Glavlit wrote on Dec 29^th, 2010 at 12:06am:


And here I was thinking this site was simply devoted to the abolition of all polygraph.

Quote:


This is what I'm saying. By admitting this and putting it on my file it just makes me look like an unreliable person. Even now, ppl see me as negative (on this website) because I am admitting to this mistake. I'm know just Wannabecoppper, but you see me as "wannabecopper that sleeps with prostitutes" and that status is not true. And that event in my life could be exaggerated by a polygrapher. I did it once and rather not be judged by it.

It's out of my mind as well and was YEARS ago. I learned from it and no one needs to know. It won't make the streets any safer.

Glavlit wrote on Dec 29^th, 2010 at 8:21pm:

True, but who would bother? We all know that all internet activity can be traced, even if you use an anonymous proxy.  But seriously, the only way the feds will come busting down your door is if you engage in criminal activity online (making threats, terrorist plots, or having a website like Wikileaks).  We are just a bunch of people ranting and raving about the polygraph, no criminal activity here, so no law enforcement is going to care to try to track each of us down.  There are millions of websites out there with discussions like this and worse.  The feds may read this site, but that's about it. 

Glavlit wrote on Dec 29^th, 2010 at 8:21pm:

Exactly.  So?  This is synonymous with our justice system at work.  So I did the deed, but what should my punishment be?  First the polygraphers have to prove guilt, which can only come from a coercive confession. There is a reason polygraph charts are inadmissible in court, they are unreliable.  If I am guilty, polygraphers argue I should get a harsh sentence (i.e. no job offer), while my defense argues an insanity defense and I deserve a slap on the wrist (i.e. I get the job).  

Glavlit wrote on Dec 29^th, 2010 at 8:21pm:

I can assure you that I am NOT WannaBeCopper.  If you don't believe me, then oh well.

Glavlit wrote on Dec 29^th, 2010 at 8:21pm:

Ok, so actually I took a lifestyle polygraph with a government agency and PASSED, but turned down the offer for a higher-paying job in the private sector that didn't require me to report my personal international travel and every little private incident in my life.  On my polygraph, sexual deviance activity was not asked.  I was given a pre-polygraph screening, where they decided what areas to focus on for my poly.  My lifestyle poly questions were on crime and misuse of computers.  The counterintelligence portion was the usual foreign contacts and such.  Yes prostution and drug use is a crime, but they were more concerned with if I had robbed or killed someone.  That was it, they never honed in on sexual activity at all.  They did ask me if I looked at "explicit images" after the polygraph during the post-test/interrogation, to which I happily answered YES, I do look at porn!  Only normal straight porn at home and nothing illegal.  I wasn't ashamed and it is no big deal as they know everyone has looked at internet porn.  In my pysch evaluation I was asked during a series of questions if I ever used a prostitute and I answered NO and made a disgusting face, lol.  The shrink seemed convinced and we continued with the questioning.  That was the only time I was asked about prostitution.  And admitting to a less serious activity when grilled by polygraphers is a great strategy!  I admitted to pot use a few times (leaving out a few other times when I was alone) and they were content.  I admitted to speeding tickets and downloading music and it was no big deal, plus I had already disclosed this information to them previously.

Not everything can be traced despite Glavlit said.  If you were never arrested or caught in any way, then there is nothing in your police file and you are clean.  During a background check they will NOT go through your ATM transactions for the past several years and ask why you withdrew hundreds of dollars at 1am, lol.  They will NOT go through your phone records and ask you to verify every phone call you made.  All they do is ask your neighbors and friends about you.  So if your neighbors and friends don't know about what you did, they never smelled pot coming from your home, they never witnessed unusual traffic coming to and from your home, they didn't see you bring in numerous women into your home like some pimp (if you were smart, you went to the hooker's hotel and didn't bring her to your home), then you are fine.  

I'm willing to bet my life and a million dollars that your job will not find out about these things unless you tell them.  You don't deserve to be blackballed from your dream job for life because of a few past mistakes.  Forget about them and pretend they didn't happen.
DON'T CONFESS! DON'T CONFESS! DON'T CONFESS!

WannaBeCopper wrote on Dec 29^th, 2010 at 7:52pm:


I am a police officer and I conduct background checks on police applicant.  The fact that you paid for sex at one point in your life means virtually nothing to me.  If it had happened yesterday, or if it had happened daily for the past twenty years, it would likely mean a bit more.  Since it was a rare occurrence and it happened long ago it would not adversely affect your application.

What would most definitely have a negative effect was if you lied about paying for sex.  Everyone, without exception, has made mistakes in their lives.  Responsible people admit their mistakes with candor, while irresponsible and immature people admit to what they think they will be caught lying about.

If you become a police officer someday would you prefer to work with honest cops, or with cops who only tell the truth when they think they will be caught in a lie?

WannaBeCopper wrote on Dec 30^th, 2010 at 7:10pm:


I don’t know to which “event” you are referring.

It is not an invasion of privacy if you are asked questions about criminal activity in your past on a job application to become a police officer.  There are volumes of laws regarding what questions employers can ask and what they can’t ask; this does not fall under the excluded questions.

However, if your personal philosophy is that no one needs to know anything about your past, for any reason, because it has no effect on who you are today, then you should feel confident in sharing that philosophy with the agencies at which you are applying.

It is disingenuous at best to lie about your past and claim you are doing so because you feel the questions shouldn’t be asked in the first place.  An honest person in the same circumstance would refuse to answer the questions rather than lie, and an honest and responsible person would be willing to accept whatever consequences came as a result of their decision.

WannaBeCopper wrote on Dec 31^st, 2010 at 3:27am:


If the event to which you are referring is your admission to smoking marijuana five times, and you are asking if, after you make that admission and I “guess” you are lying, what would happen, the answer is that I would ask you to think about it and answer truthfully.   

I am not a polygraph operator; I am a detective who is sometimes assigned to do background checks on police applicants.  If I am interviewing an applicant and I get the sense they are lying, I will ask them, sometimes several times, to answer the questions truthfully.  I will explain to them that everyone makes mistakes, and that mistakes won’t necessarily keep you from becoming a cop, but lying will.  Once a cop’s credibility is gone they can’t testify in court any more, and if they can’t testify they can’t work the road or do investigations.  If they can’t do those things they pretty much can’t be cops any more.

Generally speaking, a cop is going to be able to tell when you are lying.  Sometimes he won’t be able to tell what you are lying about, but he will get a sense as to whether you are being truthful or deceptive.  If I am doing a background and I get the sense someone is lying to me, and they ignore my requests to answer the questions truthfully, I will start digging deeper.  Usually it is not all that hard to find corroborating evidence in the person’s past; this evidence is not often good enough for probable cause, but sufficient to drop that person’s application in the shredder.

I also generally tell the applicants that state law requires them to pass a polygraph in order to get into the police academy.  Without getting into my reservations about the polygraph, I tell them that if the polygraph operator believes they are lying their application will go into the shredder.   

Quote:

Technically you did admit to most of your indiscretions up front, so you weren’t really covering anything else up that was major.

That is rather odd that they would ask you after the test if you looked at "explicit images".  What is even stranger is that they did not ask you about illegal sexual activity before or during the polygraph.  It must not have been law enforcement screening, or the interviewer did not do a very good job.  Sounds like you didn’t go through a thorough background investigation either, if all they did was just talk to a few neighbours and friends.

The psych evaluation sounds even more strange, if you were asked about prostitution, but not drug use.

In the end you ended up not taking the job, which again just goes to show that it wasn’t meant to happen for you; whether for one reason or another.