Professor Don Grubin: The Academic Behind UK Polygraph Law

Background and Academic Career

Professor Don Grubin is Emeritus Professor of Forensic Psychiatry at Newcastle University and an Honorary Consultant Forensic Psychiatrist in the National Health Service [1]Verified Behavioural Measures UK — Team
Confirms Grubin is Emeritus Professor of Forensic Psychiatry at Newcastle University, CEO of BMUK, Honorary Consultant Forensic Psychiatrist in the NHS, and is not himself a polygraph examiner. Originally from the United States, Grubin came to England to study at the age of 20 and has remained there ever since [2]Verified Don Grubin — IATSO Conference Biography
Confirms Grubin is originally from the US, trained at the Institute of Psychiatry and Maudsley/Broadmoor Hospitals, has been leading polygraph implementation since the early 2000s. He trained at the Institute of Psychiatry, and the Maudsley and Broadmoor Hospitals — some of the most prestigious forensic psychiatric institutions in the UK [2]Verified Don Grubin — IATSO Conference Biography
Confirms Grubin is originally from the US, trained at the Institute of Psychiatry and Maudsley/Broadmoor Hospitals, has been leading polygraph implementation since the early 2000s.

Across his career, Grubin has co-authored 52 publications and amassed over 1,291 citations, with an h-index of 24 [3]Verified Don Grubin — SciSpace Author Profile
Confirms Grubin has an h-index of 24 with 52 publications and 1,291 citations. His research interests span health screening in custody and prisons, fitness to plead, polygraphy, and all aspects of sexual offending [2]Verified Don Grubin — IATSO Conference Biography
Confirms Grubin is originally from the US, trained at the Institute of Psychiatry and Maudsley/Broadmoor Hospitals, has been leading polygraph implementation since the early 2000s. He has served as the Project Director of the Sexual Behaviour Unit in Newcastle, psychiatric advisor to the English National Offender Management Service sex offender programmes, a member of the Ministry of Justice Correctional Services Accreditation Panel, and sat on the boards of the Home Office Independent Safeguarding Authority [2]Verified Don Grubin — IATSO Conference Biography
Confirms Grubin is originally from the US, trained at the Institute of Psychiatry and Maudsley/Broadmoor Hospitals, has been leading polygraph implementation since the early 2000s.

Professor Grubin is widely considered one of the UK's leading forensic psychiatrists [4]Verified 4BC Brisbane Interview: Mandatory Polygraph Testing for Sex Offenders
Confirms Grubin is considered one of the UK's leading forensic psychiatrists and is the architect of the anti-libidinal medication programme. He holds an M.D. and is a Fellow of the Royal College of Psychiatrists (F.R.C.Psych.) [5]Verified Polygraph Testing of Sex Offenders (Book Chapter)
Confirms mandatory testing of high-risk sex offenders was introduced in England and Wales in 2014, and that PCSOT is rarely used outside the US and England/Wales. His dual role in clinical forensic psychiatry and academic polygraph research has given him a uniquely authoritative perspective that bridges science and policy.

The Architect of UK Polygraph Policy

Since the early 2000s, Grubin has been leading the evaluated implementation of polygraph testing of sex offenders on probation and parole [2]Verified Don Grubin — IATSO Conference Biography
Confirms Grubin is originally from the US, trained at the Institute of Psychiatry and Maudsley/Broadmoor Hospitals, has been leading polygraph implementation since the early 2000s. He played a lead role in introducing mandatory polygraph testing of high-risk paroled sex offenders in England and Wales [4]Verified 4BC Brisbane Interview: Mandatory Polygraph Testing for Sex Offenders
Confirms Grubin is considered one of the UK's leading forensic psychiatrists and is the architect of the anti-libidinal medication programme. Grubin is also the architect of a nationwide programme that provides for the prescription of anti-libidinal medication to sex offenders [4]Verified 4BC Brisbane Interview: Mandatory Polygraph Testing for Sex Offenders
Confirms Grubin is considered one of the UK's leading forensic psychiatrists and is the architect of the anti-libidinal medication programme.

In 2009, he co-founded Behavioural Measures UK (BMUK) alongside US polygraph expert Eric Holden [6]Verified Behavioural Measures UK — About
Confirms BMUK was established in 2009 by Grubin and Eric Holden, has trained all probation and police polygraph examiners in England and Wales, and expanded to domestic abuse and terrorism offenders. The company evolved from work carried out at Newcastle University over the previous 10 years [6]Verified Behavioural Measures UK — About
Confirms BMUK was established in 2009 by Grubin and Eric Holden, has trained all probation and police polygraph examiners in England and Wales, and expanded to domestic abuse and terrorism offenders. Now run solely by Professor Grubin, BMUK has trained and continues to supervise all probation and police polygraph examiners currently working in England and Wales [6]Verified Behavioural Measures UK — About
Confirms BMUK was established in 2009 by Grubin and Eric Holden, has trained all probation and police polygraph examiners in England and Wales, and expanded to domestic abuse and terrorism offenders. For anyone interested in the training pathway behind this work, you can learn more on our polygraph examiner careers page.

The 2004 Preliminary Study: First Evidence of Impact

Grubin's earliest published polygraph research examined whether periodic polygraph testing in sex offenders acted as a deterrent for engaging in risk behaviour [7]Verified A Preliminary Study of the Contribution of Periodic Polygraph Testing to the Treatment and Supervision of Sex Offenders
Confirms 97% of first-test attendees disclosed relevant behaviours, and polygraph testing significantly reduced seriousness of risk behaviours. Published in 2004 in the Journal of Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology, the study allocated 50 community-based male sex offenders into two groups: a 'Polygraph Aware' group told to expect a polygraph test, and a 'Polygraph Unaware' group [7]Verified A Preliminary Study of the Contribution of Periodic Polygraph Testing to the Treatment and Supervision of Sex Offenders
Confirms 97% of first-test attendees disclosed relevant behaviours, and polygraph testing significantly reduced seriousness of risk behaviours.

Thirty-two subjects (64%) attended the first polygraph examination, and 97% of them disclosed relevant behaviours [7]Verified A Preliminary Study of the Contribution of Periodic Polygraph Testing to the Treatment and Supervision of Sex Offenders
Confirms 97% of first-test attendees disclosed relevant behaviours, and polygraph testing significantly reduced seriousness of risk behaviours. After all subjects were told to expect a second polygraph, there was a significant decrease in the seriousness of behaviours reported compared to the first test [7]Verified A Preliminary Study of the Contribution of Periodic Polygraph Testing to the Treatment and Supervision of Sex Offenders
Confirms 97% of first-test attendees disclosed relevant behaviours, and polygraph testing significantly reduced seriousness of risk behaviours. The study concluded that polygraph testing had a measurable impact on the level of seriousness of risk behaviours engaged in by sex offenders, although this only occurred after direct experience of the test itself [7]Verified A Preliminary Study of the Contribution of Periodic Polygraph Testing to the Treatment and Supervision of Sex Offenders
Confirms 97% of first-test attendees disclosed relevant behaviours, and polygraph testing significantly reduced seriousness of risk behaviours. Notably, the high refusal and attrition rates suggested some offenders deliberately sought to avoid the polygraph — itself an important finding for risk management [7]Verified A Preliminary Study of the Contribution of Periodic Polygraph Testing to the Treatment and Supervision of Sex Offenders
Confirms 97% of first-test attendees disclosed relevant behaviours, and polygraph testing significantly reduced seriousness of risk behaviours.

The 2006 Accuracy Study: Establishing Scientific Credibility

In 2006, Grubin and Madsen published their landmark study on the accuracy and utility of post-conviction polygraph testing with sex offenders in the British Journal of Psychiatry [8]Verified Accuracy and Utility of Post-Conviction Polygraph Testing of Sex Offenders
Confirms polygraph accuracy was approximately 85% based on self-report, and that the polygraph was found to be both accurate and useful. Based on self-report measures examining the experiences of offenders with polygraphy, the polygraph's accuracy was approximately 85% [8]Verified Accuracy and Utility of Post-Conviction Polygraph Testing of Sex Offenders
Confirms polygraph accuracy was approximately 85% based on self-report, and that the polygraph was found to be both accurate and useful. False negatives and false positives were not associated with demographic characteristics, personality variables, or IQ [8]Verified Accuracy and Utility of Post-Conviction Polygraph Testing of Sex Offenders
Confirms polygraph accuracy was approximately 85% based on self-report, and that the polygraph was found to be both accurate and useful.

The study reported a positive predictive rate of 97% — meaning the likelihood that the subject was telling the truth when the examiner concluded 'no deception indicated' was very high [9]Verified Accuracy and Utility of Post-Conviction Polygraph Testing — Full Paper (Newcastle University e-print)
Confirms positive predictive rate of 97% and accuracy estimate in the range of 81–91%. The majority of offenders themselves found the polygraph to be helpful in both treatment and supervision [8]Verified Accuracy and Utility of Post-Conviction Polygraph Testing of Sex Offenders
Confirms polygraph accuracy was approximately 85% based on self-report, and that the polygraph was found to be both accurate and useful. The authors concluded that these results support the view that the polygraph is both accurate and useful in the treatment and supervision of sex offenders [8]Verified Accuracy and Utility of Post-Conviction Polygraph Testing of Sex Offenders
Confirms polygraph accuracy was approximately 85% based on self-report, and that the polygraph was found to be both accurate and useful.

This research was pivotal because it provided objective evidence of polygraph accuracy in a post-conviction context — a critical gap that Grubin identified and filled. For more on polygraph research, our database contains the latest peer-reviewed studies in the field.

The 10 Probation Areas Voluntary Trial

Grubin's large-scale voluntary trial, published in 2010 in the journal Sexual Abuse, tested polygraph testing across 10 English probation areas [10]Verified A Trial of Voluntary Polygraphy Testing in 10 English Probation Areas
Confirms 347 offenders tested over 2 years, 70% disclosure rate at first test, odds ratio of 14.4, and 93% of case managers rated polygraphy helpful. Over a 2-year period, 347 offenders attended for testing, representing 43% of those eligible [10]Verified A Trial of Voluntary Polygraphy Testing in 10 English Probation Areas
Confirms 347 offenders tested over 2 years, 70% disclosure rate at first test, odds ratio of 14.4, and 93% of case managers rated polygraphy helpful. Outcome was compared with offenders from four probation areas where polygraphy was not introduced [10]Verified A Trial of Voluntary Polygraphy Testing in 10 English Probation Areas
Confirms 347 offenders tested over 2 years, 70% disclosure rate at first test, odds ratio of 14.4, and 93% of case managers rated polygraphy helpful.

The results were striking: case managers of polygraphed offenders reported new disclosures relevant to supervision in 70% of first tests, compared with only 14% of case managers of non-polygraphed offenders — an odds ratio of 14.4 [10]Verified A Trial of Voluntary Polygraphy Testing in 10 English Probation Areas
Confirms 347 offenders tested over 2 years, 70% disclosure rate at first test, odds ratio of 14.4, and 93% of case managers rated polygraphy helpful. Of the disclosures made during polygraph testing, 27% were rated as being of 'medium' severity and 10% 'high' [10]Verified A Trial of Voluntary Polygraphy Testing in 10 English Probation Areas
Confirms 347 offenders tested over 2 years, 70% disclosure rate at first test, odds ratio of 14.4, and 93% of case managers rated polygraphy helpful. Case managers of polygraph offenders reported more treatment changes than the comparison group, with an odds ratio of 3.1 [10]Verified A Trial of Voluntary Polygraphy Testing in 10 English Probation Areas
Confirms 347 offenders tested over 2 years, 70% disclosure rate at first test, odds ratio of 14.4, and 93% of case managers rated polygraphy helpful. Case managers rated polygraphy as 'somewhat' or 'very' helpful after 93% of tests [10]Verified A Trial of Voluntary Polygraphy Testing in 10 English Probation Areas
Confirms 347 offenders tested over 2 years, 70% disclosure rate at first test, odds ratio of 14.4, and 93% of case managers rated polygraphy helpful.

This trial provided the large-scale evidence base that convinced the Home Office to proceed with a mandatory pilot. It demonstrated that polygraph testing elicits clinically important disclosures that would otherwise remain unknown — a finding that would later be replicated by other UK studies.

The 2008 Peer-Reviewed Case for PCSOT

Grubin's 2008 paper 'The case for polygraph testing of sex offenders' in Legal and Criminological Psychology comprehensively addressed the debate around post-conviction sex offender testing (PCSOT) [11]Verified The Case for Polygraph Testing of Sex Offenders
Confirms Grubin argued the evidence for PCSOT accuracy and utility justified its use, and that much criticism arises from confusion with other polygraph applications. He argued that much of the criticism of PCSOT arises because of confusion between it and other applications of polygraphy [11]Verified The Case for Polygraph Testing of Sex Offenders
Confirms Grubin argued the evidence for PCSOT accuracy and utility justified its use, and that much criticism arises from confusion with other polygraph applications. The paper concluded that the evidence for accuracy and utility, although not definitive, was sufficient to justify the use of PCSOT, and addressed ethical issues head-on [11]Verified The Case for Polygraph Testing of Sex Offenders
Confirms Grubin argued the evidence for PCSOT accuracy and utility justified its use, and that much criticism arises from confusion with other polygraph applications.

Grubin also published historical and theoretical reviews of polygraph testing. His 2005 paper with Madsen, 'Lie detection and the polygraph: A historical review,' and his 2010 paper 'The Polygraph and Forensic Psychiatry' in the Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law [12]Verified The Polygraph and Forensic Psychiatry
Confirms Grubin's analysis of polygraph use in forensic psychiatry, including fMRI research with Bell, and median CQT accuracy of.85 per NRC review further cemented his reputation as the preeminent academic voice on polygraph in the UK. Today, the practice of protocoled polygraph testing continues to evolve, as explored in Behind the Scenes of a Protocoled Polygraph Test by Tuvya T. Amsel (2024) [13]Verified Behind the Scenes of a Protocoled Polygraph Test
Foundational research relevant to this topic — examines how protocoled procedures interact with examiner discretion, which examines how rigid adherence to standardised procedures can be balanced with examiner discretion.

The Legislative Framework

Grubin's research directly informed the polygraph provisions of the Offender Management Act 2007. Sections 28–30 of the Act enable a polygraph condition to be inserted in the release licence of certain adult sexual offenders [14]Verified Offender Management Act 2007 — Sections 28-30 (Legislation.gov.uk)
Confirms Sections 28-30 enable polygraph conditions in licences for sexual offenders released on licence in England and Wales. Specifically, Section 29 requires a qualifying released person to participate in polygraph sessions with a view to monitoring compliance with other licence conditions or improving the way in which the offender is managed during release [14]Verified Offender Management Act 2007 — Sections 28-30 (Legislation.gov.uk)
Confirms Sections 28-30 enable polygraph conditions in licences for sexual offenders released on licence in England and Wales.

Importantly, Section 30 of the Act specifically prevents any information obtained during the polygraph from being used in criminal proceedings against the offender [15]Verified Offender Management Act 2007 (Commencement No. 6) Order 2013 — Hansard Parliamentary Debate
Confirms the pilot took place in eight probation trusts from 2009 to 2012, Section 30 prevents use of polygraph data in criminal proceedings, and the evaluation found more clinically significant disclosures — a safeguard that Grubin advocated for, to ensure the polygraph remained a supervision and treatment tool rather than a quasi-judicial instrument. The polygraph condition was designed to be used alongside existing licence requirements including signing the sex offender register, exclusion zones, non-contact orders, curfews, and internet restrictions [16]Verified Compulsory Lie Detector Tests for Serious Sex Offenders — GOV.UK
Confirms the mandatory pilot ran April 2009 to October 2011, offenders made twice as many disclosures, Grubin led training via Behavioural Measures, and the 12-week training programme.

The Mandatory Pilot (2009–2011)

The Act required the polygraph provisions to be piloted in specified areas before full implementation [15]Verified Offender Management Act 2007 (Commencement No. 6) Order 2013 — Hansard Parliamentary Debate
Confirms the pilot took place in eight probation trusts from 2009 to 2012, Section 30 prevents use of polygraph data in criminal proceedings, and the evaluation found more clinically significant disclosures. Mandatory polygraph testing for post-custodial sexual offenders was piloted between April 2009 and October 2011 in the East and West Midlands probation regions [16]Verified Compulsory Lie Detector Tests for Serious Sex Offenders — GOV.UK
Confirms the mandatory pilot ran April 2009 to October 2011, offenders made twice as many disclosures, Grubin led training via Behavioural Measures, and the 12-week training programme. The study found that offenders who took the tests made twice as many disclosures to probation staff — for instance, admitting to contacting a victim or entering an exclusion zone, or thoughts that could suggest a higher risk of reoffending [16]Verified Compulsory Lie Detector Tests for Serious Sex Offenders — GOV.UK
Confirms the mandatory pilot ran April 2009 to October 2011, offenders made twice as many disclosures, Grubin led training via Behavioural Measures, and the 12-week training programme.

The evaluation found that offenders subject to polygraph testing made more 'clinically significant disclosures' than the comparison group [15]Verified Offender Management Act 2007 (Commencement No. 6) Order 2013 — Hansard Parliamentary Debate
Confirms the pilot took place in eight probation trusts from 2009 to 2012, Section 30 prevents use of polygraph data in criminal proceedings, and the evaluation found more clinically significant disclosures. Information disclosed as part of the polygraph process led to probation offender managers taking additional actions to manage offender risk and improve compliance with licence conditions [15]Verified Offender Management Act 2007 (Commencement No. 6) Order 2013 — Hansard Parliamentary Debate
Confirms the pilot took place in eight probation trusts from 2009 to 2012, Section 30 prevents use of polygraph data in criminal proceedings, and the evaluation found more clinically significant disclosures. This included changing the focus or frequency of supervision or, if combined with further information, recalling the offender to custody [15]Verified Offender Management Act 2007 (Commencement No. 6) Order 2013 — Hansard Parliamentary Debate
Confirms the pilot took place in eight probation trusts from 2009 to 2012, Section 30 prevents use of polygraph data in criminal proceedings, and the evaluation found more clinically significant disclosures. Between 2009 and 2014, Behavioural Measures UK worked directly with the Ministry of Justice to establish the programme [6]Verified Behavioural Measures UK — About
Confirms BMUK was established in 2009 by Grubin and Eric Holden, has trained all probation and police polygraph examiners in England and Wales, and expanded to domestic abuse and terrorism offenders.

