Replies

Their believing that the police can "tell" when they are lying makes many a person decide to just spill their guts.

I took a polygraph once, and boy, did I ever spill my guts. It was required for a temporary job with DPS. The polygraph-er told me I was probably the most honest person he'd ever tested! LOL

One question was, "Have you ever stolen anything?" Well, as soon as I heard that question, I flashbacked to when I was about 3 years old and stole a piece of candy from a store. My mom marched me right back and made me return it. Apparently, this memory triggered something on the polygraph because he then asked, "Since you turned 18 have you ever stolen anything?"

I also remember being asked if I'd ever taken any drugs. He listed them -- marijuana, cocaine, etc. When he got to heroin, I, of course, said no. Later he said I'd registered positive (or whatever the term is) for heroin and asked me about it. It was obvious that I wasn't a heroin addict nor had I ever been. However! My brother had been and died of a heroin overdose. We talked about this and he told me that sometimes women will register a positive response for drugs because their children had taken them. He said that love is the most powerful emotion and that's the reason for the response on the polygraph.

Even though it was an interesting experience and I had nothing to hide, and I "passed with flying colors", it was still an overwhelmingly emotional hour. I think I went home and cried. :o)

Your post really points up some of the ways in which polygraphs are little more than hocus-pocus. Notice the tester used your supposed readings to get a discussion going on the "questionable" issues. That's how it really works.

A close family member of mine had a similar supposedly "positive" reading for a certain drug's use. This was while taking a required polygraph as part of applying for a police position. I am as positive as anyone can be about the actions of another, that this person never used the drug the polygraph supposedly read "positive" for. I believe that the "reading" in that case was used as an excuse to reject this otherwise-qualified family member (who never had ANY criminal record whatsoever and still doesn't), b/c the police department in question was fulfilling a quota.