Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: County Court properly denied the motion to suppress defendant's statements to the police. The officer's assurance that defendant would be permitted to go home after giving his statement did not create "a substantial risk that the defendant might falsely incriminate himself" (CPL 60.45 [b] [i]; see, People v Richardson, 202 A.D.2d 958, 959, lv denied 83 N.Y.2d 914). The unsworn testimony of the victim provided sufficient corroboration of defendant's admissions to support the conviction (see, CPL 60.50; People v Knights, 131 A.D.2d 924, 925-926, lv denied 70 N.Y.2d 713; People v Philipp, 106 A.D.2d 681, 682). The court properly excluded evidence of the results of defendant's polygraph examination (see, People v Shedrick, 66 N.Y.2d 1015, 1018, rearg denied 67 N.Y.2d 758).