[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes:
>Hi Terry
>
>No they are not the most effective means of showing lies. If they
>were, they would
>be permissible in court. Any antisocial can pass a lie detector, even
>one who is
>not a criminal. Pathological liars can pass a lie detector; people
>whose physical
>responses do not follow a normal pattern can pass a test; the person
>giving the test
>can mess up the findings; the phrasing of the questions can alter the
>findings.
>
>One other thing I disagree with--Starr just calls everyone to testify
>at the grand
>jury--seems he has a bigger stick in this case to initimidate in some
>respects. So
>both sides are engaging in some 'dirty pool', not just the wh.
>
>jackief
Hi Jackie,
I agree completely. This is obviously a controversial issue and there
are those who have reasons for having us believe that lie detectors are
the best way to tell if someone is telling the truth or not. Perhaps
they have investments in companies who make the equipment. Who knows?
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
