nome', 1904 asked you the question because he believes that anyone who is objective about polygraph must surely be an examiner. Let's just say he is an "out of towner"----coming from a (albeit beautiful) country that has more than its share of woes aside from polygraph.

Nom:

Assuming you were responding to my post, I agree with what you say, it's not just the charts.  In fact, that is exactly my point.  If the charts could actually give the results, then that would be one thing, but a "pass" or "fail" is more than the recorded squiggly lines on a chart.  It is the OPINION of the trade school graduate known as a polygrapher.

Added then to this human opinion is the issue of whether or not countermeasures can or are effective.  The fact that polygraphers have started using butt pads, suggest that at least in the case of anal constriction, countermeasures can be effective.   

The fact that the result of a polygraph exam is mere opinion, and that opinion is based on squiggly lines on a chart that might be susceptable to the use of countermeasures, might lead a reasonable person to conclude that the results of any polygraph exam are suspect.

 

Nopoly: 
But the opinion comes with a lot of wieght and expierence my friend. Assuming the history of a LEO polygrapher. That person is a detective, or a an experienced Special Agent. More then likely with a degree in psychology and has a tremendous amount of expierence in interviewing and interrogation. He/She will use all of that knowledge and expierence to make the best decision possible. Will they make a mistake, sure. Hec, I've made them too. But I had probable cause to do the things I did. Was I wrong for the mistake. It just didn't work out that time. However the next officer that felt the same way I did got the goods (lucky bas*&^%). 
I've been fortunate to have skilled, and ecellent interrogators who polygraphed me. When I've talked to other VSA/Polygraphers, I get the same answer. They hate each other, but at the same time they won't make a determination until after reading the charts, looking at the video, and listening to the recording. Once they have the totality of the situation they'll make there judgement. Meaning you could use countermeasures during a polygraph. But those darn NVI's you can't mask can and will fail you. 
I've never gone through any type of polygraph training. Again, thats interview/interrogation 101. 
If a subject keeps telling me no no no, but his NVI's are showing me yes yes yes. Am I gonna stop asking? Will I believe his no's. I stated to painful the other day, I'm skeptical as soon as I hear I'm a religous person. So, are priests who committed sexual abuse on minors, or jihadists blowing things up. 
Am I synical? Nah... I have a job to do. 
I've heard that polygraphers are lying about how the machine detects lies. Well, no polygrapher has ever told me that. It shows your BP, respitory, and sweatiness etc etc. However again it's the totality of the situation that will dictate that a person could POSSIBLY be deceptive. However without a confession, then it's only possibly. For prescreeners unfortunatly that could be enough NOT to get a job (which is why I don't like them), but at the same time there are a literally thousands of LEA's throughout the country. If your a criminal, and you go tightlip afterwards, well I'd say thats a clue. I guarantee the investigators will be working harder to complete the job. 


Mr. Johnston: nice analagy... Please again as a polygrapher let me know if I'm not writing this impartially...

Nopoly:
I'm not assuming good faith, I'm assuming professionalism. You can't go in there thinking the polygrapher is your friend, nor is he your enemy. 
On the contrary most investigators whom become polygraphers do have some sort of degree. I'll admit to being off on the psychological, but it was a guess on my part...

But normally it's hard to make an arrest stick with possible cause. JAJAJA... 
Sorry if I offended you. I thought it was funny... Have a great evening...

Fred F. wrote on Dec 1^st, 2007 at 5:31pm:


Fred:

YOur statement about promotions is very logical.  Afterall, what chief wants to promote someone who knows all is secrets? 

Regarding education, perhaps there should be a college requirement for polygraphers, even so much as one must have a Masters in Polygraphy, much like Psychologists must have a Masters before engaging in their profession.  I suspect such a requirement would go a long way towards legitimizing the field of polygraphy.

Sarge,

Wake up and get with the program.  He said without a confession then a polygraph result of DI is only a possibility.  In other words, it's not a sure thing.  I said the same is true of a jury verdict of guilty without (and some would argue even with) is the same reasoning.  Hello!