[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes:
On Wed, 01 Apr 1998 06:53:52 -0600 Jackie Fellows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:
>Jackie Fellows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>
>Hi Sue
>
>Thanks for ferreting out pertinent info. for all of us. I am not sure
>I
>read this right--my eyes might be biased <VBG>, but it seems the
>Supreme
>court is not willing to accept the idea that the polygraph is
>admissible.
>Am I correct in this??
>
>jackief
Hi Jackie,
Yes, you are correct. Although the court did not rule out acceptance of
lie detector tests in future cases that may be supported by more
compelling evidence, they ruled that the evidence presented in this case
was not sufficient to warrant approval. In other words, they did not buy
the amicus brief citing the 90% accuracy data.
Some comments in the ruling:
"There is simply no consensus that polygraph evidence is reliable."
"To this day, the scientific community remains extremely polarized about
the reliability of polygraph techniques. There is simply no way to know
in a particular case whether a polygraph examiner's conclusion is
accurate."
Bill
_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
