Info/News

Licensed, Professional Polygraph Examiner in Dallas- Ft Worth TX Professional, Trained, Highly-Experienced, Affordable


Near Dallas Parkway-Tollway Serving Businesses, Attorneys & families in North Texas, DFW, suburbs- Addison, Allen, Frisco, FlowerMound, Carrollton, Colleyville, Grapevine, Lewsiville, Garland, Highland Park, Richardson, Mesquite, Plano, Irving, Hurst, Euless, Bedford, North Richland Hills, McKinney, surrounding



April 1, 2017 Moved To New Offices
4100 Spring Valley
Suite 628
Dallas, Texas 75244
PHONE: (903) 488-5111

Read More

Dallas Lie Detectors Sex Offender Monitoring

In 1973 Courts in New York and Oregon began requiring probationers to undergo polygraph testing. Tests were offered as a condition of probation and those who declined to participate were sentenced to jail. As time passed, the courts found that recidivism of those undergoing periodic polygraph testing dropped to around 10% while those not being tested had a recidivism rate of nearly 80%. In the late 1970's polygraph was integrated into Sex Offender Treatment Programs in Oregon. In 1996, the State of Oregon concluded a 10-year follow-up program on those convicted offenders who underwent polygraph supervision. That study found only 6% had re-offended and overall less than 10% had additional legal problems.

In Texas the Joint Committee on Offender Testing or JPCOT was formed and now most treatment programs requires periodic polygraph testing as an aid in monitoring Offender behavior and to provide treatment information in the areas of sexual history and overcoming denial.

Referral Form

Legal History


  • Frye Vs United States (1923): The Frye case set the legal precedent for non-admissibility of polygraph testimony. Frey required polygraph testimony (and other forms of scientific evidence) to have "General acceptance within the Scientific Community."
  • Picionna Vs United States (1988): The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the Frye Decision and ruled Polygraph testing was scientifically accepted and admitted testimony for limited use.
  • Daubert Vs Merrill Dow Pharmaceuticals (1993): The United States Supreme Court abandoned the Frye decision and deferred to Rule 702, of the Federal Rules of Evidence.
  • Posada Vs United States (1995): Posada admitted polygraph testing within the 5th Circuit of the United States Court Appeals.
  • State of Kansas Vs Stephen Medford Shively (SNDC, 1996): The trial court ruled Polygraph testing was reliable and testimony should be admitted over the objections of the State of Kansas.


Basic Polygraph Theory


When individuals lie about something that they fear will have adverse consequences if discovered, the lie evokes physiological changes that can be monitored and recorded. It is the fear of the detection of deception that caused the physiological reactions.

The training and experience of the examiner are critical if valid diagnostic opinions are to be formed. In Texas and many states polygraph examiners are required to be licensed, have specialized formal training and must pass a rigorous board examination and participate in on-going continuing education.

Within the polygraph test environment, the polygraph subject is introduced to a series of stimuli in the form of questions. These questions are carefully developed and each serves a specific purpose. "Relevant" questions deal specifically with the matter under investigation and the results of responses to these are returned in a written report format.

Within the polygraph setting, the polygraph subject will react to those questions that cause the greatest perceived threat to their well being. Obviously, the relevant questions pose the greatest threat to the deceptive subject while an innocent person is not particular concerned about something they did not participate in.

Drug and Alcohol Effects on Polygraph


Over the years substantial research has been conducted on the effects of drugs and alcohol on polygraph testing. Generally the use of alcohol has minimal effect on the outcome of a polygraph test. The key factor is whether or not the polygraph subject "knows" an act was committed. It is not generally necessary to remember all the intricate details.

Drugs are often suspected in attempts to employ countermeasure to polygraph tests, however, Dallas Lie Detectors examiners will not test individuals who they suspect are under the influence of drugs (legal or illegal). Research has shown there is no drug that will enable someone to "pass" a properly prepared and administered polygraph test. It is possible for drugs to reduce autonomic activity to such a degree that a valid opinion cannot be formed. In fact, a subject may risk inadvertently failing an examination as there is no "smart drug" that help or hurt the results of the tests. This lack of response effect is rare and when discovered it just renders the examination as "inconclusive" and is cause to re-set the appointment for another time.

A Professional Polygraph Setting


Most licensed polygraph examiners must be graduates of a professional school approved by the American Polygraph Association (APA) and a state licensing board. Unfortunately some fail to stay abreast of the latest validated techniques or they try to perform a polygraph examination in a busy office or other unsuitable environment. Dallas Lie Detectors examiners in Dallas use a special lab setting devoid of any distractions and equipped with professional computer software, examination chairs, countermeasure detection systems and audio/visual equipment all designed to deliver accurate results.

You should expect a professional written report from your examiner. The report should contain the identifying information on the polygraph subject, information gathered during the interview, relevant questions and any admissions made following the polygraph test. All reports should be submitted in writing.

Clinical Polygraph Examinations


There are three classifications of Clinical Testing:

  1. Initial Disclosure - Sexual History - Sexual History tests are administered to evaluate the candor of the Offender in completing the treatment provider's sexual history form. Of specific interest of historical behavior is in areas prior to and not including the current offense.
  2. Instant Offense - Testing over the latest known offense usually deals with denial issues. Often offenders enter treatment at the direction of the Court and have not accepted responsibly for their actions. In some cases, denial may be real and the "offender" did not commit the act as charged. Other denial issues involve admission to some acts and denial of others.
  3. Maintenance Testing - Maintenance Tests are administered periodically and usually provided every three to six months, however in some cases offenders are required to make more regular appointments. These examinations are designed to insure compliance with treatment contracts, probation and parole requirements, and for identifying those re-offending. Offenders who are re-offending are identified early and corrective action can be taken. Maintenance tests are usually given every four to six months.
  4. Specific Issue Tests - Specific Issue Tests are given when specific problems occur. Those problems could be allegations of re-offense or use of illegal drugs. These tests are narrowly defined and deal with a single problem or issue.

Referral Form

View Sitemap