I was thinking about joing with a state law enforcement agency and I know that one of their requirements is a polygraph test. I was just wandering what questions they will ask for this type of polygraph exam. I did some marijauna when I was younger, will this come back to haunt me for the test? Can I convince myself that it never happened? Can I lie and answer it like any other question and have it look like the truth to the examiner? I'm just curious before I actually apply.
John,
Most law enforcement agencies allow for "experimental" marijuana use as a teenager or young adult. By experimental I mean usually 1-5 times but it varies with each agency and I presume some have a zero tolerance policy.
As for the questions that you should expect I would refer you to the free booklet on this site "THE LIE BEHIND THE LIE DETECTOR". It has pretty good examples of pre-employment polygraph screening questions.
My own personal recommendation to you would be to not attempt to conceal your past experience with marijuana as it may come back to haunt you in a background investigation. As far as using countermeasures on the polygraph exam? Read the booklet and decide for yourself. I myself have fallen victim to this hideous interrogation technique 3 times with a federal law enforcement agency and have been labeled "inconclusive", which generally means that they couldn't detect if I was lying or telling the truth. With those results they automatically assume that you are lying about something! And I was a Police Officer just trying to go to a federal agency.
Good luck with your endeavors and don't go into a polygraph exam blindly, read the books and experiences that people have had on this site.
I have to agree with Jane Doe that the best thing for background is not to conceal especially if it was experimental. I have recently been thru the background for a major police dept and I ended up going thru with flying colors b/c I was completely honest with them and provided explanations for all infractions and references that could back up my story. With my experience during a police hiring investigation, the investigators are there to find out all the needed information but they really want you to pass. Their goal is not to fail you. Sure there are those horror stories out there of some nut job who has it out for you, but for the most part their job is to make sure you are a qualified participant. In my experience I admitted to smoking marijuana 5 times around 10 years ago at parties. (remember one night is one time, don't for that I smoked but didn't inhale crap!) As far as the polygraph read the info on this site, read the free book and decide for yourself. For me I didn't use any countermeasures and found that as long I didn't intentionally conceal anything there really is nothing I've done for the last 10 years that would make anyone sit up and take notice. Good luck!
Hi, i have to take a lie detecter test for a state police job and i did more than just experiment with drugs, but for the last 15 years i havent done a thing, as a matter of fact ive been in the marines for 10 of that and have a piss test every other week, is the poly just going to inquire about the last 10 years?
Godzilla,
To start, download and read The Lie Behind The Lie Detector. This will provide you with the background information about how the polygraph "exam" is conducted and how to "counter" the "exam" if you choose to do so.
I believe you should have no trouble with a polygraph. If you have been a Marine for 10 years, you know about interrogation techniques along with focused thinking and in your face badgering from boot camp. The polygrapher will not be able to "break" you into making a statement that is not truthful, which is what they want.
Did you disclose your earlier drug use on your background information? Generally, if they don't like what you write you will be released at that point. Another important point is to remember what you have said earlier and keep it in line with what you will state on the pre-poly "questionaire". The polygrapher will try to extort any "hidden" information that he needs to bolster his conclusions.
Read the book and get educated. Knowledge is power. Going into a polygraph with knowledge of what is happening gives you an advantage, instead of being manipulated because you are not informed.
Good Luck
Fred F. ;)
Fred,
Thanks for the reply, I have already read the book, an excellent source of information, on the background i told them exactly what i told the Marine recruiter in 1990, that i smoked marijuana 3 times in 1983, ill stick to that. What do you think about Doug Williams' book "Sting The Polygraph" is it worth the $48, ill do anything for the job, or is it the same as "The Lie Behind The Lie Detector" Thanks again for your time.
Quote from: Godzilla on Aug 09, 2001, 02:44 AM
What do you think about Doug Williams' book "Sting The Polygraph" is it worth the $48, ill do anything for the job, or is it the same as "The Lie Behind The Lie Detector" Thanks again for your time.
Godzilla,
The decision to buy Doug's book is entirely up to you. He is a former polygrapher and I have heard positive comments on his material and that you can speak to him personally to answer questions.
The Lie Behind The Lie Detector provides you similiar information on countermeasures and how polygraph tests are performed.
I will reiterate what I said in the earlier post. Your background in the Marine Corp is more than sufficient and with the
The Lie Behind The Lie Detector you have all the knowledge you need to successfully pass your polygraph.
The decision to use the countermeasures is your personal one.
Good Luck
Fred F. ;)
Fred F.
Thanks for the input, do you know how for back they ask about? Do they say have you ever or do they say in the last 10 years?
Quote from: Godzilla on Aug 10, 2001, 07:39 PM
do you know how for back they ask about? Do they say have you ever or do they say in the last 10 years?
Godzilla,
You will not be asked questions that have to do with time frame in that sense. You will be asked control questions such as "Have you ever used marijuana"? and irrelevant questions such as "are you telling me the truth today about your drug use"?
The whole test format is laid out by the polygrapher in the pre-polygraph "interview". The examiner will tell you what questions you will be asked but BEWARE......The phrasing of some "irrelevant" questions may NOT be the same during the "test" as they were during the "interview". The "control" questions will be basic have you ever.... format.
Good Luck
Fred F. ;)
Godzilla,
I think that background questions are likely to cover your entire life and not be limited, to, say, the past ten years.
Fred F.,
You wrote:
QuoteYou will not be asked questions that have to do with time frame in that sense. You will be asked control questions such as "Have you ever used marijuana"? and irrelevant questions such as "are you telling me the truth today about your drug use"?
I disagree with your categorization of the sample questions you provided. "Have you ever used marijuana?" (or, perhaps, "Other than what you told me, did you ever use marijuana?") is a likely
relevant question, not a probable-lie "control" question.
And the question "Are you telling me the truth today about your drug use?" is
not an irrelevant question, but a
relevant question.
If you have nothing to hide 100% honesty is always the best choice. Just because you have the knowledge to beat a Polygraph doesn't mean that you should automatically lie about all the bad things you have done in your life, you have to remember that those experiences made you the person you are today. I have no regerets about my experimentation with Marijuana, if anything my having tried the drug reassured me that it wasn't for me and I no longer have the temptation to know what it was like to be "stoned", therefor making me more likely to never try drugs again.
There is nothing worse than the feeling of guilt that can come back to haunt you for having lied about something you didn't have to lie about in the first place. Lying on your application is not the right way to begin a career in Law enforcement.
Good luck with your recruitment process and especially on the Polygraph.
Dimas
Quote from: George Maschke on Aug 11, 2001, 11:02 AM
Godzilla,
I think that background questions are likely to cover your entire life and not be limited, to, say, the past ten years.
Fred F.,
You wrote:
I disagree with your categorization of the sample questions you provided. "Have you ever used marijuana?" (or, perhaps, "Other than what you told me, did you ever use marijuana?") is a likely relevant question, not a probable-lie "control" question.
And the question "Are you telling me the truth today about your drug use?" is not an irrelevant question, but a relevant question.
I have to agree with George on the question categories. However, most pre-polygraph questionnaires cover everything since the early or mid teens.
has anyone ever taken the ny state troopers poly? my friend has to in november.
I'm applying for a position at the sheriffs dept. and have read "The Lie Behind the Lie Detector" and have decided to go with the honesty approach. I'm ashamed about this, but I have one work record from my previous employer of stealing a sandwich from the store. This is true, though I've taken alot more than one since I started. It wasn't hard to take the sandwiches since there was no cameras or any other security devices, but if someone saw me, I'd be in trouble. They finally caught me, but they don't know of the countless other incidents. It's a big company that paid crap so to me it was like being my own Robin Hood. But it's still theft. My question is if I answer this truthfully will the sheriffs dept. still concider me or will I have to look for a job somewhere else?
