Post reply

The message has the following error or errors that must be corrected before continuing:
Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.
Attachments: (Clear attachments)
Restrictions: 4 per post (4 remaining), maximum total size 192 KB, maximum individual size 64.00 MB
Uncheck the attachments you no longer want attached
Click or drag files here to attach them.
(Clear attachments)
Other options
Verification:
Please leave this box empty:
Type the letters shown in the picture
Listen to the letters / Request another image

Type the letters shown in the picture:
What is 10 minus 4? (numeral):
Shortcuts: ALT+S post or ALT+P preview

Topic summary

Posted by George W. Maschke
 - May 18, 2006, 11:11 AM
As noted on the blog, in 2003, the Drug Enforcement Agency's Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) instructed polygrapher E. Victor Perez to conduct a Peak of Tension test on a confidential source who allegedly received a classified DEA document from an employee at the U.S. Embassy in Bogota, Colombia.

I have a couple questions for any polygraphers reading this:

1) Do you think it was appropriate for DEA OPR to conduct a polygraph examination of the confidential source after 12 hours of interrogation? If so, why?

2) Given the case facts presented in Special Agent Perez's report, do you think it was appropriate for OPR to instruct him to use the Peak of Tension technique? Why or why not?