Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Victim Services Polygraph topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee debates ban on compelling or asking sexual‑assault victims to take polygraph tests; amendment passes but sponsor asks to hold
Summary
The committee heard competing views on whether government actors should be allowed to request — as opposed to compel — that sexual‑assault victims submit to polygraph tests. Supporters said requests hinder reporting and are not trauma‑informed; some senators and defense advocates said requests can be a useful investigatory tool in narrow cases.
Representative Sandra Romero presented House Bill 17, which would prohibit law‑enforcement officers, prosecutors and government employees from requesting or compelling sexual‑assault victims to take polygraph (lie‑detector) tests.
Romero said the measure “prohibits law enforcement prosecutors and government officials from requesting or compelling … assault victims to undergo a polygraph exam.” She and proponents described the bill as a codification of current best practices for handling trauma‑informed interviews and noted ties to Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) funding considerations.
Supporters at the hearing included Brett Robinson of the Salt Lake County District Attorney’s Office (speaking also for SWAP), who said polygraph results are not admissible in court and that asking victims to take such tests can be a barrier to reporting. “They’re not considered reliable. We’re not able to admit it in in courts,” Robinson said. The Utah Domestic Violence Coalition, the Victim Services Commission and the Law Enforcement Legislative Committee likewise urged passage, describing polygraphs as unreliable for trauma‑impacted victims and potentially discouraging reporting. The Victim Services Commission emphasized that a trauma response can resemble deception on a polygraph.
Opponents and skeptics included defense‑oriented witnesses and some senators, who argued polygraph access can be an investigatory tool in close “he said, she said” cases and could sometimes help dissuade false accusations. Steve Burton of the Defense Attorney Association described instances where a defense‑requested polygraph could aid an innocence claim.
Senator Brammer moved to amend the bill by striking the words “request or” so the statute would prohibit only compelled polygraph examinations. The committee adopted that amendment on a roll‑call vote, 4–2; Senators Escamilla and Pitcher voted no. Representative Romero told the committee she was concerned the amendment might jeopardize federal funding and asked for more time to consult; citing that concern, the committee ultimately took no final recommendation on HB 17 and moved on to other agenda items.
What happened: The committee voted 4–2 to amend the bill (removing the word “request”), but the sponsor asked to hold the bill because the change could affect federal funding tied to VAWA. The committee did not issue a final committee recommendation during the meeting.
