Interesting article about beating a polygraph

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
A

AlwaysShocked

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2004
Messages
4,687
Reaction score
805
Since there has been so much talk throughout this case about people taking a lie detector test, I thought this article I came across was relevant:

http://www.slate.com/id/2112734/

"I am sitting on a pad that sends an electronic signal to a computer every time I move my body. Circling my chest and abdomen are two rubber tubes, the pneumographs, which monitor my breathing. Tiny metal electrodermal plates secured to the index and ring fingers of my right hand with Velcro strips are measuring how much I sweat. A blood-pressure cuff is inflated tight around my left arm. Interrogating me about my moral failings is Darryl DeBow, owner of the Virginia School of Polygraph. I am lying my head off to him, just like—depending on your politics—Bill Clinton or George W. Bush.

I'm also flexing my anus as if I'm in a proctological triathlon—but more on that later."
 
I've worked in fields where pre-employment polys were mandatory (it sometimes took 6 months to get fingerprint results from the FBI so you had to do everything you could to screen out potential criminals), and since I was an HR manager at the time, I would interview applicants first and send them to the polygrapher if they became candidates. It got to be a contest between the two of us to see who could uncover any important or disqualifying type of deception first.

The polygraph test is only a tool in any interview to uncover stress that might be related to deception, and it is completely dependent on the interrogative skills of the operator, as well as their ability to read the responses.

A good polygrapher knows when to "shut off the box" and simply say "I'm having a problem with your responses in a few areas. Maybe we should talk about it." At that point often people who are being deceptive end up admitting it and those that are not generally react an entirely different way.

Believe me, it matters much less how the polygraph test goes and much more on how the interviewer handles discrepancies, and a good polygrapher will be the first to admit it. It is not infallible, it's a science and an art like anything else in the psychological fields, but it has helped avoid compromising the safety of others when folks try to hide things that would make them unqualified or unfit for certain positions.

By the way, persons most likely to pass a polygraph would be someone like a sociopath or someone delusional. It's the ones who believe their own lies that end up giving a false result.
 
cecybeans said:
I've worked in fields where pre-employment polys were mandatory (it sometimes took 6 months to get fingerprint results from the FBI so you had to do everything you could to screen out potential criminals), and since I was an HR manager at the time, I would interview applicants first and send them to the polygrapher if they became candidates. It got to be a contest between the two of us to see who could uncover any important or disqualifying type of deception first.

The polygraph test is only a tool in any interview to uncover stress that might be related to deception, and it is completely dependent on the interrogative skills of the operator, as well as their ability to read the responses.

A good polygrapher knows when to "shut off the box" and simply say "I'm having a problem with your responses in a few areas. Maybe we should talk about it." At that point often people who are being deceptive end up admitting it and those that are not generally react an entirely different way.

Believe me, it matters much less how the polygraph test goes and much more on how the interviewer handles discrepancies, and a good polygrapher will be the first to admit it. It is not infallible, it's a science and an art like anything else in the psychological fields, but it has helped avoid compromising the safety of others when folks try to hide things that would make them unqualified or unfit for certain positions.

By the way, persons most likely to pass a polygraph would be someone like a sociopath or someone delusional. It's the ones who believe their own lies that end up giving a false result.
Click to expand...

Thanks for that insight. So people who can lie without qualms can pass a Poly...! :banghead: I can see why they are not admitted into evidence but it's an interesting tool, if only for smoking people out sometimes.
 
cecybeans said:
By the way, persons most likely to pass a polygraph would be someone like a sociopath or someone delusional. It's the ones who believe their own lies that end up giving a false result.
Click to expand...

right, anyone who just doesn't care one way or the other about what they did or feels justified (like a sociopath), or a mentally ill person, or someone who is medicated or drugged enough, anyone who's very desensitized to doing bad things or lying. Basically anyone who doesn't feel shocked, bad or guilty about anything they're asked or who just doesn't happen to be asked the pertinent questions could pass, right? Meanwhile, a person who feels shock when the polygrapher asks certain questions because the subject is so abhorrent or upsetting to him/her might show biological responses that look like guilt, right?
 
just like an honest child if asked if he stole something would probably blush and feel momentarily guilty, afraid for a second that he's done something wrong, while a child who always steals would just say no and then steal something from you before you leave :). And then say no about that, too.
 
