The Litvinenko Inquiry

The Litvinenko Inquiry
8.137 On examination, it became clear that there were a number of problems with the way
in which the test was conducted.
8.138 The type of test that Mr Burgess conducted on Mr Lugovoy is known as the Control
Question Technique (CQT). Professor Bull told me that research suggested that the
CQT has an 85% success rate in cases, such as this, where the result is that the
subject is not deceptive. There were, however, some problems with the research
techniques that had been used. Moreover, that figure assumed that the test was
properly conducted and that the subject had not used countermeasures.
8.139 Put very shortly, the CQT operates by comparing the subject’s response while
answering two sets of questions – ‘comparison questions’, which are intended to
provoke a dishonest response but which are not related to the conduct that is the
subject of the test, and ‘relevant questions’, which do relate to the subject of the test –
here, Mr Lugovoy’s alleged involvement in poisoning Mr Litvinenko. As Professor Bull
explained, the CQT depends for its success on the examiner choosing appropriate
questions and asking them in the correct manner. There were difficulties here on both
counts.
8.140 Mr Burgess repeatedly told Mr Lugovoy that the comparison questions were not
really part of the test, that they were not a threat to him, and that he wasn’t being
tested on them. This was completely contrary to the principles underlying the CQT,
as explained in scientific literature that I was shown. Professor Bull stated that this
was, “inconsistent with… good practice in polygraph testing”. Mr Burgess responded
that downplaying the importance of the control questions would be likely to increase
the chances of a negative result to the test, whereas Mr Lugovoy’s result had been
positive. I accept that there is a narrow logic to this proposition, but it does not answer
the general concern. As Professor Bull stated, polygraph tests are multi-faceted. The
outcome depends upon comparing a range of results across the piece. One cannot
simply accept that one part of the process was faulty but assume that it had no wider
damaging effect. The CQT process depends on the control questions being properly
selected and asked. The deficiencies that were identified undermine the test as a
whole.
8.141 There were, moreover, further difficulties relating to the relevant questions. One
question was whether Mr Lugovoy, “had ever performed any manipulations with
polonium”. Mr Lugovoy had told Mr Burgess prior to the test that he had been
contaminated by polonium, and that in that sense he had had “some dealings” with
polonium. Professor Bull observed that, in those circumstances, it was not clear why
Mr Lugovoy’s answer ‘No’ to that question was accepted as a truthful answer. I agree.
This question was poorly selected, and further undermined the test.
8.142 There was a further difficulty with the relevant questions. The CQT process depends
on the subject of the test being put under pressure, and measuring the subject’s
nervous physical reaction to false denials. However, throughout the testing process,
Mr Burgess sought to reassure Mr Lugovoy, telling him that he was not expecting him
to give untruthful answers to the relevant questions. As well as demonstrating a lack
of objectivity on Mr Burgess’ part, this would have tended to reduce Mr Lugovoy’s
reaction to false answers he was giving. Professor Bull considered that this was a
factor that could have undermined the test. I agree.
8.143 Professor Bull also made the more general point that the very fact that, by the time of
the test, Mr Lugovoy had answered questions repeatedly, over a period of years, about
204