, and your career is effectively over.

retcopper wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2006 at 8:51pm:


Grow up. I never said I was an expert nor have I ever implied such. However, I know enough about polygraphs to know they don't work. Of course, I've never given a polygraph. Why would I? I have a job that I can be proud of. 

You do very well recognizing cm's? Yeah, that's what they all say. 

BTW, I won't respond to any more of your posts as they are nothing but a total waste of my time.

nonombre wrote on Mar 24^th, 2006 at 3:46am:

Nonombre,

I believe the intent of the question was to determine if you would allow your child to undergo a polygraph examination if there were negative consequences should he or she fail.

Suppose, for example, you had a college-age child who attended school in a different state from where you live.  For whatever reason, he or she became a suspect for a serious crime.  The local police agency, with which you are completely unfamiliar, wants to polygraph your child during the course of their investigation.

Your child has told you they have absolutely nothing to do with this crime, and you fully believe them.  Do you think you would unhesitatingly tell them to take the polygraph, knowing that as long as they tell the truth they will be eliminated as a suspect?

I don’t see how an ethical polygraph examiner who truly believes in the accuracy of the polygraph process could give any advice other than, “Take the polygraph and tell the truth.  If you do that you will be instantly exonerated and you can go on with your life.”

NoNombre,

Your post is most impressive, But the post presents an opportunity for some research. If you QC'd the charts on your kid, and you saw that they showed no deception, but the polygrapher who gave the test started into interrogation saying that the kid was deceptive. What is your recourse ? Can you intervene ?
Interesting supposition to answer ? Your reply should be most interesting ? 

Regards  ...

Bill:

I guess we will have to bite the bullet until something else better comes along. (I know that is going to piss a lot of people off.) Like any other profession we continually  have to improve training and upgrade standards.  I respectfully disagree with you about the numbers of people who post here who say they have been wronged. While neither one of us can prove our point  I would bet that many who complain here are not telling the "whole story" concerning their polygraph experiences. I am not defending any bad or renegade polygraphists.  I know they exist. But, by the same token your side has to use commn sense when defending every anti poly story that appears here.

NoNombre,

I found much humor in your post. I snorted coffee out my nose and dam near fell out of my chair laughing on your last comment. thanks  !!! 

Regards