You wake up one day, decide you've had enough of some people who've made your life hard, so you decide you'll go and kill them. You cover your tracks well, but are eventually a suspect. You are then taken into court, and put in front a jury, of which must decide whether you are guilty or innocent. Why not just strap people to a lie detector test and be done with it? Sure, I know theses tests aren't perfect (even though, you'd think, in this day and age, they would be), but from my understanding of it, they only falsify readings if blood pressure is high, or people are in shock etc. For your average case, I'd have thought them to work pretty well, yet, they're not used. I do believe there is a law too, that forbids lie detection tests being forced upon people. That being said, why would any innocent person choose to not be put through one, especially if they've nothing to hide. Only the guilty would have a problem with it, knowing that they'd end up screwed. Half of them would probably admit before hand that they did it, save being put through the test. They should safe the jury for selective people. A Doctor should be on the scene, and should decide whether people are 'stable' enough to take the test (save falsifying the readings). If blood pressure etc is stable, and they're good to take it, why don't they?
18th November 2004
Lie detector devices just aren't reliable enough to have their readings considered as solid evidence. You can tell the truth and get a false positive, or you can lie and fool the machine.
I was forced to take one back in the 80's at a job... then later they came back and said I stole from them(which I didn't). I asked to see the results. They refused and said if I walked away, they would bury the results later. Since I was young and dumb, I did what they asked.
But since then I don't like them because it can be used as a tool against you even when you are inocent.
Strange... they really did bury it... 17 years later I went back to work for them. I talk to my boss about it and he did some digging but couldn't find any evidence of it or even why I was fired.
I wouldn't take one even if I was innocent. Lie detection tests can only hurt you and the results can depend on the subjectivity of the technician who may be on the side of the police that arrested you.
Voice of joy and sunshine
26th May 2003
Aerilon;4910448If blood pressure etc is stable, and they're good to take it, why don't they?
Lie detectors basically look at how nervous you are, they're not a reliable test for truth.
Hello my friend, the Lie detector is about as reliable as my mind. The outcome of a lie detector lies greatly on the person asking the questions. When people take these tests they are normally nervous just by being questioned in general. If you asked someone their name in an accusatory tone you could make the test show that they lied even when they did not.
Lie detectors are no good. They don't read your mind, they just look at your mental state as reflected by physiological reactions - stress, anxiety, that sort of thing. It won't do anything for people who are pathological liars, or those who lie without compunction. In addition, since people normally get nervous when they get hooked up to random machines that go 'Ping', it's possible that there will be a large number of false positives if the machine is used for something serious, such as in deciding the innocence or guilt of the accused in a trial.
You wake up one day, decide you've had enough of some people who've made your life hard, so you decide you'll go and kill them. You cover your tracks well, but are eventually a suspect. You are then taken into court, and put in front a jury, of which must decide whether you are guilty or innocent.
David Bain, anyone?
I agree with Mr.Pedantic. The lie detector is always requested by the person pointing the finger so if you are hooked up to one someone assumes you are a liar. People almost never get a lie detector test to clear their name.
this reminds me of an old discovery channal show about whether something was real or a myth. and the myth was that these 2 policemen were interogating this guy and they built a makeshift lie detector out of boxes and kitchen utensils. and when they brought it in and strapped it to the guy. the guy confessed.
Zamamee;4910500Lie detector devices just aren't reliable enough to have their readings considered as solid evidence. You can tell the truth and get a false positive, or you can lie and fool the machine.
Lie detectors are actually quite accurate today. They are hard to fool and I think you can be subject to multiple ones for verification of lies just to ensure.
They had a mythbusters episode about it. Kari looked quite hot in it and the cords above and below her boobs accented them very well.