polys in CA

[novachic20]

Are there any depts in CALI that don't poly recruits?

[Berlioz]

Well...if you want to consider agencies that use the CVSA as those who don't use the poly..then, yes there are several. But those who don't use either? Probably the only ones I can think of are OC Sheriffs (they can at their discretion, but it isnt automatic). LAXPD, Port of LA PD, and LAGSD say they don't poly, but I can't verify if thats true.

[maminel]

Thank you so much!

[Stugotz]

LAXPD polys all recruits who entered the process after Nov 2006. LA General Services Police also polys all recruits now. I've heard LA Port PD does not generally poly, but has the option to use the poly if they are concerned about discrepancies in your BG. Where's DOACop, he can verify this about Port PD???

Most CSU and UC Police Depts don't list the poly/CVSA as part of their hiring process. Perhaps you can contact a recruiter at one of those PDs to verify.

Monterey Park PD uses the CVSA, not the poly.

[hbliam]

Asking for a list of agencies that don't poly is weird.

[Rogerthump]

Asking for a list of agencies that don't poly is weird.

Why is that? It can be junk science. I have failed a poly before when I knew damned well I was telling the truth. Took a voice stress that confirmed that I was telling the truth. But what good is that if they both claim to be a tool to tell if you may or may not be truthful but give different results?

I see your point though. Some people may think they can pass a BG as long as they are not called on something. But there are others who feel otherwise.

I think this specific topic has been covered before with the question of CA departments who don't poly (few and far between), and the retorts about the poly itself that came with the thread.

[a7x]

Asking for a list of agencies that don't poly is weird.

I agree, it makes it look like someone is trying to hide something.

I've taken both CVSA and Polygraph and have passed both. Both times I was nervous as hell because of the "stories" I have read on here and other places. Both "devices" are pretty painless.

Don't apply to an agency just because they don't have sort of "truth verification" device.

If you are asking about agencies that don't poly because you are trying to hide something and plan on deceiving your way through the process, don't bother applying in the first place. You'd be surprised what a thorough background investigation will uncover.

[GB0610]

Listen, there are enough liars who pass polys all the time to get on with PD's.

I do not want anymore liars in my proffession.

Learn to have integrity right now. Believe me, if you will lie in the hiring process, you will lie when you get on the job.....when it really matters.

[Berlioz]

Just as there is enough liars who pass polys, there are honest people who fail them...

[Stugotz]

Asking for a list of agencies that don't poly is weird.

This is a discussion forum. The question relates to the hiring process. Nothing wrong with asking questions about the hiring process.

[aggienut]

CHP and Roseville CA PD use CVSA only.

Both are absurd. I know people that are such liars they ace these things and angels that fail them.

If departments want to use them they need to use them as advisory only, not excuses to DQ someone. Departments keep complaining they cannot get qualified applicants...hmmmm I wonder why. You DQ 98% of them for one silly reason or another. I'm not saying anyone should be allowed to be a cop...they shouldn't, but use methods that can actually be trusted.

I know...sounds harsh. But that's how I feel and I haven't even had the opportunity to fail a poly/CVSA yet. The point is....if a jury is not allowed to see poly/CVSA result because they are deemed unreliable, nobody should be allowed to be someone who arrests someone (an LEO) because they passed such an unreliable test.

More notable: try this on for size....we let people run our country without passing a poly/CVSA. That makes sense....

[hbliam]

This is a discussion forum. The question relates to the hiring process. Nothing wrong with asking questions about the hiring process.

Like you said this is a discussion forum. I can post that I think it's weird to try to avoid taking a poly. Not to mention that if the guy just did a search he would find the other threads on the same topic.

This isn't a question "about the hiring process", this is a question about avoiding parts of the process he doesn't like. If you are an honest person with nothing to hide then the poly shouldn't be a worry. I've taken five and never had a problem.

[GB0610]

Like you said this is a discussion forum. I can post that I think it's weird to try to avoid taking a poly. Not to mention that if the guy just did a search he would find the other threads on the same topic.

This isn't a question "about the hiring process", this is a question about avoiding parts of the process he doesn't like. If you are an honest person with nothing to hide then the poly shouldn't be a worry. I've taken five and never had a problem.

Amen. (and becuase a post needs 10 characters) Amen, again.

[Rogerthump]

If you are an honest person with nothing to hide then the poly shouldn't be a worry.

Tell that to the thousands of honest would-be cadets waiting for their results. Even honest people crap their pants due to a machine "results".

