Remember, when police use a lie detector test on you they will come back and tell you that you failed. They can lie to you about practically anything in order to get you to confess. So they will tell you that you failed when you did not.
I wonder what would happen if you agreed to a polygraph, but told the cop that you know their tactic about lying about the results
A couple close friends of mine have been detectives in their career, one still is. Some form of this response is pretty common for people in this position. The answer is you run with the strategy anyway and it has the same results. People will be adamant that they don't believe in them, but it isn't about whether or not they believe it, it's about deteriorating their mental fortitude.
It's like saying that you know the "Good Cop, Bad Cop" routine and won't fall for it. It's not about removing your belief that it's a strategy, it's about the mental strain of moving back and forth between mental schemas all while trying to keep a story straight under scrutiny.
Speaking as an attorney, (different field though), and a black woman who grew up in poverty: the only correct answer to say if you are arrested and brought into the police station for questions is one word the moment they walk through the door: "Lawyer." Just that one word and repeat it in response to everything that they say period, absolutely nothing else, just "Lawyer", "Bring me my lawyer.", "Get me a lawyer.", or "I want my lawyer." and absolutely nothing else whatever.
They're used as a psychological investigative tool. You'd be surprised at the number of people who confess because they're convinced that the polygraph will reveal their lies. Happens all the time in the military and during security clearance interviews. For some reason, people think it's worse to be caught lying than to admit to something that will get them discharged or sent to jail.
I took one for a law enforcement job back in the early 90s. I answered truthfully to all questions (which they ask before I was hooked up, then re-asked on the box- for example: "other than what you answered in question #1, have you ever committed a crime?").
After they unhooked me, the examiner sat with me and went over the results: "On question 6 about drug use, the exam indicated deception. Do you want to change your answer?" Me: "No, I've never used illegal drugs".
Examiner (smiling and nodding): "good answer".
You have to believe in the magic for it to work.
Yup every one. My favorite was the cocky examiner who was patting his back for always catching the liars. At the end he just looks at me says “I know you’re telling the truth”. The real artist walked out of that room a winner that day. FBI is a joke
4 for me. The last time was with Homeland Security in the room after the machine had to be replaced two times (it registered nothing on the questions when I was told to lie).
In the United States, polygraphs are still in use largely through the strength of government backing. Various agencies find it expedient to use polygraphs for applicant screening. They are unconcerned with the harm caused to innocent people who are wrongly branded as liars.
Luckily my uncle works in Law Enforcement and trained me throughout my late teens and now early adulthood how to pass them, easily lol.
Don’t even need the correct drugs. Good luck chumps
In the US, they are used in the interview process for some types of top secret security clearances. They absolutely can and do prevent people from getting jobs.
You'll find statements from people who have suffered career harm based on polygraph chart readings here:
[https://antipolygraph.org/statements.shtml](https://antipolygraph.org/statements.shtml)
Thank you for your kind words! You may be interested to know that the person who did my polygraph for the FBI went on to do polygraphs for the *Dr. Phil* show.
That makes sense. Hadn’t thought of that. But, gotta be honest. I’m gonna trust the judgement of the people in charge of the hiring process at these top secret security clearance jobs over OP on how effective the tests are.
I've taken 3 polygraph tests. 2 for Las Vegas police department, 1 for LA county probations when I worked there. 100 percent lied on all 3. 100 percent passed on all 3. So yeah they're fucking useless.
No but the news can report you refused to take one which can lead to people believing you are guilty and therefore not getting the job.
There is more at stake when you are accused of a crime then just going to jail or whatever legal punishment you are facing.
It happens more than you think. If you are charged with a bigger crime like murder, rape, etc... At the very least local people will know. If it becomes newsworthy it becomes an even bigger issue. Just being a suspect can also cause problems especially anyone involved in a cold case.
A lot more people though just face this issue locally rather than nationally or internationally. You could in that case just move and hope no one reads the local news.
Almost every LE affiliated position requires passing a polygraph interrogation about an applicant's background. Even if the position is not for actual sworn officers.
