POLYGRAPH SERVICES

CRIMINAL EXAMINATIONS

            I specialize in criminal cases from around the country.  I am normally retained by the defense attorney, as that protects the confidentiality of the results under the attorney/investigator or attorney/work product privileges.  I also conduct examinations for county attorney offices and law enforcement agencies.  The examination is narrowly focused on the specific activity under investigation.  I do not delve into the examinee’s personal life except to determine his fitness to be tested, and to ensure that there is nothing related which could cause a mistake.  Unless the examination involves a sexual offense, I do not ask any questions of a sexual nature.  As soon as the exam is completed I tell the examinee and the requestor the preliminary results.  The next day I conduct a thorough re-analysis of the charts optimizing the parameters on a large monitor, supplemented by computer analyses.  The written report is submitted to the requestor electronically.

            I am a licensed examiner and adhere to the standards established by the American Polygraph Association and ASTM International.

I do not conduct the following type of examinations, but I’ll be happy to refer you to examiners who do.

• Examinations for businesses subject to the Employee Polygraph Protection Act (EPPA).
• Pre-employment examinations.
• Marital or fidelity issues unless referred by a therapist.  I believe your money would be better spent on marital counseling.
• PSCOT (post-conviction sex offender test) examinations.

QUALITY ASSURANCE

           Before an examination is proffered as evidence, it should undergo an independent review by an impartial expert.  The purpose of the review is to ensure that the examination meets professional standards and that the results were correctly interpreted.  My reviews also assess the strengths and weaknesses of the examination, so that the proffering counsel can anticipate how the opposing attorney might try to discredit the results.  Forewarned is forearmed!

            The entire polygraph file should be reviewed, including available investigative reports, the consent form, the examiner’s pretest notes, the digital polygraph charts, the examiner’s score sheet, and the report.  If the examination was recorded, the recording should also be reviewed.  The review usually takes longer than the original examination.

TESTIMONY

Polygraph

           I support the admissibility of polygraph examinations meeting professional standards and which are correctly interpreted.  I have testified in numerous Frye and Daubert hearings regarding the validity and reliability of polygraph examinations.  Both my Master’s and doctoral research were on the validity of the polygraph.  I have presented foundational testimony for the defense in state, federal, and military courts.  I have also testified for the prosecution opposing the admissibility of examinations in which there was evidence that the tested person had used countermeasures to “beat” the test.

            There are different philosophies about how experts should testify.  One approach is that the expert is an advocate for the side which retains his services.  He answers the questions put to him with a simple “yes” or “no” where possible, without elaboration.  He doesn’t volunteer information, especially if it would weaken the case for the side which calls him.  That is not my philosophy.

            My belief is that the expert must be objective, fair and balanced.  He is there to inform the court.  My testimony is the same regardless of which side retains my services.  I prefer to get the bad out up front on direct examination, right along with the good, rather than avoid it in the hopes the negatives won’t be brought out on cross.

            For a 2005 district court decision admitting the bulk of a polygraph examination based upon my foundational testimony, see U.S. v Rafael Davila and Deborah Cummings.

Voice Stress Analysis

            Many brands of voice stress analysis equipment have been developed.  I was a pioneer in conducting validation studies on the first such device, the Psychological stress Evaluator (PSE).  The Computerized Voice Stress Analyzer (CVSA), which is based upon the same mechanism as that of the PSE, is widely used by law enforcement today.  Other voice stress analyzers include the Hagoth, Mark II, Truster, and TrusterPro,  Although they advertise themselves as being more accurate than the traditional polygraph, the evidence strongly indicates that they are unable to differentiate lies from truths.

            I oppose the use of voice stress analysis for decision-making by law enforcement agencies.  While it has value as an interrogation prop due to the bogus pipeline effect, there is no scientific support for agencies to use its readout when deciding whether to clear or indict a suspect.