Forgot your password?
Type your email address below and click the sign up button to create an account.
Polygraphs are scientifically based and have research to back up their validity. However, they are not reliable for large groups of people who are naturally anxious, are practiced liars, or sociopaths.
I agree polygraphs shouldn't be allowed in court. My question was how did it become that polygraphs weren't permitted but scent lineups were. They both seem like weak ways to convict someone of a crime.
Alton, Rusty and Mike,
Thanks for reading and for the kind words. I'll share them with Leslie.
Read ever word, even backed up a few times to make sure I did not misread something. I never even knew sure a thing existed. Thanks for the learning experience.
#1. As some folk would say, "Ya done good Leslie." #2. Her story might get that super sleuth a new source of business, paranoid parents requesting sniffs of the backseats of their teenager's cars.#3. The story is another example of unscrupulous LE using any evidence, true or not, to "solve" a case. An instructor at the Wyoming Law Enforcement Academy stated, "The only thing worse than a cop killer, is a killer cop." The same applies to implicating and/or prosecuting innocent people, even though you may not actually throw the switch on the electric chair, you've basically "killed" their life to some extent.
Polygraphs should not be accepted as evidence either. Its pure pseudo-science. Where is the DNA evidence? That seems like it would settle the case rather quickly.
I did post this morning but it disappeared..
She did a great job....