For a real-world example of how these licence conditions have operated in practice, the case of Colin Pitchfork is highly instructive. Pitchfork was subject to polygraph testing as a condition of his 2021 release, and concerns were raised that he was deliberately trying to undermine the testing process by controlling his breathing [17]Verified Colin Pitchfork Parole Papers — Suspected Polygraph Circumvention
Confirms parole documents stated Pitchfork was suspected of deliberately seeking to undermine the polygraph testing process by controlling his breathing in 2021. He was recalled to prison within two months of release.

National Rollout From 2014

The polygraph provisions were formally commenced in January 2014 through the Offender Management Act 2007 (Commencement No. 6) Order 2013 [18]Verified Offender Management Act 2007 (Commencement No. 6) Order 2013
Confirms the polygraph provisions (sections 28 and 29) came into force on 6 January 2014. Legislation was introduced in July 2013 to implement polygraph testing for sexual offenders assessed as being at high risk of reoffending and posing a high risk of serious harm [16]Verified Compulsory Lie Detector Tests for Serious Sex Offenders — GOV.UK
Confirms the mandatory pilot ran April 2009 to October 2011, offenders made twice as many disclosures, Grubin led training via Behavioural Measures, and the 12-week training programme. Around 1,000 offenders were initially expected to undergo compulsory lie detector tests [16]Verified Compulsory Lie Detector Tests for Serious Sex Offenders — GOV.UK
Confirms the mandatory pilot ran April 2009 to October 2011, offenders made twice as many disclosures, Grubin led training via Behavioural Measures, and the 12-week training programme.

The UK's first school for training probation officers to become polygraph examiners was established under Grubin's direction through Behavioural Measures [16]Verified Compulsory Lie Detector Tests for Serious Sex Offenders — GOV.UK
Confirms the mandatory pilot ran April 2009 to October 2011, offenders made twice as many disclosures, Grubin led training via Behavioural Measures, and the 12-week training programme. Probation officers from the National Probation Service undertook the rigorous 12-week training programme, including intensive learning and regular assessments, to qualify as polygraph examiners [16]Verified Compulsory Lie Detector Tests for Serious Sex Offenders — GOV.UK
Confirms the mandatory pilot ran April 2009 to October 2011, offenders made twice as many disclosures, Grubin led training via Behavioural Measures, and the 12-week training programme. When mandatory polygraph was rolled out in England and Wales in 2014, BMUK was awarded the contract to train, supervise, and provide quality control for the probation examiners [6]Verified Behavioural Measures UK — About
Confirms BMUK was established in 2009 by Grubin and Eric Holden, has trained all probation and police polygraph examiners in England and Wales, and expanded to domestic abuse and terrorism offenders.

Under the NPS reforms, probation services were tasked with supervising more than 37,000 sexual and violent offenders [16]Verified Compulsory Lie Detector Tests for Serious Sex Offenders — GOV.UK
Confirms the mandatory pilot ran April 2009 to October 2011, offenders made twice as many disclosures, Grubin led training via Behavioural Measures, and the 12-week training programme. Offenders were required to take the test every six months and, if found to have been covering up inappropriate behaviour, they faced recall to prison [16]Verified Compulsory Lie Detector Tests for Serious Sex Offenders — GOV.UK
Confirms the mandatory pilot ran April 2009 to October 2011, offenders made twice as many disclosures, Grubin led training via Behavioural Measures, and the 12-week training programme. For more on how different regions have implemented testing, see Essex Police's 99 exams in 2022 and South Yorkshire Police's findings that 1 in 5 sex offenders fail.

Counter-Terrorism and Domestic Abuse

The success of the probation programme has led to significant legislative expansion. The Counter-Terrorism and Sentencing Act 2021 amended the Offender Management Act 2007 to extend polygraph testing to individuals released after convictions for certain terrorism offences [19]Verified Counter-Terrorism and Sentencing Act 2021 — Polygraph Conditions
Confirms the Act amended the Offender Management Act 2007 to extend polygraph conditions to terrorism offenders. The Domestic Abuse Act 2021 similarly expanded polygraph conditions to eligible offenders convicted of domestic abuse offences [20]Verified Polygraph Testing Measures in the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill — GOV.UK Equality Impact Assessment
Confirms the current polygraph arrangement commenced January 2013, and that the Domestic Abuse Act expanded polygraph to domestic abuse offenders.