Dan,
I suggest you tell your Background Investigator about the sandwiches. If you did this more than a few times you probably don't remember all of them. For example, lets say that you stole 10 sandwiches over the course of one year. The BI will ask you, "Have you ever stolen anything in your life (or since the age of XX) ? You would respond with, "Yes, when I was working at XX I stole a couple of sandwiches." It is critical that you appear confident in your response to the question. The BI will continue probing, most likely trying to minimize the theft, but you will stick to your story and finish up with letting him know you were caught. You don't want him to catch you off guard later with... "I just spoke with your previous employer over at XX and he told me that you were a thief!" Keep in mind that you were not shoplifting but embezzling. This incident can be made to vilify you if you are not prepared. The key is to show responsibility for your actions. Personally I prefer to come across as remorseful only in the sense that it took XX mistake for me to learn my lesson and make me a stonger person.
Good Luck and let me know how it goes.
Mike
Dan, all I can say is I hope they don't hire you. Califmike, let me ask you, would you want Dan working as a Deputy Sheriff in your community? If so, I hope he does get hired there. On second thought stike that because it wouldn't be fair to the others who live in your community.
Dan, your example illustrates exactly why law enforcement agencies across the nation have undertaken pre-employment polygraph screening. The people who work as law enforcers in this country have to be more honest, more resistant to temptation than the average person. Mark Twain said it best when he said, "Opportunity can make a thief of anyone." The fact that you routinely stole from your employer, an activity which is estimated to cost the rest of us about $10 billion a year, is bad enough. The fact that you can so completely rationalize that misconduct by saying it was easy, because there weren't any surveillance cameras, and it was a big company that didn't pay you enough, is even more distrubing.
Few people face as much temptation as a uniformed patrol officer to be dishonest. If you think you worked for a big company that didn't pay you enough, how easy will it be to rationalize that you are now working for a Government that doesn't pay you enough. If your fear of "someone seeing you and getting in trouble" wasn't enough to deter you then, how could we expect that when you walk into that business burglary at 2:00 am, with no one around that you wouldn't help yourself to some merchandise in the future. After all the thief will be blamed for it and the insurance company will cover the loss, you deserve it for risking your life at odd hours to protect an ungrateful public for inadequate wages.
Dan, please go find another job. Law Enforcement is not for you. Follow George's advice and JUST SAY NO to the polygraph.
Examiner,
I totally agree wit you in this case, although don't believe that minor offfences commited early in life should in themselves dq someone from srving the public provided the attidtude and integrity of said person is appropriate, Dan, your attempt to justify your mistakes alone tell me that you should seek a different line of work.
Examiner, as for the material that has led me to refer to polygraph as a coin flip, I am as time permits gathering the information I have read and or seen/heard which supports my belief that the accuracy of polygraph to determine deception or truthfulness (barring confession) is no more than slightly better than chance, ie "the coin flip".
Wannabe, glad to hear I'm not alone on this. Your comment on the coin flip debate related to comments in another thread. Would it be possible for you to post your comment there so we don't end up too disjointed in our discourse on that subject. To clarify, what I was looking for was what sources other than the chats and info on this site have you used to come to this conclusion, if any? The point I wanted to illustrate is that people who are making serious life-altering decisions should verify information for themselves from the source, rather than blindly accepting someone else's summary of that information. I'm not trying to put you on the spot and I don't need a detailed comprehensive listing, just a run down of what actions you took beyond the boundaries of this site. It seems to me that most people don't go beyond summaries, George disagrees with that. I'm just curious which side you fall on with regard to this.
