http://www.siliconvalley.com/docs/news/svtop/voice090301.htm



Police use controversial tech tool on suspects

Critics say 'voice stress analyzers' are a scam
BY SEAN WEBBY
Mercury News

Bay Area police departments are snatching up one of the latest technological
tools in crime-solving -- a computerized voice analyzer that's supposed to
determine when the bad guy is telling a lie, just by the sound of his voice.

But critics say this $10,000 device doesn't work; it only intimidates
suspects into confessions.

Police departments in San Jose, San Francisco, Menlo Park, Mountain View and
Redwood City are among about 1,000 agencies that use ``voice stress
analyzers.'' The California Highway Patrol uses the machine when hiring
officers.

Law enforcement agencies have only one place to buy the controversial devices
and train their officers at $1,300 per student -- the National Institute for
Truth Verification, a private company in West Palm Beach, Fla.

Yet many law enforcement agencies refuse to use the analyzers, including the
FBI and both the San Mateo County and Santa Clara County sheriff's
departments.

Several police chiefs and other senior investigators in departments who
bought the voice analyzers said privately they doubted that the device
measured the truth very well. But all said it did what they had bought it to
do -- elicit confessions from suspects who are convinced the machines work.

``It's a marketing scam,'' said Sgt. Gary Hoss, who is the chief polygrapher
for the San Mateo County Sheriff's Department. ``It's fast and it's cheap and
it doesn't work, and that's the bottom line.''

Hoss and others predict these voice analyzers will put innocent people in
jail and expose police departments who use them to massive lawsuits.

Yet NITV says its product is more powerful at detecting a criminal's
deception than polygraph tests.

``It can't get much more accurate,'' said David Hughes, the company's
director and a retired captain from the West Palm Beach, Fla., police
department. NITV reports that its analyzer has about a 98 percent accuracy
rate.

San Jose police used one recently to interview a suspect in an unsolved
30-year-old homicide, according to detective Sgt. Mike Ponte. The analyzer
showed he was telling the truth about his innocence, Ponte said.

``It was fast and easy, and we felt comfortable that he was clear,'' Ponte
said.

The theory is that the voice stress analyzer works by measuring
``micro-tremors'' in the human voice -- inaudible vibrations that speed up
uncontrollably when a person is lying.

The device's theoretical advantage is that it can be used on tape recordings,
phone conversations and even from television shows to determine whether the
speaker is lying.

Many investigators who have used the machine agree with NITV's pitch that the
machines are faster, cheaper and more accurate than polygraph testing.

Company officials de-emphasize the few studies done on whether the voice
stress analyzer works, because many of the studies have been done by the
polygraph industry, the machine's chief critic. The U.S Department of Defense
Polygraph Institute in 1996 concluded that the machines have an overall
accuracy rate of just under 50 percent.

Critics say that analyzers are simply electronic Ouija boards. The detectives
who use them, trained to detect lies, see what they want to see in the
machines' results. The NITV asks agencies to send to them for training their
``most accomplished interviewing/interrogators available.''

And it is the mistakes that officers will make with the voice analyzer that
worry its critics.

``What is more stressful than a person who is being questioned by law
enforcement?'' said Brian English, a polygrapher with the Baxter Institute in
San Diego.

Judges generally don't allow polygraph test results or voice-stress results
as evidence in court. Lie detection, judges have ruled, is not scientifically
reliable enough.

In 1998, a police officer arrested a San Diego teenager on charges of
murdering his sister after he failed a voice-stress test. The charges were
dropped the next year. Now the boy's family is suing the police, prosecutors
and the NITV.

A Henderson, Nev., man sued the local police department after it charged him
with being an accessory to rape when he flunked a voice-stress test in 1996.
The charges against Vincent Sedgewick were eventually dismissed, and so was
his lawsuit.

Reply via email to