CarlBrutananadilewski wrote on Jul 1
st, 2022 at 3:56pm:
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?)
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.)
Quote: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.
What do you hope to accomplish by doing this? You indicate in question 6 that you don't get to choose which polygraph operator you go to. I think that asking for this information will only make it more difficult to establish any kind of positive rapport with the polygraph operator.
Quote: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?
No.
Quote:(I've searched online but find only releases for examinees) Any tips on how to go about that?
No.
Quote: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)
No.
Quote: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).
No.
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? [/quote]
No.
Quote:(perhaps that could better explain my one alleged inconclusive response, assuming they give a shit) or would that be more 'guilty person behavior.'
Presenting documentation of your anxiety disorder without being asked may be interpreted as excuse-making for why you might not pass. It is unlikely to help you.
Quote:Any citations/articles on how anxiety disorder or chronic insomnia interferes/invalidates polygraph results?
To the best of my knowldege, no such articles exist.
Quote: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?
I am not aware of any such right accruing to federal probationers.
Quote: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)
I am not aware of any case law that prohibits the conduct of sexual history polygraphs in post-conviction polygraph screening.
Quote: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)
I will address this question privately.
Quote: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?
It is common for polygraphers to ask about prior polygraph experience. I think it would be prudent to only mention prior passed polygraphs to your polygrapher if and when asked.
Quote: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?
I don't think so.
Quote: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?
I am not familiar with any cases where federal probation was revoked based on polygraph outcomes leading to expulsion from a "therapy" program.
Quote: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?
I think it is likely that you failed to recognize some probable-lie "control" questions as such.
Quote: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%?
I think that because of polygraphy's lack of scientific underpinnings, one cannot establish a generalizable false positive rate for any polygraph technique. One can credibly argue, however, that the theoretical basis for the Relevant/Irrelevant technique is even weaker than that for the "Control" Question "Test."
Quote: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).
I am aware of no probation revocation case where the use of the Relevant/Irrelevant technique was at issue.
Quote: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?
Apart from Google, you might try Martindale-Hubbell:
https://martindale.com