[Archive]

Posted By: Bob

Tom- perhaps I did not clearly state my positon on polygraphs. I agree that in the hands of an unskilled and/or unimpartial examiner they can be a disaster. We routinely counseled our clients NOT to agree to take polygraph examinations except in the most extreme sitautions when there were extenuating circumstances that justified their use. Of the several examiners in this area, there is only one examiner whom I trusted enough to use.
That said, I would reiterate that in the hands of a well trained, competent and impartial and neutral examiner they can be accurate, not infallible, but approaching trustworthiness.
As far as their infallibility goes, (the flip side of the coin), I once represented a serial killer who was adept at "fooling" the examiners (more than one was given), and was able to provide incorrect answers which appeared as truthful responses.
They are not 100% effective and there are too many variables from the examiner himself, the questions asked, etc. and that is why the results will probably never be admitted in federal court and most states.
I also agree that Clemens' attorneys probably explored the possibility of having a "friendly" examiner give the Rocket a test and if the results had been positive that he was being truthful, would have trumpeted the results from the rooftop.
tbob