Examiner,
I realize this isn't the proper thread for my responce I just didn't want you to think I was ignoring your question completely. I do regularly read material from other sources (including pro poly) and do not blindly accept the advise and opinions of others, just a couple of these are listed here:
http://www.apa.org/releases/liedetector.html
http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/polygraph/ota/index.html
http://www4.nas.edu/webcr.nsf/MeetingDisplay4/BCSS-I-00-01-A?OpenDocument&ExpandSection=1#_Section1
Well, I do appreciate both sides of this dilemma. I was only 18 when this happened, young and stupid. Everybody always says, "Oh, he was just young and didn't know any better." But it's true. When your young, almost any person feels that they can do anything, and without consequences. Some young people just brush it off like nothing happened, but, unlike most young people, I have a very guilty conscience. I understand my wrongs and feel even more guilty that I've taken more sandwiches than they accused me of. If I confess this to the background investigator, at least I'll get it off my chest, if I get the job or not.
On second thought. On the top of this page, there was a person who had used dope, which is a drug. Drugs alter the mind and make people do things and say things that they wouldn't do or say in their right mind. I have never done any drugs in my life and don't ever plan to. The reason I bring this up is because if I were on drugs at the time I stole those sandwiches, some people would say that I wasn't in my right mind and I shouldn't be written up for anything, and yes, there are people out there who would say that! I, however, was in my right mind and want to take RESPONSIBILITY for my actions. What I did was wrong but I still want to pursue my interests in law enforcement. I can understand if they don't hire me, but I wouldn't understand if they don't let me explain myself. Everybody makes at least one bad mistake in their life. Take the first woman, for example!
Dan,
Wannabe and Examiner are blowing smoke up your skirt on this. Every background investigator and polygraph examiner expects you to have stolen something at one point in your life. No one since Christ walked this earth has been perfect, so don't make yourself out to be. Honesty is the best policy. You obviously have matured since you "stole" those items. If the department isn't intelligent enough to see that, they don't deserve to have you as an officer. There are plenty of departments out there that will give you a fair shake. Sure they'll ask you about the thefts and they'll be point blank tough questions. Answer truthfully and you'll be okay.
Wannabe: If you are a law enforcement officer already, congrats. If not, you are out of your league telling others who should and should not seek a career in LE.
Examiner: You're just protecting your facade of a profession. Your lies and lack of remorse for screwing up peoples dreams is more disturbing to me than petty theft. How many dollars are you taking from people like Dan because you are on your "holier than thou" pedestal? Crawl back under that rock you came from until you learn how to play nice.
Thank you for your input, Pseudo Relevant. By the way, I like your quote, "Pull my finger, not my leg." :D
exactly the type of responce I would expect from someone who says "pull my finger". Good Pseudo Relevant, I hope morre people that think they can justify the crimes they commit get hired in YOUR neighborhood. I think I made it pretty clear that indiscretions made while young and still learning about life are a differrent story, PROVIDED, a lesson was learned and if that was the case, dan would not be sitting here saying at first that he thought it was ok because.... then turning around and saying how sorry he was and that he learned his lesson.
and ummmm Pseudo Relevant are you a cop and if so where, I want to be sure never to enter your jurisdiction, must be some real winners there.
one more thing. regardless of wether or not I am already an officer, exactly what does that have to do with my ability to distinguish between right and wrong? Are you implying that ONLY police officers are capable of determining ones fitness for a career in LE?
dan,
I've been following the discussion your initial question has sparked, and would like to share some observations here with all.
First of all, the question you initially asked is, "if I answer this truthfully will the sheriffs dept. still concider me or will I have to look for a job somewhere else?" I do not know the answer to this question, but it seems to me that Pseudo Relevant's statement that "[e]very background investigator and polygraph examiner expects you to have stolen something at one point in your life" is about right.
In fact, the probable-lie "control" question "test" (CQT) used by law enforcement agencies in the polygraph screening of applicants is designed to pass through people who would commit petty theft from an employer and then lie about to a background investigator. This is evidenced by the fact that one of the most popular probable-lie control questions used in pre-employment polygraph screening is, "Other than what you told me, did you ever take anything of value that did not belong to you?"
