Ch 17 Reports

Iraq or Iraq if you ever committed an armed robbery. No polygraph operators in ways that. Were very actually violating people's civil rights. He adds there is no need to have an interpretation it needs a very clear cut. If you license a polygraph examiner It gives in or just a mystery to the examiner and we're totally against polygraphs. Period. I'm saying the potential is there for the abuse. And given the unreliability of the

instrument that potential should not be allowed to materialize. This is from me. I do think that we have to be careful about tipping the balance and being more concerned with the wrong door possible wrong door than we are with the victim. Well polygraph has been in existence for over 30 years and it's been demonstrated time and time again as being a reliable instrument of finding the truth. On Channel 17 reports this week. Well examine the controversial issue of the

polygraph. Better known as a lie detector. Well explore the claims and counterclaims questioning the authenticity of the polygraph whether it's a valid instrument of truth or an invasion of privacy. And look at a movement underway in both the private and public sectors to ban the operation in New York State. The polygraph faces a coalition of organizations that have varied reasons for opposing its use by employers in New York State. The way it is used in New York state because it is unrestricted and the employer uses it as a condition of employment giving it at will to its employer employees unscrupulous employers can use it for unscrupulous purposes. For example if the employer wants to eliminate somebody because of race color creed or religion or sex. It can simply decide that the results of the polygraph tests are unfavorable to the person who has taken it or decide that the answers of the person

were deceptive and thus place the person out of a job and very little recourse if any can be effectual aided by the employee thus tainting future employment because of the bad mark on the employment record of that person. The Constitution guarantees that a person does not have to testify against themselves. The use of polygraph sidesteps that whole constitutional protection. With polygraph testing it is very commonplace that people are asked to do just that polygraph testing. It is virtually bringing charges against people and trying them and convicting them. Sidestepping the whole criminal justice system. We jack to the use a polygraph test by an ethical employer is to weed out union sympathizers or the parents. We perceive the

polygraph examiner as a prosecuting attorney and a judge and jury. And the final tribunals for the use of polygraphs has had a record of astonishing abuse with the polygraph operators asking questions that are illegal for the employer himself to ask such as the race sex marital status or prior arrest record of the job applicant. Operators have even been known to ask about a woman's use of birth control devices. Therefore now supports an amendment to 20 B of the New York state labor law to prohibit the use of polygraphs in employment situations. What prompted the attorney general's office to get involved with a polygraph issue. The attorney general is concerned that just as with the boy stress about a waiter's the use of a polygraph test was a huge invasion of privacy

for employees or job applicants. That there was a significant amount of coercion in its use or suggested use. And also concerns with the reliability of the abuse of the polygraph test the real interest that the NLRB has is how it impacts on employees rights to organize or to engage in union activity. It's the NRA isn't necessarily interested in a morality or even the legality of the test. In. That vacuum but in principle it's how it impacts on the employees rights to organize for gaging union activity to band together to protect each other. You feel then that the use of such a polygraph test may tip the employer that this person may be trying to organize a union and make it rough on him as a switch. There have been cases such as this and the board has found violations in cases like that where the use of the polygraph wasn't designed to further any legitimate interest of the

company. Like in. Discovering theft but instead was used to discover union activity which is protected. Louis Glickman a graduate attorney and licensed private investigator is president a polygraph and investigative association with offices in Williamsville. I don't know of any medical type instrument that is completely infallible we've all heard of stories where a person in a medical office in a completely competent medical officer with a complete complet medical practitioner has been told they're in good health and they walk out of the office and perhaps a week later they're gone they drop dead. So it's the same with the polygraph polygraph is not infallible but it is considered to be to at least to the tremendous extent to which it's used a very valuable instrument along with other methods that the employer uses in along with other criteria to see whether the person's going to be reliable and loyal on the job.

The polygraph has been existence for over 30 years and it's been demonstrated time and time again as being a reliable instrument of finding truth. I would I would say that if it were grossly unreliable that it would have long long ago disappeared from. Police is a police tool and also from private industry. It has a higher degree of a little reliability it's been admitted in many courts in the country. It's been admitted at least once in 36 states and nine of the 11 federal jurisdictions New York State Supreme Court two years ago and people versus Daniels admitted the results of the pollers I mation for the defense over the objections of the prosecution and a judge in its opinion laid down guidelines for the criteria that would be used in establishing the competency of the Examiner and also for the examination itself while the examination should meet the requirements. So where making progress in that area and I think that the courts need a means of verifying the truth with perjury or running rampant in our courts. This wit is a tremendous aid.

