Sue Hartigan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Hi Jackie:
What is an amicus brief?
Sue
>
> Hi Terry
>
> Thank you for the site. The info you included in your post was gathered
> from a specific groups of scientists it appears and is an amicus brief
> and is only to present legal arguments or facts on behalf of someone.
> IOW, it is my belief it is similar to an expert witness. And you,
> yourself, state that it is not the most effective way of learning the
> truth. So why would Paula taking a lie detector test prove anything?
> Also all the information that I have summarized below counters the
> excerpts from the amicus brief.
>
> Here is the information I have from psychology sources: Bacon's 1998
> Psychology textbook, Meyer's 1998 Psychology textbook, Kassim 1998
> Psychology textbook, Hockenbury & Hockenbuy 1997 Psychology textbook and
> Meyer"s (frorensic psychologist) book on abnormal behavior and the cj
> system.
>
> 1. The central assumption underlying the polygraph test is that lying
> results in more emotional arousal than telling the truth. Lying then is
> stressful and should cause the same physiological responses that stress
> does. Problem number 1--*most*, not all people, experience these
> physiological responses when lying. Some people are able to lie without
> experiencing arousal or anxiety because of the personality
> characteristics, chemical use, or physical attributes. One of the
> characteristics of an antisocial is that they are amoral--to feel guilt,
> stress, anxiety about lying you must have some degree of morality I
> would think. Other characteristics is that of persistent lying,
> disregard for the truth, and manipulation (con-artist). Evidence shows
> that accomplished con artists can tell huge lies with little little or
> no emotional respons.
>
> 2. The lie detector does not detect lies--only emotional arousal.
> Similar responses occur with feelings of irritation, guilt, anxiety,
> etc. Thus, a person's perceptions can affect the results of the test.
> If a dishonest person is skeptical but an honest persons believes the
> detector works, the person telling the truth may actually show a larger
> reaction on the machine than a person who is lying. And, because the
> machine cannot detect which emotion is being recorded, at a conservative
> estimate the test errs about 1/3 of the time, with innocent people being
> more likely to fail the test than a lying person. Others estimate the
> error for innocent people at 45 percent. Also there are simple
> countermeasures that can be used even with the refined polygraph tests
> now given. Studies show that you can beat the test simply by
> distracting yourself or by tensing your muscles, biting your tongue, or
> squeezing your toes while answering the control questions which will
> mask the stress aroused by lying to the relevant questions.
>
> Finally, it has been concluded after review of all the polygraph
> research for the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment that it
> is possible to make accurate and discriminating judgments of truth and
> deception only IF the subject is naive and the examiner well-trained.
>
> This leaves me with the conclusion that Paula Jones polygraph test tells
> me nothing in regard to her truthfulness or not. In fact, if I wanted
> to be cyncial I would point out that if she really had suffered such
> emotional trauma, then she should have been aroused emotionally just
> having to answer the relevant questions and. thus, should have failed
> the test. They have found some evidence for this when questioning rape
> victims using the polygraph test.
>
> jackief
>
> However, these same responses (physical) are present in people when they
> they are experiencing anxiety, irritation,
--
Two rules in life:
1. Don't tell people everything you know.
2.
Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