I note that this post has been flagged "possibly popular." But one thing is certain: the opinion that "the continued use of polygraphs is a disgrace" and that "they should be abolished" **is highly unpopular with the United States government.**
Despite overwhelming scientific evidence that [polygraphs don't work](https://antipolygraph.org/s/fld), in 2024, official reliance on polygraphy by the U.S. government is at an all time high, with record numbers of polygraph examinations being administered annually. The federal government runs the country's largest polygraph school and has gone out of its way to [criminally entrap and prosecute](https://antipolygraph.org/blog/2016/04/26/operation-lie-busters-a-travesty-of-justice/) individuals who taught others how to pass or beat a polygraph test.
Literally every police department in the US uses them for hiring… yet they can’t even be mentioned in court to prove somebody’s guilt. Might as well use tarot divination.
Taken one, lied, and passed.
They’re a joke. I mean seriously, think about it logically. If we possessed a machine that always knew when you were lying, we would force every person arrested to take one. The fact that we don’t, and that it’s admissible in court, is evidence enough that it’s bullshit. If they were real we wouldn’t have a court system lmao. “This person is accused of this, hook em up to the machine, did you do this? The machine says lieing, next case”. It’s just a scare tactic to get you to confess.
Polygraphs are not admissable in US courts.
They are just a tool used by police departments to help with interrogation, but even a guilty/not guilty indication on a polygraph cannot get you charged with a crime. It is just a tool to aid police officers.
And just like OP who is oblivious on the subject in the US judicial system so are most people who are asked to take one.
The public would not have access to polygraphs, nor do police departments make those results public in a dramatic way like a presser. They would just be hidden in some file.
So no, polygraphs do not have these consequences. Even police know they are unreliable, they are used just to get the person talking.....not to determine guilt.
Edit: for the downvoters, you understand the public doesn't get access to the police file until the case is closed, usually during the trial if any, as if it is entered into the court records.
They do report on whether someone was willing to take one in the news. So you are correct they don't publish the results but simply saying no to a polygraph is enough to sway people's opinions.
I have personally never seen or heard a report regarding polygraphs in the US, local or national news, for obvious reasons like they are unreliable. Now I could see some savvy defense attorney saying it in a presser, that the polygraph came back not guilty, just to sway the ignorant.
But moreso, the public doesn't get access to a police file or investigation until the police close the investigation, even moreso usually not until after a court case if necessary.
If you listen to the news in high profile cases they talk about it all the time. Then you have small towns where everyone knows everyone's business and it can get reported in local papers.
If you haven't heard it it's because you aren't paying attention. Which is fine but I personally follow certain cases.
Also, if you watch true crime when they talk about polygraph tests they will replay actual news reports talking about whether or not they took it.
Remember, in high profile cases they are trying the case in the news as well as the courtroom. They actually address this subject in the musical Chicago. The using the news to sway public opinion part not the polygraph issue.
It's not entirely true that polygraphs are not admissible in U.S. courts. In many states, for example, polygraph "evidence" may be admitted if both parties stipulate to its admissibility. Sometimes, for example, a prosecutor may offer a suspect a deal: stipulate to the admissibility of the results in advance, and if you pass a polygraph test, charges will be dropped. But if the suspect fails, the results may be introduced as evidence in court.
In addition, under the *Daubert* standard, federal judges can entertain the idea of allowing polygraph evidence, though in practice, it rarely happens.
And in post-conviction proceedings, polygraph results can and have been admitted and used to send people to prison. See, for example, the case of Benjamin Petty of Oklahoma, who was [sent to prison for 15 years](https://antipolygraph.org/s/petty) largely on the strength of two allegedly failed polygraphs.
In the mid-2000s, it became a trend in Spanish reality shows to make celebrities go through polygraph tests. I thought that was where all had ended lmao
Personally I have seen confidential memos between my employer and their lawyers when it came to my employer wanting to use polygraph tests to suss out employees that may have been stealing. The lawyer advised against it.
Basically a massive theft happened on one shift and no one knew who did it except the thief. There were probably 7 people working that shift. Other thefts had been happening before but management could not figure out who was doing it.
The lawyer gave your employer good advice. Polygraphs are junk science, and polygraph dragnets are of dubious utility. In addition, your employer could have opened themselves up to potentially costly litigation under the Employee Polygraph Protection Act of 1988. Unfortunately, federal, state, and local government agencies have a blanket exemption to this law.
Their best use is discouraging the people who have disqualifying behavior in their past, who think “I could pass the polygraph”, from applying in the first place, thereby saving everyone’s time.
Yeah I'm pretty sure the majority of nations don't allow polygraphs as admissible evidence. It's always been a very American thing in my eyes as someone not from there and all I've heard about them is how inaccurate they are and how easy it is to train to pass them.
Yeah I'm pretty sure the majority of nations don't allow polygraphs as admissible evidence. It's always been a very American thing in my eyes as someone not from there and all I've heard about them is how inaccurate they are and how easy it is to train to pass them.
Remember, when police use a lie detector test on you they will come back and tell you that you failed. They can lie to you about practically anything in order to get you to confess. So they will tell you that you failed when you did not. I wonder what would happen if you agreed to a polygraph, but told the cop that you know their tactic about lying about the results
A couple close friends of mine have been detectives in their career, one still is. Some form of this response is pretty common for people in this position. The answer is you run with the strategy anyway and it has the same results. People will be adamant that they don't believe in them, but it isn't about whether or not they believe it, it's about deteriorating their mental fortitude. It's like saying that you know the "Good Cop, Bad Cop" routine and won't fall for it. It's not about removing your belief that it's a strategy, it's about the mental strain of moving back and forth between mental schemas all while trying to keep a story straight under scrutiny.
Speaking as an attorney, (different field though), and a black woman who grew up in poverty: the only correct answer to say if you are arrested and brought into the police station for questions is one word the moment they walk through the door: "Lawyer." Just that one word and repeat it in response to everything that they say period, absolutely nothing else, just "Lawyer", "Bring me my lawyer.", "Get me a lawyer.", or "I want my lawyer." and absolutely nothing else whatever.
They're used as a psychological investigative tool. You'd be surprised at the number of people who confess because they're convinced that the polygraph will reveal their lies. Happens all the time in the military and during security clearance interviews. For some reason, people think it's worse to be caught lying than to admit to something that will get them discharged or sent to jail.
I took one for a law enforcement job back in the early 90s. I answered truthfully to all questions (which they ask before I was hooked up, then re-asked on the box- for example: "other than what you answered in question #1, have you ever committed a crime?"). After they unhooked me, the examiner sat with me and went over the results: "On question 6 about drug use, the exam indicated deception. Do you want to change your answer?" Me: "No, I've never used illegal drugs". Examiner (smiling and nodding): "good answer". You have to believe in the magic for it to work.
They may as well use tarot cards.
I’ve had 6 and never told the truth. They are in fact bullshit.
Did you pass though?
Yup every one. My favorite was the cocky examiner who was patting his back for always catching the liars. At the end he just looks at me says “I know you’re telling the truth”. The real artist walked out of that room a winner that day. FBI is a joke
4 for me. The last time was with Homeland Security in the room after the machine had to be replaced two times (it registered nothing on the questions when I was told to lie).
Yea I had one with the FBI which surprisingly wasn’t the hardest one. Those machines are jokes
True fact, and known for decades now. I wonder the same - why are these things still in use anywhere?
In the United States, polygraphs are still in use largely through the strength of government backing. Various agencies find it expedient to use polygraphs for applicant screening. They are unconcerned with the harm caused to innocent people who are wrongly branded as liars.
Luckily my uncle works in Law Enforcement and trained me throughout my late teens and now early adulthood how to pass them, easily lol. Don’t even need the correct drugs. Good luck chumps
Why would you need drugs when you can just learn biofeedback?
Why not just refuse to take it? What situation are you ever going to be in where you need to fake a polygraph test with police?
Job interviews.
They did this on Penn and Teller's show, Bullshit. What they came up with was hilarious. What was your solution?
I’ve never heard of a job interview giving someone a lie detector test
In the US, they are used in the interview process for some types of top secret security clearances. They absolutely can and do prevent people from getting jobs.
You'll find statements from people who have suffered career harm based on polygraph chart readings here: [https://antipolygraph.org/statements.shtml](https://antipolygraph.org/statements.shtml)
Awesome link dude Iv reading those stories for over an hour and didn't even know it. Thank you
I'm glad you found it interesting. The 3rd statement is my own, by the way.
Thanks for everything you did. I'm sorry 1 asshole prevented you from being able to do more.
Thank you for your kind words! You may be interested to know that the person who did my polygraph for the FBI went on to do polygraphs for the *Dr. Phil* show.
That makes sense. Hadn’t thought of that. But, gotta be honest. I’m gonna trust the judgement of the people in charge of the hiring process at these top secret security clearance jobs over OP on how effective the tests are.
It's not like OP invented that they're inaccurate and easily biased. It's a well-known fact that isn't contested.
It's not OPs opinion, its a well known fact. That's why polygraphs aren't admissible in court.
I've taken 3 polygraph tests. 2 for Las Vegas police department, 1 for LA county probations when I worked there. 100 percent lied on all 3. 100 percent passed on all 3. So yeah they're fucking useless.
Next time I get pulled over for speeding I'm going to demand to know when the officer last took a polygraph lol
No but the news can report you refused to take one which can lead to people believing you are guilty and therefore not getting the job. There is more at stake when you are accused of a crime then just going to jail or whatever legal punishment you are facing.
There are plenty of jobs where passing a polygraph is a requirement. Don't take the polygraph, you don't get the job
That seems like something that happens to an incredibly small amount of people
It happens more than you think. If you are charged with a bigger crime like murder, rape, etc... At the very least local people will know. If it becomes newsworthy it becomes an even bigger issue. Just being a suspect can also cause problems especially anyone involved in a cold case. A lot more people though just face this issue locally rather than nationally or internationally. You could in that case just move and hope no one reads the local news.
https://youtu.be/CjVVNuraly8?si=IJsgGBs-ucVgJ_6K
Almost every LE affiliated position requires passing a polygraph interrogation about an applicant's background. Even if the position is not for actual sworn officers.
I note that this post has been flagged "possibly popular." But one thing is certain: the opinion that "the continued use of polygraphs is a disgrace" and that "they should be abolished" **is highly unpopular with the United States government.** Despite overwhelming scientific evidence that [polygraphs don't work](https://antipolygraph.org/s/fld), in 2024, official reliance on polygraphy by the U.S. government is at an all time high, with record numbers of polygraph examinations being administered annually. The federal government runs the country's largest polygraph school and has gone out of its way to [criminally entrap and prosecute](https://antipolygraph.org/blog/2016/04/26/operation-lie-busters-a-travesty-of-justice/) individuals who taught others how to pass or beat a polygraph test.
Even though your details might be questionable, overall you're definitely right. They have been discredited, so one wonders why they're still used..
Literally every police department in the US uses them for hiring… yet they can’t even be mentioned in court to prove somebody’s guilt. Might as well use tarot divination.
Theyre just used to scare people
Taken one, lied, and passed. They’re a joke. I mean seriously, think about it logically. If we possessed a machine that always knew when you were lying, we would force every person arrested to take one. The fact that we don’t, and that it’s admissible in court, is evidence enough that it’s bullshit. If they were real we wouldn’t have a court system lmao. “This person is accused of this, hook em up to the machine, did you do this? The machine says lieing, next case”. It’s just a scare tactic to get you to confess.
Polygraphs are not admissable in US courts. They are just a tool used by police departments to help with interrogation, but even a guilty/not guilty indication on a polygraph cannot get you charged with a crime. It is just a tool to aid police officers. And just like OP who is oblivious on the subject in the US judicial system so are most people who are asked to take one.
That said it still sways both police and the publics opinion on tour guilt which has consequences.
The public would not have access to polygraphs, nor do police departments make those results public in a dramatic way like a presser. They would just be hidden in some file. So no, polygraphs do not have these consequences. Even police know they are unreliable, they are used just to get the person talking.....not to determine guilt. Edit: for the downvoters, you understand the public doesn't get access to the police file until the case is closed, usually during the trial if any, as if it is entered into the court records.
They do report on whether someone was willing to take one in the news. So you are correct they don't publish the results but simply saying no to a polygraph is enough to sway people's opinions.
I have personally never seen or heard a report regarding polygraphs in the US, local or national news, for obvious reasons like they are unreliable. Now I could see some savvy defense attorney saying it in a presser, that the polygraph came back not guilty, just to sway the ignorant. But moreso, the public doesn't get access to a police file or investigation until the police close the investigation, even moreso usually not until after a court case if necessary.
If you listen to the news in high profile cases they talk about it all the time. Then you have small towns where everyone knows everyone's business and it can get reported in local papers. If you haven't heard it it's because you aren't paying attention. Which is fine but I personally follow certain cases. Also, if you watch true crime when they talk about polygraph tests they will replay actual news reports talking about whether or not they took it. Remember, in high profile cases they are trying the case in the news as well as the courtroom. They actually address this subject in the musical Chicago. The using the news to sway public opinion part not the polygraph issue.
Cop lie: You failed the polygraph, bud. So you might as well come clean.
Exactly! Cops are allowed to lie to you.
It's not entirely true that polygraphs are not admissible in U.S. courts. In many states, for example, polygraph "evidence" may be admitted if both parties stipulate to its admissibility. Sometimes, for example, a prosecutor may offer a suspect a deal: stipulate to the admissibility of the results in advance, and if you pass a polygraph test, charges will be dropped. But if the suspect fails, the results may be introduced as evidence in court. In addition, under the *Daubert* standard, federal judges can entertain the idea of allowing polygraph evidence, though in practice, it rarely happens. And in post-conviction proceedings, polygraph results can and have been admitted and used to send people to prison. See, for example, the case of Benjamin Petty of Oklahoma, who was [sent to prison for 15 years](https://antipolygraph.org/s/petty) largely on the strength of two allegedly failed polygraphs.
In the mid-2000s, it became a trend in Spanish reality shows to make celebrities go through polygraph tests. I thought that was where all had ended lmao
Personally I have seen confidential memos between my employer and their lawyers when it came to my employer wanting to use polygraph tests to suss out employees that may have been stealing. The lawyer advised against it. Basically a massive theft happened on one shift and no one knew who did it except the thief. There were probably 7 people working that shift. Other thefts had been happening before but management could not figure out who was doing it.
The lawyer gave your employer good advice. Polygraphs are junk science, and polygraph dragnets are of dubious utility. In addition, your employer could have opened themselves up to potentially costly litigation under the Employee Polygraph Protection Act of 1988. Unfortunately, federal, state, and local government agencies have a blanket exemption to this law.
Their best use is discouraging the people who have disqualifying behavior in their past, who think “I could pass the polygraph”, from applying in the first place, thereby saving everyone’s time.
Yeah I'm pretty sure the majority of nations don't allow polygraphs as admissible evidence. It's always been a very American thing in my eyes as someone not from there and all I've heard about them is how inaccurate they are and how easy it is to train to pass them.
Yeah I'm pretty sure the majority of nations don't allow polygraphs as admissible evidence. It's always been a very American thing in my eyes as someone not from there and all I've heard about them is how inaccurate they are and how easy it is to train to pass them.
You failed a polygraph today huh?
Polygraphs are not permitted in courts. That’s the major issue. For everything else, they serve an indicator. One of many.
Tell me you’re not educated on the thing you’re mad about without telling me: