Excellent site George.......Ive enjoyed your site since 2005 and have introduced it to too many to count.
I just wanted to comment as I had a fleeting idea pass through my mind tonight.
I was a sworn police officer and have also been subject to many many polygraph "exams" in the course of my hunt for the right job. On my first ever exam there were 3 exams given and ultimately I was told by the examiner I had "passed" and that he looked forward to working with me in the department in the future.....only for me to receive a disqualification letter weeks later. The reason listed "deception indicated" on several portions of my polygraph.
WHat was passing through my mind tonight though was a video Ive watched and made fellow officers,family and friends watch :
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4097602514885833865# Professor James Duane and Virginia Beach Detective/Law School Student George Bruche explore the topic of the 5th amendment and how the public is polarized by the position that like a "failed" polygraph invoking your god given 5th amendment right to remain silent somehow confirms guilt.
Specifically though I like the portion where Det. George Bruche whom I have worked with discuss's how he asks suspects if they "want" the interaction/interview/interrogation taped or recorded.
He goes on to explain that regardless of the suspects response the rooms that these exams/interviews what have you take place in are not only rigged for audio but ALSO video. Once I thought about it I realized how deceptive this simple question is.
In the realm of polygraphy if you WERE to ask for recording you'de likely be challenged with "why".......are you afraid of something out of the ordinary or perhaps you might need a recording to defend yourself if you fail? DO you expect to fail sir/maam?
It just reinforces so much of the good work your site and writing does.
I can tell you I told 100% truth on my first exam and failed......on my second exam I lied to see if this would change the outcome and wah lah.....I passed....which I found amusing.
IN my first test the "failed" issue was whether or not I had ever PURCHASED marijuana. I have never in fact Purchased marijuana although I had in my youth smoked marijuana with friends who were already in possession of it. The examiner in the first test acted as if my denial of purchasing it was SO unbelievable that he wanted to do the test 2 more times....and as previously mentioned I left after the test....but not before we left the exam room together to the facilities break room where we had a 20+ minute discussion on how confident he was that I would soon be a co worker and brother in law enforcement with him with HIS department.
On my second poly with a separate agency I simply answered "yes" to purchasing for personal use and I "passed" the exam.
However in my career in law enforcement I have seen many abuses including working with BI's and polygraphers who have told me stories about how when a candidate or "examinee" enters the room they ask for their drivers license and physically retain custody of it throughout the test. They tell me they do this in order to verify the candidate is who they say they are but then withhold it to attempt to or in hopes of subliminally making the examinee feel like they are not free to leave or have been robbed in order to "break them down a bit". Once I mentioned how despicable I found this technique I was returned 24 hours later to uniformed patrol even though I was assigned to recruiting and BI work for 6 weeks to help with the back log of BI's that we needed to complete in order to fill seats for the upcoming academy.
A very good friend was assigned to fill my spot and this VERY SITE was mentioned multiple times to him during his tour in recruiting.
The permanent employees in recruiting mentioned how they felt this site was a nuisance and counterproductive to their mission.
Later on during a midnight shift we went into further discussion about our experiences with polygraphs,examiners,candidates ,equipment and our tours in BI. My fellow officer told me of instances where multiple examiners would leave the candidate in the exam room still "tied" to the machine (done by laptop) and would discuss how they would get a confession. He explained to me that in fact in our own agency the department/chief and even the examiners felt the poly was garbage.......what they did support was using it as a tool to get confessions. In fact he reported to me that they would pick an area where a BI had found inconsistent information and zone in on that in the poly. They would eventually get the candidate to believe that correcting the information given would "set them free" even though in fact by that point in the game changing information was considered a disqualifier. SO in fact theres really no way to tell how many liars stuck to their stories and made it into the uniform and how many truthful candidates were either forced to lie or were disqualified.
Anyway......from the Hampton Roads area of Virginia I wanted to send a warm hello and GOOD WORK form several police officers who LOVE your site and support you and your work 100%
PS. One of the worst polygraph offenders down here are Portsmouth,Virginia Police:
http://portsmouthpd.org/index.php?s=recruiting Several other local agencies are abandoning the junk science in lieu of stronger BI work
Pages: [1] 
Federal Polygraph Lawsuit Dismissed (Read 19566 times)
