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:
Type the third word in this sentence: 'The quick brown fox jumps.' (answer in lowercase):
Shortcuts: ALT+S post or ALT+P preview

Topic summary

Posted by anon011
 - Dec 07, 2008, 07:54 PM
OK I'm trying to understand what's going on here.  So someone who is or has an understanding of the process of polygraph was under criminal investigation and was polygraphed? That person either after being polygraphed or during the polygraph confessed?  Sorry, I don't know what an LEA examiner or DI is.  

So, if from what I read in the "The Lie Behind the Lie Detector" are true and some emails to head polygraph officials about the scenario about a guy who knows the "interrogation" tactics of polygraph.  Shouldn't they 1) not polygraph the guy   but since they did 2) couldn't the man under investigation beat the polygraph or 3) at least refuse the polygraph on the basis that it could produce a false positive because he knows the process?

Is it because only people who know what countermeasures are can beat the polygraph or at least create false positives?
Posted by T.M. Cullen
 - Dec 07, 2008, 02:37 PM
DI verified by confession?  How do you know it wasn't a false confession?  Was there a follow up investigation?  What criminal matter was at issue?

Wait a minute.  Shouldn't it be the other way around?  Shouldn't the confession be verified by the polygraph given it's 98% accuracy rate at detecting deception?  And given that a criminal polygraph is really an interrogation designed to get a confession, wouldn't that be using a confession to verify a confession?

That there is what ya call a "conundrum"!

TC
Posted by pailryder
 - Dec 07, 2008, 08:22 AM
I polyed a LEA examiner in a criminal matter at the request of his department.  DI verified by confession.
Posted by George W. Maschke
 - Dec 07, 2008, 01:59 AM
I've never heard of a polygrapher being polygraphed in the course of a criminal investigation. But federal agencies that require polygraph screening for applicants and employees also polygraph their polygraphers. If only for appearance's sake, they have to.
Posted by anon011
 - Dec 07, 2008, 01:11 AM
I was wondering if professional polygraph persons are polygraphed for whatever reasons? Lets say for example a polygraph professional allegedly committed a crime or is trying to apply for a FBI position.  Are they administered a polygraph exam?  Isn't there federal and state guidelines for this?