You know, the really pathetic thing about what you just said is that I've never illegally downloaded music or movies, and never cheated on my partner.
Care to cite where I accused you of any such thing?
And you're seriously saying that will get flagged as a lie and make me untrustworthy?
Depends on what else they know... either based on their own info or that which is said about you by others and the credibility of those statements.
Let me tell you this right now ... the people screening based on those things are morons unless they actually have proof to the contrary.
Oh? And you've been on the receiving end of such Q's and know their mental processes? I haven't... so I can't say either way.
Because unless you have evidence, assuming everyone who answers no to those questions is lying is completely idiotic. Because, not everybody has done those things, and if you have no evidence suggesting otherwise is just being an asshole.
No where did I say answering no would get you flagged as a liar... I said that depending on the circumstances they it will raising a flag that they may not be the most trustworthy. Key word in that sentence *may*. Further investigation may be required. Maybe they've honestly never used Napster back in the day and instead has a rather lengthy iTunes purchase history?
A broader thing is you seem to thinks such a background check has the same level of evidence & burden of proof as a court does in a criminal trial. It does not.
I increasingly believe the people who do security screenings don't give an actual damn about the truth, just their own interpretations of reality.
Very true at the airport, when it comes to security clearances... it depends on who is doing the vetting and to what degree they are doing it (based on the degree of clearance being sought).