When professional investigators tell you to not put stock in whether someone passes or fails a polygraph, it’s because of cases like this.
Amateurs call for polygraphs and expect case decisions to be based on them. This is what we need to learn from as a collective instead: the killer, a young male who “located the victim”, passed a polygraph yet was the killer.
Dallas Police refused to and failed to perform polygraph in connection with one of three perpetrators who relentlessly pursued Armani tracking and hunting him down with the intent to cause Armani physical harm ultimately violently assaulting Armani on 3 separate occasions including the day Armani suddenly disappeared not to mention the fact that this particular perpetrator is also suspected of being the shooter who knowingly fired a gun bullet into Armani’s residence 3 days before Armani suddenly disappeared without any investigation into the deadly conduct w/firearm shooting incident at Armani’s home in the weeks leading up to his sudden disappearance and unexpected discovery of Armani’s skeletal remains less than one minute away from his home shared with his mother. Despite my repeated requests for a polygraph involving this particular perpetrator nothing was done although this particular perpetrator flippantly and sarcastically boasted that they would undergo a polygraph if and when asked by Dallas Homicide Detectives which never took place which is extremely unfortunate and appalling to say the least.
Hello Robin, as shown by this article a polygraph is not a reliable tool or admissible as evidence in court. Many agencies don’t even spend time using a polygraph machine because of their lack of reliability.
In the article, you can see the a killer passed a polygraph test and eluded detection for many years until DNA was tested. Therefore, a polygraph can be misleading and is not recommended to be used in a case.