Greetings,
First off, I would like to thank you George for your eye-opening TLBTLD book, your website and all your efforts, as well as Dan Mangan and Joe McCarthy and others on this forum for your many very informative posts —George, despite all the hate and vitriol you receive for exposing the fraudulent polygraph 'indu$try,' I think you are doing a public service, particularly for the truly innocent in the pre-employment realm, and I am glad you weren't entrapped by the Feds like some others.   

I am posting here on PCSOT, because yes, surprise, I am a participant in federal PCSOT—commence trolling/hatred sequence.  I have passed two maintenance polygraphs, and one voluntary history polygraph pre-sentencing, but was told my last treatment program history polygraph was “inconclusive,” despite the fact that I was completely honest and fully disclosed everything—I immediately suspected something nefarious on the part of the polygrapher and/or my treatment program, where they are colluding for extra income and/or another bite of the fishing expedition apple, and I considered getting a third-party review, but didn't want to rock the boat.  As noted, I took a voluntary history polygraph prior to sentencing, with an adversarial polygrapher recommended by the prosecutor/detectives, I was honest about everything, and passed with flying colors.  From this forum, I have recently learned that my area is known for 'double-dipping' with history polys, and in the therapy group I participate, it just so happens that every single group member has had to take the history poly at least twice—including two people I know to be scrupulously honest about everything—to a fault.  For the record, and for the haters/trolls, apart from passing all maintenance polys, I am doing everything in my power to 'do the right thing,' I follow all treatment and probation requirements, and the mandatory SO treatment I am participating in is the least significant of the many other voluntary treatment-related interventions I am regularly participating in.  I am scheduled for round #2 of the history polygraph in 2 months.  Because I have seen that repeated poly failure has very real-world consequences, where treatment group members have been sent back to halfway house/prison solely on the basis of failed polygraphs, I have spent several days reading articles on this forum to better educate myself—I am on the fence and leaning against trying any CMs—I am still deluding myself that honesty will prevail, but if the “inconclusive” was legit, it didn't work last time, and the more posts I read on this forum, and the more journal articles I read from this site and elsewhere, I am increasingly questioning that decision. TLBTLD and various very experienced participants in this forum note that honest people are at a disadvantage with the polygraph—that I find myself encountering the prospect of having to lie (employ CM) to increase my odds of passing a polygraph, where I am otherwise being completely honest about everything, is more than ironic, and to me, perfectly encapsulates everything wrong with this instrument.

I have the following questions: 

1) Would it be inappropriate/inadvisable/manipulative/idiotic to tell the polygrapher, prior to starting the polygraph, that if I am deemed deceptive or inconclusive, I want results released to a third party polygrapher (whose name I will provide) to vet his entire poly file, as well as vetting the last one where I had an (allegedly) inconclusive finding? (or should I just tell him I want to do that at the onset, regardless of the outcome?) 

2) Similarly, any problems if I were to request a copy of his C.V., license/certification, and business card—would that be highly unusual and suspect? I would do that for any other 'professional' I am working with, particularly where the stakes are so high.

3) Is there some polygrapher-to-polygrapher release of information form that I could bring with me to the evaluation to have the polygrapher complete, to release my complete poly file to another polygrapher, while I am completing his release? (I've searched online but find only releases for examinees)  Any tips on how to go about that?  I've read that the APA requires release of the results to the examinee within a week—are there some comparable requirements for releasing the entire file to another 3rd party polygrapher? (the Model Policy for Release and Management of Polygraph Reports and Polygraph Data doesn't speak to this)

4) After reading George's book, any feedback on someone who tried the 'Complete Honesty' approach while a  participant in federal PCSOT? (cue laughter track) (From my training and career and habit of reading journal articles, I could easily make the argument I am hopelessly contaminated in my negative beliefs about the polygraph).

