- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by False +
- Sep 19, 2002, 09:31 PMAll,
Maria's post is indeed most disturbing. I really hope Maria can get some fair resolution of this issue. But frankly, I would be very surprised if audio/video of the entire exam existed that the agency would be willing to release to Maria. If this were the case, the examiner would know this beforehand, and think twice before concocting anything in the report. Moreover, as many of us have already found out the hard way as examinees, we almost NEVER have access to this audio/video of our exams. In many cases with federal agencies, you don't even get to see the report.
Without trying to make it sound like Maria's is a lost cause, it's difficult to see why an examiner would put him/herself into such a precarious position if the examinee has access to evidence that could incriminate the examiner. That's the whole point behind hiding these records from examinees. The polygraph community got my state's governor to outright veto a law requiring examinations to be taped. All of this is by design.
On that note, best of luck.
False +
Maria's post is indeed most disturbing. I really hope Maria can get some fair resolution of this issue. But frankly, I would be very surprised if audio/video of the entire exam existed that the agency would be willing to release to Maria. If this were the case, the examiner would know this beforehand, and think twice before concocting anything in the report. Moreover, as many of us have already found out the hard way as examinees, we almost NEVER have access to this audio/video of our exams. In many cases with federal agencies, you don't even get to see the report.
Without trying to make it sound like Maria's is a lost cause, it's difficult to see why an examiner would put him/herself into such a precarious position if the examinee has access to evidence that could incriminate the examiner. That's the whole point behind hiding these records from examinees. The polygraph community got my state's governor to outright veto a law requiring examinations to be taped. All of this is by design.
On that note, best of luck.
False +
Posted by polycop
- Sep 19, 2002, 03:23 PMQuote from: Drew Richardson on Sep 19, 2002, 12:39 PM
...Additionally, polygraph examiners should not be rewarded for admissions and/or confessions obtained related to the administration of polygraph examinations. The obvious conflict of interest and encouragement for the aforementioned behavior on the part of less than scrupulous examiners is obvious. Would you agree with this analysis?
Drew,I never considered your position. Like most examiners, I have always been quite proud of my resolution rate. I can see however, that in agencies where an examiner's confession ratio is "rewarded" or "punished" one way of the other, it could lead to unethical behavior in an effort to "boost" one's stats. All I can say about this, is if one of my examiners were to EVER get caught making clearly false statements regarding confessions, he would be without a license and seeking employment in the house cleaning or fast food industries...
Polycop...
Posted by Maria
- Sep 19, 2002, 03:03 PMJust to give an update - I wrote a letter to the HR Department where this happened and other letters to top officials about what happened. I got a phone call from the HR director this morning saying that she is going to view "the tape" and get back to me in a week, when I told her I was in shock from these so called admissions, she seemed surprised - like to say that if you made these admissions then why are you in shock?! She was truly understanding and said she would get on it and resolve the matter soon. Hopefully this, what I call adventure, will result in me winning this battle. Can anyone answer a thought on my mind? Can they tape (I don't know if it was video or audio) with out my knowledge? I just thought they had to advise you that you will be taped. I am glad it was though so this matter can be cleared up but was wondering if they had to tell you that they were going to tape the session. UPDATE TO COME!!!!!!!
Posted by Drew Richardson
- Sep 19, 2002, 12:39 PMPolycop,
I am also quite disturbed about Maria's claims and, unfortunately, have heard similar complaints from other polygraph examinees. You alluded to one critical component of the solution though--every polygraph examination administered in this country should be audio and video taped and be made available for examinee review when such complaints/allegations are made/raised. Not only would this discourage such reprehensible behavior, but would provide clear evidence of it when it does occur. It is not sufficient to wish such a recording existed after such a travesty takes place. Additionally, polygraph examiners should not be rewarded for admissions and/or confessions obtained related to the administration of polygraph examinations. The obvious conflict of interest and encouragement for the aforementioned behavior on the part of less than scrupulous examiners is obvious. Would you agree with this analysis?
I am also quite disturbed about Maria's claims and, unfortunately, have heard similar complaints from other polygraph examinees. You alluded to one critical component of the solution though--every polygraph examination administered in this country should be audio and video taped and be made available for examinee review when such complaints/allegations are made/raised. Not only would this discourage such reprehensible behavior, but would provide clear evidence of it when it does occur. It is not sufficient to wish such a recording existed after such a travesty takes place. Additionally, polygraph examiners should not be rewarded for admissions and/or confessions obtained related to the administration of polygraph examinations. The obvious conflict of interest and encouragement for the aforementioned behavior on the part of less than scrupulous examiners is obvious. Would you agree with this analysis?
Posted by Polycop
- Sep 19, 2002, 12:08 PMQuote from: Maria on Sep 17, 2002, 11:03 PM
Well I got my letter today and it said I was rejected because
1- Admissions regarding multiple times about falsifying police reports regard vehicular accidents.
2- Admissions that a transported illegal substances.
3- Concerned about my admission regarding the handling of former employer's cash. These are lies on top of other lies cause I never admitted to any of this crap! I sent a certified letter to the agency and wrote all my senators, representatives using the antipoly.org links. I never have done anything illegal in my life and now this agency is posing me as a criminal, This polygrapher clearly lied! So anyone out there looking for a job at the Collier County Sheriff, Florida, Watch out and read the Lie about the Lie Decector First, God I wish I had!!!!!!!!
Maria,
As a licensed polygraph examiner, I am deeply disturbed by your post. I truly do not know if you made those admissions or not, but if you did not, then there are several avenues you can take for corrective action:
1. Contact the American Polygraph Association. Although they have no punative authority over their members, other than tossing out a clearly unethical examiner, I would not want to be that examiner having to explain in some future hearing as to why I am no longer a member of the APA.
2. Same goes for the Florida Polygraph Association. Contact them and get help. Both these organizations may already have complaints against this examiner.
3. Does Florida have a licensing law? If they do, then you can have this person's license to practice revoked.
4. The department contracting with this examiner may want to know of your complaint. If substantiated, they can take administrative, civil, and maybe criminal action.
5. Please make sure your complaints are substantiated. Are you SURE you did not say anything that could have been construed as an admission? What might help you would be to find out if the exam was audio or video recorded. Those recordings are a source of public record....
If you were in actuality treated in the way you claim, then I wish you the best of luck in correcting this situation. Please keep me posted..
Regards...
Polycop...
Posted by Maria
- Sep 17, 2002, 11:03 PM
Well I got my letter today and it said I was rejected because
1- Admissions regarding multiple times about falsifying police reports regard vehicular accidents.
2- Admissions that a transported illegal substances.
3- Concerned about my admission regarding the handling of former employer's cash. These are lies on top of other lies cause I never admitted to any of this crap! I sent a certified letter to the agency and wrote all my senators, representatives using the antipoly.org links. I never have done anything illegal in my life and now this agency is posing me as a criminal, This polygrapher clearly lied! So anyone out there looking for a job at the Collier County Sheriff, Florida, Watch out and read the Lie about the Lie Decector First, God I wish I had!!!!!!!!