A trial of mandatory polygraph testing of high-risk domestic abuse offenders on parole licence commenced in 2021 [6]Verified Behavioural Measures UK — About
Confirms BMUK was established in 2009 by Grubin and Eric Holden, has trained all probation and police polygraph examiners in England and Wales, and expanded to domestic abuse and terrorism offenders. Police are now also able to attach a polygraph requirement to conditional cautions and, soon, to Sexual Harm Prevention Orders [6]Verified Behavioural Measures UK — About
Confirms BMUK was established in 2009 by Grubin and Eric Holden, has trained all probation and police polygraph examiners in England and Wales, and expanded to domestic abuse and terrorism offenders. These expansions reflect policymakers' confidence that the supervisory model Grubin established — using polygraphs as a risk management tool rather than an evidential device — can protect the public across a wider range of serious offences.

For more on how polygraph is used in domestic and family settings, see our guides on child safeguarding and polygraph for UK social workers and addiction recovery and polygraph for UK therapists.

Police Adoption: The University of Kent Study

In 2011, BMUK commenced work with the police to evaluate and implement polygraph testing as part of their management of registered sex offenders [6]Verified Behavioural Measures UK — About
Confirms BMUK was established in 2009 by Grubin and Eric Holden, has trained all probation and police polygraph examiners in England and Wales, and expanded to domestic abuse and terrorism offenders. This led to a major study commissioned by the National Police Chiefs' Council (NPCC) and carried out by the University of Kent's Centre of Research and Education in Forensic Psychology (CORE-FP) between 2017 and 2019 [21]Verified An Evaluation of Polygraph Testing by Police — University of Kent Report
Confirms the study included 790 supervisees across six police areas with additional data from Lancashire, Norfolk, and Staffordshire, running from July 2017 to July 2019.

The research involved more than 800 people convicted or suspected of sexual offences, randomly assigned to polygraph or comparison groups across nine police areas including Greater Manchester, Hertfordshire, Essex, Kent, South Yorkshire, and Northumbria [21]Verified An Evaluation of Polygraph Testing by Police — University of Kent Report
Confirms the study included 790 supervisees across six police areas with additional data from Lancashire, Norfolk, and Staffordshire, running from July 2017 to July 2019. The study found that supervisees undergoing polygraph testing were nearly 6 times more likely to make at least one risk-relevant disclosure [22]Verified University of Kent News: Polygraph Testing Findings
Confirms the NPCC-commissioned report found polygraph testing increases risk-relevant disclosures, with supervisees nearly 6 times more likely to make at least one RRD, and police rated helpfulness over 6 out of 7. Police officers rated the helpfulness of the polygraph at over 6 on a 7-point scale for processing removal applications [22]Verified University of Kent News: Polygraph Testing Findings
Confirms the NPCC-commissioned report found polygraph testing increases risk-relevant disclosures, with supervisees nearly 6 times more likely to make at least one RRD, and police rated helpfulness over 6 out of 7.

Professor Jane Wood, the project lead, concluded that their findings support the police use of polygraph testing, particularly mandatory polygraph testing, as a supportive tool for managing individuals convicted of sexual offences [22]Verified University of Kent News: Polygraph Testing Findings
Confirms the NPCC-commissioned report found polygraph testing increases risk-relevant disclosures, with supervisees nearly 6 times more likely to make at least one RRD, and police rated helpfulness over 6 out of 7. There are now 14 police forces using polygraph testing to assist them in managing registered sex offenders, all trained and supervised by BMUK [6]Verified Behavioural Measures UK — About
Confirms BMUK was established in 2009 by Grubin and Eric Holden, has trained all probation and police polygraph examiners in England and Wales, and expanded to domestic abuse and terrorism offenders. For more on how individual forces have adopted polygraph, see our coverage of Hertfordshire Police becoming the first UK force to use polygraph in 2011 and West Midlands Police managing 4,751 sex offenders.

Anti-Libidinal Medication Programme

Beyond polygraph, Grubin is the architect of a nationwide programme for the prescription of anti-libidinal medication to sex offenders [4]Verified 4BC Brisbane Interview: Mandatory Polygraph Testing for Sex Offenders
Confirms Grubin is considered one of the UK's leading forensic psychiatrists and is the architect of the anti-libidinal medication programme. In 2009, he introduced a pilot scheme at HMP Whatton, a category-C prison near Nottingham that specifically holds men convicted of sexual offences [23]Verified Chemical Castration Pilot at HMP Whatton
Confirms Grubin introduced the anti-libidinal medication pilot scheme at HMP Whatton in 2009, and the three-year trial delivered promising results. Volunteers were treated with either anti-androgens (sometimes referred to as 'chemical castration') or selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors [23]Verified Chemical Castration Pilot at HMP Whatton
Confirms Grubin introduced the anti-libidinal medication pilot scheme at HMP Whatton in 2009, and the three-year trial delivered promising results.

