Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Ohio Court Admits Lie Detector Tests As Evidence

Posted by CowboyNeal on from the good-enough-for-maury dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Last month, an Ohio court set a new precedent by allowing polygraph test results to be entered as evidence in a criminal trial. Do lie detectors really belong in the court room? AntiPolygraph.org critiques the polygraph evidence from the this precedential case (Ohio v. Sharma)."

6 of 198 comments (clear)

  1. Lie Dectectors will persist... by bossesjoe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...as long as people are still searching for some magical way to get the truth out of somebody. Won't happen short of the next fifty years of neurological research.

    --
    There is no replacement for displacement.
    1. Re:Lie Dectectors will persist... by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Give me a two by four and I can have you begging me to believe you are Osama Bin Ladin in under 60 minutes!

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
  2. Weight vs admissibility by deblau · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Getting evidence admitted is one thing, but getting a jury to believe it or give it any weight or credibility is something else entirely.

    --
    This post expresses my opinion, not that of my employer. And yes, IAAL.
    1. Re:Weight vs admissibility by Elemenope · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's fantastic! That means only people who can't afford better lawyers than the schmucks on TV will be imprisoned, and who cares about them, anyway?

      But, to lose the sarcasm for a moment, most defendant protections in criminal law were developed so as to defend even the indigent, since they are the most vulnerable to unfairness seeing as how their lawyers either suck or are overworked (or both). If a method of obtaining evidence is bad enough that a decently trained lawyer can demonstrate its utter ridiculousness, it does not belong in a courtroom in the first place. The competence of the defendant's lawyer should not be depended upon as the single fail-safe employed to determine whether a person should be deprived of their freedom.

      --
      All the techniques ever used to make men moral have been themselves thoroughly immoral... (Nietzsche)
  3. What's next handwriting analysis and phrenology? by GoatRavisher · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I once interviewed for a job and was told that I would be required to handwrite a statement so it could be analyzed by their "handwriting expert." I promptly got up and left. They looked shocked. Apparently they initially tried polygraphing applicants, but found it to be too expensive. Years later I bumped into the HR person at another job and asked her about the success of the vetting process. She said it didn't work and if anything made things worse.

    --
    Man will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest. --Denis Diderot
  4. DON'T CALL IT A LIE DETECTOR!!! by Robber+Baron · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It doesn't "detect lies"!!! It detects physiological changes ONLY! Determining what those changes actually mean is entirely subjective and open to varied interpretations!

    --

    You're using her as bait, Master!