5) I've read in TLBTLD and elsewhere that only guilty people talk about their anxiety prior to polygraph, along with all the other 'guilty people' behaviors to avoid--if I were to bring BOP and other official documentation diagnosing anxiety disorder and insomnia, from multiple providers, would that be something worthwhile to show the examiner in advance? (perhaps that could better explain my one alleged inconclusive response, assuming they give a shit) or would that be more 'guilty person behavior.'  Any citations/articles on how anxiety disorder or chronic insomnia interferes/invalidates polygraph results?

6) In my federal court-mandated treatment program, all poly exams are directed to only one polygrapher, which seems sketchy to me—any resources or citations or websites on my right (9th Cir) of getting a polygrapher of my own choosing, despite being in PCSOT?

7) Does George or anyone have any information on the current legality of doing sexual history polygraphs in the 9th circuit? I swear I have seen 9th Cir (court of appeals?) caselaw prohibiting those, where they were called an unconstitutional fishing expedition, yet I now cannot seem to find that.  Any help? (not 9th Cir Antelope (2005), not 10th Cir Von Behren (2016), not Dansby Texas court appeals (2013)--BTW-George, these aren't in your otherwise very comprehensive Litigation section)

8) In the event I cannot get the polygrapher to sign something agreeing to release my complete poly file to a third-party polygrapher, any thoughts on my (surreptitiously yet legally) audio recording the assessment myself? (I've read that the video is the most important—not sure if audio would provide anything other than capturing belligerent and completely unprofessional behaviors that violate APA standards, which occurred during my first polygraph with a different examiner, which I still passed)

9) If I have a copy of my prior (presentencing) history polygraph, where I can show they asked me the exact same recently inconclusive question two different ways, asked them repeatedly, and I passed them all—what are your thoughts on showing that to the polygrapher before this next examination begins?  In my treatment program, polygraphs are considered spoken of with reverence for their God-like powers and infallability, yet they can't explain why the first history polygraph I did (and passed) presentencing somehow doesn't count.  Any case law or thoughts on that?

10) I know that TLDTDP says to never explain an (alleged) physiological response on a question—Given that I have had several months to think about it (assuming it existed), is there anything to be gained in telling the polygrapher the reason why I think I may had a response to that (allegedly) inconclusive question, prior to repeating the history polygraph?

11) I have federal probation paperwork that clearly states in bold type on page one that you cannot be violated solely on the results of polygraph failure alone, which is one of many different federal documents I have collected that seem to freely admit their beloved polygraph is unreliable and deeply flawed, yet I have seen first-hand in my treatment group how they end-run that prohibition, by getting the therapist to use the illegitimate poly results to say that you aren't being honest in treatment and thus not meaningfully participating (even though you had very good participation), and then you are involuntarily discharged from treatment, which of course violates your probation, and then back to prison you go—objective achieved!  I have also read that federal rules of evidence don't seem to apply to probation revocation hearings because they are considered 'administrative'—simple 'hearsay' statements and otherwise inadmissable polygraph results and related SWAG are good enough—Have others heard about this end-run dynamic and the federal administrative hearing polygraph evidence exception?

12) From what I can identify on TLBTLD, and what I can recall despite high anxiety, it seems that both my maintenance and history polygraphs were Relevant-Irrelevant, although from reading your forum, that seems extremely unlikely for PCSOT, as some 2002 forum posts indicate R-I is a nearly extinct unicorn and only rarely used for LEO and NSA.  The examiner formally announces the beginning and end (control), and then he reads the list of relevant and irrelevant questions before formally asking them 3 times in differing orders.  I believe he asked one global question about whether I was being honest during the eval (relevant), but it was somewhere in the middle, and definitely not the first relevant typical of sacrifice relevant, and the question wasn't repeated three times like the others, but I may have imagined all that.  At the end, consistent with his empathic I'm-your-friend approach, he asked me what I was thinking on the one particular relevant question where I allegedly had an inconclusive response.  From what I can recall, there were no actual control questions, and definitely no stim test, probable lie, directed lie, hypothetical, or concealed controls or even time-banding—does this sound like R-I format to you?  Could it be anything else?  Apart from what I found on this forum, I found a powerpoint from Raymond Nelson that says PCSOT does not use R-I format.  If it is R-I, I am very concerned.  The Polygraph and Lie Deception book says R-I is unstandardized, outmoded, and “does not satisfy the basic requirements of a psychophysiological test” while citing a Rasking & Honts 2002 study, while Honts & Handler (2014) described it as “markedly inferior.”  From TLBTLD and your experience, is it correct that the R-I poly format has the highest rate of false positives of any poly format, something like 16-33%?  If the sh*t hits the fan and I failed and they start the aforementioned end-run, and I needed to lawyer up, is that something I could use to discredit the results and/or the polygrapher, for not following APA or other standard of practice guidelines by using a markedly inferior test—I know that would be an easy defense in court in other fields, but has anyone heard of someone doing that with polygraphy? (or maybe that is where the Federal rules of evidence that admit simple hearsay and uninformed opinions get me).

