@TruWVblu- Reading comprehension isn't your forte is it? Read my post above. For chrissakes, she didn't take a polygraph, nor would any lawyer allow her to take any polygraph administered by her former employer who is her pending adversary. And just because he claims he "passed" a polygraph, doesn't mean that happened. Also, the employer (UA), who can be held vicariously liable in this context, is not going to make any admission that its employee committed acts for which they will be held liable.
While a polygraph is not admissible in court, it is relevant that he passed his test and the accuser did not. Not only that, but she refused to even cooperate with the investigation. Look, I am not a RR fan by any stretch but this guilty before facts are known and guilt is established society we live in is getting very dangerous. The mere mention of a sexual allegation results in an immediate judgment and consequences. It is just wrong.