I find it perverse that persons who bare their souls to their polygraphers, and then answer "control" questions like the one above with a clean conscience, are likely to become false positives (and, in many cases, to have their admissions blown out of all proportion).
Note that the "complete honesty" approach described in Chapter 4 of
The Lie Behind the Lie Detector does not mean allowing your polygraph interrogation to become a confessional. It means being completely honest with your polygrapher about your knowledge of polygraphy. Should you choose this approach, bear in mind our warning regarding the risks involved:
QuoteBut beware! While the Wizard of Oz may have meekly admitted to being a humbug once the curtain was drawn aside and his humbuggery laid bare, your polygrapher might not be so accommodating. One graduate of DoDPI has cautioned that if a subject were to follow this "complete honesty" approach, the polygrapher would probably go ahead with the polygraph interrogation anyhow and arbitrarily accuse the subject of having employed countermeasures. Maureen Lenihan is a case in point. She worked as a research assistant with the federal Commission on Protecting and Reducing Government Secrecy, also known as the "Moynihan Commission." [reference deleted] She later applied for employment with the CIA. She explained to her CIA polygrapher that she had researched polygraphy while working with the Commission. The polygrapher proceeded with the interrogation anyhow, and later accused her of having employed countermeasures.
In another message thread ("CM advice on dealing with DI results misguided" (https://antipolygraph.org/forum/index.php?topic=255.msg1142#msg1142)), Examiner confirmed that in his view, a subject's knowledge of "the lie behind the lie detector" is no barrier to conducting a CQT. And be aware (as also confirmed by Examiner's statements in the aforementioned message thread) that whether or not you are completely honest with your polygrapher, your polygrapher will lie to and attempt to deceive
you.
You know George this is precisely the reason more examiners do not participate in this site. My statements above have been portrayed out of context. Anyone who is following this thread, please review the entire comment George refers too in the other thread.
Quote from: wannabe on Sep 06, 2001, 11:27 PM
exactly the type of responce I would expect from someone who says "pull my finger".
Well, what you see is what you get. You have your opinion based on what I don't know. Mine is based on over twenty years experience in both Federal and Municipal LE, with the last seven years being the senior recruiter and background investigator for my agency.
Quote
Good Pseudo Relevant, I hope morre people that think they can justify the crimes they commit get hired in YOUR neighborhood.
What? Are you merely a parrot? Do you honestly believe every single police officer in your neighborhood's police department has a spotless record? The fact is, just like Dan, every applicant has made some mistakes, whether it's drug experimentation, petty theft, vandalism, etc. Utopia doesn't exist. There aren't any perfect cops, anywhere. If you take a real look at the person instead of making superficial judgements, you'll find plenty of good qualified people. Those people actually make better officers than those who claim to have never done anything wrong. Why? They tend to show compassion towards the citizens they deal with. They know what it feels like to have done something wrong and can relate better to the wrongdoer.
QuoteI think I made it pretty clear that indiscretions made while young and still learning about life are a differrent story, PROVIDED, a lesson was learned and if that was the case, dan would not be sitting here saying at first that he thought it was ok because.... then turning around and saying how sorry he was and that he learned his lesson.
Are you saying that Dan didn't learn his lesson? Rationalization is natural. It is a self defense mechanism. For you to say that Dan (who went through the natural progression of denying it was "really wrong" for him to take those items, then realizing he was wrong, and subsequently learning from his mistake) is not credible, you are absurdly out of touch with reality. Confession, though good for the soul, is hard to do sometimes. One of the reasons for that is... a person must realize he/she was wrong (something most people hate to admit to themselves or anybody else). Once they know in their heart they're wrong, the struggle turns to how to deal with it. To make peace they must confess to someone. If it is suppressed, it won't stay suppressed for long.
