Cuban spy passed polygraph at least once
BY TIM JOHNSON
WASHINGTON - Even though confessed Cuban spy Ana Belen Montes already outwitted
a lie-detector
test, the government plans to rely on polygraph exams to check her honesty
as they debrief her about
her 16-year spying career while working for U.S. military intelligence.
Montes took a polygraph examination at least once during her career as
an analyst at the Defense
Intelligence Agency, her attorney says.
''At the time she was polygraphed, she passed it,'' said prominent Washington
attorney Plato Cacheris,
who added that he did not know when the exam was given.
Critics of polygraph exams, which are designed to snare liars, say they
are astounded that U.S. officials
would rely on them to determine if Montes is telling the truth.
''Isn't this incredibly ironic?'' asked Drew C. Richardson, a retired FBI
agent who wrote a doctorate
dissertation on polygraph research. ``She beats the polygraph and now we're
going to use a
polygraph to assess the damage? It's utterly, unbelievably stupid.''
Montes, 45, is the most senior spy for Cuba ever caught. FBI agents arrested
her Sept. 21 at her
workplace. In a plea agreement with the Justice Department, Montes confessed
March 19 to spying for
Cuba and offered to reveal all details of her betrayal to investigators
before her Sept. 24 sentencing. If
polygraph exams show that she has been honest and candid, she will get
a 25-year jail term, with five
years of parole.
Montes isn't the first turncoat in the U.S. intelligence community to beat
the polygraph, or lie-detector,
exam, and her case is sure to add to controversy over whether the government
can rely on the
polygraph to catch spies.
Some critics assert that the polygraph tests lure counterintelligence units
into a false sense of security,
and should be abandoned for other methods.
The Defense Intelligence Agency, which is the preeminent military intelligence
arm of the Pentagon,
declines to say whether -- or when -- Montes was given a polygraph exam
after her hiring in September
1985. It also refuses to provide details of results of any exams given
to Montes.
''All DIA employees are subject to polygraphs,'' said an agency spokesman,
Lt. Cmdr. James E. Brooks,
declining further details.
REGULAR TESTS
All government intelligence agencies require employees to agree to regular
polygraph examinations. In
such tests, an examiner asks a subject questions while a polygraph machine
measures changes in a
subject's heartbeat, blood pressure and respiratory rate. If the subject
lies, the theory goes, then the
examiner can detect faster heartbeats, higher blood pressure and other
telltale physiological changes.
The FBI, the CIA, the National Security Agency, federal and state governments,
local police departments
and numerous private agencies routinely use polygraph tests to detect suspected
criminal activity.
''The use of polygraph is controversial even within the law enforcement
and intelligence community,''
said John L. Martin, the former head of internal security at the Justice
Department.
Some form of polygraph machines have been around since 1917, and their
use is now widespread,
even if still controversial. ''There may be about 3,000 examiners [in the
United States],'' said Dan
Sosnowski, a spokesman for the American Polygraph Association, a trade
group.
In 1988, Congress barred most private employers from probing possible criminal
activity of job
applicants through polygraph exams. Law enforcement agencies and some limited
categories of private
companies can still require a polygraph exam as a preemployment requirement.
While statutes vary from state to state, polygraphs can sometimes be introduced
as evidence at
criminal trials if attorneys for all parties agree, Sosnowski said. They
are inadmissible in Florida courts
unless the prosecution and defense agree to admit them.
The CIA is known as the agency with the most-freewheeling polygraph tests,
delving even into intimate
details of the lives of employees in an effort to unmask spies.
''There's a schedule of polygraphs that you have over your career. And
they can be aperiodic as well,''
said CIA spokesman Tom Crispell. ``It is one of many tools that are used
at the CIA as a security
procedure.''
Curiously, among those criticizing the use of polygraph tests is Aldrich
Ames, a CIA veteran arrested in
1994 and accused of receiving more than $2 million to reveal to the KGB
the names of U.S. agents in
Russia. At least 10 agents were later killed.
PASSED EXAMS
Ames passed two polygraph exams in the CIA while spying for Russia, said
one knowledgeable official,
speaking on condition of anonymity.
The polygraphs were not done correctly, he said: ``It indicated deception. They didn't pursue it.''
Ames calls the polygraph tests ``pseudoscience.''
''Like most junk science that just won't die [graphology, astrology and
homeopathy come to mind],
because of the usefulness or profit their practitioners enjoy, the polygraph
stays with us,'' Ames wrote
in November 2000 from his cell at Allenwood federal prison in Pennsylvania.
''The U.S. is, so far as I know, the only nation which places such extensive
reliance on the polygraph. . .
. It has gotten us into a lot of trouble,'' Ames added in letter to a staff
employee of the Federation of
American Scientists, Steven Aftergood.
Another career CIA analyst, Larry Wu-tai Chin, arrested in 1985 as a spy
for Beijing, also beat the
polygraph exams he was administered.
Martin, the former chief counterintelligence officer, said the polygraph
exam, if administered with
precisely phrased questions, can lead to new avenues of interrogation,
and uncover deception.
''It can be effective if used properly,'' Martin said.
Aftergood, the official at the Federation of American Scientists, said
evaluation of polygraph tests ``is a
subjective matter.''
''There is a widespread recognition that it is not an entirely reliable technology,'' Aftergood said.