Key Takeaways
- Utah now prohibits government officials from asking sexual assault survivors to take polygraph tests.
- Advocates argue polygraph exams can retraumatize survivors and undermine investigations.
- Several states have enacted laws limiting or banning polygraph use in sexual assault cases.
- Survivors should know that polygraph requirements vary by state.
Law enforcement officials in Utah will no longer be allowed to ask sex abuse survivors to take polygraph tests after reporting their assaults, a decision that advocates and survivors have applauded. Utah joins dozens of states that have banned government officials from using polygraph exams in cases that involve sexual violence. The bill was first introduced in 2024 and pushed forward by Utah state Rep. Angela Romero, who has previously addressed the harmful effects polygraph tests can have on someone recovering from an assault. The bill went into effect in early March.
What Is a Polygraph Test and How Does It Work?
When you think of a way to prove whether someone’s telling the truth, you may picture the polygraph test. For some, it’s considered a gold standard for truth-telling, but the science behind the tests has been called into question. Invented over 100 years ago, polygraph exams, which are also known as lie detector tests, were first introduced to the court in the 1920s in Frye v. United States, a trial that involved a man accused of murder. James Alphonso Frye passed a polygraph test that his lawyer argued proved his innocence, but the court didn’t allow the test results to be used as evidence.
In the 1990s, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a rule that forbade polygraph tests from being used in military court cases. Presently, they usually aren’t admissible in court cases because of their unreliability. Despite the legal system’s clear skepticism toward lie detector tests, they were widely used during the 20th century in federal hiring processes and law enforcement investigations. The American Psychological Association warns against using the exams in legal proceedings and forensic interviews because “the evidence suggests polygraph tests are not a reliable and valid way to detect deception.” Still, law enforcement agencies around the country rely on polygraphs when interviewing survivors of sexual assault.
Someone taking a polygraph exam wears sensors that usually track breathing, heart rate, blood pressure, and sweat. The idea is that a person who’s lying will show physiological responses because stress levels increase when someone isn’t telling the truth. That line of thinking overlooks the fact that taking a lie detector test is an inherently anxiety-provoking situation for many people, so someone may react even if they’re being honest. These physical responses can happen for several reasons that don’t involve lying. Lie detector tests can lead to innocent people being unfairly investigated — or to criminals who pass a test not facing the scrutiny they need.
Why Utah Banned Polygraph Tests for Sexual Assault Survivors
The new Utah law introduced by Romero came about after a joint investigation from ProPublica and The Salt Lake Tribune into a therapist, Scott Owens, who sexually abused patients. The article shared the story of Andrew, a man who was inappropriately touched by the therapist he hired to work through internal struggles with his sexuality. Andrew, who was 22 years old at the time, endured abuse for five months before reporting the perpetrator to state licensing officials. The therapist was allowed to continue practicing and abused at least three more men after the licensing complaint.
Why did it take years for the state to take action? One reason was that Andrew failed a polygraph test administered by the Utah Division of Professional Licensing. He was resistant to taking the exam until he was told that a passing score could strengthen his case. Instead, he didn’t pass the test because he said the questions provoked him emotionally — an understandable reaction for someone who’s undergone sexual trauma.
The division reprimanded the perpetrator for hugging Andrew but chose not to suspend his license, and the polygraph seemed to play a role in its decision. The therapist preyed on patients for years after the reprimand — all because his license remained active. He eventually surrendered his license after more survivors came forward. It’s unclear whether the licensing board would have made the same call if not for the polygraph exam.
Romero said Andrew reached out to her to share his story and told her how the results of the test were devastating for him. While the lawmaker first introduced a polygraph bill in 2024, it took years for it to reach the governor’s desk. Romero said Andrew’s story gave her a reason to advocate for the legislation. Owens was sentenced to 15 years in prison last year.
How Polygraph Testing Can Affect Sexual Assault Investigations
Andrew’s story is a sobering reminder of the real-world consequences of polygraph exams. Sexual assault commonly creates feelings of fear and shame, and pressuring a survivor into taking a lie detector test can be even more detrimental to their well-being. They may say yes out of fear that it’ll seem suspicious if they don’t agree to the interview or think that telling the truth will be enough. Many people who take polygraph tests assume they have nothing to lose if they answer all of the questions honestly.
In reality, even someone who is fully truthful might fail a polygraph for reasons they can’t control. If law enforcement and government officials are primed to take the results of these exams at face value, survivors often bear the brunt of their erroneous beliefs. Lie detector tests can further traumatize people who are seeking justice and call their accounts into question, even if the things they’re saying are accurate. Research provides ample reason to be skeptical of the exams, even in circumstances that aren’t as sensitive as sexual assault.
State Laws on Polygraph Tests for Sexual Assault Survivors
The problems polygraphs can create are becoming more apparent, and the tide seems to be turning. Utah joins a long list of states that have banned lie detector tests for sexual assault survivors. According to the National Sexual Violence Resource Center, many jurisdictions have legislation regulating polygraph use for sexual assault survivors. Some rules are more stringent than others. In some states, law enforcement officials aren’t allowed to require a polygraph exam. In others, even asking a survivor is forbidden. Other states permit exams with stipulations.
One example is Iowa, where government officials who want to conduct a lie detector test “must inform the person to be tested that their participation is voluntary, that the results are not admissible in court, and that their participation or nonparticipation will not be the sole condition for investigation.”
In California, survivors can sue if someone violates the law and asks for a polygraph exam after a sexual assault. Still, dozens of states have no polygraph regulations for sexual assault survivors, allowing officials to ask survivors to sit for tests that can trigger distress. Advocates who view the Utah law as a step in the right direction hope that other legislative bodies will follow suit.
