Dui And Expungment

[ArkPO]

I unfortunatly have a DWI on my record. It was 4 years ago. One of the very first things I told the board during my interview was the truth about my past. I believe me being truthfull in the beginning helped me obtain the Parole Officer position.

[Not a cop]

Oh, and I find documents that are not suposed to be found all the time at courthouses, including misfiled juvy records. Medical records in public record files and the like. Human error is great sometimes.

[Not a cop]

I am a PI who does the interview section of BG's for my local department. We do all the door knocking, school records, famaly and friends, etc...etc... The PD does the computer based check. The applicants are run through NCIC as well as star and several other databases. I find out just about everything about you, sorry but EVERYTHING. Expungement is easy for a PI to find (please). Arrests without conviction are childsplay. And yes I will track down all your drinkin' buddies, but as long as one is lawfull there is not a problem. Lie to the department or me and you will end up DQ'ed or before the Chief / Captain / and or board to explain yourself, and I mean about ANYTHING! Be totally honest or don't bother.

I can't run NCIC (duh) when I'm working on a private background check, but you should all be aware that more private companies have been using us to run theirs as well. It's not cheap (footwork takes time) but it is very effective.

Don't worry... Be honest now....

[jimdvs]

Answers to polygraphs depend on the experience of the examiner, where he was trained, how much time he has on the machine, the person being examined, and MOST important the questions asked.

Sure, rely on that when you decide to not be truthful on your application......good luck!

[jimdvs]

Again in my State a question phrased like this: "Have you ever been arrested ?" Could be answered with a; "No." DWI is not a criminal offense it is a motor vehicle offense. The reading the examiner would try to determine is up to both persons.

That's fine, but how will they answer to this question from a polygrapher, "Have you ever been charged or convicted of DUI or DWI?" This is a common question in many initial interviews, panel interviews, and then followed up on a polygraph for federal and other law enforcement agencies.

The largest civilian Police Dept in the USA does NOT polygraph applicants.
Why they do not I have no idea.

I wasn't going to bring this up however, since someone on this message board doesn't seem to be getting that "honesty is the best policy", I'll tell a story that happened recently. I have worked for the past few years as a private criminal investigator for a large, national company (not a bad retirement gig by the way). We also do not have a polygraph for people that our company hires, however we do have a background investigation like many police departments in the country. Without getting into specifics there was an individual that applied for a position with our company and looked like a great candidate, on paper. Everything was fine until the background investigation was being worked on. It just so happened that two of this person's friends just so happened to mention an arrest that took place when this person was in his teens. Hmmmmm, look back to individuals application and there is nothing mentioned about an arrest. Individual is brought in to clarify this discrepancy and it appears that he received some bad advice because he said he didn't put it down on his application because it was expunged. The person was not hired for the position. It really boils down to the fact that his integrity came into question and a company that is relying on you to write true and accurate reports is going to probably think twice before they consider hiring a person where their integrity is already of question. I also saw this type of situation when I worked in the federal government and I can tell you that NONE of those individuals were hired and yes, some of them filed a lawsuit against the federal agency and it ended up just burning a hole in their checkbook, probably made a few car payments for their lawyer, and still did not get hired.

So, again, people monitoring this board make your own decision as to how you want to answer questions on the law enforcement applications you are filling out. Just remember that honesty is always the best policy, however the decision is yours to make.

[BigWill2876]

Hiring

I understand perfectly.
DWI does NOT and is NOT an automatic disqualifier for LE jobs.

As YOU stated, your job even allows them. The length of time between the offense and the job interview is the variable.

As you may or not know some states allow DWI convicted drivers to have conditional DL's to allow them to drive to and from work. So not everyone continues to drive while suspended.

Driving while on the suspended list is a personal decision, some do drive, some do not. In my State operating while suspended, envolved in MV accident, anyone at all injured in the accident....mandatory 90 day jail time.

Answers to polygraphs depend on the experience of the examiner, where he was trained, how much time he has on the machine, the person being examined, and MOST important the questions asked.

Again in my State a question phrased like this: "Have you ever been arrested ?" Could be answered with a; "No." DWI is not a criminal offense it is a motor vehicle offense. The reading the examiner would try to determine is up to both persons.

The largest civilian Police Dept in the USA does NOT polygraph applicants.
Why they do not I have no idea.

I do not speak to the the moral issues of that answer.

[rix031]

A DWI should not be a negative hiring for most LE as long as there are not multiple violations and the date of the violation is 2 or more years in the past. Each department and agency has different hiring policies.
So there is no need to try for expungement. IIFC some states don't allow expungement as well.
Also in some states, DWI is NOT a criminal offense but a quasi-criminal offense under motor vehicle statutes not criminal statutes. In some states you are not fingerprinted, not mug shot, and no arrest report is done, so you do not get a Federal ID number (someone can give the correct name it escapes me right now) that would show anywhere.
Other states and cities are more stringent, for example NYC confiscates and sells the violators vehicle used in the DWI ! (can you say TAXI !)
You are fingerprinted, are mug shot and you are arrested.

sir, i just dont think you get it. a dui IS negative for hiring purposes. it doesnt matter if its criminal, civil, or administrative!!! my local department will not even allow anyone to apply until 7 years AFTER the disposition of the offense. keep another thing in mind, most persons drive even while having a suspended license (other than the work privileges), which goes along with the dui. this will also be a negative during the polygraph!

overall, i just dont think you understand that the hiring process encompasses more than the tangible. just because the dui is not criminal, doesnt make it ok. its the behavioral patterns that are considered.

[BigWill2876]

Back to the basic question;

A DWI should not be a negative hiring for most LE as long as there are not multiple violations and the date of the violation is 2 or more years in the past. Each department and agency has different hiring policies.
So there is no need to try for expungement. IIFC some states don't allow expungement as well.
Also in some states, DWI is NOT a criminal offense but a quasi-criminal offense under motor vehicle statutes not criminal statutes. In some states you are not fingerprinted, not mug shot, and no arrest report is done, so you do not get a Federal ID number (someone can give the correct name it escapes me right now) that would show anywhere.
Other states and cities are more stringent, for example NYC confiscates and sells the violators vehicle used in the DWI ! (can you say TAXI !)
You are fingerprinted, are mug shot and you are arrested.

[jimdvs]

Which is EXACTLY why polygraph readings are NOT legally binding in some states as proof of anything.

A polygraph being legally binding or not in any state is irrelevant for what people on this board are looking for and that is advice on how they can gain employment in the field of law enforcement. The fact is that many law enforcement agencies require their applicants to submit to a polygraph examination and the agencies have deemed them legally binding, which is all that matters for people on this message board. During the process the applicant can either submit to the polygraph exam or withdraw from the process. If they submit to the polygraph then they will be questioned on many issues, including issues in their background, many of which derive from their application that they filled out, signed, dated, and swore to being true. So they can consult all the attorneys they please, but the fact of the matter is that when they are hooked up to the polygraph their attorney won't be their to console them when the polygrapher detects deception regarding a person answering "no" to the question "have you ever been arrested for any crime?" because they were given bad advice regarding expungement.

However, for those of you that are monitoring this board and are going through the hiring process for a law enforcement agency, you have to figure out what your best option is when it comes to this issue. As a person that has worked in law enforcement for over 28 years (retired now) and also was heavily involved in the application, interviewing and hiring process for a federal agency, the best advice I can give you is to be honest from the the first time you fill out any form and throughout the entire process.

[rix031]

bigwill,
here is a fact. not all local/state and/or federal districts completely "erase" an expungement. before my current position, i was a background investigator for a private firm. when i went to a court house to do a "complete" background investigation, i would scan the hard-copy "incident" logs that are usually handwritten and stored in the basement or some other out-of-the-way storage locker. on numerous occasions, i would find an incident involving our subject, but there wasnt a criminal history in the records check computer systems. it doesnt usually state the offense or disposition, but if i found an incident without any more information, then it was USUALLY a good indication that the record was expunged. i only reported my findings, so i have no idea if this was disqualifying for the position since the applicant didnt report it or not; however, we are not talking about private companies, we are discussing law enforcement positions. i would imagine that a good b.i. could also find this information just as easily and if the applicant did not disclose this incident, that would be the end of the process.

here is my disclaimer: not all incident reports are kept in log books or written by hand, so one may not find the expunged record in every local, state or federal districts.

[Washingtonian]

You're right, polygraphs are generally inadmissible in a criminal trial. But that's not the issue here. They can and frequently are used to DQ law enforcement applicants.

If the question is whether to admit the arrest or not, why consult an attorney? You have 2 options, tell the truth or lie. Hopefully no attorney with any integrity would advise someone to lie during a police BI. Sounds like a waste of money to me.

[BigWill2876]

READING is fundamental

What I initially said was; "consult with an Attorney".

Some thought that was a waste of money.

I responded with a real life (not Internet bs) instance of a
complete expungement, at every local/state/federal level.
USING an Attorney. (of couse in my example the Attorney was the subject's Brother and didn't charge him.)

The fact that the arrested person was eventually able to attain his JD, become a Member of his State's Bar Association, practice Law within a company that is State regulate, teach at his Alum Law School and Law Schools overseas, would be hard to quantify with an exact $ figure.

But of course NOBODY can expunge peoples memory or newspaper accounts of the incident expunged in a legal manner.

Sometimes I think it would be better for kids to skip their 18th year and go right from 17 to 19 and skip the foul up years. Which was the age of my relative. No, he had comitted no felonies, misdemeanors, motor vehicle law violations, or local ordinances. Sometimes kids make mistakes in judgement, his was a huge one. Luckily he was able to correct this mistake as a teen.

So MORALLY he has been arrested/convicted/served jail time, LEGALLY there is no legal record of the incident ANYWHERE.

How he or anyone in that instance answers the poly and the reading that the poly gives back for the examiner to attempt to determine T or F is conjecture.
Which is EXACTLY why polygraph readings are NOT legally binding in some states as proof of anything.

[GrayState]

.......................................

[jimdvs]

Close relative was convicted of several felonies, refused Pre-Trial Intervention, served his time (over 6 months) on work release in county jail.
Parolled, went back to community college at night.
Graduated with AA, then local Univ at night.
Graduated with BA. This took about 6 years since he worked days.
His Brother was Attorney (free legal work is nice) and filed for Expungement. Local authorities/arresting officer contested the filings.
Lost first time thru, Brother kept filing as time allowed.
Finally WON, records expunged.
Various filings were made to check that all LE agencies, BOTH state and federal had destroyed both files and fingerprint records.
Took about 2 years for all this to happen.
He then took law boards, applied to law school, accepted, went nights for about 4 years.
Graduated with his JD.
Now works Attorney, in house, for a large company that is state regulated, also teaches some law courses at his law school and also abroad.
Answers; NO, to any question about arrests.

It took a long time but he is a practicing Attorney, Member of the State Bar, with NO LE records at any level. No files, no fingerprints, no ID number ANYWHERE.

How many of these are out there is anyone's guess, but this is actual.

I would say it is safe to assume your close relative has never had to take a polygraph examination for his positions. Many of the people on this message board will eventually have to take a polygraph for the position(s) they are applying for. So if they were to follow your advice and answer NO to any questions about arrests because of expungement, how do you think they will fare when the polygrapher poses the question, "Have you ever been arrested for any crime?"?

Always tell the truth when applying for LE jobs.

[jsbeith]

always tell the truth.