About Time? Lie Detectors

[sb772107]

I recently saw this article in the Daily Mirror.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/paedophile-lie-detector-trap-test-3841159

Isn't this long over due. They should extend this to anyone arrested or questioned for a sexual offence, especially historic cases where evidence is lacking.

I know the results can't be used as evidence (yet), but surely it will help rule out false accusations and on the flip side, could uncover serial offenders and their crimes.

Your thoughts

Stephen B

[jeffa]

Lie detectors / polygraphs aren't admissible as evidence for one good reason: they're so easy to fool.

[factor-fiction]

Well it seems to be regarded as a way of discovering the truth on the Jeremy Kyle show.
But if it's not accepted as reliable I am not sure how it can do what you suggest.

[jno]

just hope your freedom never depends on one

http://www.apa.org/research/action/polygraph.aspx

[ludwig]

Lie detectors are notoriously unreliable.

[Old_Geezer]

"Well it seems to be regarded as a way of discovering the truth on the Jeremy Kyle show."

Thanks f-f, LMAO.

[New Judge]

Sorry, disagree sb.

In UK law it is the job of the prosecution to bring evidence to court which is sufficient to support a conviction. The defendant has to prove nothing; he is not obliged to answer any questions put to him whether under a polygraph or not (though of course an adverse inference can be drawn if he refuses); he has no obligation to assist the enquiry in any way.

This suggestion removes those protections. The police will be able to fish for potential suspects and bring them in to be questioned under a lie-detector. Even if polygraphs were 100% reliable (which they most certainly are not) the idea would shift the burden of proof substantially and is not something I would like to see.

[ludwig]

Sooner or later we copy everything America does, so this should come as no surprise.

[agchristie]

I think New Judge has summed it up very simply.The Defendant is under no obligation to co-operate and just as if he/she doesn't give evidence in court,runs the risk of an adverse inference.In my view,the introduction of the lie-detector is a non-starter...

[sb772107]

I know lie detectors have a terrible reputation, but for the MOJ to introduce them in such a way to assist the police and probation officers they must have some faith in them.

I just thought, if the odds where stacked against you, which they so often are in these cases like this, a positive lie detector result, although not conclusive, could assist the investigation.

Just a thought. Good to hear your comments.

[twix123]

It would be interesting to see the results if our ever truthful MPs were subjected to lie detector tests, which should happen on a random basis, both before an election and during the course of the term of a Parliament !!!

[Zeuhl]

/interesting to see the results if our ever truthful MPs were subjected to lie detector tests/

the scariest thing is that, for example, Tony Blair might still actually believe the invasion of Iraq was justified, lawful and the right thing to do.

It might be difficult for rational people to understand but there it is.

[EDDIE51]

A major problem is that in cases from decades ago the suspect often can genuinely not remember what happened or their memory has altered their recollection and what they believe to be true is not actually true.
Could you remember if you met a particular person at a specific place on a day 30 or 40 years ago ?

[EDDIE51]

Cataract surgery in India can be cheaper than private surgery in the UK.
http://www.whatclinic.com/eye-clinics/india/cataract
They do 100,000s every year and the top clinics are as good as if not better than any in the world. They even do complete packages with flights surgery and accommodation all in.
A lot of the doctors doing them here are Indian trained anyway!

[EDDIE51]

Sorry wrong thread, how did that happen?