Vanton68

I did the poly. I worked for DHS at the time and used my connections to find a retired FBI agent who had done well over 6000 polys. I gave him info, that my WW didn't know that I had. He used that in his questions to determine her reaction when she was lying or telling the truth. He also interviewed us before the test to gauge us.

This was something she had proclaimed she would do because I didn't believe a word that she said (mind you she was STILL lying to me while saying she would take one to prove to me that she was telling the truth ).

I surprised her with the poly, and right before the test we had a long talk, in which she came clean on some things. I relayed the info from our talk to the FBI agent, who used this to further determine whether or not she was telling the truth. She passed, and I truly believe he had enough ammo to tell. I paid $300 for piece of mind, and we started our R.

I wouldn't have gone through with it, or felt that it was accurate had I not had info that she didn't know that I previously had. IMHO, by relaying info to him, I think that the tests accuracy was increased.

donny64

A polygraph is a tool to help get to the truth. It is not a completely accurate indicator of truth.

I've witnessed probably 60 of the damn things. Many times they would facilitate a confession from someone who was hiding things. Sometimes people were showing deception on a particular question because of the way a question was worded, although there was zero wrongdoing on their part. I've also see a couple where deception was not indicated, but where the party clearly was, and was later proven to be untruthful.

It's a tool, but I consider it junk science to some degree. There are some great examiners out there, but I don't think they're in the majority. The simple impropper wording of a question can really throw off results.

Someone really "jacked up" on the whole "voodoo, mind reading capability" of the polygraph can really psyche themselves into a "deception indicated" or "incolclusive" result, even if they're telling the truth.

A great tool to get a confession from a guilty party. Not so great to accurately, in and of itself, reveal the truth. Of course very few examiners will ever admit or even self acknowledge such a thing, because it's their job.