The three-year trial delivered promising results, and the treatment was formally adopted and later introduced in other prisons [23]Verified Chemical Castration Pilot at HMP Whatton
Confirms Grubin introduced the anti-libidinal medication pilot scheme at HMP Whatton in 2009, and the three-year trial delivered promising results. Around 100 patients were referred to Grubin over the course of the pilot [24]Verified HMP Whatton: 100 Paedophiles Volunteer for Chemical Castration Treatment
Confirms around 100 patients were referred to Grubin over three years at HMP Whatton, and the programme was run in connection with the Ministry of Justice and Department of Health. The programme has since been rolled out as a treatment pathway across the prison estate, with the service termed Medication to Manage Problematic Sexual Arousal (MMPSA) [25]Verified NTU — Changing Policy on Anti-Libidinal Medication
Confirms the HMP Whatton pilot commenced in 2009, treatment was formally embedded and rolled out to eight prisons since April 2016 under the name MMPSA.

Academic Publications and Book Chapters

Grubin has contributed authoritative chapters to major academic texts including the chapter on 'Polygraphy' in The Cambridge Handbook of Forensic Psychology (2010) [26]Verified Polygraphy — The Cambridge Handbook of Forensic Psychology
Confirms Grubin authored the chapter on polygraphy in this major academic handbook, published 2010 and 'Polygraph Testing of Sex Offenders' in Treatment of Sex Offenders (Springer, 2016) [5]Verified Polygraph Testing of Sex Offenders (Book Chapter)
Confirms mandatory testing of high-risk sex offenders was introduced in England and Wales in 2014, and that PCSOT is rarely used outside the US and England/Wales. He also co-authored with Stockdale a 2012 paper on the admissibility of polygraph evidence in English criminal proceedings [5]Verified Polygraph Testing of Sex Offenders (Book Chapter)
Confirms mandatory testing of high-risk sex offenders was introduced in England and Wales in 2014, and that PCSOT is rarely used outside the US and England/Wales, and with Bell a 2010 paper exploring how functional magnetic resonance imaging may promote theoretical understanding of the polygraph test [12]Verified The Polygraph and Forensic Psychiatry
Confirms Grubin's analysis of polygraph use in forensic psychiatry, including fMRI research with Bell, and median CQT accuracy of.85 per NRC review.

His paper 'The Polygraph and Forensic Psychiatry' in the Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law (2010) remains one of the most cited works on polygraph applications in clinical forensic settings [12]Verified The Polygraph and Forensic Psychiatry
Confirms Grubin's analysis of polygraph use in forensic psychiatry, including fMRI research with Bell, and median CQT accuracy of.85 per NRC review. Grubin has also published on the historical development of polygraph testing, with his 2005 co-authored review 'Lie detection and the polygraph: A historical review' covering its emergence in the United States and its role in newer applications [27]Verified Lie Detection and the Polygraph: A Historical Review
Confirms Grubin and Madsen published a historical review of polygraph development including its emergence in the US and role in sex offender supervision. For those interested in the academic foundations of polygraph practice, our polygraph research database includes the latest peer-reviewed studies, such as Ogloblin and Molchanov's (2004) academic course on instrumental detection of lies [28]Verified Instrumental Detection of Lies: Academic Course
Foundational academic training textbook relevant to the broader polygraph education landscape.

Training Standards and Quality Control

Behavioural Measures UK operates a distinctive training model. The company differs from other polygraph training schools in that it requires graduates to commit to ongoing supervision and quality control [6]Verified Behavioural Measures UK — About
Confirms BMUK was established in 2009 by Grubin and Eric Holden, has trained all probation and police polygraph examiners in England and Wales, and expanded to domestic abuse and terrorism offenders. BMUK's stated position is that the controversies associated with polygraph testing are not fundamental to polygraphy, but to poor practice and implementation [6]Verified Behavioural Measures UK — About
Confirms BMUK was established in 2009 by Grubin and Eric Holden, has trained all probation and police polygraph examiners in England and Wales, and expanded to domestic abuse and terrorism offenders.

The school is directed by Don Krapohl, one of the most widely known and respected polygraph experts in the world, who is the current President of the American Polygraph Association [29]Verified Behavioural Measures UK — Team (Don Krapohl and Donnie Dutton profiles)
Confirms Don Krapohl is President of the APA and school director, Donnie Dutton is past APA President and formerly of the National Center for Credibility Assessment. Grubin himself teaches the physiology component of the programme [30]Verified UK Police Polygraph — First-Person Account of Police Polygraph Training
Confirms Hertfordshire and South Yorkshire Police were first to fund trained police polygraph examiners, and Grubin taught the physiology component of training. Other primary instructors include Donnie Dutton, a past President of the American Polygraph Association and former Head of the Threat Analysis and Strategic Support Branch at the National Center for Credibility Assessment [29]Verified Behavioural Measures UK — Team (Don Krapohl and Donnie Dutton profiles)
Confirms Don Krapohl is President of the APA and school director, Donnie Dutton is past APA President and formerly of the National Center for Credibility Assessment.

