Utah has quietly, but decisively, shifted its approach to investigating sexual assault, enacting a law that prohibits law enforcement and government officials from requesting polygraph tests from alleged victims. While seemingly a technical adjustment to legal procedure, this change represents a significant victory for advocates who have long argued that these tests are not only unreliable but actively harmful, particularly in cases involving trauma. The move, signed into law by Governor Spencer Cox on March 21st, 2026, follows years of campaigning sparked by a harrowing case involving a therapist who continued to abuse patients while benefiting from flawed polygraph results.
The Fallout from Scott Owen’s Abuse: A Catalyst for Change
The impetus for this legislation stemmed directly from the case of Scott Owen, a licensed therapist in Provo, Utah, who sexually abused multiple patients. Reporting by ProPublica and The Salt Lake Tribune revealed how a polygraph administered to one of Owen’s accusers, identified as “Andrew” to protect his privacy, cast doubt on his claims. This doubt allowed Owen to continue practicing for two more years, during which he abused additional individuals. Owen is now serving a lengthy prison sentence, but the damage was already done.
Representative Angela Romero, the House minority leader who spearheaded the bill, recounted her determination to prevent similar injustices. “For me, it was really specifically for that one individual who was not believed,” Romero stated, “and then their perpetrator went on to harm other people.” The case highlighted a disturbing pattern: the reliance on a scientifically questionable tool to discredit victims and shield abusers.
Why Polygraphs Fail Sexual Assault Survivors
The core issue isn’t simply the inaccuracy of polygraphs – though that’s substantial. It’s the specific way trauma impacts physiological responses. Polygraph tests measure indicators like heart rate, blood pressure, and skin conductivity, interpreting fluctuations as signs of deception. However, individuals who have experienced sexual assault often exhibit similar physiological responses when recounting their experiences, due to the inherent stress and anxiety. This creates a scenario where a victim’s genuine emotional reaction is misinterpreted as lying.
“The fundamental problem with polygraphs in these cases is that they measure physiological arousal, not truthfulness,” explains Dr. Stephen Behnke, Director of the ABA Criminal Justice Section.
“Trauma fundamentally alters the nervous system. Expecting a survivor to exhibit the same physiological baseline as someone recounting a neutral event is not only unrealistic but deeply unfair. It essentially punishes them for their trauma.”
This isn’t a new concern. The American Psychological Association has long maintained that there is little evidence to support the validity of polygraph tests, and their use in legal proceedings is highly restricted. However, Utah was an outlier, allowing their use in investigations even when other evidence was lacking.
A National Trend: States Rejecting Polygraph Evidence in Sexual Assault Cases
Utah’s decision aligns with a growing national trend. Half of U.S. States already prohibit law enforcement from administering polygraphs to sexual assault victims. These laws reflect a broader understanding of the complexities of trauma and the unreliability of these tests. States like California, Illinois, and New York have taken similar steps, recognizing the potential for re-traumatization and the risk of hindering investigations. The National Conference of State Legislatures provides a comprehensive overview of state laws regarding polygraph evidence.
However, the resistance to banning polygraphs wasn’t universal, even in Utah. Some defense attorneys argued that the tests, while not admissible in court, could still be valuable tools for investigators, providing a potential avenue for assessing credibility when other evidence is scarce. Steve Burton, with the Utah Defense Attorney Association, voiced this concern during legislative hearings, stating that polygraphs could offer a “way to show that their client may be telling the truth.” This argument, however, was ultimately outweighed by the potential harm to victims.
Beyond Polygraphs: Addressing Systemic Failures in Sexual Assault Investigations
The passage of this law is a crucial step, but it’s only one piece of a larger puzzle. Utah is also establishing a task force to address systemic shortcomings in how sexual misconduct complaints against licensed professionals are handled. This task force, announced earlier this month, will focus on improving reporting mechanisms, standardizing investigative procedures, and fostering better communication between agencies. The goal is to prevent cases like Owen’s from happening again.
The task force’s focus on health care, mental health, and massage therapy is particularly noteworthy. These professions have historically seen a disproportionately high number of sexual misconduct allegations. Melanie Hall, a spokesperson for the Utah Division of Professional Licensing (DOPL), acknowledged this trend, stating that the agency is aware that certain license types “have a tendency towards certain types of violations.”
This acknowledgement highlights a critical issue: the need for proactive measures to prevent abuse within these professions. This includes enhanced screening processes for applicants, ongoing training for licensed professionals, and a culture of accountability that prioritizes victim safety.
The Broader Implications: Rebuilding Trust in the Reporting Process
The ban on polygraphs and the creation of the task force signal a broader shift in Utah’s approach to sexual assault. It’s a move towards prioritizing victim-centered investigations, recognizing the unique challenges faced by survivors, and fostering a more supportive environment for reporting abuse.
However, rebuilding trust will require sustained effort. Victims must feel confident that their claims will be taken seriously, investigated thoroughly, and handled with sensitivity. Which means addressing not only the legal and procedural aspects of investigations but also the cultural factors that contribute to victim-blaming and silence.
As Utah moves forward, its experience offers a valuable lesson for other states grappling with similar issues. The case of Scott Owen serves as a stark reminder of the devastating consequences of relying on flawed tools and failing to prioritize the needs of survivors. The question now is: what other systemic changes are needed to truly create a safer and more just system for those who have experienced sexual assault?
What steps do you think are most crucial for rebuilding trust between survivors and the institutions meant to protect them?