And tell that to the thousands who know they were lying and passed. They just love to hear what you wrote above.

I have taken seven and passed all but one. You know what? I wouldn't have my job now if I had not taken the voice stress to counter the standard poly. The fact that they both claim to be equally accurate proves my point. Why would I fail one, then pass the other?

What ever a BI that chimes in may say, the poly results do have an effect on the hiring process. Otherwise they wouldn't use it at all.

Do I like that we can use a poly to screen for suspects in major crimes? YES!
Am I convinced that if the results of an interview with a suspect say deceptive then the person is guilty? NO!

Frankly, I feel that they poly should only be used to scare those away with hidden criminal pasts.

(Yes, just like all of the other threads on the poly, this one has turned into a ****ing match over it's use and accuracy)

[novachic20]

Yup Rogerthump. And all I asked was for was which departments don't poly. Not trying to hide anything...but I didn't know I had to say all of that just to get some answers. How about I could be using the information for some research....or general knowledge. But if anyone else must add their personal negative opinions of why I'm asking...ill just skim and ignore that response and look for those answers that are helpful. Thanks everyone! :)

[hbliam]

Yup Rogerthump. And all I asked was for was which departments don't poly. Not trying to hide anything...but I didn't know I had to say all of that just to get some answers. How about I could be using the information for some research....or general knowledge. But if anyone else must add their personal negative opinions of why I'm asking...ill just skim and ignore that response and look for those answers that are helpful. Thanks everyone! :)

Sorry I wasn't as helpful as you like. If you are applying to be a cop and happen upon a department that doesn't poly that's one thing. If you are specifically trying to avoid taking one that's another.

RT has his opinion, I have mine. I don't think anyone should be DQ'd over a poly. I think the poly should be used to identify items that need to be checked out during the BI. If you fail the poly miserably that's another thing.

[1970k10]

I think its funny how some states say you absolutely cannot use the poly then others states say you can for government workers.

Neither can detect "truth".

[chrisfnrb7]

Like you said this is a discussion forum. I can post that I think it's weird to try to avoid taking a poly. Not to mention that if the guy just did a search he would find the other threads on the same topic.

This isn't a question "about the hiring process", this is a question about avoiding parts of the process he doesn't like. If you are an honest person with nothing to hide then the poly shouldn't be a worry. I've taken five and never had a problem.
I'm a good example of a person with nothing to hide, but failed a polygraph. I was in backrounds for LASD and am getting DQ'd for failing the poly. This was my first polygraph, and the problem was this...I have asthma and I breathe through my mouth, and I was told by the examiner to breathe through my nose because she didn't want me swallowing during the test. I breathed through my nose and then she said my irregular breathing was throwing off the machine. At the end of the process the examiner told me she could not determine if I was passable or not. In other words, my results were inconclusive. She said she knows that I was telling the truth, but she needs to send my results up the latter and see if I would need to retake it. I come to find out 2 months later I flat out failed because I reacted to a question that I know I didn't lie about. I was DQ'd and so far I have not yet been given a second chance. I have been told by many people along the way who are Deputies and Sargeants that I am the perfect candidate...yet I was dq'd over my poly alone? I have nothing to hide and I am more than willing to do my polygraph over again, but I am alittle nervous that the same thing would happen and I am positive it would not be because of the same question. Because of this, I would now prefer to get in with a department not requiring polygraphs for this bad experience and I am afraid if I keep failing because I am not a good polygraph taker, I won't get hired anywhere.

[1970k10]

Some departments use the polygraph as a way to half *** the background investigation. In the long run a full investigation without the poly would cost more but actual look into the persons background.

[JPR]

Just my two cents here.......but reading the replies seems to confirm my theory of polygraphs......When I first found out the mechanics behind the test, it seemed to me and still does that the term "lie detector test" is not an accurate description of the test. I would suggest that "stress detection test" would be a more accurate description. Based on this, I would think that someone who is very much in control of their emotions could lie their way all the way through the test and pass. Conversely, a person who has less control of their feelings may appear to be lying when they are telling the truth.....God forbid I ever become a suspect in a crime but if I do I don't believe I would submit to a polygraph test. Knowing the result of the answer to some of the questions might convince the police I am guilty might cause me stress when the question is asked which would make me look like a liar. Unfortunately, refusing the test makes a person look like they have something to hide. I would have no problem taking a lie detector test if I was confident that it was 100% reliable but a stress test for the above reasons I have enumerated is not the same as a lie detector test......Just my two cents worth...