- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by Human Subject
- Nov 12, 2003, 09:36 PMFun stuff, huh?
Posted by Alf
- Nov 12, 2003, 07:56 PM>So Alf, would you characterize the results of your exam as unfair?
yes; absolutely unfair. There were NO valid reasons for finding "concerns" with my drug use/history. I clear their drug policy by miles. After my 2nd poly, I was asked to write down my "use/history".
that was simple; MJ twice in '89, haven't seen that or anything else since then! but still not good enough.
I told them I was fully confident a background check/investigation would prove the veracity of what I was saying...no dice.
yes; absolutely unfair. There were NO valid reasons for finding "concerns" with my drug use/history. I clear their drug policy by miles. After my 2nd poly, I was asked to write down my "use/history".
that was simple; MJ twice in '89, haven't seen that or anything else since then! but still not good enough.
I told them I was fully confident a background check/investigation would prove the veracity of what I was saying...no dice.
Posted by Human Subject
- Nov 12, 2003, 04:13 PMSo Alf, would you characterize the results of your exam as unfair? (I mean, were there valid reasons for showing concern on certain questions, because you were either lying or admitting to violations of FBI policy?)
For the record, I consider myself falsely DQed. I'm not a foreign agent, I haven't committed any major crimes, and I certainly haven't violated FBI drug use policy. (FBI drug use policy is so lax Tommy Chong wouldn't be DQed on this basis.)
For the record, I consider myself falsely DQed. I'm not a foreign agent, I haven't committed any major crimes, and I certainly haven't violated FBI drug use policy. (FBI drug use policy is so lax Tommy Chong wouldn't be DQed on this basis.)
Posted by Alf
- Nov 12, 2003, 12:01 AMUpon hearing there were "concerns" with some answers, I followed up with my coordinator and relayed my "concerns" with the polygrapher's.
I receieved a 2nd poly; it "concentrated" on the questions with "concerns". Same polygrapher, same "concerns", same conclusion.
>Did they ask you similar questions to the first?
identical; I believe.
>Did they treat you with hostility?
not on the first nor the second.
>Did you employ countermeasures? Did they work?
Did they accuse you of countermeasures?
no, n/a, no.
I receieved a 2nd poly; it "concentrated" on the questions with "concerns". Same polygrapher, same "concerns", same conclusion.
>Did they ask you similar questions to the first?
identical; I believe.
>Did they treat you with hostility?
not on the first nor the second.
>Did you employ countermeasures? Did they work?
Did they accuse you of countermeasures?
no, n/a, no.
Posted by Human Subject
- Nov 11, 2003, 12:14 AMQuote from: Ray on Nov 10, 2003, 12:18 AMHuman Subject,
Sounds like you may have been caught attempting c/m's. What went wrong?
If you don't use CMs, and you are not accused of using CMs, then you KNOW you weren't "caught".
If you don't use CMs, and you are accused of using CMs, then you were "caught", but falsely.
If you use CMs, and you are not accused of using CMs, then you KNOW you weren't "caught".
If you use CMs, and you are accused of using CMs, you don't know if you were really "caught". You don't know whether you would have been accused of using CMs regardless of what you did.
I didn't say which of these bins my particular case falls into. This is just pure logic. (And actually, this is grossly oversimplified, because I haven't even dealt with the issue of pass/failure... for example, you may use CMs, not be accused of using CMs, and fail. What inference does one draw from that? Did you use CMs unsuccessfully? I'm just trying to make the point that drawing conclusions about this is not a simple matter.)
Posted by Fair Chance
- Nov 10, 2003, 11:18 AMDear Ray,
Maybe nothing went "wrong." I was accused of countermeasures during my second polygraph exam (previously described in other posts) and used absolutely no countermeasures. I had no polygraph knowledge during my first two exams. I do not know if the "reviewers" in Washington, D.C., agreed with the accusations of the examiner or just decided that I was an "acceptable loss" and did not want to challange his decision (there are many other "fish" in the sea trying to jump into the boat).
The polygraph as used in the FBI for employment screening is very much a different animal as opposed to criminal prosecutions. No recording of the process, no witnesses, and it is your word (an unproven applicant) against the agent's (seasoned "veteran"). Very difficult odds on any appeal if your case depends on improper conduct of the examiner or disputes over "confessions."
The black mark does follow an applicant because all NCIC checks performed by federal, state, and local law enforcement have an "FBI" status check box which will be marked because there is an "official" FBI record. The requestor will have to perform an additional step to get the information but only very naive departments would hire any law enforcement employees without going to this "extra step." The inference from being "not within acceptable parameters" will be interepreted as the FBI finding you untrustworthy. The whole situation just gets uglier from there.
