Why Polygraphs Are Not Always The Answer

Discussion in 'Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum' started by JR, Jun 14, 2002.

  1. JR

    JR FFJ Senior Member

    New York Judge Dismisses Murder Conviction for Wrongly Imprisoned Man

    In 1989, another man, Charles Rivera, a federal prisoner in the witness protection program, confessed to the killing. Authorities didn't believe Rivera because he failed a lie detector test.

    http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGA0NB6JF2D.html
     
  2. fly

    fly Member

    absolutely

    JR - There's no question that polygraphs are subject to a lot of errors. I've posted about this many, many times.

    While they can provide useful information, they are known to be wide open to a variety of problems leading to faulty results. That is precisely why they are not allowed as evidence in most courts.

    There's pretty clear evidence that the chance of being labeled a liar incorrectly is greater than being labeled honest when lying, and that makes them particularly dangerous when used in a criminal justice setting.

    A "guilty" result should simply identify the person as somebody at whom investigators should look very closely -- a red flag, but not an orange jumpsuit complete with shackles.
     
  3. AK

    AK Member

    Questions, questions, questions

    I'd like to find out a lot more about the family polygraphs. Were they administered and deemed inconclusive by the SLC police, and at what point was the decision to send them to Quantico for analysis? Did all the tests go or just the hinky one? Will they get fast-tracked because of the nature of the crime?

    While I'm here, does anyone know of a case when a Voice Stress Evaluation test was deemed admissible in court?
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice