The most frequent statement, we, polygraph examiners, hear – not only from ordinary citizens but also from lawyers – is: “The polygraph is not evidence!”

In June 2024, when I was invited to participate as a lecturer in the workshop “Innovative Forensics in the Conditions of War,” organized by the Council of Europe’s project “Strengthening Law Enforcement of Ukraine During and After the War,” I was asked to prepare a controversial topic to spark audience interest. I chose this: “Is the polygraph considered evidence?”

Tetyana Morozova poses a controversial question at the workshop “Innovative Forensics in the Conditions of War” (21.06.2024, Kyiv): “Is the polygraph considered evidence?”

The participants almost unanimously and quickly concluded: “The polygraph is not evidence!”

Then I asked: “Is a microscope – used to conduct millions of forensic examinations around the world -considered evidence?” And I answered: of course not, because the microscope is merely an instrument used to collect evidence. So why is this obvious when it comes to a microscope, but not when it comes to a polygraph?

My next question was: “Is a forensic expert’s conclusion based on a psychological examination using a computerized polygraph considered evidence?”

And that’s when the audience, as the youth say, “froze.” It turned out that most of them were barely aware such an examination even existed.

But it does exist. It is provided for by:

• amendments made on 27.07.2015 to Section VI of the Scientific and Methodological Recommendations on the Preparation and Appointment of Forensic Examinations and Expert Studies, approved by Order No. 53/5 of the Ministry of Justice dated 08.10.1998;
• the industry standard DSTU 9266:2023 “Forensic Psychological Examination. Use of Polygraph. General Requirements,” which came into force on 01.05.2024;
• and the Methodology for Conducting Forensic Psychological Examinations Using a Computerized Polygraph, which is included in the register of the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine (registration code – 14.1.84; type of examination – 14. Psychological Examination. 14.1. Psychological Studies).

The Ukrainian Polygraph Association (UPA) has paid close attention to the development of regulatory support for forensic psychological examinations using a computerized polygraph. But rules mean nothing if there is no one to follow them. Moreover, any methodology must be tested in practice – but who will ensure that, if there are no qualified professionals?

This meant one thing: alongside developing the Methodology, it was essential to train polygraph examiners for state research forensic institutions and provide them with methodological support in their early careers.

You can complain that “nothing works,” or you can follow a different principle: take action, don’t wait for others.

UPA always chooses the latter, and we are repeatedly convinced that this is the only right approach – one that leads to success.

In the past 8 years, we have trained many certified forensic polygraph experts. One of them is Anton Shmukin, a graduate of the UPA’s polygraph training school, now Head of the Laboratory of Psychological, Linguistic, and Other Studies at the Dnipro Scientific Research Institute of Forensic Examinations of the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine.

Certified forensic expert Anton Shmukin prepares for field research.

Anton’s recent success became the reason for this article: the forensic psychological examination using a computerized polygraph, conducted by him, was taken into account along with other evidence in a case involving systematic sexual violence by a father against his 9 – and 13-year-old daughters.

The study was conducted under a ruling of the Lozova City District Court of Kharkiv Region. The examination identified indicators of the man’s involvement in the alleged crimes. In July 2025, the court found the accused guilty and sentenced him to life imprisonment.

Below, we will provide a link to the court decision in the Unified State Register of Court Decisions, but first, let us tell you more about forensic expert Anton Shmukin.

From 1998 to 2023, he served in the criminal police of the National Police of Ukraine, from detective to deputy chief of a district police department. Always interested in psychology, he earned a master’s degree in psychology in 2020.

While working on solving particularly serious crimes, he frequently thought about the effectiveness of using polygraphs in investigations. In 2023, Anton decided to undergo polygraph examiner training at UPA, under the guidance of Dr. Tetyana Morozova, a polygraph examiner with over 20 years of experience.

When the Dnipro Research Institute of Forensic Examinations approached UPA with a request to recommend a polygraph examiner who could become a forensic expert, we didn’t hesitate to recommend Anton Shmukin.

Smart, thoughtful, analytical, articulate, tactful yet persistent, responsible, and self-demanding—his qualities made him an ideal candidate for forensic work. He accepted the offer.

As a result, the man who came to polygraph training as a police officer left the course nearly a full-fledged forensic expert. He later retired with 25 years of service, got employed at the DniproNDiSE, and obtained certification as a forensic expert.

Time flies. In just 2.5 years, Anton Shmukin, as a certified forensic expert, has conducted many psychological examinations, including over 10 using polygraph, some of them in serious criminal investigations and court trials.

Forensic Experts Anton Shmukin and His Mentor, Tetyana Morozova, at the Extraordinary UPA Congress Held on April 26, 2025

We are proud of our graduates and always share their successes on the websites of the Ukrainian Polygraph Association (UPA) or the Expert Research Center of Tetyana Morozova:
Link 1 
Link 2 
Link 3 
We congratulate Anton Shmukin, his leadership, and his colleagues—forensic experts, police officers, and prosecutors—whose dedicated work ensured the inevitable punishment in a pedophilia case:
Link 4