- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by Lethe
- Apr 08, 2009, 11:36 PMThat agency lies about the accuracy of the polygraph? I am shocked--shocked! In other news, you will all be astonished to know that water is wet.
Those things couldn't tell the truth about the polygraph if you put a gun to their heads.
Those things couldn't tell the truth about the polygraph if you put a gun to their heads.
Posted by nopolycop
- Mar 13, 2009, 10:18 AMBefore my last polygraph, I brought in a written statement to the polygrapher as to why I thought the poly was bullshit. He read through it, (but because he had to go through the motions) said okay, and started into his "routine," explaining 98% accuracy after new studies, explaining that Gary Ridgeway didn't pass the polygraph, it was the polygraphers fault that he was over worked and missed the deception signs, (yeah, right), blah, blah blah. I then looked him in the eyes and asked him if he could tell if I was actually lying to him. To his credit, he answered truthfully, and said no.
I then agreed to the poly, and when he gave me the hold harmless agreement to sign, I refused, stating that since he can't guarantee that he won't brand me a liar, I won't release him of any liability.
The test ended there, with me agreeing to take the poly but refusing to release him from liability, and he refusing to test me because of it.
Quite a show when it was all said and done...
I then agreed to the poly, and when he gave me the hold harmless agreement to sign, I refused, stating that since he can't guarantee that he won't brand me a liar, I won't release him of any liability.
The test ended there, with me agreeing to take the poly but refusing to release him from liability, and he refusing to test me because of it.
Quite a show when it was all said and done...
Posted by Labeled4Life
- Mar 12, 2009, 04:43 PMQuote from: travis b on Mar 12, 2009, 02:39 PM I was told that the polygraph indicated I was lying when I stated that I did not ever use heroin... I rarely take aspirin and never use other non prescription medications. So much for accuracy.
travis, this is my first post...of many. Once I stop feeling like a dirt bag I will probably tell my story. Until then, I will continue to hold it in.
In regards to your comment, if it makes you feel better, I was accused of illegal drug use by a FBI polygrapher recently. Unfortunately, and well documented, I have a rare neurological condition that shuts my breathing down if I take drugs. In a nutshell my brain tells my breathing that it too can relax with the rest of my body. I was almost lost to a routine surgery because they did not have an airway established beforehand. Yet by the time I was degraded and left the FBI building, I felt like I had spent years in Columbia trafficking narcotics even though I physically fear drugs...even prescribed.
Posted by T.M. Cullen
- Mar 12, 2009, 03:00 PMQuoteI was told that the polygraph indicated I was lying when I stated that I did not ever use heroin.
Polygraphers routinely claim their machine can detect deception. But when confronted with the fact that scientifically, all the polygraph machine does is measure fight or flight reactions which can have many underlying causes, they play this down. One polygrapher here even claimed it was an "overgeneralization" to claim that polygraphers use the term "deception indicated" when labeling chart reactions. Yet the four NSA polygraphers who tested me either stated or implied the machine detects deception. One (Mr. Lingenfelter) claimed 98% accuracy. We have other applicants who routine report they make that claim.
They want it both ways. Fact is, if it became common knowledge that the machine doesn't detect deception, it would lessen the utility of the test, which relies heavily on applicant gullibility. Maybe this is why many polygraphers are purposely evasive on the subject (outside of the examination room, of course).
TC
Posted by travis b
- Mar 12, 2009, 02:39 PMI took a polygraph as a police officer candidate. Their were a series of questions relating to drug use. I was told that the polygraph indicated I was lying when I stated that I did not ever use heroin. There were three questions relating to heroin use. In fact I have tried marijuana only once and have never seen nor tried any harder illicit drugs. I rarely take aspirin and never use other non prescription medications. So much for accuracy.
Posted by George W. Maschke
- May 26, 2008, 11:06 AMQuote from: Marty on May 26, 2008, 10:00 AMMy husband recently passed a polygraph and I am still unsure if he did the crime. I was wondering how effectve these are? What are the chances he lied and still passed?
There's no way of calculating those chances. Polygraph "testing" has no scientific basis and its accuracy rate cannot be specified. In general, assuming that the examinee is uninformed about polygraph procedure and countermeasures, it's more likely that a truthful person would wrongly fail than that a deceptive person would wrongly pass. But the deceptive can pass using simple countermeasures that polygraphers have no demonstrated ability to detect.
Posted by usband recently pMichelle
- May 26, 2008, 10:00 AMMy husband recently passed a polygraph and I am still unsure if he did the crime. I was wondering how effectve these are? What are the chances he lied and still passed?
