What happens if A polygraph is failed? (Army, Marine, training)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Procedures might have changed, particularly after Manning and Snowden, but I held a TS/SCI for 26 years and only got polygraphed when I went to work directly with the CIA for a year.
In that case, there had been a compromise agreement between CIA and DoD that we military would get a DIA administered polygraph--not the CIA "lifestyle" polygraph. My understanding is that about 30% of uniformed troops failed the CIA polygraph...because they got up and quit it. They'd rather go back to their regular military intel jobs than put up with that CIA junk.
One thing I did derive from that polygraph is that a major point seemed to be making sure you were a person who was "decryptable" by polygraph.
There were three particular questions I had trouble with. First, the examiner read me Article 31, then plugged me in. He asked about half an hour of "set up" questions to figure out how my responses worked.
Then he said, "Have you ever exaggerated about yourself to impress someone else? You must answer, 'No.'"
I asked him, "Does that include high school?"
So he totally disconnected me from the machine, assumed a priestly expression, and said, "Well, what incidents came to mind when I asked that question? You can tell me anything...I've heard everything."
Yeah. Like I'd forgotten he'd read me Article 31.
So I told him one particular situation with a girl when I was a senior that had always been on my conscience. He explained, "We're really only concerned about things like lying on a resume to get a job you're not qualified for."
So he re-connected me back to the machine and asked, "Except for the incident you told me about, have you ever exaggerated about yourself to impress someone else? You must answer, 'No.'"
Well, if the interest was on official stuff like lying on a resume, I had no problem saying "no."
"Have you ever made a mistake at work that you didn't tell your supervisor about? You must answer, "No."
Did he mean, like, today?
So he disconnected me from the machine again and assumed the priestly expression. Okay, maybe from time to time I'd made a mistake on a report, pulled it before it hit edit, and made corrections--without telling my boss. He explained that they were concerned about "cover ups" of serious failings that would cause harm to persons or damage to equipment. Well, no, I'd never screwed up like that. So, he reconnected me to the machine and asked, "Except for minor incidents such as we discussed...."
Then he asked, "Do you consider yourself an absolutely honest individual? You must answer, 'Yes.'"
Well, dang, Jesus is an absolutely honest individual. Me...I've thought about cheating once or twice, so I must not be absolutely honest.
We went through the same rigamarole until he could say, "Except for those things...."
Clearly, those kinds of questions were intended to "throw me off my game" if I was trying to game the test. It was after that that he asked "real" questions like, "Have you ever transferred classified material to an unauthorized person?"
At any rate, failing a military polygraph means you don't get that particular job.
Procedures might have changed, particularly after Manning and Snowden, but I held a TS/SCI for 26 years and only got polygraphed when I went to work directly with the CIA for a year.
In that case, there had been a compromise agreement between CIA and DoD that we military would get a DIA administered polygraph--not the CIA "lifestyle" polygraph. My understanding is that about 30% of uniformed troops failed the CIA polygraph...because they got up and quit it. They'd rather go back to their regular military intel jobs than put up with that CIA junk.
One thing I did derive from that polygraph is that a major point seemed to be making sure you were a person who was "decryptable" by polygraph.
There were three particular questions I had trouble with. First, the examiner read me Article 31, then plugged me in. He asked about half an hour of "set up" questions to figure out how my responses worked.
Then he said, "Have you ever exaggerated about yourself to impress someone else? You must answer, 'No.'"
I asked him, "Does that include high school?"
So he totally disconnected me from the machine, assumed a priestly expression, and said, "Well, what incidents came to mind when I asked that question? You can tell me anything...I've heard everything."
Yeah. Like I'd forgotten he'd read me Article 31.
So I told him one particular situation with a girl when I was a senior that had always been on my conscience. He explained, "We're really only concerned about things like lying on a resume to get a job you're not qualified for."
So he re-connected me back to the machine and asked, "Except for the incident you told me about, have you ever exaggerated about yourself to impress someone else? You must answer, 'No.'"
Well, if the interest was on official stuff like lying on a resume, I had no problem saying "no."
"Have you ever made a mistake at work that you didn't tell your supervisor about? You must answer, "No."
Did he mean, like, today?
So he disconnected me from the machine again and assumed the priestly expression. Okay, maybe from time to time I'd made a mistake on a report, pulled it before it hit edit, and made corrections--without telling my boss. He explained that they were concerned about "cover ups" of serious failings that would cause harm to persons or damage to equipment. Well, no, I'd never screwed up like that. So, he reconnected me to the machine and asked, "Except for minor incidents such as we discussed...."
Then he asked, "Do you consider yourself an absolutely honest individual? You must answer, 'Yes.'"
Well, dang, Jesus is an absolutely honest individual. Me...I've thought about cheating once or twice, so I must not be absolutely honest.
We went through the same rigamarole until he could say, "Except for those things...."
Clearly, those kinds of questions were intended to "throw me off my game" if I was trying to game the test. It was after that that he asked "real" questions like, "Have you ever transferred classified material to an unauthorized person?"
At any rate, failing a military polygraph means you don't get that particular job.
Thank you for sharing your experience, that makes me feel a lot better. So it sounds like you didn't have to take the lifestyle polygraph then? I was really interested in being a CTN but I'm afraid that since I've tried drugs once or twice 5 years ago that it would screw me over if there was a lifestyle poly
The polygraph only measures how stressed out you are by the questions. If your readings go through the ceiling whenever they ask a question, they'll assume that means you're lying. They would be happy to see a job history showing the ability to keep things confidential; a write-up for a breach of privacy might well disqualify you.
The only drug history that will disqualify you is a current, ongoing one.
Bygeorge, Great advice on the honesty, but for the most part, any drug use other than marijuana is disqualifying for military service. We've gotten stricter over the years. For the Air Force, there isn't even a waiver. One hit of ecstasy= lifetime disqualification, one hit of meth=lifetime disqualification, etc.
Bygeorge, Great advice on the honesty, but for the most part, any drug use other than marijuana is disqualifying for military service. We've gotten stricter over the years. For the Air Force, there isn't even a waiver. One hit of ecstasy= lifetime disqualification, one hit of meth=lifetime disqualification, etc.
So if I've tried a few drugs ears ago only once then that would mean I couldn't get a TS clearance? I haven't done anything like for 4 or 5 years now
Bygeorge, Great advice on the honesty, but for the most part, any drug use other than marijuana is disqualifying for military service. We've gotten stricter over the years. For the Air Force, there isn't even a waiver. One hit of ecstasy= lifetime disqualification, one hit of meth=lifetime disqualification, etc.
Ummm..., not anymore.
If you read Obama's autobiographies, you know he spent a good part of his youth experimenting with all kinds of dope, including cocaine. Really tough to rule out good candidates when the CINC was a doper as a kid.
Once upon a time, one hit of anything as a civilian or a minor was exclusionary. That ended years ago. The only drug I am aware of that is permanently exclusionary is LSD-25, because its residue hides in your fat cells and can re-emerge later (they used to call that a flashback). No one uses that drug anymore. If you spent ten years as a serious poly-drug user, or got high last week, you aren't going to get into the military, let alone get a clearance. If you experimented with a little weed when you were a kid, that's kinda' normal. We got over that years ago.
If you did any of the following things, don't apply for a job that requires a poly: murder, rape, armed robbery, theft over $10 grand, narcotics trafficking, drug dealing (that means made a profit, not just handed a joint to a friend), or stole classified information. You will get caught. If you didn't do any of those things (or similar felonies), I would recommend you not be concerned about the exam.
I had a TS/SCI with a whole bunch of initials after that - took lots of polys for different agencies and later was a first-level approval authority for a administering exams. Most of the officers and agents I worked with had experimented with something when they were a kid, and fully disclosed it. Most had clearances that were as high or higher than mine.
My advice: Don't sweat trying some dope when you were a kid. Admit it and get it out of the way. Lifestyle polys are rare today and a lot different than they were back in my day; you only take those if you get into programs where really, really sensitive collection platforms (like, the kind with a pulse) are involved.
Here's what the exam will be like, and none of this is a secret:
Think of the interview process is a short term (2 - 3 hour) relationship. You have a goal and the poligrapher has a goal. Cooperate, be friendly, be truthful and both goals get met. They hire (or periodically clear) a quality intel asset and you get the job you want. Lying just prolongs the process, because then you have to endure the post-test interrogation and re-examination.
You will know every single question you will be asked before the test. This is called the pre-test phase, and it is where you and the examiner get little issues out of the way - like you experimented with weed when you were a civilian under 21, and you swiped $100 from a cash register at the hobby shop that employed you when you were 16. More importantly, you and the examiner agree on the definitions of the words that are going to be used. If you have a problem with the way a question is worded, this is where you tell him. He'll restructure the question to avoid you thinking about the wrong thing while he's trying to get you to answer the question he has to ask.
Depending on the examiner, you will get asked 10 - 12 questions per series. Only 3 or 4 questions are relevant. You will not know which ones those are. (Okay, 'Is my necktie red?' is not a relevant question, unless they are testing you for color-blindness.) The series will be repeated a couple times. The reason is that the scoring is mathematical. Don't worry about it - the examiner gets paid a lot of money to calculate the difference between positive 3 and negative 3. Just humor the guy, be polite, answer his questions with a truthful yes or no, and move on to your new career.
You should also know that poligraphers are specifically selected for their ability to interact with people, especially nervous applicants. As a rule they are really nice guys or gals - they have to be to get hired into that position. Of all the ones who tested me, only one tried to fool me with a lie later in my career (he didn't know I could read a polygram). To be fair, he looked very, very overworked. He was CIA.) The other Agency poligrapher didn't try to lie to me and was as polite as I was.) The rest of the guys and gals were just trying to get both goals met.
Good luck; think positive and go get the job you want!
So if I've tried a few drugs ears ago only once then that would mean I couldn't get a TS clearance? I haven't done anything like for 4 or 5 years now
I don't know how it would affect a clearance, because the clearance is more concerned about your honesty... but it would likely mean you couldn't get into the military at all. You're talking about enlisting in the Navy, or merely working for the Navy as a civilian? You should speak to your recruiter.
A counter intelligence polygraph is required by military members assigned to the 3 letter agencies. Active duty military don't have to do a lifestyle polygraph.
Bygeorge, Great advice on the honesty, but for the most part, any drug use other than marijuana is disqualifying for military service. We've gotten stricter over the years. For the Air Force, there isn't even a waiver. One hit of ecstasy= lifetime disqualification, one hit of meth=lifetime disqualification, etc.
And so it should be that way.. We all make choices.. some make better ones then others. I for one, am glad to see this.
For someone to be shaken up about the fact they are going to be taking a polygraph test tells me all I need to know about this person. There are skeleton's in their closet. Not to say they are not fit for service.. but really why be concerned about a polygraph unless you are truly hiding something?
And so it should be that way.. We all make choices.. some make better ones then others. I for one, am glad to see this.
For someone to be shaken up about the fact they are going to be taking a polygraph test tells me all I need to know about this person. There are skeleton's in their closet. Not to say they are not fit for service.. but really why be concerned about a polygraph unless you are truly hiding something?
Because the poly is bunk science, that is why. So for many people, they are naturally a bit concerned getting tagged with lying, yet there is no recourse for them to prove otherwise. Someone gets tagged for lying about drug use in the past, it is impossible for them to prove otherwise, so it creates a fallacy, prove you did not do something.
That and along with other BS, like there are "goals" for the examiners, and their rates are compared with others. The poly has been cited as one reason for the 9/11 intel failures; the CIA was still recovering from the witch hunt from the fallout from Aldrich Ames, who by the way passed the polygraphs just fine...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