And to just completely ban it by amending the business law is just unconscionable. It really is. I am a licensed polygraph as in the state of Michigan and in the state of Kentucky. New York State does not have a licensing law something that we very much like to change. And in turn it would protect totally the public. This is the polygraph and the controversy centers primarily on the question of the instruments accuracy device measures blood pressure respiration and excess perspiration. In this simulation Mr. Glickman and one of his employees demonstrate a polygraph test and a real examination. There would be 15 seconds between each question to allow bodily responses to stabilize. Do you live in the United States. Yes. If you ever committed an armed robbery you know is this the month of May. Yes.

Is it true that all of your three boys are always perfectly behaved young gentleman. Yes. It's OK if I took the child out. Right now. As I told you previously this bottom line is blood pressure and this next one is excess perspiration. And this these two are respiration and in order to tell whether there is deception we see where we get the most reactions either in one or more of the other readings. Now as you also know of course we manufactured these questions because as I was explaining an example like this where there's no real guilt it's very difficult to get attention and the whole power graph instrument operates on the basis of tension you see. But on the question that we manufactured Have you ever committed an armed robbery.

We still get a little bit of. We get a lot of perspiration here. Now we. Know when you I know that you never committed an armed robbery. But I would just be asking the question well provoke tension. Dr. David Lipton is a professor of psychiatry at the University of Minnesota and one of the toughest critics of the polygraph. He recently authored a book on the scientific status of the polygraph. There are three good studies of the accuracy of the lady and what these studies show is I think kind of shocking. The polygraph industry claims you know 95 percent 99 percent accuracy for the procedure. The studies show and they all agree with one another and it makes all of them more credible because they get the same results. The studies show that the polygraph is actually about 65 70 percent accurate or accurate. You could be 50 percent accurate by flipping a coin. They do a little

bit better than chance but maybe 70 percent which means that. A third of the time they're wrong. The worst thing that these studies show is that if you look just at the fate of the innocent criminal suspects the people who are cleared later by the confession of somebody else and so on. It turns out that nearly 50 percent of those people failed a polygraph test. It's a biased against the truthful innocent person. And I think that's a very scary statistic when you consider that at least a million Americans have to submit to a lie detector test every year in this country. I don't consider him an authority on polygraph no on the basis of what I've read because to be an authority you had to pass an exam experience as well. The fact that a person is a psychologist does not make him a polygraph. And Doctor look in his own book states that out of forty six thousand psychologists in this country he doused out forty six of them are qualified to make an accurate judgment or an accurate opinion regarding a polygraph.

Did he go to polygraph school or not. You know he did not. I lectured at every college in this part of the country and Miami and Texas as a polygraph consultant and I have conducted over 20000 examinations. I was in law enforcement for 37 years 25 in Buffalo two in the bar association investigating lawyers three in private industry where I investigated everybody in five and half of the district attorney's office where I investigated more. Is all of time utilizing the past 24 years I was a polygraph expert polygraph exam the polygraph is an instrument that does not measure anything now. Like in concert repeats constantly in his book hear that it measures the polygraph does not measure it record physiological responses. You appear very concerned over the type of questions asked in a polygraph examination. Can you explain to me why. Well. The types of questions that very very often are asked are very invasive kinds of questions are invasive of the

person's privacy and they cause great turmoil whether it's a male or a female job applicant to be asked. Have you ever used marijuana or do you ever drunk too much or have you ever been treated for mental illness or have you ever been arrested. That those are very very difficult questions for people to deal with whether or not they have. I have gotten complaints from people who have been given polygraph tests for the position and based on the questions they've told me that they've been there. They're not asked same questions. There may be an element of discrimination. Clearly rights violations if this were a ploy or a drug and employer.