13) If things go completely south with this poly, despite my excellent treatment and probation performance documented by PO and therapist, any recommendations on where to find an attorney well-versed in the PCSOT polygraphy area, apart from Google?

I apologize for the length of this post, but the more I read, the more questions and concerns I have.  I thank you all in advance for any advice and assistance you can provide.

George, thank you so much for your answers.

A few follow-up questions:

Question:
1) Would it be inappropriate/inadvisable/manipulative/idiotic to tell the polygrapher, prior to starting the polygraph, that if I am deemed deceptive or inconclusive, I want results released to a third party polygrapher (whose name I will provide) to vet his entire poly file, as well as vetting the last one where I had an (allegedly) inconclusive finding? (or should I just tell him I want to do that at the onset, regardless of the outcome?) 

ANSWER:  I think that as a convicted sex offender undergoing mandated polygraph "testing," you are not in any position to make such demands, and that doing so would have an unhappy outcome for you.

In the event that you face adverse action based on polygraph results, your lawyer may be able to secure release of your polygraph materials for review by a third party. (This is something that I have done pro bono in a number of cases.) 

FOLLOW-UP QUESTION:  Maybe I'm missing something, but when I think of ANY other type of evaluation (psychological, psychiatric, etc.) done in a forensic (criminal, civil) context, a person has the right to third-party evaluation of the results—is polygraph that different? (although I admit I can't find anything about that online).  I understand that I the examinee cannot access the raw test data, but my third-party polygrapher should be able to.

Question:
I've read that the APA requires release of the results to the examinee within a week—are there some comparable requirements for releasing the entire file to another 3rd party polygrapher? (the Model Policy for Release and Management of Polygraph Reports and Polygraph Data doesn't speak to this) 


ANSWER:  No. 

Just to make sure I understand, you are saying that even with a lawyer and a third-party polygrapher in place, my examiner could CHOOSE not to release anything, or release an incomplete file without the data?

Question:
7) Does George or anyone have any information on the current legality of doing sexual history polygraphs in the 9th circuit? I swear I have seen 9th Cir (court of appeals?) caselaw prohibiting those, where they were called an unconstitutional fishing expedition, yet I now cannot seem to find that.  Any help? (not 9th Cir Antelope (2005), not 10th Cir Von Behren (2016), not Dansby Texas court appeals (2013)--BTW-George, these aren't in your otherwise very comprehensive Litigation section) 


ANSWER:  I am not aware of any case law that prohibits the conduct of sexual history polygraphs in post-conviction polygraph screening. 

FOLLOW-UP COMMENT:  Read those citations I listed—10 Cir Von Behren provides a right for refusal of sexual history polygraph—for people in the 10th Cir.

https://antipolygraph.org/blog/2016/05/15/federal-appeals-court-rules-certain-ma...