I think that the main use for a polygraph is to demostrate to LE that one has no involvement in a crime and has no problem utilizing a tool to support their claims. We all know that it is not admissable in court yet it can go a LONG way in helping LE focus in the right direction. When someone refuses a polygraph, there is a reason. They are either concerned about it indicating a mistruth, or concerned that it may open up a Pandora's Box that could retain them in the "line of sight" of investigators. JMO
 
AlwaysShocked said:
Since there has been so much talk throughout this case about people taking a lie detector test, I thought this article I came across was relevant:

http://www.slate.com/id/2112734/

"I am sitting on a pad that sends an electronic signal to a computer every time I move my body. Circling my chest and abdomen are two rubber tubes, the pneumographs, which monitor my breathing. Tiny metal electrodermal plates secured to the index and ring fingers of my right hand with Velcro strips are measuring how much I sweat. A blood-pressure cuff is inflated tight around my left arm. Interrogating me about my moral failings is Darryl DeBow, owner of the Virginia School of Polygraph. I am lying my head off to him, just like—depending on your politics—Bill Clinton or George W. Bush.

I'm also flexing my anus as if I'm in a proctological triathlon—but more on that later."
Click to expand...

Interesting article but wouldn't it just be easier to spray yourself with antiperspirant and put a thumb tac in your shoe? I've read some stuff about magnets being used, also.
 
cecybeans said:
I've worked in fields where pre-employment polys were mandatory (it sometimes took 6 months to get fingerprint results from the FBI so you had to do everything you could to screen out potential criminals), and since I was an HR manager at the time, I would interview applicants first and send them to the polygrapher if they became candidates. It got to be a contest between the two of us to see who could uncover any important or disqualifying type of deception first.

The polygraph test is only a tool in any interview to uncover stress that might be related to deception, and it is completely dependent on the interrogative skills of the operator, as well as their ability to read the responses.

A good polygrapher knows when to "shut off the box" and simply say "I'm having a problem with your responses in a few areas. Maybe we should talk about it." At that point often people who are being deceptive end up admitting it and those that are not generally react an entirely different way.

Believe me, it matters much less how the polygraph test goes and much more on how the interviewer handles discrepancies, and a good polygrapher will be the first to admit it. It is not infallible, it's a science and an art like anything else in the psychological fields, but it has helped avoid compromising the safety of others when folks try to hide things that would make them unqualified or unfit for certain positions.

By the way, persons most likely to pass a polygraph would be someone like a sociopath or someone delusional. It's the ones who believe their own lies that end up giving a false result.
Click to expand...

Bold by me. Sure wish a certain person would have considered this when he was interviewing somebody with hidden info in another missing child case...maybe he would have gotten some answers instead of a bunch of "inconsistencies"!
 
Jersey*Girl said:
Bold by me. Sure wish a certain person would have considered this when he was interviewing somebody with hidden info in another missing child case...maybe he would have gotten some answers instead of a bunch of "inconsistencies"!
Click to expand...

Well, legally, all he was hired to do was point them out. When it comes to interrogating young women, LE and males are at a disadvantage.

I was in the area when the LE tapes of KC's Universal interview came out and was shocked that some coverage was saying LE was too rough in their questioning. Are you kidding me? All they did was insinuate she might be lying because she was scared. They let her eat cake! I wish they'd had a couple of tough chick cops browbeat her for awhile. And I think she was getting ready to crack before she first got bailed, and again, when she made the "indictment day detour". JB put the skids on that, though.

BTW, some people think certain drugs will help them pass a poly, but a good polygrapher will notice unusual consistencies and spot that as well. All those little tricks are generally uncovered by a seasoned pro. And they factor in "innocent guilt" as well. Like I said, it's an art and a science, just like any other investigative method.
 
cecybeans said:
Well, legally, all he was hired to do was point them out. When it comes to interrogating young women, LE and males are at a disadvantage.

I was in the area when the LE tapes of KC's Universal interview came out and was shocked that some coverage was saying LE was too rough in their questioning. Are you kidding me? All they did was insinuate she might be lying because she was scared. They let her eat cake! I wish they'd had a couple of tough chick cops browbeat her for awhile. And I think she was getting ready to crack before she first got bailed, and again, when she made the "indictment day detour". JB put the skids on that, though.