Are Required a supervisor who is not normally protected under the National Labor Relations Act required a supervisor to take a polygraph test. The board found that that was a violation of our act because in taking that test they inquired of the supervisor about the union activity of the people of the other employees who are protected by the Board found that that was a violation because well right now I'm in the worst situation is when something's missing in the company when there's been a theft. They pick out the employees that they suspect and make them they subject them to a trial by polygraph in which the polygraph examiner is judge and jury and whoever he identifies as the guilty party gets fired loses their reputation. All future chance of getting employment. Recent research the good research shows unequivocally and this opinion is shared by all respectable scientists in my field. The lie detector test is not a

valid procedure it's based on a dumb theory. And when that test is studied in peer it Cleon objective Leah turns out to be barely more accurate than flipping coins even when it where the tests are given by the best trained most respected people in the field. I feel that the use of the polygraph test by employers as a condition in place should be banned entirely just as currently in New York State voice stress evaluators as a so-called lie detector is banned. And there are three primary reasons. One it's an invasion of the privacy of the employee to the polygraph is not a lie detector. It is not an instrument of truth. In fact it is so unreliable that only last year the state of Wisconsin the state supreme court of Wisconsin. Band the admissibility of the results of polygraph tests into evidence in all of the state courts of Wisconsin saying that it is not a reliable instruments

and therefore has no value to the courts in determining anybody's lying or telling the truth. I have in my evidence admitted in the York State Supreme Court the grand jury. Buffalo City Court Erie County Court Negra county court. It has been admitted in murder trials arson trials and I have testified before the grand jury as a lone witness in the grand jury in the case was dismissed on my testimony on my charge and I my testimony. These are all a matter of record in Erie County and their county. I did a certain man who loved his child starve to death worked with him for many hours and when it was all through I presented my testimony in the grand jury. When they came out they said how could you possibly sit for so long with a man who is as low as this man was without losing your temper without losing control. You must be objective you must be totally objective and you must have integrity and you must have compassion in our society we've got the constant problem of balancing the rights of a possible wrong door

against the rights of an individual hasn't done anything wrong or against the rights of society. And now I happen to have spent close to 20 years in civil rights work myself. I know that in the in the city of Buffalo now there are several very reliable and responsible social rights groups that are opposed to the polygraph. OK I know where some of their leadership but I have a tremendous amount of respect for them. I happen to think that they're wrong in this case. I I happen and I know that this isn't going to go along well with many of the viewers who are watching this program. But as a person who considers himself liberal as a person who feels a strong necessity of civil rights I do think that we have to be careful about tipping the balance and being more concerned with the wrong door possible wrong doer than we are with the victim.

If the employer chooses a polygraph examination as opposed to a background investigation for many reasons number one cost but a much more important reason as dentists used to be brought out is that I have personally have conducted thousands of background investigations as a pharmacist special agent of the ISI and I can readily say that they are not as accurate as a polygraph examination as a matter of fact the Department of Defense at this moment as embarked on a very large part RAF program because they found a background of ESTA geishas were not where there are cracked up to be. If we look at pharmaceutical companies that have to protect their drugs go refineries jewelry companies and alliance with high value items. Supermarkets to dealing with moneys holiday are going to protect themselves. There is no invasion of privacy by the simple fact that nobody can be forced to submit to a polygraph examination. Nobody. If somebody did not cooperate with me I cannot polygraph him. If somebody refused to give me their consent

to be polygraphed in writing I will not polygraph him. The invasion of privacy statement comes from several of these organizations that have nothing else to hang their head on. First of all if these people fill out an application and apply for a position these employers have every right to check out these people. And by the way I think the important issue that should be considered. If a person driving a company vehicle is an alcoholic allowed to be employed as a driver this is the type of person that's going to maim or kill your relatives or my relatives or our opponent's relatives. We prevent that from happening. We do a lot of work for small organizations for example hotdog stands pizza places who could be put out of business by employees stealing extensively as they do. I have an exam here that I can show

you where one particular place which is probably it's a small place but it's known throughout the city for its excellent hotdogs hamburgers things like that where employees among eight or 10 employees there were stealing as much as 25 or 30 dollars a week each. It adds up well how kind of how can a small business survive when two three hundred dollars a week is being ripped off. That's the problem. The problem is that in foyers make decisions based on minimal reports either subject passed or subject flunked. And the employer does not ask to know what it was he flunked. What it was he was nervous what question he was nervous about answering. The employer really doesn't have that information when he makes a very important decision whether to hire or fire that person. Nobody talks about the people we've been able to say out of age save people whose reputations would have been destroyed had not been for a polygraph. Where circumstantial evidence made it look like these people were

