why souldn't polographs be admitted in court,?

Question

in order to learn the truth ,shouldn't a polograph become evidence in court whether who's telling the truth.

Answer 1

First of all, its spelled polygraph.

Second, the only thing a poly machine produces is a graph paper with a bunch of wiggly lines representing electrical inputs. The only evidence before the jury is the opinion of the poly operator that a group of particular wiggly lines indicates that the subject was being deceptive in response to a question asked by the operator. People can "beat" polys if (a) they are psychopathic, and/or (b) they practice doing it, and/or (c) they have taken certain drugs. Some polygraph operators are incompetent & make up opinions they have no basis for. Some poly operators are outright liars.

Result, polygraphs are a good investigative tool, but do not have the kind of "beyond reasonable doubt" reliability necessary to be admissible in court.

Answer 2

My brother can beat a polygraph no problems. I've been there and seen him do it. I've taken a polygraph and had the results come back negative (meaning I was lying) but I was telling the truth. At my last duty station I was working with the polygrah tech and we got bored. So to show me how accurate the test was he sat me down and he questioned me about a conversation we had earlier in the morning. According to the results, I was lying about having a conversation with him that morning.

The polygraph was a good idea, but the technology just isn't there yet.

Answer 3

They are not accurate enough. Why would a polygraph be admitted when people's lives are on the line? A so-so truth is not good enough and I don't believe this manmade devise contributes to true justice. I can already visualize a comic in my head - An investigator scratching his head says, "Well, I can't seem to find enough evidence on this guy...let's get out the ol' polygraph machine...we'll just wrap this up right here and now". ("Don't forget to dust it off"!)

Answer 4

Assuming that you mean "polygraph," remember that such devices do not actually detect lies; they measure physical responses commonly associated with lying. However, any of those physical responses can be triggered by stress even if the subject is entirely truthful. What's more, fallible humans interpret the data. Would you want your reputation, your freedom or your life to turn on one technician's assertion that your galvanic skin response "proves" that you're a liar?

Answer 5

photos accuracy has always been in question.. but sometimes they are allowed.

mostly when the authorities have taken them at the scene of the crime.

you will have to consult a lawyer about this.

video at times is also questioned all this computerization and manipulation going on is destroying the credibilty of what is a good idea.

:(

Answer 6

It could but often both parties are lying anyhow. Also, in this country, you are innocent until proven guilty. You need more proof than a test. Must have many kinds of evidence.

Answer 7

Because there are ways to fake the results of polygraph tests - they're just not that accurate.

Answer 8

not only can you fool them they can also show incorrect results if you are telling the truth as you're under a stressful situation which makes you nervous etc...

Answer 9

So far they are not admissible evidence because even they are not always 100% accurate.

Answer 10

It would be great if they were wonderfully accurate but they are not it is reasonably easy to fool one if you know you are gettin one in advance and you can even fool one if sprung at random.