I have been fighting the evil insidious Orwellian polygraph industry for almost 40 years now. To make a long story short, I have been crusading against the thugs who perpetrate the fraud of claiming that the polygraph is accurate and reliable as a “lie detector”. The basis of this lawsuit is simply this: Using the polygraph as a "lie detector" is a fraud. Millions of people have been damaged as a result of agents of the US federal government perpetrating this fraud, and therefore, are entitled to damages as a result. One of the high points of my crusade, which started in 1979, was working with the congress in drafting legislation which ultimately became the EMPLOYEE POLYGRAPH PROTECTION ACT. I not only helped draft the House and Senate bills, I testified in a congressional hearing and lobbied for passage of this legislation. I even went on CBS 60 MINUTES and proved the so-called "lie detector test' was nothing but a sick joke and should be banned. And, in 1988, it was banned in the private sector. But, my fight was and continues to be a very dangerous proposition. As Voltaire said, "It is dangerous to be right with the government is wrong". I was sent to prison for 21 months because I "protested the loudest and the longest against the polygraph". But, the mere fact that the US federal government prosecuted and imprisoned me for teaching two federal agents how to "beat" a polygraph test is prima facie evidence the polygraph is worthless as a "lie detector".
My fight is far from over, while in prison, I spent a great deal of time working with Jack Straw to write the book about my crusade, FALSE CONFESSIONS, and we worked up a basis for a class-action lawsuit. I think we've come up with a good idea.
I have also been soliciting people to tell me their stories about how they were harmed by polygraph operators who violated this federal law. I have one who has documented his abuse at the hands of the government polygraph operators and he has a great deal of evidence in his possession. He has been through the ringer with the DOD and has gone though a very extensive appeal process – all of which is documented, and which he has shared with me – and it is overwhelming evidence proving that he has been harmed by this agency and agents of this agency who not only violated the DOD regulations concerning polygraph examination, but violated the federal law by ignoring provisions of section 2007 of the EPPA.
At POLYGRAPH.COM, we have composed a list of 24 points of action that justify a class-action lawsuit, this list, and the accompanying grounds for a lawsuit, are clearly delineated here. This information will be given to any law firm requesting it.
As I said, there are literally hundreds of thousands of people who have been harmed by the ILLEGAL actions of the polygraph operators. The most egregious of these harmful actions were at the hands of federal polygraph examiners.
The EMPLOYEE POLYGRAPH PROTECTION ACT (EPPA) prohibits the use of the polygraph in the private sector as a condition of employment or continued employment. But there were exclusions written into this law that allows polygraph examinations to be administered to those seeking employment with the federal, state and local governments. Section 2006 of the EPPA grants permission to those agencies involved in intelligence and law enforcement to administer these polygraph examinations.
But section 2007 (shown below) sets forth the conditions under which these tests can be administered. These conditions and requirements are NEVER adhered to. Which means that people who applied for jobs or who are removed from their positions or had their security clearances canceled as a result of a polygraph examination - an examination which was administered by polygraph operators who violated federal law in the process should be entitled to damages.
In short, anyone who is harmed by a federal agent’s actions - which are a violation of federal law - I believe should be grounds for a lawsuit.
Again, I don’t know what we have to do to get a class-action lawsuit on behalf of these hundreds of thousands of people, but I do believe we have grounds for a tort action since these people were harmed by the ILLEGAL actions of federal polygraph operators.
Below, I have listed the applicable section (2007) of the EPPA. And remember these requirements are routinely violated particularly by agents of the federal government.
(a)Test as basis for adverse employment action
(1)Under ongoing investigations exemption
Except as provided in paragraph (2), the exemption under subsection (d) of section 2006 of this title shall not apply if an employee is discharged, disciplined, denied employment or promotion, or otherwise discriminated against in any manner on the basis of the analysis of a polygraph test chart or the refusal to take a polygraph test, without additional supporting evidence. The evidence required by such subsection may serve as additional supporting evidence.
