Almost lost to the "Dark Side"

[guest from canada]

I didn't mean for it to come across as such.  I meant to say something along the lines that officers who try rocking the boat or who are seen as potential non conformists may not be received into the blue brotherhood as readily.  Trying to discredit a method that the force has been using might shake up the chiefs (and/or other officers) faith and trust in the informing officer.  They might not feel as close to him/her and start to consciously and/or subconsciously ostrasize that "trouble maker".  Look at how the police and pro polygraph community look towrds that ex cop/polygrapher turn cruisader (sorry can't remeber his name).

[Saidme]

Oh PK, you're my hero.  Come back in about 15 years after you've requested polygraph examinations for suspects in some of your cases (if you ever get in a detective unit).

[suethem]

PK,

If you need a polygrapher to help you with your cases, your cases are already in  big trouble!

[Poly-Killer]

Sorry gang...been gone for WMD training...boy was it a "blast"!!  

Guest from Canada,

We already discussed this, at length, and I don't think she would be putting herself in harms way. She is going to approach it from a "non-adversarial" perspective. Rather than going in screaming "this thing is crap" (which it is), she is simply going to present him with the findings and let him take it from there. He is a good guy, and a very good leader, I don't think she has to worry.

I spoke with an examiner recently, and he realizes that there are false positives and such, but feels it is "worth the price." He feels that it isn't whether the poly is 100%, or even 50% accurate, he said "the value of the poly is in the information obtained from the examinees, be it due to intimidation, belief in the poly's accuracy, etc." The way he sees it, "it scares the hell out people." He realizes it's just a scare tactic and was fairly open about it.

Saidme,

You really should get out more often, I am flattered nonetheless. Maybe you aren't "up to speed" on all my views regarding the polygraph. I do believe there is some benefit and applicability for the poly in criminal matters, just not in SCREENING formats. It's far too flawed, even some pro-poly people admit this. As far as detective work goes, I really don't see that for me...although it's a very important part of LE, it's too boring for me.

I'd rather be doing the job on the street and teaching others to do the job, no offense to any detectives that may read this. I do find, however, most of them do their job through sound detective work, being out in the field, gathering evidence, forensics, etc., not by simply lining people up and plugging them into a box. They do use the poly when needed. As for what kinds of cases, how often, etc, I really don't know.

I did find out some interesting information. My dept. has 5 full-time poly examiners, 2 strictly for screening, 2 for criminal, 1 that does both. The two "screeners" are both out on leave, 1 for stress, 1 for medical as a result of frequent migraines. I wonder why.  

Suethem,

I can only say I'm glad I'm in a position where I have limited contact with them, they're a little bit "different" from REAL cops.   I do occasionally see the examiner I beat up during my poly, I just grin and say hi, all the while I'm thinking "puhleeease." He thinks of himself as being "intimidating", ( he said one time "now that Dale Earnhart is gone, there is only intimidator left"). "Intimidator", yeah, right.  

Best,
PK