involved in all types of theft and in fact they were not. And the guilty person was eventually up to him. But these are the people who would have been fired and would have been a mark on a record wherever they went. So it's not an instrument of truth and you know one thing that puzzles me is this. One of the great lobbies against restrictive legislation is you're trying to get passed year in New York state as we've already passed in Minnesota. Our lobby is composed of employers that want to use the polygraph. And the question is why do they think they want to use it. There has never been a decent study done to show that any company has actually saved money has actually reduced theft as a result of using the polygraph and yet the supposedly hard headed American businessmen are determined to use this in their phony procedure. They've been bamboozled by the false wishful thinking claims of the lie detector industry.

We have a few opponents of the polygraph who claim that such an instrument is not a valid instrument of truth. How do you argue that. Well one argument that I have and this deals with a very large chain of discount stores. When we first started doing work for this company they were suffering six to seven percent shrinkage. After one complete year of a polygraph program their shrinkage was three tenths of one percent. Now if it didn't work how do you account for this change. And by the way most of the clients I deal with are the ones that have been able to expand and create more jobs for more people because they haven't suffered the theft loss that these that these other businesses are suffering. Are you aware of any unscrupulous incidents. Sure. An unlawful uses of it. I sat in on an unfair labor practice

hearing some years ago in which a supervisor of a dry cleaning establishment which had been accused of an unfair labor practice admitted in a hearing that the polygraph. Operator hired by that particular place had asked about the union activities of people some of the opponents to polygraph. I feel that there may be an unscrupulous polygraph examiner who may use that information to blackmail the person or make life miserable for him. Fran I'm sure that just as there are unscrupulous medical people unscrupulous who are errors and scrupulous civil rights people and unscrupulous news people I'm sure there are unscrupulous polygraph examiners also. Again you know you can't separate the human race. But this probably is one reason why we should have

licensing in New York state which we do not have and coast supervision. Because hopefully that would tend to eliminate a large degree of unscrupulous behavior. How about licensing in the private sector do you feel that that would help the licensing of polygraph examiner. I certainly do. Licensing would. If there are any problems with unscrupulous people in the field or improperly trained people in the field licensing would certainly give the state control over that type of thing a law for. Which you change your mind if the polygraph operators in New York State New York State were licensed not under any circumstances. No I would not. Nor would the ACLU is there any kind of movement underway to try to get licensing. Well yes there is. There is but it's just not interesting enough. Some of the people who are opposed.

To to the use of power graph. I have been opponents of licensing because they're afraid that it will become more accepted than they want it to be. Yes I think that if use of polygraph in business is outlawed I think it would be a tremendous disservice to the business community. So what type of legislation are you advocating now across the board in the area of client polygraph testing. The most important consideration is accuracy. If these techniques were as accurate as industry claims if they're 95 percent right 99 percent right that. Then we ought to use them I believe. I think we'd have to use them. I believe in fact that we would have to throw out every jury box in every courtroom in the land because juries are 95 percent accurate. In the interests of justice we get rid of the jury box install a polygraph machine think out quick and cheap inefficient those trials would be

huge simply as the defendant did you do it in the polygraph examiner would say whether it's true or false and the judge would pronounce sentence that would be great. Think With Think of the money it would save. The trouble is it doesn't work and the trouble is that half the time or at least a third of the time the outcome would be wrong and there would be a great injustice if the employer has a right to ask a person to take a medical examination where it could include an EKG where they put components on the person's body where they're to even have to remove clothing with a polygraph you don't. And you don't hear any objections to a person questioning about their health. So it must be the questions and not just mentation that is at stake here and if that's the case then I'm all for a licensing law. And you come in a federal and state to debate the issue as to what questions could be asked and when everybody agrees as to what questions will protect both the private citizen and the companies and employers. Then you can apply to polygraph and have a licensing law to ensure that only those who are competent to

administer it that we're in business everybody would be satisfied. But they want to throw the baby out with the bathwater and that's not the way to go.