As my experience indicated to my, use of "countermeasure detection" is strictly based on individual interepretation and not indicative of any "scientific method".
Regards.
Maybe nothing went "wrong." I was accused of countermeasures during my second polygraph exam (previously described in other posts) and used absolutely no countermeasures. I had no polygraph knowledge during my first two exams. I do not know if the "reviewers" in Washington, D.C., agreed with the accusations of the examiner or just decided that I was an "acceptable loss" and did not want to challange his decision (there are many other "fish" in the sea trying to jump into the boat).
The polygraph as used in the FBI for employment screening is very much a different animal as opposed to criminal prosecutions. No recording of the process, no witnesses, and it is your word (an unproven applicant) against the agent's (seasoned "veteran"). Very difficult odds on any appeal if your case depends on improper conduct of the examiner or disputes over "confessions."
The black mark does follow an applicant because all NCIC checks performed by federal, state, and local law enforcement have an "FBI" status check box which will be marked because there is an "official" FBI record. The requestor will have to perform an additional step to get the information but only very naive departments would hire any law enforcement employees without going to this "extra step." The inference from being "not within acceptable parameters" will be interepreted as the FBI finding you untrustworthy. The whole situation just gets uglier from there.
As my experience indicated to my, use of "countermeasure detection" is strictly based on individual interepretation and not indicative of any "scientific method".
Regards.
Posted by Ray
- Nov 10, 2003, 12:18 AMHuman Subject,
Sounds like you may have been caught attempting c/m's. What went wrong?
Sounds like you may have been caught attempting c/m's. What went wrong?
Posted by n0mad
- Nov 06, 2003, 08:10 PMI don't think telling us if you employed cm's is going to identify you, especially since you didn't pass anyway; seems moot.
Posted by Mr. Truth
- Nov 06, 2003, 07:53 PMOh, I see what you mean now. I thought you had written off ever getting into that field, so the "no comment" stance made me wonder. How about a user name of "Polygraph Training Aid?"
Posted by Human Subject
- Nov 06, 2003, 04:46 PMQuote from: Mr. Truth on Nov 06, 2003, 03:09 PMWhat's with the Secret Squirrel routine? Why no comment?
I'm trying to be as helpful to the guy as possible, but I'd prefer not to go into too much detail. How many people get 2nd FBI poly exams? Can't be a huge number. Start adding details -- rough dates, exchanges, specific results -- and it seems to me it wouldn't be hard for someone to figure out exactly who you are.
I don't see too many people around here posting under their real names.
Posted by Mr. Truth
- Nov 06, 2003, 03:09 PMWhat's with the Secret Squirrel routine? Why no comment?
Posted by Human Subject
- Nov 06, 2003, 01:01 AMQuote from: cck on Nov 05, 2003, 08:59 PMLooking for any and all information on people's experience taking their 2d FBI poly.
I had a 2nd test and failed again.
QuoteDid they ask you similar questions to the first?
Yes, virtually the same.
QuoteDid they treat you with hostility?
Yeah, at the end, but overall it was actually more professional and less hostile than my first.
QuoteDid you employ countermeasures?
No comment.
QuoteDid they work?
This is only knowable if you pass, right?
I do think it's possible that CMs can work too well, especially on 2nd or 3rd tests. (If you do suspciously well when you had trouble before, I would expect the examiner would be "intrigued".)
QuoteDid they accuse you of countermeasures?
No comment.
QuoteAny details anyone can provide on your experiences would be helpful.
Thanks.
I didn't make it, and I think the odds are very long against repeat test takers.
They will of course be more suspicious of CMs, since one would expect an intelligent human being who failed a polygraph to do research on this technique.
In fact, I'd guess some examiners assume CMs will be used on 2nd tests, and look at them as opportunities to study the use of CMs by test subjects. It becomes a test of their mettle (ie, can I catch a cheater?). This is purely my conjecture.
In a true unbiased "retest", they would not inform the examiner that this is your 2nd attempt. (This probably isn't practical.)
Good luck to you on your polygraph.
Posted by cck
- Nov 05, 2003, 08:59 PMLooking for any and all information on people's experience taking their 2d FBI poly.
Did they ask you similar questions to the first?
Did they treat you with hostility?
Did you employ countermeasures? Did they work?
Did they accuse you of countermeasures?
Any details anyone can provide on your experiences would be helpful.
Thanks.
Did they ask you similar questions to the first?
Did they treat you with hostility?
Did you employ countermeasures? Did they work?
Did they accuse you of countermeasures?
Any details anyone can provide on your experiences would be helpful.
Thanks.