How many are being improperly held in custody due to "LIE" Detectors?

Question

"Lie" detectors do not detect lies. They detect nervousness.
So a stone cold liar can be guilty, and look like he's telling the
truth. And someone who is innocent, but nervous, will appear to be lying.
Did you know law enforcement officers don't have to take
lie detectors? While we have them shoved in our face and
are held, and predetermined guilty over them!

Answer 1

There are various ways that a polygraph (the correct term for the machine for reasons you noted) can be useful in conducting an investigation. The most reliable way is what is known as the "guilty knowledge" test. In this method, the examiner asks several neutral questions to establish the baseline physiology of the individual. Then critical questions are interspersed with other neutral questions. Most importantly, information known only to a perpetrator or someone familiar with a crime is asked about. For example, say a red hat was located at a crime scene. When an examiner asks, "Do you own a red hat?" and innocent person who actually owns a red hat would answer "yes" with no change in physiology since s/he would not know the importance of the questions to the investigation. A guilty person who owns a red hat, however, may likely show changes in physiology regardless of how they answer the question (yes or no) simply because they know one was at the scene.
When administered properly, polygraph examinations can have reliable and valid findings relevant to an investigation. Interestingly, they are in all likelihood more reliable than eyewitness testimony which is routinely allowed in court and rarely successfully challenged on reliability grounds. As a matter of fact, most people consider eyewitness testimony as "infallible" and of critical importance.

Answer 2

How is it that most of society accepts as credible, the results of polygraph machines? I believe it's because most people, unlike you, are ignorant. You are correct in your statement that they detect nervousness. The major proponent of the so called validity of polygraphs is the F.B.I. However, what the F.B.I. always fails to mention is the fact that certain infamous individuals have PASSED their tests! Jeffery Dahmer, and Ted Bundy, both mass murderers, PASSED the "lie" detector exam, for example. The phrase: "Lie Detector" was invented by the F.B.I., in the hopes that the ignorant members of society would be duped into believing the results.. Here is the bottom line, that will put everything into focus on this subject: ask yourself, or anyone else who believes the validity of the results of a polygraph test--do you really believe that there is such a thing as a machine that can read a human being's mind??

Answer 3

technically, lie detectors are still not admissable proof in court. they can be used as an exhibit, or the witness's desire or lack thereof to openly take a lie detector test. but they are never admitted as lack hard evidence. however, someone may break down and admit to something while taking the test and THAT can be used against them.

Answer 4

Yes, they do this often on Talk Shows and people's lives and credibility are forever destroyed thereafter.

Answer 5

i agree they are not accurate at all..... they should never be used