Question:
11) I have federal probation paperwork that clearly states in bold type on page one that you cannot be violated solely on the results of polygraph failure alone, which is one of many different federal documents I have collected that seem to freely admit their beloved polygraph is unreliable and deeply flawed, yet I have seen first-hand in my treatment group how they end-run that prohibition, by getting the therapist to use the illegitimate poly results to say that you aren't being honest in treatment and thus not meaningfully participating (even though you had very good participation), and then you are involuntarily discharged from treatment, which of course violates your probation, and then back to prison you go—objective achieved!  I have also read that federal rules of evidence don't seem to apply to probation revocation hearings because they are considered 'administrative'—simple 'hearsay' statements and otherwise inadmissable polygraph results and related SWAG are good enough—Have others heard about this end-run dynamic and the federal administrative hearing polygraph evidence exception? 

ANSWER: I am not familiar with any cases where federal probation was revoked based on polygraph outcomes leading to expulsion from a "therapy" program. 

FOLLOW-UP COMMENT: 

One from your own forum:
https://antipolygraph.org/cgi-bin/forums/YaBB.pl?num=1350624423

https://gritsforbreakfast.blogspot.com/2012/03/tx-court-of-criminal-appeals-okay...

Here is direct from a probation officer on Quora:

Robin Frazier
Investigator at Probation (workplace) (2014–present)Author has 148 answers and 91.1K answer views2y

Going to prison is the definition of having probation revoked. However, I am a little confused about that, since the sentencing court is the only one who can revoke probation; that's done by holding a hearing and presenting evidence. Additionally, you've said your case was being dismissed; do you mean judgment overturned or something else?

In my state, the only people required to take polygraph exams as part of a treatment program are sexual offenders who are required to complete Sex Offender Treatment Program; and failing a polygraph will certainly get sex offenders sent back to prison. However, this is usually on parole or Sexual Offender Conditional Discharge, not probation. Of course, I don't know where you are located, so laws where you are may differ.


George, in your PCSOT forum on this site, I have read of this occurring in TX, WI, and TN, and I am witnessing it first-hand in my state.  I have also read of it in other states on a Reddit forum, but did not screenshot the info.

Question:
13) If things go completely south with this poly, despite my excellent treatment and probation performance documented by PO and therapist, any recommendations on where to find an attorney well-versed in the PCSOT polygraphy area, apart from Google?


ANSWER: Apart from Google, you might try Martindale-Hubbell:

https://martindale.com ;

FOLLOW-UP QUESTION: 
Okay, apart from PCSOT and SO-specific issues, are there any attorneys you or anyone else know to be particularly versed in debunking the polygraph in civil or criminal cases?  With your (and many others) lengthy experience, I would think you would know someone specific.

Thanks in advance.

Wow. Good luck to you fighting city hall. The object lesson you're missing is power and control - over you. If you think you have any power, rights, protection, etc., here's a tip: you don't.

You're not going to beat the system, and playing games with the entities in your containment circle is a recipe for a lot of misery - on your end.

Is it fair? Absolutely not. Aside from the farce of the polygraph, suck it up and do your time in whatever program you're in. You obviously made a mistake, so own up to that, grow, and move on (which you allude to). Haggling over testing conditions or types of questions you can be asked will get you nowhere. Keep a low profile and stay off of your PO's radar. There are plenty of knuckleheads on supervision who can take up that time and attention for you.

Advertising your background here isn't the smartest move. What can people figure out? Generally where you live (9th Circuit), your more local area has one approved provider (so probably not a larger metro area), you have testing history (and a result set to match on), sounds like you're in a new program having left one (for whatever reason, such as moving, being kicked out for being unmanageable, etc.), and likely college educated based on your writing. Plus you have a fed beef (vs state), so your peer population is a lot smaller to search through. I wouldn't think it would be hard to identify you were I a federal PO reading this.

You can follow your terms and conditions, tell the truth during testing and beat the exam, or you can not follow the T&Cs, lie about it, and beat the exam. That's really the short and sweet of your situation. If you're in the former mindset, and want to protect yourself from bogus results and the consequences that follow, that's understandable (and it means you may have to lie about what you know about polygraphs, or how you answer "Are you using any countermeasures today?"), and not no one, but less people would fault you for that. Those people being others who've been screwed over by being deemed deceptive when you know g-d well you were telling the truth.