This document discusses the history and development of the polygraph from its origins in the early 20th century to its current use for monitoring sex offenders. It traces the key individuals such as Marston, Munsterberg, and Wigmore who advanced the polygraph and debates its validity. The document argues that polygraphs should focus on diagnostic, single-issue exams rather than screening, multi-issue exams when used for sex offender monitoring and management given limitations in its ability to determine deception. Guidelines from groups like the American Polygraph Association aim to standardize techniques.
Developer Data Modeling Mistakes: From Postgres to NoSQL
The Polygraph's Role in Identifying and Managing Sex Offenders
1. DECEPTION NOS The Polygraph During the Identification and Management of Sex Offenders KEN BLACKSTONE ACFP – 2010
2. There once was a doctor named Hugo, a lawyer named John and a doctor/lawyer named William. Hugo had a square peg, John had a round hole, and William started carving. The carving continues.
5. If “there is ever devised a psychological test for the valuation of witnesses, the law will run to meet it.” Illinois Law Review, 3, 399-445 (1909) Evidence § 875 (2d ed. 1923) JOHN HENRY WIGMORE (1863-1943)
6. Wigmore encouraged William Marston, who was then a graduate student at Harvard, to “build a device that would monitor the pulse of a witness and would display the activity to the jury.” Assistant Secretary of War Medal of Freedom Harvard Law degree – 1918 Harvard Ph.D. (Psychology) – 1921 Marston(1893-1947)
7. Marston, William, “The Physiological Possibilities of the Deception Test”, The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 1921. Trial courts in Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin, Ohio admitted Marston tested witnesses while on the witness stand MARSTON DETECTION OF DECEPTION TEST
12. First “polygraph” was a copy machine – 1804 First multi-channel instrument - 1921 All electronic analog - 1974 Computer aided analog - 1988 Fully Computerized recording – 1992 CHANGES
16. EXAMINATIONS ARE REQUIRED TO BE CONDUCTED USING A TESTING AND ANALYSIS TECHNIQUE THAT HAS BEEN VALIDATED THROUGH PUBLISHED AND REPLICATED RESEARCH. AMERICAN POLYGRAPH ASSOCIATION
17. examinations are not permitted to materially deviate from the protocols of a validated testing technique. AMERICAN POLYGRAPH ASSOCIATION
18.
19. EVIDENTIARY – min 90% OVERALL ACCURACY INVESTIGATIVE – min 80% OVERALL ACCURACY Post Conviction Sex Offender Tests AMERICAN POLYGRAPH ASSOCIATION
20.
21. Examiners should use multi-issue polygraph techniques only in the absence of a known incident, known allegation, or a particular reason to suspect wrongful behavior. AMERICAN POLYGRAPH ASSOCIATION
22. Examiners should use a successive hurdles approach to testing to maximize both the informational efficiency and sensitivity of multi-issue (mixed-issue) screening polygraphs and the diagnostic efficiency and specificity of event-specific single-issue exams. AMERICAN POLYGRAPH ASSOCIATION
23. FAILURE TO DISCERN BETWEEN FORENSIC – DIAGNOSTIC POLYGRAPH UTILITY – NON-DIAGNOSTIC POLYGRAPH WHY HAS WIGMORE’S PROPHESY FAILED?
42. ALL YOU HAVE ARE THE RELEVANT QUESTIONS AND THE OUTCOME “DECEPTION INDICATED”.
43. DID YOU TOUCH THAT BOY’S PENIS? DID YOU SHOW THAT BOY PORNOGRAPHY? DID YOU ENCOURAGE THAT BOY TO DRINK ALCOHOL? HAVE YOU EVER FANTASIZED ABOUT SEX WITH A MINOR? MULTIPLE ISSUE
44. DID YOU HAVE SEX WITH (ANOTHER INMATE) LAST WEEK? SYLT, HAVE YOU LIED TO YOUR THERAPIST ABOUT YOUR SEXUAL VICTIMS? SYLT, HAVE YOU LIED TO YOUR THERAPIST ABOUT YOUR SEXUAL FANTASIES?
55. AMERICAN POLYGRAPH ASSOCIATION – www.polygraph.org Blackstone, K.E. (2008). Post-Conviction Polygraph in the Community and Court: Raising the Bar on PCSOT Examiners, The Forensic Examiner, 17 (3), 72-79 Krapohl, D. (2006). Validated Polygraph Techniques. Polygraph, 35(3), 149-155 Lieb, R., Quinsey, R., Berliner, L. (1998) Sexual Predators and Social Policy (M. Tonry, Ed.). Crime and Justice: A review of Research, 23, 43-114 Marston, W. (1938). The Lie Detector Test. New York: Richard R. Smith, 1938, pp. 1-179 References: