Professional Documents
Culture Documents
POLYGRAPHY Notes For Criminology
POLYGRAPHY Notes For Criminology
It deals with the study of scientific lie detection and forensic psychophysiology. It covers
the fundamental concepts about lies and deceits, history of lie detection, fundamentals
of polygraph science, and polygraph examination procedures and techniques. Other
methods of detecting deception aside from polygraphy are included in the academic
discussions. However, the focus of the study is on the uses of polygraph instrument and
the standard procedures of polygraph examination.
GENERAL OBJECTIVES
1. State the significance of studying the physiology of the human nervous system in
relation to lie detection;
2. Identify the pioneers in lie detection and their significant contributions;
3. Discuss the basic function of the polygraph instrument in psychophysiological
veracity examination;
4. Enumerate the principal uses, objectives, stages, procedures, and techniques of
polygraph examination;
5. Enumerate the qualifications and responsibilities of the polygraph examiner;
6. Demonstrate the basic operation of the polygraph instrument and how to attach
the sensors to a person’s body;
7. Interpret the tracing produced by the subject during the instrumentation stage;
and
8. Define the basic principles behind each of the scientific methods of detecting
deception.
UNIT I
For as long as there are liars and deceitful persons, there are people who persist to find
out the truth and detect those who are lying.
Various methods have been developed using science and technology to establish if a
person is telling the truth. Such methods applied knowledge in various sciences such as
psychology, psychiatry, physiology, and pharmacology. The application of modern
technology such as electronics and computer science is gaining its popularity in the field
of lie and crime detection.
Although lie detection methods are scientifically base, these are not fully recognized by
the courts as a means of producing evidence to establish the truth. In fact, most
information developed using the scientific lie detection methods are not admissible as
direct or primary court evidence despite their expediency in crime detection and
investigation. This is something that is ironic in the Philippine setting.
In crime detection, the task of determining the truth initially lies on the hands of the field
investigators.
In his earlier book System der Kriminalistiks. Gross emphasized that most part of the
investigator’s work involves battle against lies. The investigator has to discover the truth
and must fight the opposite, as “lies and deceits”. He encounters the opposite every
step of his investigation. (Trovillo.) 1939
Today, lying became a lucrative business and more and more people are lured into it.
As future law enforcers and criminal investigators, you have to learn more than what
ordinary people know about detecting lie and discovering the truth. By force of necessity
due to nature of your profession, you have to be knowledgeable about lies, truth and
deception.
Most of you probably think that the field of lie detection is geared towards
discovery of lies and deceits. However, it would be better to say first because once the
truth is known, lie will be revealed eventually.
WHAT IS TRUTH?
Microsoft Encarta Reference Library (2004) procided the following meanings of
truth.
In the broadest sense, a fraud is an intentional deception made for personal gain or to
damage another individual. The specific legal definition varies by legal jurisdiction.
Fraud is a crime, and is also a civil law violation. May hoaxes are fraudulent, although
those not made for personal gain are technically not frauds. Defrauding people of
money is presumably the most common type of fraud, but there have also been many
fraudulent “discoveries” in art, archaeology, and science.
Lie and deceit is therefore, synonymous and can be used interchangeably. Based on
their definition, there are means of committing deception.
There are various methods of detecting lies and deceit. Lie detection methods available
today may be grouped in four ways. (Llamas Jr., 2002).
Dr. Pedro Solis, in his book Legal Medicine, provided a more elaborate classification of
lie detection methods available today.
However, there are new sophisticated techniques of detecting deception not mentioned
by Solis. These include:
Lie Detection is also called Deception and Scientific Truth Verification. As scientific
lie detection is now included as one area of forensic science. Forensic lie detection is
better known in the academe as Forensic Psychophysiology. The most popular field
of forensic psychophysiology is the polygraph method. According to Dr. William J.
Yankee of the Dept. of Defense Polygraph Institute (DoDPI).Polygraph examination is
one of the most complex psychophysiological examinations ever developed. (Matte,
1996).
In advance countries, the following are preferred descriptions of lie detection through
polygraph examination.
Lie Detection test customarily involves the process of recording the psychophysiological
reactions of a person while being questioned and scientific interpretation of the person’s
reactions by trained experts.
Scientific lie detection methods primarily and extensively utilize the combined
knowledge of psychology and physiology. This led the term psychophysiology.
We may say that the person is deceptive if we detected that his pulse and respiration
suddenly increased but such conclusion is disputable unless we trace the cause of
significant changes in physiological reactions. Our deduction is positive if we identified
that the cause is anxiety or similar stress reaction that is psychological in nature. Hence,
there is direct relationship between human physiology and psychology that is functional
in explaining the theory of lie detection.
Emotions are an indispensable part of the body’s adjustive machinery. Strong emotions
especially fear, usually hamper sound thinking in at least three ways.
The system that prepares the body’s defenses to meet, these emergencies is none
other than the sympathetic subdivision of the autonomic nervous system (a motor
system).
The human nervous system is composed of the central nervous system and
peripheral nervous system. The central nervous system (CNS) consists of the brain
and the spinal cord.
1. The CNS processes and coordinates all incoming sensory information and
outgoing motor commands.
2. CNS is the seat of complex brain functions such as memory, intelligence,
learning and emotion.
The peripheral nervous system (PNS), includes all neural tissue outside the
central nervous system. It is responsible for providing sensory (afferent) information to
the CNS and carrying motor (efferent) commands out of the body tissues.
The PNS has two sub-divisions: the Somatic Nervous System and the
Autonomic Nervous System. Their respective functions are as follows:
It directs all activities of the body that occur without a person’s conscious control
such as breathing and food digestion. It has two parts: the sympathetic division, which is
most active in times of stress, and the parasympathetic division, which controls
maintenance activities and helps conserve the body’s energy.
The sympathetic and parasympathetic nervous system acts opposite with each
other. When the person is under the influence of physical stimulus (exertion) or
emotional provocation (such as excitement, fear and anger), the sympathetic branch
dominates and over-rides the parasympathetic component. In effect there will be
changes in the:
When the conditions of stress are no longer present, the parasympathetic branch
works to restore things to normal. Thus, the parasympathetic branch is dominant when
things are normal and the person is calm, contented and relaxed. (Solis 1987)
NEURONS: The basic unit of the Nervous System. The nervous system is made up of
billions of structural units called NEURONS. Neurons are cells especially adopted to
transmit messages from one part of the body to another in the form of electrochemical
impulses. This has three distinct parts which include:
1. Cell Body – The central part of the neuron which contains the nucleus. The
nucleus is a dense area within the cell body which contains structures necessary
to the life and development of the neuron.
2. Dendrites – These are small extensions on the cell body that receive messages
from other neurons and carry towards the cell body.
3. Axons – are relatively elongated part of a neuron that carry messages away from
the cell body.
“If someone tells you he always tells the truth, you know you have a liar on your hand.”
(Croucho Marx)
“The sin of lying is one of the most damnable and common sins of human race.”
(Echols, 1946)
“Warfare is the way of deception. Thus, although you are capable, display incapability to
them. When committed to employing your forces, feign inactivity. When your objective is
nearby, make it appear as if distant: when far away, create the illusion of being nearby.”
(Sun Tzu, 510 BC)
Anyone can tell a lie. However, making someone believe your lie is difficult to do.
To convince someone that your story is true, you must be able to adequately and
effectively communicate with him. To do this, you must have a reason or motive.
WHY DO WE LIE?
Benedict Carey of Los Angeles Time March 8, 2003. He identified at least four
honest reasons why we lie:
Augustine of Hippo wrote the two books about lying: On Lying (De Mendacio) and
Against Lying (Contra Mendacio). He describes each book in his later work, Retractions.
Based on the location of the De Mendacio in Retractions, it appears to have been
written about A.D. 395. The first work, On Lying, begins: “Magna quæstio est de
Mendacio”. From his text, it can be derived that St. Augustine divided lies into eight
categories, listed in order of descending severity:
• Lies in religious teaching.
• Lies that help others and help no one.
• Lies that harm others and help someone.
• Lies told for the pleasure of lying.
• Lies told to “please others in smooth discourse.”
• Lies that harm no one and that help someone.
• Lies that harm no one and that save someone’s life.
• Lies that harm no one and that save someone’s “purity”.
PSYCHOLOGY OF LYING
The capacity to lie is noted early and nearly universally in human development.
Social psychology and developmental psychology are concerned with the theory of
mind, which people employ to simulate another’s reaction to their story and determine if
a lie will be believable. The most commonly cited milestone, what is known as
Machiavellian intelligence, is at the age of about four and a half years, when children
begin to be able to lie convincingly. Before this, they seem simply unable to comprehend
why others don’t see the same view of events that they do --- and seem to assume that
there is only one point of view, which is their own.
Young children learn from experience that stating an untruth can avoid
punishment for misdeeds, before they develop the theory of mind necessary to
understand why it works. In this age of development, children will sometimes tell
outrageous and unbelievable lies, because they lack the conceptual framework to judge
whether a statement is believable, or even to understand the concept of believability.
When children first learn how lying works, they lack the moral understanding of
when to refrain from doing it. It takes years of watching people tell lies, and the results of
these lies, to develop a proper understanding. Propensity to lie varies greatly between
children, some doing so habitually and others being habitually honest. Habits in this
regard are likely to change in early adulthood.
MORALITY OF LYING
1. Lying is a perversion of the natural faculty of speech, the natural end of which is
to communicate the thoughts of the speaker.
2. When one lies, one undermines trust in society.
The Old Testament and the New Testament of the Bible both contain statements
that God cannot lie(Num 23:19, Ps 89:35, Hab. 2:3, Heb 6:13-18).
Various passages of the Bible feature exchanges that are conditionally critical of
lying (Prov 6:16-19, Ps. 5:6), (Lev 19:11, Pr. 14:5, Pr. 30:6, Zep 3:13), (Isa 28:15, Da
11:27). Most famously, in the Ten Commandments: “Thou shalt not bear fault witness”
(Exodus 20:2-17, Deutronomy 5:6-21), a specific reference to perjury.
• Rahab lied to the king of Jericho about hiding the Hebrew spies (Joshua 2:4-
5) and was not killed with those who were disobedient because of her faith
(Hebrews 11:31).
• Delilah repeatedly accused Samson of lying to her (Jg. 16:10, 13) as she
interrogated him about the source of his strength.
• Abraham instructs his wife, Sarah, to lie to the Egyptians and say that she is
his sister (Gen 12:10), which leads to the Lord punishing the Egyptians (Gen
12:17-19). However, it can be argued that this was not actually a lie as she
was, in fact, his half-sister (During the time of Abraham, it was not unheard of
for one to marry their half-brother or half-sister.)
In the New Testament, Jesus refers to the Devil as the father of lies (John 8:44)
and Paul commands Christians “Do not lie to one another” (Colossians 3:9, Cf. Leviticus
19:11). St. John Revelator reports that God said “..all liars shall have their part in the
lake which burneth with fire and brimstones: which is the second death.” (Rev 21: 8)
Whereas most Christian theologians conclude that the Bible does not contain any
intentional untruths, some scholars believe differently. Among those who conclude that
the Bible contains lies and intentional untruths is Thomas Jefferson. He edited his own
version of the Bible, Jefferson wrote of “so much untruths, charlatanism and imposture,”
“roguery”, “dupes and impostors”, “corruptor”, and “falsifications”.
In one worldwide research that was conducted which involved more than 2,000
people from nearly 60 countries, this question was asked: “When can you tell when
people are lying?” (Lock, 2004).
Gaze aversion is the most prevalent typical sign of deception. However, it does
not always mean that a person who can maintain eye contact is not lying.
Aside from gaze aversion, there are other telltale signs of deceptions that can be
unconsciously manifested by a liar.
TYPES OF LIES
1. White Lie – benign lie, honest lie, harmless lie, etc. It is the type of a lie perceived
or intended not to harm, but told in order to avoid distress or embarrassment. It is
usually in the form of a remark or comment that is not true however it must be
uttered to maintain friendship or harmony at home or in a workplace.
2. Red Lie – sometimes called misinformation. This is a line of information that is
seemingly valuable but it is intended to destroy a political belief or ideology. This can
also be better known as Politics Propaganda.
Strictly speaking, propaganda refers to an information or publicity put out by an
organization or government to spread and promote policy, idea, doctrine, or cause.
However, most propaganda is misleading publicity since these are in the form of
deceptive or distorted information that is systematically spread.
3. Malicious Lie - is a chronic (constant) lie that is intended to mislead justice. It is
usually in the form of pure dishonest statement for the purpose of obstructing justice.
Basically lying can be classified into three ways and say why people lie.
1. Habitual Lying: Some people use to tell lies as a habit whether good or bad. It is
purely a habit of lying for nothing and are not to take it seriously that it would be
against the interests of others and harmful for them. It is difficult to make them
realize that it is not good.
2. Compulsive Lying: in a few cases people are compelled to tell lies, the compulsion
being out of a self-based need or an external force. Such type of lying is known as
compulsive lying.
3. Delusive Lying: this type of lying is of worst nature because it is harmful to others. It
is highly deceptive in consequences with utmost bad intention of cheating others and
avoiding punishment.
Types of Liar
1. Panic Liar – this is a person who panics when questioned about his involvement
concerning a crime but immediately denies the truth to avoid shame or
humiliation that it might cause to his family. A panic liar decides to circumvent the
truth in order to avoid humiliation consequences of his confession to himself or to
his family.
2. Occupational Liar – this is an individual whose job is to tell lie and deceive other
people. One who is being paid to tell lies. He is practical liar – he will tell lie if
doing it provides a higher pay-off than telling the truth.
3. Tournament Liar – is a person who uses the act of lying to test his ability and
prove to himself that he is capable of deceiving the police or authorities. One who
is gratified by telling lies to mislead others. His view is that telling lies is one form
of contest.
4. Ethnological Liar – is a person trained to lie.
5. Psychopathic Liar – is an individual who has no conscience thus, capable of
lying to the point of causing death to other people.
6. Pathological Liar – is a sick person who tells a lie, simply because he cannot
distinguish what is right from what is wrong.
7. Black Liar – is one who enjoys pretending and better known as hypocrite.
The problem of determining who is lying and who is telling the truth is as old as
civilization. Since the birth of the first civilization, man has been searching ways to verify
facts, which is necessary to know the truth and detect deception. Early people had their
own ways to decide who were guilty and who were innocent. Suspected people who
were found to be lying were judged as the guilty party concerning crime under
investigation.
The idea that a person’s truthfulness can be detected may not be much more than a
throwback to ancient ideas of trial by ordeal. Primitive methods of detecting deception
were usually in the form of fortune and trial by ordeal. Some author takes trial separately
from ordeal. Trial by ordeal involves the practice of settling a dispute using divine
intervention or Judicium Dei (God’s Judgment).
Ordeal refers to the antiquated trial rooted on the practice of referring disputes to God’s
Judgment, determined either by lot or by certain trials. It is usually placing a suspect or
an accused to life-threatening danger. Whatever the outcome is it reflects divine
judgment. Today, ordeal is basically regarded as a physical test that usually involves
painful experience.
Throughout Europe, before the 14th century, ordeal existed in various forms under the
sanction of law and was closely related to oath. The most prevalent kinds of ordeal were
fire, water, and the wager of battle.
1. Red Hot Iron Ordeal – practiced in North Bengal. The accused had to carry a bar
of red-hot iron in his hands while he walked nine marked paces. In the unlikely
event of
no burns appearing on his hands, he was adjudged innocent. Otherwise, he was
promptly hanged.
2. Wager of Battle – the judgment of God was thought to determine the winner, and
the defeated party was allowed to live a recreant, that is, on retracing the perjury
that had been sworn.
3. Ordeal by Balance – practiced by the Institute of Vishnu, India. A scale of balance
is used in one end of the scale is placed and in the other end is a counter balance.
The person will step out of the scale and listen to a judge to deliver an exhortation
on the balance and get back in. If he was found lighter than before, then he should
be acquitted.
4. Ordeal by Water – the water was symbolic of the flood of the Old Testament,
washing sin from the face of the earth, allowing only the righteous minority to
survive.
There are two kinds of ordeal by water, The Boiling Water and the Cold Water.
Ordeal by water was the usual mode of trial allowed to members of the lower class.
a. Boiling Water – according to Athelstan, the first King of England, the ordeal of
boiling water consisted of lifting a stone out of the boiling water, with the hand
inserted as deep as the wrist. More serious offense demanded that that arm was
submerged up to the elbow. The burn was bandaged for three days before fateful
examination.
b. Cold Water – this ordeal has a precedent in the code of Hammurabi, where a
man accused of sorcery is to be submerged in a stream and acquitted if he
survives. The practice occurred in Frankish law and was abolished by Louis the
Pious in 829. The practice did re-appear in the Late Middle Ages, however. In the
Dreieicher Wildbann of 1338, a man accused of poaching is to be submerged in
a barrel three times, and to be considered guilty if he sinks to the bottom.
5. Ordeal by Rice Chewing – it is performed with a kind of rice called sathee,
prepared with various incantations. The person on trial eats the sathee, with the
face to the east and then spits upon a pea leaf. If saliva is mixed with blood or the
corner of his mouth swells or he trembles, he is declared to be a liar. Indians
practice this ordeal.
6. Ordeal of the Red Water – the ordeal of the “sassy bark” or red water is used in
the wide region of Eastern Africa. The accused is made to fast for twelve hours, and
then swallows a small amount of rice. He is then immersed into dark colored water.
The water is actually emetic and if the suspect ejects all the rice, he is considered
innocent of the charge. Otherwise, the accused is guilty.
7. Ordeal by Combat – the aggrieved party claimed the right to fight the alleged
offender or to pay a champion to fight for him. The victor is said to win not by his
own strength but because of supernatural powers that had intervened on the side of
the right, as in the duel in the European Ages in which the “judgment of God was
thought to determine the winner.” If still alive after the combat, the loser might be
hanged or burned for a criminal offense or have a hand cut off and property
confiscated in civil actions.
In England, King Henry III abolished all legal ordeals except Ordeal by Combat.
This ordeal was vividly dramatized in the movie “Ivanhoe” based on the novel of the
same title.
8. Ordeal by Corsnaed (Ordeal by Blessed Bread) – a priest puts the corsnaed or
hallowed bread into the mouth of the accused, with various imprecations. If the
accused swallowed it he was freed from punishment.
9. Ordeal of Ingestion - Franconian law prescribed that an accused was to be given
dry bread and cheese blessed by a priest. If he choked on the food, he was
considered guilty. This was transformed into the ordeal of the Eucharist (trial by
sacrament) mentioned by Regino of Prüm ca. 900: the accused was to take the
Eucharist after a solemn oath professing his innocence. It was believed that if the
oath had been false, the criminal would die within the same year. This was applied
chiefly among the clergy and monks. When they took the host it was believed that
God would smite the guilty with sickness or death. Others believe that if the
accused is innocent, when given a poisonous drink for him to take in, Angel Gabriel
will descend the accused from taking in the poisonous drink.
Another version states: "The priest wrote the Lord's Prayer on a piece of bread,
of which he then weighed out ten pennyweights, and so likewise with the cheese.
Under the right foot of the accused, he set a cross of poplar wood, and holding
another cross of the same material over the man's head, threw over his head the
theft written on a tablet. He placed the bread and cheese at the same moment in the
mouth of the accused, and, on doing so, recited the conjuration: 'I exorcize thee,
most unclean dragon, ancient serpent, dark night, by the word of truth, and the sign
of light, by our Lord Jesus Christ, the immaculate Lamb generated by the Most High,
that bread and cheese may not pass thy gullet and throat, but that thou mayest
tremble like an aspenleaf, Amen; and not have rest, O man, until thou dost vomit it
forth with blood, if thou hast committed aught in the matter of the aforesaid theft.'"
Numbers 5:12–27 prescribes that a woman suspected of adultery should be
made to swallow "the bitter water that causeth the curse" by the priest in order to
determine her guilt. The accused would be condemned only if 'her belly shall swell
and her thigh shall rot'. It is known as the Sotah. One writer has recently argued that
the procedure has a rational basis, envisioning punishment only upon clear proof of
pregnancy (a swelling belly) or venereal disease (a rotting thigh).
10. Ordeal of the Bier – it was an ancient belief that the slain dead could point out their
killer. In England, it was customary for the accused to approach the bier where the
corpse lay. In the view of the witness, the wounds of the victim were observed to
see if they began to bleed again. They believe that the murderer is near which
causes the blood to flow out from the wound of the victim. This ordeal was recorded
well by
Shakespeare in “Richard III.”
11. Ordeal of the Needle – a red-hot needle was made to pierce the lower lip of the
alleged criminal and if blood flowed from the wound, he was deemed guilty, but if
none he is innocent. Wanaka, eastern Africa practiced this ordeal.
12. Ordeal by Heat and Fire – the accused walked bare footed over red hot coals, or
was made to walk through fire, if he was unharmed by fire he was considered
innocent.
13. Trial of the Cross – the ordeal of the cross was apparently introduced in the Early
Middle Ages by the church in an attempt to discourage judicial duels among the
Germanic peoples. As with judicial duels and unlike most other ordeals the accuser
had to undergo the ordeal together with the accused. They stood on either side of a
cross and stretched out their hands horizontally. The one to first lower his arms lost.
This ordeal was prescribed by Charlemagne in 779 and again in 806. On the other
hand, a decree of Lothar I, recorded in 876, abolished the ordeal so as to avoid the
mockery of Christ.
14. Trial of the Waxen Shirt – the accused was dressed in cloth covered with wax and
walked barefooted over burning coals. If he was unhurt by the fire and the wax did
not melt, he was considered innocent.
15. Hereditary Sieve Method – Hans Gross, the Father of Criminalistics, in his famous
book in criminal investigation in which beans thrown into a sievel. If the beans jump
out of the sieve, the owner of the sieve is innocent. If the beans remained in the
sieve, the person is named a thief.
16. Donkey’s Tail Order – as a psychological theory, a donkey is placed in a room
alone and observed. If the donkey cried a judgment of guilt in crimes, is pressured.
It is believed that deep inside one’s conscience, he is guilty.
17. Ordeal of the Tiger – practiced in Siam, the accused and the accuser are placed in
a cage. If a tiger spare one of them he is considered innocent.
Burma – the ordeal by divination is being practiced in this country, whereby the two
contesting parties are furnished with candles of equal size and lighted simultaneously,
the owner of the candle and the outlasts the other is adjudged to win his cause.
Madagascar – legal authorities practiced Trial by Ordeal. The supposed criminal was to
drink, a poisonous fruit called “tangena”, a small dose can be fatal. By managing the
size of the dose, those who administer it can decide result.
Borneo – the accuser and the accused were presented shellfish placed on a plate. An
irritating fluid was then poured on the shellfish and the litigant whose shellfish moved
first was adjudged the winner.
Greece – a suspended axe was spun at the center of a group of suspects. Soon as the
axe stopped, whoever was in the line with the axe’s blade was supposed to be guilty out
by the Divine Providence.
Nigeria – the priest greased a cock’s feather and pierced the tongue of the accused, if
feather passed through the tongue easily, the accused was deemed innocent. If not, the
accused is guilty. Another method practiced in the same country is the pouring of the
corrosive liquid into the eyes of the accused who was supposed to be unharmed if
innocent. Pouring of boiling oil over the hand of the accused with usual requisites for
guilt or innocence is also practiced.
In the middle of the 13 th century, the ordeal had died out in England and on the other
Continents.
b. Concealment Test
c. Card Test