Quote
and ummmm Pseudo Relevant are you a cop and if so where, I want to be sure never to enter your jurisdiction, must be some real winners there.
Again the parrot... There alot of "real winners" in my agency. We have officers from every walk of life. We don't have a singular mold for our officers. As a matter of fact, those applicants who claim to be "perfect" are scrutinized more closely, because history proves that most everyone has done something wrong at some point in their life. Not only that, people with no life experience dealing with wrongdoing on a personal level tend to be "momma's boys" or "major league suck-ups", bringing strife and unrest to the agency. We don't "play" at law enforcement. It's not a game. The sooner you realize that, the better your chances of making an informed decision about whether you should come here or not.
Examiner,
You wrote:
QuoteYou know George this is precisely the reason more examiners do not participate in this site. My statements above have been portrayed out of context. Anyone who is following this thread, please review the entire comment George refers too in the other thread.
How would you know the reasons for which more examiners do not participate in this message board?
I don't believe I mischaracterized your remarks, and I provided a link to the thread where they appeared so that anyone interested could check. I wrote:
QuoteIn another message thread ("CM advice on dealing with DI results misguided" (https://antipolygraph.org/forum/index.php?topic=255.msg1142#msg1142)), Examiner confirmed that in his view, a subject's knowledge of "the lie behind the lie detector" is no barrier to conducting a CQT. And be aware (as also confirmed by Examiner's statements in the aforementioned message thread) that whether or not you are completely honest with your polygrapher, your polygrapher will lie to and attempt to deceive you.
When I wrote that in your view, a subject's knowledge of "the lie behind the lie detector" is no barrier to conducting a CQT, I was referring to the following passages from the above-linked thread:
QuoteThe download begins by advising people to use complete honesty. I agree with that, personally I don't believe knowledge the control question test is a barrier. I think there is a study out on that very topic and I will try to locate it and provide the reference. (posted on 4 Sep. 2001 at 11:09:49)
and
QuoteWith regard to complete honesty, I knew what you were talking about, its very clear in the download. They should be completely honest about their efforts to research polygraph. I support that. I continue to maintain that it is not a barrier to conducting a polygraph. (posted on 5 Sep. 2001 at 10:00:37)
When I wrote that your statements in the same message thread also confirm that whether or not a subject is completely honest with the polygrapher, the polygrapher will lie to and attempt to deceive the subject, I was referring to the following statement you made:
QuoteYes, an examiner lies during the conduct of an interview. Every investigator I have ever known or heard of, from law enforcement to insurance to private lies during the interview process. The United States Supreme Court sanctioned this type of activity decades ago. This is an appropriate and accepted aspect of law enforcement. Its not like its any secret, I fail to understand why this is such a significant issue here. (posted on 6 Sep. 2001 at 09:34:20)
I believe that I have neither misunderstood your words nor taken them out of context. If you disagree, please explain.
Quote from: wannabe on Sep 06, 2001, 11:32 PM
one more thing. regardless of wether or not I am already an officer, exactly what does that have to do with my ability to distinguish between right and wrong?
Nothing. What it refers to is your lack of understanding regarding how the real world is and how the LE community finds qualified applicants.
QuoteAre you implying that ONLY police officers are capable of determining ones fitness for a career in LE?
No. What I am implying is that you apparently have no LE experience to draw upon which would allow you to make a thoroughly informed decision. You are trying to determine for others what is and is not an acceptable history based on your own moral standards. Not an entirely bad thing, but not fair or realistic. If what you said to/about Dan is a hard and fast rule (should you be in the position of making any hiring decisions for LE personnel) then your success rate will be very very low.
Of all the replies I have recieved, I accept the ones siding with me. Not because I like hearing them, but because they're the only ones that give any reasons without putting down anyone elses. I think that the people who have something bad to say about me have something eating away at their soul, too, but just choose to rag on someone else to make themselves look better. I'm not saying that I don't appreciate your replies, but I am saying if you're going to reply to my problem, than direct it to me.
