Truth and consequences

Advertisement

Advertise with us

Have you ever lied?

Read this article for free:

or

Already have an account? Log in here »

To continue reading, please subscribe:

Monthly Digital Subscription

$1 per week for 24 weeks*

  • Enjoy unlimited reading on winnipegfreepress.com
  • Read the E-Edition, our digital replica newspaper
  • Access News Break, our award-winning app
  • Play interactive puzzles

*Billed as $4.00 plus GST every four weeks. After 24 weeks, price increases to the regular rate of $19.95 plus GST every four weeks. Offer available to new and qualified returning subscribers only. Cancel any time.

Monthly Digital Subscription

$4.99/week*

  • Enjoy unlimited reading on winnipegfreepress.com
  • Read the E-Edition, our digital replica newspaper
  • Access News Break, our award-winning app
  • Play interactive puzzles

*Billed as $19.95 plus GST every four weeks. Cancel any time.

To continue reading, please subscribe:

Add Free Press access to your Brandon Sun subscription for only an additional

$1 for the first 4 weeks*

  • Enjoy unlimited reading on winnipegfreepress.com
  • Read the E-Edition, our digital replica newspaper
  • Access News Break, our award-winning app
  • Play interactive puzzles
Start now

No thanks

*Your next subscription payment will increase by $1.00 and you will be charged $16.99 plus GST for four weeks. After four weeks, your payment will increase to $23.99 plus GST every four weeks.

Opinion

Have you ever lied?

Have you ever cheated?

Have you ever stolen anything?

Those were three of many questions asked during an hours-long ordeal known as a polygraph (a.k.a. lie detector) examination, and I answered yes to all three.

For a brief time circa 1984, this examination was part of the hiring process for prospective applicants for the Winnipeg police, and the recruit class I applied for was one of (I believe) three classes where it was used.

At the beginning of the examination, you were asked to tell a deliberate lie so you’d see how the polygraph reacted, so there would be no doubts.

In 1984, a polygraph was essentially similar to a seismograph, whereby a moving needle on a long scroll of paper recorded your body’s reaction to questioning, as a seismograph recorded the ever-changing fluctuations of the earth’s surface.

Lying would cause the needle to move like the seismograph would to a city-crushing earthquake.

I recalled having admitted lying to get booze at 16, while we were at a hockey tournament in southwest Manitoba.

I was big for my age, and there was no photo ID back then, and using a teammate’s older cousin’s ID, I successfully purchased some liquor.

The cheating example was more recent, during midterms for a stats exam.

“Focusing” on my paper, my eyes did a hard left, purloining an answer off the student beside me. I don’t recall if it was correct, but it didn’t impact passing the course regardless.

As for stealing, when I was nine, I got caught up with some older kids during a brief period of feral behaviour on their part.

I stole a bag of golf tees from a local store, and also some money off a sibling. My mother found out, and lessons were administered that were never forgotten.

The questioning during the polygraph examination (like that of my mother’s) was meticulous, comprehensive, thorough, and I felt completely drained afterwards.

After all, there was much expected of the successful applicant, so integrity was crucial.

And polygraph examiners are experienced, highly trained investigators.

Winnipeg stopped using polygraphs soon after, there apparently being some criticism surrounding their usage, but there’s always something to criticize with the police (some certainly justified).

Polygraphs or something similar, however, are still used by many (most?) major Canadian police services for screening applicants.

No, they’re not perfect, but they helped provide some perspective, and assist in preventing the hiring of someone who would fail to uphold the standards expected.

Had Winnipeg retained the polygraph, the situation they currently find themselves in might have been prevented.

For example, a now-disgraced, now-former officer may not have been hired had it still been used during recruiting.

Who else would also not have been selected in the application process, had there been a polygraph?

There may even have been some from management who would have been discovered to be who they truly are (those who shouldn’t be hired), and would have been screened out.

Meanwhile, some who weren’t selected, but should have been, might have been hired.

Some of them are currently very competent police officers elsewhere, where polygraph examinations are still part of the hiring process.

I recall working in general patrol on a call downtown with a former police cadet, with whom I’d already worked with numerous times.

A violent male was on a rampage, and this cadet and their partner ably assisted us in catching him.

I’d worked with hundreds of different officers over many years on thousands of different calls.

And I would’ve had total confidence in that particular cadet if they were my partner. They were capable, competent, and trustworthy.

So it was a surprise when they weren’t accepted after applying to be a police constable (cadets don’t automatically become officers).

No explanations are given why not, yet a polygraph examination could conceivably have exonerated them of someone’s misconceptions.

Consequently, they went to another profession, one equally if not more valuable than policing, where their skillset would be welcome, and beneficial to many.

It was again our loss, and the other profession’s gain.

Kevin Birkett retired from the Winnipeg Police Service in 2020.

Report Error Submit a Tip

Analysis

LOAD MORE