ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION IN LIMINE TO PRECLUDE EVIDENCE OF POLYGRAPH RESULTS

ROBERT E. BLACKBURN, District Judge.

The matter before me is Defendant William I. Koch's Motion In Limine To Preclude Evidence of Polygraph Results [#242],1 filed September 12, 2014. I grant the motion.

While acknowledging that "[p]olygraph tests are generally inadmissible in this circuit," Jones v. Geneva Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 132 Fed. Appx. 772, 776 (10th Cir. June 1, 2005), plaintiff insists that such evidence may become admissible if defendant "opens the door" by referring to the fact that the Gunnison County District Attorney refused to bring criminal charges of false imprisonment against defendant. Even if such evidence is admitted at trial,2 plaintiff's conclusion that he perforce would be allowed to proffer the results of his polygraph examination is far from pellucid. Nor does plaintiff explain how he intends to qualify such evidence even if the court were inclined to consider it. See id. ("If a party seeks to admit a polygraph test, that party must satisfy the criteria for admission under Daubert.").3 Indeed, this same rule would apply even if plaintiff were to testify only to the bare fact that he underwent such an examination. See id. In addition, "[t]he credibility of witnesses is generally not an appropriate subject for expert testimony," and thus "is often excluded because it usurps a critical function of the jury and because it is not helpful to the jury, which is capable of making its own determination regarding credibility." United States v. Call, 129 F.3d 1402, 1406 (10th Cir. 1997), cert. denied, 118 S.Ct. 2064 (1998).

Finally, even if plaintiff were able to overcome these not-insignificant hurdles, the court sees as extremely unlikely any possibility that the admission of such evidence would survive analysis under Rule 403. See Call, 129 F.3d at 1405; Jones, 132 Fed. Appx. at 776. Any probative value, which for now appears extremely attenuated, would likely be substantially outweighed — if not overwhelmed — by the dangers of confusing the issues, misleading the jury, and wasting time.

THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED as follows:

1. That Defendant William I. Koch's Motion In Limine To Preclude Evidence of Polygraph Results [#242], filed September 12, 2014, is GRANTED; and

2. That all parties are PRECLUDED and PROHIBITED, pending further order of court, from referring to or offering in evidence before the jury matters referring or relating to plaintiff's submission to a polygraph examination and/or the content or results of any such examination.