(2)Under other exemptions
In the case of an exemption described in subsection (e) or (f) of such section, the exemption shall not apply if the results of an analysis of a polygraph test chart are used, or the refusal to take a polygraph test is used, as the sole basis upon which an adverse employment action described in paragraph (1) is taken against an employee or prospective employee.
(b)Rights of examineeThe exemptions provided under subsections (d), (e), and (f) of section 2006 of this title shall not apply unless the requirements described in the following paragraphs are met:
(1)All phasesThroughout all phases of the test—
the examinee shall be permitted to terminate the test at any time;
the examinee is not asked questions in a manner designed to degrade, or needlessly intrude on, such examinee;
(C)the examinee is not asked any question concerning—
religious beliefs or affiliations,
beliefs or opinions regarding racial matters,
political beliefs or affiliations,
any matter relating to sexual behavior; and
beliefs, affiliations, opinions, or lawful activities regarding unions or labor organizations; and
the examiner does not conduct the test if there is sufficient written evidence by a physician that the examinee is suffering from a medical or psychological condition or undergoing treatment that might cause abnormal responses during the actual testing phase.
(2)Pretest phaseDuring the pretest phase, the prospective examinee—
is provided with reasonable written notice of the date, time, and location of the test, and of such examinee’s right to obtain and consult with legal counsel or an employee representative before each phase of the test;
is informed in writing of the nature and characteristics of the tests and of the instruments involved;
(C)is informed, in writing—
whether the testing area contains a two-way mirror, a camera, or any other device through which the test can be observed,
whether any other device, including any device for recording or monitoring the test, will be used, or
that the employer or the examinee may (with mutual knowledge) make a recording of the test;
(D)is read and signs a written notice informing such examinee—
that the examinee cannot be required to take the test as a condition of employment,
that any statement made during the test may constitute additional supporting evidence for the purposes of an adverse employment action described in subsection (a),
of the limitations imposed under this section,
of the legal rights and remedies available to the examinee if the polygraph test is not conducted in accordance with this chapter, and
of the legal rights and remedies of the employer under this chapter (including the rights of the employer under section 2008(c)(2) of this title); and
is provided an opportunity to review all questions to be asked during the test and is informed of the right to terminate the test at any time.
(3)Actual testing phase
During the actual testing phase, the examiner does not ask such examinee any question relevant during the test that was not presented in writing for review to such examinee before the test.
(4)Post-test phaseBefore any adverse employment action, the employershall—
further interview the examinee on the basis of the results of the test; and
(B)provide the examinee with—
a written copy of any opinion or conclusion rendered as a result of the test, and
a copy of the questions asked during the test along with the corresponding charted responses.
(5)Maximum number and minimum duration of tests
The examiner shall not conduct and complete more than five polygraph tests on a calendar day on which the test is given, and shall not conduct any such test for less than a 90-minute duration.
(c)Qualifications and requirements of examinersThe exemptions provided under subsections (d), (e), and (f) of section 2006 of this title shall not apply unless the individual who conducts the polygraph test satisfies the requirements under the following paragraphs:
has a valid and current license granted by licensing and regulatory authorities in the State in which the test is to be conducted, if so required by the State; and
maintains a minimum of a $50,000 bond or an equivalent amount of professional liability coverage.
(A)renders any opinion or conclusion regarding the test—
in writing and solely on the basis of an analysis of polygraph test charts,
that does not contain information other than admissions, information, case facts, and interpretation of the charts relevant to the purpose and stated objectives of the test, and
that does not include any recommendation concerning the employment of the examinee; and
maintains all opinions, reports, charts, written questions, lists, and other records relating to the test for a minimum period of 3 years after administration of the test.
If you have been harmed, denied employment, or had unfavorable action taken against you due to a “failed” polygraph test please contact me with your story and I will add you to the list of people who may be candidates to participate in this class-action lawsuit.