An area attorney is speaking out about issues he has with the use of polygraph tests.

Earlier this week, in an interview with 680 KFEQ’s Barry Birr, Lawyer David Graham of Overland Park, talked about problems he sees with lie detector tests.

“My problem with the polygraph examination is, it is non-scientific, or some would call it pseudo scientific,” Graham said. “The reality is, there is no scientific basis to it what-so-ever, for the purposes of telling whether or not someone is lying.”

He said a polygraph is okay to monitor if someone’s blood pressure increases, or decrease or if their heart-rate jumps, or heats up.

“But whether the lines on the polygraph computer correlate to whether a person is telling the truth or not, there’s no link. There’s no scientific basis to it what-so-ever,” Graham said. “The reason that’s important is that the U.S. Government relies on polygraph testing for pre-employment hiring.”

While most private businesses are barred from using lie detector test for hiring, Graham said the government is exempt. He said the polygraph is essentially an interrogation tool.

“If you can convince someone that they have failed the polygraph, or that they have lied on a certain question, and you need them to come clean so then you can give them the examine again; so that they can pass it, so that then you can give them the job. They may give you a confession. They may confess to something they would not have otherwise confessed to,” Graham said. “This is why the police use it so much.”

While Graham said the polygraph isn’t admissible in court, if an individual confesses during the test, that is allowed in court.

“The results of the so-called test are not admissible but if he makes an admission, then that is admissible,” Graham said. “The person will say, ‘You had trouble with this question, which tells me you know something you aren’t disclosing.’ Then the person says, ‘Well, I didn’t do it, but I know who did it.’…That may be seen as evidence of guilt and those statements can be used against that person in court.”

Graham said he feels strongly about the use of the polygraph as an attorney, due to the potential for misuse.

“I see how it can be misused by police, I can see how resources could get wasted by police if the polygraph operator says, ‘this guy knows something,’ but he doesn’t,” Graham said.

Graham said at one time he supported the lie detector test but changed his opinion after stumbling across the website, https://antipolygraph.org/