Posted by Fair Chance
- Nov 15, 2003, 06:19 PMQuote from: Marty on Nov 13, 2003, 11:02 PM
The problem is that cck has already indicated he is outside of the FBI's acceptible drug usage range. While I believe his stated useage is long enough ago as to not matter, it is not my call - or his call - it's the FBI's call.
Fair Chance, this in no way excuses the FBI for use of marginal "science" in screening or the excesses and abuses polygraphers inflict on the innocent. There is little so painful as being accused falsely.
-Marty
In a nutshell folks, this is what it is all about. The FBI does have the right to demand honesty and truthfulness from all of its applicants. In return, the FBI has the responsibility to show respect, truthfulness, and honesty to its applicants. The pre-employment screening polygraph exam as used today in the FBI is without honor, ethics, or faithfulness to the Constitution of the United States. I believe in treating people the way I would want to be treated. The FBI wants honesty. The FBI has to be honest with its applicants. The polygraph is not a way to do so.
Regards.
Posted by Skeptic
- Nov 15, 2003, 12:11 AMQuote from: Torpedo on Nov 14, 2003, 06:44 PMWell done George....I gather from your exchange concerning this person's test that you DO NOT encourage countermeasures.....I am glad that you appear to have seen the light....whew, for a moment there, I could hqve sworn you had ealier (11/04)directed him to the infamous Chapter 4, which one might construe was a tacit recommendation to employ countermeasures, but given your final recommendation that he withdraw his application in lieu of attempting those hopeless countermeasures, I must be incorrect. Hooray for you George, here is hope for you!
Hmmm...do you suppose that, if we all take a moment and let him think, Torpedo will realize the (obvious) flaw in his own reasoning?
Well, I can hope.
Skeptic
Posted by Torpedo
- Nov 14, 2003, 06:44 PMWell done George....I gather from your exchange concerning this person's test that you DO NOT encourage countermeasures.....I am glad that you appear to have seen the light....whew, for a moment there, I could hqve sworn you had ealier (11/04)directed him to the infamous Chapter 4, which one might construe was a tacit recommendation to employ countermeasures, but given your final recommendation that he withdraw his application in lieu of attempting those hopeless countermeasures, I must be incorrect. Hooray for you George, here is hope for you!
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Nov 13, 2003, 11:20 PMI agree that the ethically preferable option for CCK would have been to withdraw his/her application.
Posted by Marty
- Nov 13, 2003, 11:13 PMQuote from: George W. Maschke on Nov 13, 2003, 11:07 PMMarty,
How would you have answered CCK's question?
I would not answer it. I would encourage CCK to withdraw his application as he stated his drug usage is outside of FBI limits.
-Marty
Posted by Marty
- Nov 13, 2003, 11:11 PMQuote from: George W. Maschke on Nov 13, 2003, 10:56 PMMarty,
CCK asked me whether he/she should "write a beneign statement that perhaps [he/she] did more drugs than previously stated, but that it was so long ago [he/she] can't be sure?" I would have been lying had I stated that doing so would be in his/her interest.
Indeed, George, your advice was factually correct. My unease is with the implication some may take that you agreed with cck's falsification of his background to obtain employment as a special agent. I believe that detracts from your more general polygraph message.
-Marty
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Nov 13, 2003, 11:07 PMMarty,
How would you have answered CCK's question?
How would you have answered CCK's question?
Posted by Marty
- Nov 13, 2003, 11:02 PMQuote from: Fair Chance on Nov 13, 2003, 10:13 PMMarty and Ray,The problem is that cck has already indicated he is outside of the FBI's acceptible drug usage range. While I believe his stated useage is long enough ago as to not matter, it is not my call - or his call - it's the FBI's call.
I have never advocated circumventing any rules on an application. My complete honesty approach put me through the wringer plus an extra wash cycle and rinse. I read George's opinion to be one that any change, no matter how slight, could be interpreted in the worst way possible and not put into context (as compared to a a court of law with a jury and defense lawyer to argue your case).
Marty, you know me never to advise anyone to not tell the truth but I think this one might be in a gray area. When in the room with the "polygraph pro", there are no witnesses or records to clarify statements or explainations. Misinterpretations are easy to come by and become part of a lifetime permanent record.
Regards.
Fair Chance, this in no way excuses the FBI for use of marginal "science" in screening or the excesses and abuses polygraphers inflict on the innocent. There is little so painful as being accused falsely.
-Marty