Dan, I am not and did not attempt to put you down nor judge you, you asked for opinions, I gave mine, it simply appeared to me that you chose to justify your actions HERE not back when you were 18, if you did indeed learn from it then I apologize, but I would expect the same if I were to come here and say that "I did this.... BUT the guy was a jerk so he deserved it and there was no way to get caught, should I confess?" see my point? if I were to say, " when I was young I did something I didn't get caught for, but learned from it etc.." I would expect different results.
Pseudo Relevant's holier that everyone's attitude is strikingly similar to that of the polygraph communities which he attacks.
QuoteYou are trying to determine for others what is and is not an acceptable history based on your own moral standards. Not an entirely bad thing, but not fair or realistic.
I thought that was what he asked us to do.
Again Dan I apologize if I seemed harsh I didn't thnk I had been, I simply said that if this is the way you feel, then I think you should seek another line of work.
peace
I want everyone to know that I came to this site for advice, and no doubt I got it. But I will still continue with the departments' testing process, no matter the outcome. I want the sheriff's dept. to know what I did and know that I accept the responsibility of my wrongdoing. Doing nothing and not continuing with the testing assures me of not getting the job.
At least if I continue, I still might have a chance, depending on how mature and understanding my employer is.
Thank you for everyones advice and I'll post a reply soon to let you all know how it went.
Dan,
I truly wish you luck, let us know how it turns out :)
Quote from: wannabe on Sep 07, 2001, 09:00 PM
Pseudo Relevant's holier that everyone's attitude is strikingly similar to that of the polygraph communities which he attacks.
I never claimed to better than anyone. My "attacks" as you call them, have substance, unlike your original comments to Dan. You obviously know you were wrong, so let's just leave it at that.
Quote
Again Dan I apologize if I seemed harsh I didn't thnk I had been, I simply said that if this is the way you feel, then I think you should seek another line of work.
You are entitled to your opinion, even though it's not based on reality or fact, but we've already been over all of that.
yeah whatever
btw the pm:
QuoteIf you want to engage in personal attacks in the public forum, I'll stand toe to toe with you, doesn't bother me. If you don't, then may I suggest you think your position through before spewing a line of baseless advice, so you won't invite a debate you can't handle or win. Just some friendly advice...
Pseudo Relevant
is taken into advisement, but just so you know, I am not out to "win" anything, as for handling it, your replies are self defeating so I have nothing to handle.
and if that's friendly advice, you must be a polygrapher LOL
cheers
Quote from: wannabe on Sep 10, 2001, 03:51 PM
...you must be a polygrapher
Now that's uncalled for!
your right, that was a low blow and I apologize, and just to let you know, I do have alot of respect for your experience, but in my
HUMBLE opinion, you do have a better than you attitude, as evidenced your posts.
QuoteWannabe: If you are a law enforcement officer already, congrats. If not, you are out of your league telling others who should and should not seek a career in LE
QuoteQuote:Are you implying that ONLY police officers are capable of determining ones fitness for a career in LE?
Quote
No. What I am implying is that you apparently have no LE experience to draw upon which would allow you to make a thoroughly informed decision. You are trying to determine for others what is and is not an acceptable history based on your own moral standards. Not an entirely bad thing, but not fair or realistic. If what you said to/about Dan is a hard and fast rule (should you be in the position of making any hiring decisions for LE personnel) then your success rate will be very very low.
like I said, I do respect your experience, but just because someone elses opinion differs from yours, does not make them wrong or incompetent to form their own opinion or blowing smoke up someones skirt. So if you feel the need to continue this childish squabble, it will go unanswered, I feel I justified my opinion, if not, oh well.
but I do apologize for the polygrapher comment, it was below the belt.
peace
Quote from: wannabe on Sep 10, 2001, 06:20 PM
just because someone elses opinion differs from yours, does not make them wrong or incompetent to form their own opinion or blowing smoke up someones skirt. So if you feel the need to continue this childish squabble, it will go unanswered, I feel I justified my opinion, if not, oh well.
but I do apologize for the polygrapher comment, it was below the belt.
