This article takes a critical look at the recent Jensen, Shafer, Roby, and Roby study that found that juveniles and adults have no statistically significant different rates of passing sexual history polygraph examinations. Numerous research and statistical issues are identified, including lack of independence, no adjustment for differing rates of opportunity across ages, poor construct validity of deceit, failure to adjust for base rates of deceit in subsequent analyses, and failure to include recidivism as an outcome. In addition, three arguments made by Jensen et al. against using recidivism as an outcome to judge post-conviction polygraph are discussed along with critical assessments of two recent studies examining the relationship between recidivism and sexual history polygraph examinations. It ends with a discussion of the current state of post-conviction polygraph testing research and way forward to find solid, replicable evidence that assesses its utility as a correctional intervention.