Svobodny F. K.
Citation: Svobodny F. K. Some Problems of Polygraph Examination in Crime Detection. Psychopedagogy in Law Enforcement. Vol. 24. No 4(79). 2019. Pp. 375–382 (In Russ.). DOI: 10. 24411/1999-6241-2019-14004
Для цитирования: Свободный Ф. К. Некоторые проблемы исследований на полиграфе в рамках оперативно-розыскной деятельности // Психопедагогика в правоохранительных органах. 2019. Т. 24, № 4(79). С. 375–382. DOI: 10. 24411/1999-6241-2019-14004
Full text: Svobodny F. K. Some Problems of Polygraph Examination in Crime Detection
Abstract
Introduction. Using a polygraph in crime detection is effective for criminal investigation, however, it causes a range of urgent scientific and practical problems that require analysis and solution. Materials and Methods. The data included investigative and court files (over 300 criminal cases). The methods comprised: self-analysis of the authors’ personal experience concerning 1,000 conducted researches and expert examinations using the polygraph; interviewing; questioning of interrogators, investigators, experts and examinees (152 respondents), specialists conducting researches and expert examinations with the polygraph according to the law enforcement organs’ rulings (152 respondents). Results and Discussion. The author reveals such problems of polygraph use in crime detection as theoretically arguable role of polygraph in the structure of crime detection measures; examinee’s acquiring polygraph experience; specialist’s informing of the examinee about details of a crime; superficial nature of “operative” polygraph examinations; specialist’s and expert’s unequal statuses. The mentioned peculiarities of polygraph use negatively influence the results of the following forensic polygraph examination and cause harm to the system of evidence on a criminal case. Conclusions. To increase effectiveness of criminal investigation it is suggested to exclude polygraph examinations with regard to such crime detection measure as questioning and give them criminal procedural status as a source of evidence.
Keywords: crime detection, crime detection measure, questioning, polygraph, psychological experimen, forensic examination.
Main Provisions
- Including polygraph examination into such measure of crime detection as questioning is inappropriate, as it answers neither the essence of questioning as a process of obtaining verbal information nor the essence of polygraph examination as a psychological experiment.
- The examinee’s acquiring of the experience of polygraph examination in crime detection field, informing about the details of the investigated crime, superficial nature of “operative” polygraph examinations; unequal legal statuses of a specialist conducting polygraph examination for crime detection and a forensic expert negatively influence the results of the following forensic polygraph examination and can cause harm to the system of evidence on a criminal case.
- To solve the identified problems it is suggested to exclude polygraph examinations with regard to such crime detection measure as questioning and conduct this examination either as a means of an operative psychological profiling of a person or as a separate examination (expertise) which results will be a source of evidence, that is applicable beyond crime detection.
References
1. Vinogradov M. V., Kasperovich Yu. G., Karavaev A. F. Improving the Psychophysiological Methods for Assessing the Reliability of Information given by a Person. Psychopedagogy in Law Enforcement. No 4 (75). 2018. Pp. 96–102. (In Russ.)
2. Blackstone K. E., Plaud J. J. The Polygraph. Chapter 4. Toolkit for Working with Juvenile Sex Offenders, 2014. Pр. 89–119.
3. Elaad E. Reviving the discussion on the rationale underlying the Comparison Question Test. Percept Mot Skills. Vol. 119(2). 2014. Pр. 43–49.
4. Mao Y., Liang Y., Hu Z. Accuracy rate of lie-detection in China: Estimate the validity of CQT on field cases. Physiology & Behavior. Vol. 140. 2015. Pр. 104–110.
5. Hasan S., May L., Satar A. Establishing Mutual Trust of Bonds in the Working Alliance from the Perspective of Polygraph (Lie-detector): An Exploratory Study of Counsellor Competency in Malaysia. Procedia — Social and Behavioral Sciences. Vol. 84. 2013. Pр. 1523–1528.
6. Ushakov A.Yu., Berkovich O. E. The Main Trends of Using Polygraph in Criminal Investigation in Russia and abroad at the present stage. Legal Science and Practice: Journal of Nizhny Novgorod academy of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia. No 1(29). 2015. Pp. 183–186. (In Russ.)
7. Widacki J. Polygraph Examination in Criminal Cases. Current Polish Practice. A Critical Study. European Polygraph. Vol. 6. No 4(22). 2012. Pр. 249–256.
8. Budahazi A. Conditions and Requirements of Polygraph Examination. European Polygraph. Vol. 6. No 3(21). 2012. Рр. 161–181.
9. Varlamov V. A. Lie detector. Мoscow, 2004. 357 p. (In Russ.)
10. Wilcox D. T., Gray R. The Use of the Polygraph with Sex Offenders in the UK. European Polygraph. Vol. 6. No 1(19). 2012. Pр. 55–67.
11. Stempkowski M. Polygraph in Austria. European Polygraph. Vol. 7. No 2(24). 2013. Pр. 77–84.
12. Seliс P. Complementary Use of Profiling and Polygraph Method in Slovenia During the Period 1997–2004. European Polygraph. Vol. 6. No 2(20). 2012. Pр. 103–116.
13. Stepanov А. А., Shananin M. G. Using the Results of Crime Detection in Conducting Investigative Actions. St. Petersburg, 2005. 60 p. (In Russ.)
14. Crime Detection. Ed. by Klimov I. A. Мoscow, 2016. 407 p. (In Russ.)
15. Belkin R. S. Encyclopedia on Criminalistics. Moscow, 2000. 334 p. (In Russ.)
16. Mikhaylov V. I. Controlled Delivery as a Crime Detection Operation. Ed. by Shumilov A.Yu. Мoscow, 1998. 96 p. (In Russ.)
17. Crime Detection Theory. Ed. by Goryainov K. K., Ovchinsky V. S., Sinilov G. K. Мoscow, 2006. 223 p. (In Russ.)
18. Kholodny Yu. I. Polygraph Usage: A Hard Way of Terminology Evolution. Legal Psychology. No 2. 2012. Pp. 32–36. (In Russ.)
19. Моzyakov V. V. Guidelines for Investigators. Мoscow, 2005. 912 p. (In Russ.)
20. Toym K. Associative Experiment in Psychodiagnostics of the 19th century. Tartu University Scientific Notes. No 465. 1978. Pp. 106–121. (In Russ.)
21. Luria A. R. Psychology to Define Traces of Crime. The Word of Sciences. No 3. 1928. Pp. 79–92. (In Russ.)
22. Ogloblin S. I., Molchanov A. Yu. Instrumental “Lie Detection”: academic course. Yaroslavl, 2004. 447 p. (In Russ.)
23. Zubrilova I. S., Skrypnikov A. I. Use of Polygraph in Crime Detection conducted by Police. Мoscow, 1999. 117 p. (In Russ.)
Submitted 15.02.2019