BTW, some people think certain drugs will help them pass a poly, but a good polygrapher will notice unusual consistencies and spot that as well. All those little tricks are generally uncovered by a seasoned pro. And they factor in "innocent guilt" as well. Like I said, it's an art and a science, just like any other investigative method.
Click to expand...

I completely agree with you! I thought she was getting ready to crack, too ... then Padilla came in trying to "save the day by finding Caylee" and all hell broke loose. She should have been left in jail! If he didn't bail her out, maybe things would have been different & Caylee would have been found sooner...heck, maybe Casye would have even cracked & admitted her guilt!
 
That was much more than I needed know about puckering anus' and polygraphs.

So much for lunch.
 
Jersey*Girl said:
I completely agree with you! I thought she was getting ready to crack, too ... then Padilla came in trying to "save the day by finding Caylee" and all hell broke loose. She should have been left in jail! If he didn't bail her out, maybe things would have been different & Caylee would have been found sooner...heck, maybe Casye would have even cracked & admitted her guilt!
Click to expand...

Well, I have a feeling she would have admitted it anyway, if JB hadn't kept her so isolated. She sure got chatty with TMc and RD. I can only imagine the conversations she'd have had by now if they'd put her in general pop next to someone she wanted to show off for. And I still think her family has been trying to talk her into copping to accidental death since before she got bailed - it's just that JB gets in the way by promising her a game of beach volleyball after she's acquitted.
 
cecybeans said:
Well, I have a feeling she would have admitted it anyway, if JB hadn't kept her so isolated. She sure got chatty with TMc and RD. I can only imagine the conversations she'd have had by now if they'd put her in general pop next to someone she wanted to show off for. And I still think her family has been trying to talk her into copping to accidental death since before she got bailed - it's just that JB gets in the way by promising her a game of beach volleyball after she's acquitted.
Click to expand...

I've always felt that JB has had different goals in this case, and his goals aren't serving Casey's best interests. If Casey were to make a plea bargain, JB doesn't get to go to trial and be on national television. He sees this case differently - it's his ticket to fame and fortune, but not if his client accepts a plea bargain. He doesn't get any fame and notoriety that way.

I think a good defense attorney would have looked at this case differently from the beginning. With all that was known in the first month after the 911 calls on July 15, 2008, a good defense attorney would have urged his client to take the plea bargain that was being offered at that time. If I recall correctly, there was a limited period of time that the option of a plea bargain would be on the table. JB refused to consider a plea bargain.
 
There are two recent posts on my blog that deal directly with the inability of psychopaths and others to beat a [I]properly administered [/I]polygraph test. Scientific research has shown that it can't be done.

To see the posts, go to PolygraphReality.wordpress.com. I'll be happy to answer any questions about this.

Louis Rovner, Ph.D.
 
lourovner said:
There are two recent posts on my blog that deal directly with the inability of psychopaths and others to beat a polygraph test. Scientific research has shown that it can't be done.

To see the posts, go to PolygraphReality.wordpress.com. I'll be happy to answer any questions about this.

Louis Rovner, Ph.D.
Click to expand...

I agree they are hard to beat. And I have friends who are highly respected and sought after polygraphers, one who works closely with FDLE. They all say it can be done. But I also know people who have beat a poly - some received military training in deception techniques which may or may not have served to help.
 
Once again, if a competent (underline competent) examiner is doing the test properly (underline properly), no one is going to beat him. I can't say much about the competence of a polygraph examiner who feels that he can be beaten.
 
christine2448 said:
The Truth About Lie Detectors (aka Polygraph Tests)

Most psychologists agree that there is little evidence that polygraph tests can accurately detect lies.

http://www.psychologymatters.org/polygraphs.html

http://antipolygraph.org/

http://antipolygraph.org/lie-behind-the-lie-detector.pdf
—Department of Defense Polygraph Institute motto
Tests of deception, ironically, must themselves include a deceptive element.​
Polygraph tests present, perhaps, the most egregious problem.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Which is why it's a combination of art and science. A good polygrapher will know when to strategically supplement the process of measuring physiological stress response with good interview or interrogative techniques. Sometimes the presence of the machine alone can get folks to talk.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 131 more.
Total: 3,769 (members: 132, guests: 3,637)

Online statistics

Members online
132
Guests online
3,637
Total visitors
3,769
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,528
Messages
17,953,875
Members
228,522
Latest member
Cabinsleuth
Back
Top