Page 21 - November 2017 Magazine

routinely disqualified for “admissions” made during the pre-polygraph interrogation. My office has represented dozens of candidates who were disqualified because of answers given during this interrogation process. The ex- aminers are all Chicago Police Officers who take pleasure in interrogating these kids who have never been in trou- ble and never been questioned by Police. These kids are nervous and anxious because they desperately want to be Police Officers and they are respectful of the application process.
Recently, I represented a female African-American can- didate who was disqualified based upon an answer given during the polygraph interrogation. This young woman was a remarkable candidate in every aspect. She would have been at the top of the list of any Department in the country. She grew up in a gang-infested neighborhood on the Southside of Chicago. She not only resisted the neg- ative influences and temptations faced by a kid in such an environment, she thrived. She was an accomplished student athlete who was awarded an academic and ath- letic scholarship to a prominent school in the SEC. She graduated with a degree and went on to earn a Master’s degree. She also was an All-American track athlete in col- lege and served as an alternate on the U.S. Olympic team. Her pedigree was impeccable.
During her polygraph interrogation she was asked re- peatedly about her representation that she had never used drugs. The interrogator could not believe that this young woman had led a drug-free life. She was asked about all illegal drugs and whether or not she had ever ex- perimented. The interrogator was practically begging for some type of admission. She truthfully denied all accusa- tions. Finally, she was asked whether or not she had ever taken prescription medication which was not prescribed to her. The young applicant remembered that she had once taken a prescription Tylenol that was prescribed to her father. One day when she was in high school she came home and complained to her father about a pain that she was having. Her father gave her one of his prescribed Ty- lenols. She was disqualified because she failed to admit this fact when she completed her personal history ques- tionnaire.
Thankfully we were able to challenge the Department’s ridiculous decision and the Human Resource Board placed her back on the list where she belonged. Luckily, for the residents of Chicago, she accepted the job and currently serves as a Chicago Police Officer. I have spo- ken with other, similarly situated candidates who were so disheartened by the process that they moved on to other opportunities.
I have cross examined a number of polygraph exam- iners during the Board hearings throughout the years. It is obvious that this testing phase is broken. The Depart- ment employs numerous polygraph examiners; however, it appears only one is fully certified and licensed with the State. The others are licensed as “trainees.” Despite their limited certification, these examiners routinely conduct examinations alone. The examiners admit that they are required to conduct examinations only when under the guidance of a fully certified examiner; however, they be-
lieved that they comply with this requirement as long as the certified examiner is somewhere within the same building. Their explanation is preposterous and so is this phase of the employment process.
These examiners, who clearly prefer interrogating young job applicants over hardened criminals, fail to recognize the difference between a mistake and an in- tentional falsification. The primary complaint about law enforcement officers is that they don’t tell the truth. They promote the code of silence. Ironically, applicants to the Chicago Police Department are being disqualified be- cause of their honesty. As demonstrated in the example of my female client, but for her honesty she would have passed all phases and been assigned to the first available class. This promotes a very dangerous message for future Police Officers. The current testing process encourages deception. When future applicants learn of others that have been disqualified for admitting something during a polygraph interrogation, they will likely lie during their interrogation and avoid any admission that could serve as their disqualification. There is an online discussion fo- rum devoted to this exact subject matter.
The new Superintendent has pleaded with his Officers about the duty to tell the truth. In one of his first pub- lic statements after being appointed Superintendent he said, “I’m going to put some things in place to ensure (Of- ficers) do feel they can admit honest mistakes. One thing I’ve learned over the years is a cover-up is always, always worse than an incident – always. So if they do make a mis- take, own it, fix it.”
I encourage the Superintendent, the Mayor and the City Council to put their words into action and begin by trans- forming the hiring process for the Chicago Police Depart- ment. This can be done by simply providing transparency and encouraging honesty. Sound familiar? d
CHICAGO LODGE 7 ■ NOVEMBER 2016 21
o e
- s
t
-
s e
-
- e