No need to apologize. I'm glad you believe in Utopia. Perhaps if more people did the world would be a better place (definitely wouldn't be a need for polygraph). ;)
Hey folks! It's Dan. I just wanted you to know that I have decided to hold off the Sheriff thing for a while. As you all know, there has been a terrible tragedy in America involving terrorists. Because of these horrible events that took place in this blessed land, I have decided to join the Military instead. I hope someday when (if) I get back, I can continue with my pursuit to be a sheriff. Either way, I'll be serving and protecting America's people.
"God Bless America"
I took a polygraph for a local LE agency today and I was scared to death. I opted to tell the truth about every question I was asked. They asked questions about employee theft and retail theft (off the machine). I have spent the last 9 months in the academy and I have a lot riding on this exam. The polygraph examiner asked me a question like "Other than what you have told me are you withholding any info. about stealing items" I hope this was a control question because I about jumped out of the seat. He only asked me about certain things and not about everything I had ever stolen. i.e. money from my parents, etc.. I thought about it a second and told him no because I had answered him truthfully on the questions he asked me. Does this mean I will most likely appear deceptive or does this mean if I was calmer when I answered the relevant questions I should be Ok? Also, I was not given the results. I asked him if I passed and he told me that he had to look over the chart. Is this good or bad. I did some stupid stuff in college but nothing too bad. :P
HELLO EVERYBODY, ANYBODY KNOW IF MICHIGAN STATE POLICE USE POLY DURING THEIR HIRING PROCESS?
Squid -
Go to http://www.michigan.gov/msp
select education, training and careers (on the left side of the page)
select MSP recruiting
select examination process
The snippet states:
"The examination process begins with a video based written test. The score you achieve on this examination determines if you will be processed further. You may retake the written examination in an attempt to raise your score no more often than once every six months.
Candidates who meet the established cut-off point for the video based testing will continue in the selection process and are subject to a physical agility test, drug screening, traffic and criminal history checks, initial pre-screening interview, background investigation, background investigation review, and a final oral interview. Candidates must successfully complete all of these steps to be placed on the employment list. Candidates who receive a conditional offer of employment will be invited to participate in medical and psychological testing. Candidates passing these tests will be offered an appointment to the Michigan State Police Training Academy in Lansing contingent upon department hiring needs and position availability."
While it doesn't necessarily spell out p-o-l-y-g-r-a-p-h, I think it is a definite possibility.
Heck, just call them and ask? If you're worried about your phone number etc, do it from a pay-phone, but this is a good question, and I'm sure not the weirdest one they've received.
Hi John,
Please don't entertain the notion about lying. Remember, you are a prospective law enforcement officer and lying and law enforcement is not synonymous. Just tell the truth about your past experiences with marijuana. A lot of times, it's up to a particular agency as to what they decide to do during their hiring process. I can assure you of this, if you are less than candid during your application process,you then allow yourself no opportunity to succeed. On top of that, you will more than likely fail the polygraph examination and be DQued. Just be honest and tell the truth. Good luck to you.
Hi John,
Please don't entertain the notion that a polygraph can detect lying. Remember, you're a prospective law enforcement official and as such should be professionally and privately skeptical of 'mind reading machines'. They don't exist John. While I concur that lying about one's past is reprehensible, the polygraph has nothing to do with whether or not one is being truthful on one's application. I can assure you this: If you employ countermeasures as described in The Lie Behind The Lie Detector, you're sure to pass the polygraph. Whether or not you have the right stuff for a career as a LEO I don't know, but you don't want to entrust that decision in part to the lime-green leisure suit wearing types who sit behind the magic spirit box. They're tin gods John, and the information available on this site will arm you against them.