Could some of the polygraph experts shed a light on what is going on?  I am a former US Army Interrogator with TS SCI.  I have applied for employment at the local detention facility.  The detention facility required me to take a polygraph test as a part of pre-employment requirement.  Last week I got a "post card" from the detention facility saying that I did not meet the MINIMUM requirement for hiring and that I FAILED the polygraph test!!!  I was absolutely floored and I called the HR administrator for clarification, but she is not answering my calls and her assistant could not answer any of my inquiries because she does not have the information.  I am CERTAIN there has to be some kind of mistake, because I called the polygrapher back and he assured me that I DID pass the test.  WAS HE LYING TO ME???  I had nothing to lie about.  I told the polygrapher about my experimentation with marijuana over 22 years ago, and even about some money that I stole when I was a teenager.  It was a simple 10 question yes/no answers.  The polygrapher told me if I was being truthful he'll only need to run the test twice, and twice and we were done.  On one of the administrative papers I had to sign said something to the effect of me being given the chance to explain the reaction that might indicate deception, and he never questioned me on any.  Is the detention facility lying to me? or Is the polygrapher lying to me?  Do I have the right to demand to see the result of the polygraph?  I am really concerned because  I have also applied to the police department and I don't know what to expect now.  I would really appreciate it you could shed some light.  

1904, I sure don't run an exam like that.    

Revenoir, if you failed one or more portions of the polygraph you should have been questioned and possibly had another polygraph administered to clear up that particular issue.  Drug use 22 years ago shouldn't be a problem unless you used more than the allotted amount specified by your local POST.  POST has the standards that the LE's have to comply with or the individual cannot be certified.

Additionally, your juvenile behaviors are juvenile behaviors.  I have seen many officers hired that were ‘hell on wheels’ when they were juveniles and they are damn good cops.

If the Polygraph Examiner didn’t question you after the exam, I would tend to believe it has something to do with the hiring agencies back ground investigation.  However, if you used CM’s on the polygraph, that may be an entirely different story and hopefully you didn't take that route.

Keep trying, if that is all you have in your back ground, someone will pick you up.

Quote:


Fact----falsely accused and convicted criminals are incarcerated as a result of "solid scientific evidence and techniques" without polygraph---make no mistake about that '04. Fingerprints?--not 100% Eye witness accounts?---please, the worst and most unreliable yet. DNA---this is great but the contamination factor is overwelming, not to mention that many crimes are ill-suited for DNA. What's left 1904? Interrogation---also filled with treachery, and fortunately, American courts are giving less and less credibility toward confessions each year. Physical Anthropology?---a great science if applicable in post mordum cases, but far from perfect. Forensic Dentistry----again, priceless in murder cases. What's left----chemical analysis and a few others that are valuable in certain forensic dterminations. But what about the following crimes;

Frotage---eye witness
Molestation (small digital, rubbing) (eye witness and rarely medical tests concurr)
Rape with condom---eye witness (medical does little for intent of rape)
Peepers and flashers ------(eye witness)
Fraud----eye witness, phone records (soft target investigation points) and distorted video on occasion.
Assault----eye witness, medical, weapon possession (rarely obtained before disposal)
Kidnap-----eye witness
Internal theft-----possession of stolen property evidence (rarely found before conversion)/eye witness
Espionage---------eye witness (very rare----or possession of contraband---rarely found before conversion)
Unauthorized release of classified docs-----see above

All of the above crimes and many more have very little stand alone "solid scientific investigative evidence techniques." I can appreciate your disappointment in polygraph ----but it is yet a strong tool of investigation, and touting it as a prop or otherwise chips away at the field of preventing residivistic crimes---it hurts people. I too am very concerned with applicant screening polygraph modalities---and I am inclined to be suspicious of those modalities, so I don't rn those tests anymore. I have a feeling that you could be more inclined to specificlly target polygraph in applicant screening for LE, rather than the whole field---but I could be wrong. I secretly look forward to 100% methods and due to not being in love with any career per se, I will welcome better methods as it will make my kids safer yet. 

regards
Paradiddle

Paradiddle wrote on Oct 10^th, 2007 at 3:29pm:


As usual, you put up such a goddam good presentation. Shit PD, you could probably get a lizard to confess that its a crocodile. 
I agree with you in principle. I only differ with the methodology.  I dont have the answers and certainly dont know who does. We can only agree to disagree.
Peace

I'll be Damned if they didn't make quick action of gangin' up on you 1904. holy shit! 

rice

Yea whatever WW, I just find it amusing how when 1904 makes a logical observation (or any other person on this site for that matter) and a relatively excellent point you examiners always rush in to the poly's defense. You and all the other examiners gotta amit the poly is flawed and if you think it is not then you sister are full of sh*t. 

rice

ps good luck with your date 

rice

Revenoir, no one here has claimed polys to be 100% perfect and the BI should do an investigation if there are areas of concern on the poly.  Look at your supposed situation.  You came here because you got a 'post card' that said you failed your test.  Later you found out it was sent by mistake.  I think Polys get blamed for a lot that isn't the poly or examiners fault.  Maybe people get letters indicating they failed the poly becuase of admissions made in the poly that disqualified them (not by the poly test itself).   BTW what agency sends 'post cards'?