The training programme runs for 12 weeks with intensive learning and regular assessments [16]Verified Compulsory Lie Detector Tests for Serious Sex Offenders — GOV.UK
Confirms the mandatory pilot ran April 2009 to October 2011, offenders made twice as many disclosures, Grubin led training via Behavioural Measures, and the 12-week training programme. All probation and police polygraph examiners trained by BMUK are accredited to the standards set by the American Polygraph Association [31]Verified Polygraph Testing for UK Immigration and Probation — APA Standards
Confirms probation officers involved in polygraph testing have been trained as examiners to the standards set by the American Polygraph Association. Professor Grubin himself is not a polygraph examiner — he provides objective oversight of how polygraph testing is implemented, reported, and quality controlled in keeping with what can be justified by evidence, and where evidence is lacking, theory [1]Verified Behavioural Measures UK — Team
Confirms Grubin is Emeritus Professor of Forensic Psychiatry at Newcastle University, CEO of BMUK, Honorary Consultant Forensic Psychiatrist in the NHS, and is not himself a polygraph examiner. For those interested in polygraph training, visit our polygraph training page or learn how to become a polygraph examiner.

Thousands of Tests and Growing

Since 2014, thousands of polygraph tests have been conducted with individuals convicted of sexual offences as part of their community supervision across England and Wales [20]Verified Polygraph Testing Measures in the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill — GOV.UK Equality Impact Assessment
Confirms the current polygraph arrangement commenced January 2013, and that the Domestic Abuse Act expanded polygraph to domestic abuse offenders. There are now 14 police forces using polygraph testing in their supervision of individuals [32]Verified Professor Theresa Gannon — University of Kent
Confirms 14 police forces currently use polygraph in supervision of individuals, and Kent CORE-FP won the MoJ tender to evaluate mandatory polygraph testing in 2010. The programme continues to generate important risk-relevant disclosures that help offender managers keep the public safe.

The Colin Pitchfork case powerfully illustrated the value of polygraph monitoring: parole papers revealed that during polygraph tests in 2021, it was believed Pitchfork was deliberately seeking to undermine the testing process by controlling his breathing [17]Verified Colin Pitchfork Parole Papers — Suspected Polygraph Circumvention
Confirms parole documents stated Pitchfork was suspected of deliberately seeking to undermine the polygraph testing process by controlling his breathing in 2021. He was recalled to prison within weeks of release after probation staff identified concerning behaviours [33]Verified Colin Pitchfork Recalled to Prison — Police Professional
Confirms Pitchfork was subject to polygraph tests as a condition of his licence and was recalled to prison for concerning behaviours in November 2021. The Parole Board later noted that any future risk management plan for Pitchfork would be less robust without polygraph testing [34]Verified Colin Pitchfork — Parole Board Decision (2025)
Confirms that the Parole Board noted any future risk management plan for Pitchfork would be less robust without polygraph testing.

Polygraph is increasingly being recognised as a valuable tool across a range of UK contexts. Private investigators now routinely work alongside polygraph examiners in cases across the UK, while families have found polygraph helpful for issues including gambling addiction, financial infidelity, and charity fraud investigations.

Influencing International Discourse

Grubin has noted that post-conviction polygraph testing of sex offenders is common in the US and increasingly applied in England and Wales, but hardly if ever used elsewhere in the world [5]Verified Polygraph Testing of Sex Offenders (Book Chapter)
Confirms mandatory testing of high-risk sex offenders was introduced in England and Wales in 2014, and that PCSOT is rarely used outside the US and England/Wales. His work in establishing a robust, evidence-based implementation model in the UK has created a template that other countries can follow. He maintains strong links with the American Polygraph Association, especially in relation to research [1]Verified Behavioural Measures UK — Team
Confirms Grubin is Emeritus Professor of Forensic Psychiatry at Newcastle University, CEO of BMUK, Honorary Consultant Forensic Psychiatrist in the NHS, and is not himself a polygraph examiner.

His presentations at international conferences including the International Association for the Treatment of Sexual Offenders (IATSO) have shared findings from the large-scale trials of post-conviction sex offender testing carried out in England [2]Verified Don Grubin — IATSO Conference Biography
Confirms Grubin is originally from the US, trained at the Institute of Psychiatry and Maudsley/Broadmoor Hospitals, has been leading polygraph implementation since the early 2000s. The UK model — where polygraph is used exclusively as a supervision and treatment tool, with legal safeguards preventing use in criminal proceedings — is frequently cited as a balanced approach to polygraph governance. For related polygraph applications in the UK context, see our guides on polygraph testing in UK divorce proceedings and polygraph for immigration and spouse visa cases.