Should women who say they've been raped be given a lie detector test to determine the validity of their claim?

Question

I ask this because some mainstream web sites which are advocates for men estimate that up to 40 percent of rape accusaitons are false. Feminist web sites say 2 percent. I tend to believe it somewhere in between. Should lie detector tests in which there is no DNA, no rape kit, accusation made way after the fact, or during a nasty divorce or child custody case be given? The idea is not to use the test results in court, but just to determine if the police should continue their investigation. This policy WOULD NOT apply to women who have DNA in their bodies, those who have been beaten up and those who make the reports and get the proper tests (rape kit, police report, rape crisis center, etc.)

I say this because I know there are women out there who will false claims for sympathy or because they had an affair or other similar motives. I also a news story where the police did administer a test to a woman they suspected of making up a rape. She failed the test.

Any comments?

A few of the posters said the tests are not admissible in court; I know that, and that's why I put it in the added details.

I didn't think about the consensual sex with DNA present and the woman crying rape.

I still contend that if the police suspect a false accusaiton that they administer a detector test and continue the investigation if the woman is telling the truth.

If the woman waits days, months or years to make the accusation, how does the man prove he didn't do it if there is no DNA? How do you then prove a negative? It becomes a he said - she said kind of case with no corroboration.

Answer 1

Although a lie detector test is not admissable or always correct, it may cause a false accuser to think twice about doing so. DNA of the accused may be present because sex was consentual. Women who falsely accuse are the reason it is difficult to prosecute a rape case and why rape victims have such a hard time.

Answer 2

If we give lie detector tests to women who make allegations of rape, then we would have to give a lie detector test to everyone who makes an allegation of any crime wouldn't we, otherwise we would be singling out females. It wouldn't work.
It would deter genuine victims from reporting rapes.
Rape is a terrible crime and for the victims it can ruin their life. why would a civilised society put a female through a lie detector test if she is a victim of a rape, it's a step backwards.
As a person is innocent until proven guilty by British law, then the allegation itself is not enough to find the suspect guilty. So rest assured there is an awful lot of detective work which goes on before a charge is brought against a suspect.
If a woman who has suffered domestic violence and rape throughout a marriage gets the courage to report it after she is divorced from from the husband, does this mean that nobody should believe her because she didn't report it whilst she was living with the violent husband?
It's taken a long time for the laws to actually work for the victim in cases of rape, what you suggest would put society back about 50 years.
Also, there are many other forensic ways of proving rape other than dna.

Answer 3

This is a very dicey question. I agree with you that the rape claims of 40% and 2% fabrications are hard to believe. I'm not sure that lie detectors are the way to go, but I hate the thought of someone being accused of such an awful crime unjustly as well. If there is NO proof a crime has been committed except her word, I'd say forget the lie detector, note the complaint, and leave things alone. If there is any proof, then the police should investigate thoroughly, including lie detector tests for both of them and let a jury decide.

Answer 4

Lie detector are unreliable at best.

A woman who truly believes she was raped would pass, even if she wasn't raped.

The problem with most rape cases is that the woman waits too long before going to the police. It might take days, weeks, or years, before she get the courage to go to the police, and by that time most of the DNA is lost. She might have tried to clean herself up, shower, douche, throw away the cloths she was wearing, ETC and destroy the evidence.

And if you do force the woman to take a lie detector test, you would have to force the man to take one also, then aren't you saying both parties are guilty until proven innocent.

Something to think about.

Answer 5

I'd say no. If she really was raped it would be awful for her to go through that. It would be like being raped all over again. There are enough other ways that law enforcement can use to find out if she is making it up. It shouldn't be more difficult for women to report rapes and abuse. I can't help but think that the benefits of not subjecting women to lie detector tests outweigh the few false claims that slip through.

Answer 6

I think that if no dna is found, or other collaberating evidence that suggest rape, that it should be mandatory for all women to take a lie detector test and the investigators should base the decision to investigate / prosecute not on the the lie detector results alone ( lie detectors are not 100%) but take into consideradion all evidence. My mother's former roomate gets high and hid her methadone from herself and called the police to have me arrested for stealing it. The police came and did nothing to me because I didn't steal it and she found it when moving out, but never told the cop who ordered her off of our property because she was so screwed up and acting crazy. The next day being mad because my mom kicked her out she tried to swear a warrant out on me for rape that never occured. There is no dna and funny how she just forgot to mention to the cops the day before when she accused me of stealing her pills that she was raped too! She did this to be vindictive knowing I had a prior criminal history but no sexual offenses I still could have been facing life in prison for something I never did or even considered doing.

Answer 7

The trauma of a rape is terrible, how can you possibly think about victimizing the victim even more. After I was attacked they did a rape kit and there was no DNA because the a**hole used a condom and left nothing. If someone would of asked me to take a lie detector test to prove that I was raped I would of gone off on them.

Answer 8

You bring up some good points. However, I do not think a woman should be subjected to a polygraph because they are not that reliable. As an example, she might have been making out and her partner decided to have sex. She said, "No" and he refused to listen. Legally, that is a rape. I'm aware men can be harmed from false allegations. But so can women who are violated, then blamed for causing it. The system often rapes victims of rape a second time.

Answer 9

No lie detector, but I say that rape shield laws should not apply if there is no DNA, