Tweet
I created this thread so people can stop hijacking LE job threads and voice their frustrations here. Nice and organized!
-
-
Huh?Originally posted by dark321 View Post-
Page was meant to be sarcasm. Its 2022, gender is apparently a spectrum meaning anything could be a gender at this point.
dark321, FYI a number of people that get axed at polygraphs are already LEOs. If you get on with a federal agency you'll figure it all out soon enough.Last edited by Levithane; 09-05-2022, 04:39 PM.
-
-
Being a Polygrapher is about the same profession as a Tarot Card Reader. Imagine going to work everyday.Comment
-
dark321 Im starting a new post to save Aidokea all the notifications. I never said LEO's were all model citizens, I am quite aware quite a few of them are not model citizens. Without leaking any sort of information that I am particularly aware of when it comes to these exams. All im going to say is there have been quite a few times where I have developed something in an individuals history through pulling an official record, or interviewing a reference that developed derogatory information about an individual AFTER they passed a polygraph exam. As in it is information they should have disclosed, that was not and a capable interviewer should have been able to pry it out. The information was documented somewhere, or someone was aware of it. That is all im going to say on this.Comment
-
Page I don't know anything about pass or failure rates or how that whole mess is sorted out. Its been pointed out many times on her there's been people who have passed Federal Agency A's exam, then goes and fails Agency B's exam. Which usually makes zero sense sense on the federal side is usually more standardized across the board, than local and state. Then you get some agencies which will fail and applicant, which correct me if Im wrong is a deception ruling, then tells the candidate they can try again in 2 to 3 years. -
Levithane — I want to thank you for having the most adult and objective statement about the matter polygraphs. What you have stated, I have personally seen.
I am honestly 2-2 with polygraphs in my professional endeavors. Never lied, and it’s typically the same line of questions — no surprises. No ill will. I just lost in the game of chance. But I’ve worked for two agencies:
Agency A was heavily reliant on the device while Agency B didn’t even administer one.
While working for Agency A, I noticed a trend. There was a lot of off-duty issues with some of the hires, and even those who were blessed with passing a polygraph, often had issues arise in their backgrounds later on in their career, or shortly after getting hired. Because the polygraph was the item that was utilized as the catch all.
I now work for Agency B. A pretty well respected state agency. No polygraph, but a very in-depth background investigation which included door knocks, visits to neighbors, were conducted — really instrusive but much needed. Agency B would often find very telling personal and attitude-esq type findings and short comings that would be of concern. Even amongst prior federal LEOs with clearance and other local LEOs trying to hop on. This agency barely has misconduct transpire within our ranks.
As someone mentioned earlier, it’s the elephant in the room no one wants to talk about. And it’s apparent nothing beats a good field investigation.Last edited by IroqouisB; 09-05-2022, 07:21 PM. -
IroqouisB Theres a lot of agencies like "agency A" you described. Me personally I have no problem complying with a BI. Now if the polygraph occurred after the background investigation rather than before, it would probably be utilized more correctly. Doesn't seem like that will be the case at any point.
-
-
I failed a polygraph for stating I was nervous about the test when asked why the magic box was telling the wizard I was a liar liar pants on fire. Clean record, only been pulled over twice my entire life, have had a job that required drug testing since 18 and never failed. Never been fired or disciplined. Still was deemed a liar and unfit. But We nEeD rEcRUitSComment
-
Has nothing with being nervous. Theyll fail you for a multitude of reasons. One thing in particular they'll fail you for is if you put the examiner in a box or talk back to them about something they don't know what they're talking about. IE: they make incorrect claims about your job duties, and you cite the state statue proving them wrong, and they'll get angry at you for it.
-
-
Agencies like USSS and CBP are heavily reliant on the poly. The irony is, these agencies are the ones who have the most personnel stringed up on misconduct due to deviant behavior…….. But they passed their poly right?
The polygraph and COVID-19 vaccine have the same level of efficacy. And they’re both billion dollar industries. Both aren’t going anywhere. Haha!Comment
-
Anti poly candidates get so worked up that they keep failing the test.Last edited by dark321; 09-05-2022, 06:22 PM.Comment
-
I mean. Most of the complainers have a job and appear to know what they’re talking about. I’m curious on why you’re so angered about their resentment? This is a very odd thread you’ve started here.Originally posted by dark321 View Post
Comment
-
I've also noticed anecdotally that some of the least intelligent people people can breeze through the polygraph. Case in point with one of the posters here. Likely because they don't really understand the science or the implications of failing one.
It's a flawed tool at best but does have a place in some settings. At my last federal agency, we polygraphed sex offenders on a risk-based basis. The ones who passed were often the ones we later found with child porn during searches. The guys who failed, only infrequently would we find contraband on a later search. It was random. -
Winter_Patriot Idk what service you guys used. At the state level when I worked there my co workers who managed that case load went through a contractor. The amount of variance between polygraph contractors is outright ridiculous. There was one where their reports were less than 1 page. Then there was another one that wrote a pretty comprehensive detailed report.
-
I would like to know what your particular expertise is by which you can state this to be the case? I mean, you made this statement like you know it to be fact. So?Originally posted by dark321 View Post((≡￣♀￣≡))Comment
-
In like the 90s, there was a controlled study. 85.4% of black candidates were incorrectly seen as “deceptive”. While “only 14.6% of black participants were correctly identified as giving non-deceptive answers, compared to 33.3% of whites.” So, seeing as the polygraph is the holy grail to our giggly friend dark321 and Co., I guess it’s safe to say that the agencies that use the polygraph as the deciding factor to eliminate candidates, that they’re right when they call the 85.4% of black candidates “drug dealers and terrorists”. The topic of this Stone Age practice is becoming polarized again in the modern era and I love it. -
My point is, if dark321 had such a keen interest to start this thread and knows so much, perhaps this is just another case of a polygraph examiner starting up on a forum. It happened before on Delphi with a CBP examiner. That one was a real disaster case. So, I am just wondering...
-
-
-
Whiskey
Tango
Foxtrot.Comment
-
-
I LOVE a thread that's got this much popcorn.Comment
-
Guys I have to be real, both sides of this sound pretty stupid at this point lol.Comment
There are currently 26666 users online. 69 members and 26597 guests.
Most users ever online was 158,966 at 04:57 AM on 01-16-2021.
Comment