Oregon Jon’s Polygraph Test

Polygraph test in a missing person investigation: why two charts mattered

This episode follows a high-stakes polygraph session arranged by the host and a man known only as John, who volunteered to be tested to clear his name in the disappearance of Florence. A certified polygraph examiner from Los Angeles administered multiple charts in a Portland hotel room to reduce stress and improve data quality. The production intentionally recorded a second test for public transparency after conducting an initial private session to avoid added pressure.

What happened during the two polygraph sessions and recorded contradictions

Technically straightforward but emotionally complex, the tests used upper and lower thoracic bands, a blood pressure cuff, and galvanic skin response sensors to monitor physiological reactions. Questions were limited to yes-or-no format and interspersed with known-truth control items to establish a baseline. The crucial moment came when John answered the same question differently across sessions: once saying he had not withheld information about Florence and later saying he had. That verbal contradiction, independent of needle movement, became the episode’s central puzzle.

How to interpret polygraph signals and verbal contradictions in investigations

The episode emphasizes that a polygraph is a tool that measures autonomic responses — not an incontrovertible proof of guilt. The host acknowledges scientific debates, the National Academy of Sciences’ caution about false positives, and the real-world problems of pressure, movement, and context. Even so, physiological spikes and inconsistent answers on critical topics such as sexual contact and withholding information raised red flags that warrant further inquiry.

Ethical context and next steps in the Florence disappearance inquiry

Producers balanced transparency with sensitivity: the initial unfilmed chart sought to minimize performance stress, while the filmed second test allowed public scrutiny. The episode closes with a promise of deeper analysis: the polygraph examiner will return to explain the charts in detail, and the investigation will continue with new leads. Listeners are asked to weigh results for themselves while the podcast pursues additional evidence.

• Key outcomes: multiple signs of deception were reported on core questions about Florence.
• Procedural notes: two separate tests, controlled questions, and a trained examiner were used.
• Next steps: fuller chart analysis with the examiner and continued investigative reporting.

This installment underscores how modern investigative reporting combines human testimony, forensic tools, and ethical choices when pursuing truth in cold and active cases. It invites listeners to wrestle with uncertainty while the team gathers more verifiable information.