|
Author
|
Topic: FBI Polygraph Court Case
|
Ted Todd
Member
|
posted 12-27-2012 03:39 PM
 
United States v. Pelletier, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 24016 (7th Cir. Ill. Nov. 21, 2012)
Pelletier applied for a job with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). As part of the application process, he went to the FBI office to undergo a personnel security interview and to take a polygraph examination. Pelletier failed the polygraph examination. When the polygraph examiner asked him how he thought he did, Pelletier told him that he had some trouble with some of the questions because of a set of files on his home computer that contained images of naked children. The polygraph examiner then invited an agent from the Cyber Crimes Unit to join them. The agent did not Mirandize Pelletier who admitted to downloading child pornography from the internet for a graduate school research project. The agent asked Pelletier for consent to search his computer but Pelletier refused. The agent left the room and directed other agents to go to Pelletier’s home and secure it until a search warrant or consent could be obtained. The agent also contacted federal and state prosecutors about obtaining search warrants for Pelletier’s home and computer. The agent returned to the interview room and told Pelletier if he did not consent to a search that he was going to apply for a search warrant. Pelletier signed a written consent to search form and was allowed to leave. As he left, Pelletier asked the agent if “this was going to slow down the application process.” It did. The FBI found over six hundred images of child pornography on Pelletier’s computer and instead of hiring him, arrested him.
Pelletier claimed that several of his incriminating statements should have been suppressed because he never received Miranda warnings. He argued that the job interview became a custodial interrogation by the time the agent from the Cyber Crimes Unit, who was wearing a badge and carrying his duty weapon entered the interview room.
The court did not agree. Pelletier came to the FBI office as a job applicant, not a suspect. A reasonable applicant for an FBI job would expect to go through lengthy interviews in an FBI office, encounter armed FBI agents and be subject to security measures limiting free movement
9
through the building. Pelletier never expressed any discomfort, asked to leave or asked for an attorney. The agents offered him snacks, sodas, and restroom breaks several times and Pelletier remained friendly and talkative throughout the day. Pelletier’s statement to agents as he was leaving showed that he believed he was still in the running for an FBI job. Under these circumstances, a reasonable person would not have thought himself in custody; therefore, Pelletier was not entitled to Miranda warnings.
Pelletier also argued that he involuntarily consented to the search of his computer. Without deciding the issue of consent, the court held that the child pornography evidence was admissible under the inevitable discovery doctrine. First, Pelletier’s admission that his computer contained child pornography established probable cause to apply for a warrant to search it. Second, the Cyber Crimes agent had contacted both federal and state prosecutors about obtaining a search warrant and he testified that he would have applied for one if Pelletier had refused consent.
IP: Logged | |
Polygraph Place Bulletin Board
