The Effects Of Polygraph Tests On The United States Government

In a United States courtroom, evidence is king. There are all different kinds of evidence that can be brought into court, and these types of evidence are statistical, anecdotal, analogical, and testimony. Testimony is defined by Merriam Webster dictionary as “something that someone says especially in a court of law while formally promising to tell the truth” (2014). During a trial, testimony is heard supporting both sides of the court, the prosecution and defense. Though some of that testimony is based on hard facts, or expert testimony (deemed an expert by the judge), some of it can be easily misconstrued, and some can be undeniable (such as expert testimony in relation to hard evidence such as DNA). But there remains one type of testimony that carries an unprecedented weight in a courtroom, and that is eyewitness testimony. Some of the problems associated with eyewitness testimony are that is it unreliable, and it is leading or suggestive to a jury. In this paper I am going to address these issues as well as explore some ethical issues around eyewitness testimony, how it can effect the presumption of guilt, and who should have the burden of proof under certain circumstances.

The field of forensic psychology is constantly evolving due to new research and better techniques that have developed. The polygraph test was created many years ago; however, it is still being analyzed and

of the lie detector in criminal investigation. John Larson, a “college cop”, student of Vollmer, who built the first lie detector in the Berkeley department, later said that he felt the technique had

way due to the fact that the witness’s verbal testimony could be wrong especially if it is drawn on paper.

There are many instances in which the polygraph is proven to be at fault such as with Cleve Backster. He was a polygraph examiner and believed strongly in the polygraph and its results. Backster one day decided to attach a houseplant that was in his office to the machine. He then would light the plants leaf on fire to see if the polygraph would have a spike in action. To his surprise as he struck the match the polygraph jumped signifying a response (Eells). Instead of considering that the polygraph went off randomly Backster instead assumed the plant had feelings and could even read his mind. This discovery lead to many scientific research projects in which scientists were unable to replicate Backster’s results. Rather than dismiss the event and polygraph as unreliable Backster dedicated the rest of his life to proving his discovery. The polygraph has been drilled into the minds of people as credible that taking it out of the justice system

Psychological research shows that eyewitness testimony is not always accurate, therefore it should not be used in the criminal justice system. Discuss.

Psychological research shows that eyewitness testimony is not always accurate; therefore it should not be used in the criminal justice system. Discuss.

However, although this suggests that human lie detection is fairly accurate, earlier research has found the opposite. According to Wallace (1999), psychological research on deception shows that most of us are poor judges of truthfulness. One may assume that this only applies to only ordinary people and not professionals. However further research shows that ‘this applies to professionals such as police and custom inspectors, whose jobs are supposed to include some expertise at lie detection’ (Wallace, 1999).

Polygraph- an electronic instrument Taft records physiological arousal from multiple channels, it is often used as a kid detector the signals are kicked oh by denies attached to different parts of the body. Rubber tubes are strapped around a suspects torso to measure breathing, blood pressure cuffs are wrapped around the upper arm do measure pulse rate abs electrodes ads places on fingertips to record sweat-gland activity or perspiration these signals are send by amplifies and can be seen usually it's to detect deception. But not full-proof sometimes truthful people fail the test and people who understand the test can fake the

Also, due to the Brain scans being “70 to 90 per cent” accurate, this producing a defence for a defendant to argue that the scan in inaccurate, causing the process of scans to be a waste of time. As previously seen In R v Béland the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that the results of a polygraph examination are not admissible as evidence. As the test had relied upon ones sweat and heart palpitations which delivered inaccurate results. This has also been seen to be the reason why polygraph examinations were excluded as evidence in the English Criminal justice system. Therefore

PrimePoint Polygraph is a self-owned company that provides adequate polygraph, and investigative services. Tim Ruby is both the owner, and operator of PrimePoint. Ruby is a full time forensic psychophysiologist for the government. He has been a polygrapher for six years. In addition, he conducts testing for post convicted sex offenders, and pre-employment for law enforcement. Ruby got interested in the polygraph field as a former police officer, and criminal investigator. He was given the opportunity to attend the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s polygraph school, which sparked his interest in the field. He then pursued the field by earning an Associate Degree of Criminal Justice Administration, as well as a Bachelors Degree of Science and

Facts of the case: Imagine you are an HR manager and your boss and owner of the company, Bill, comes to you suspecting his assistant, Paige, is stealing money from the company. Bill would like a polygraph test conducted to see if Paige is stealing from the company. He would also like you to conduct electronic surveillance on Paige’s work e-mail for anything suspicious.

Credibility- Now, I would like to consider myself an expert lie detector, but apparently binge-watching 12 seasons of Criminal Minds in 3 months does not give me those qualifications. So to better inform and assist you, my lovely audience, I did some research, mostly utilizing online materials.

Polygraph tests are simply not reliable enough to determine a person 's punishment that can be life changing. There are quite a few things that make a polygraph test tick and not all of them are as reliable as they may seem. There are a few different factors that come into play when someone is taking a lie detector test. “William M. Marston invented the first lie detector in 1917,” (Hammiett, 2016 p.1). His attentions were great, and he thought that it would be accurate and efficient with no problems. “However, in 1923, the D.C. Court of Appeals stated that there was not enough scientific evidence to support Matson’s lie detector machine,” (Hammiett, 2016 p.1). If there wasn’t enough evidence, then what makes us think that there is now? It is the same as it has always been and if the D.C. Court of Appeals says that there isn’t enough scientific evidence to support it, then we shouldn 't use something that is

The polygraph test is one of the most controversial criminal investigative techniques of all-time. From the initial years of the invention to today, there is not a consensus about the investigative tool. That is why there are many people for and against the administration of polygraph tests. Therefore, in order to develop a clear picture of the polygraph test the history of the test must be established. Although, there are many sources that have well documented concerns about the invention, the polygraph test is still around after almost 80 years.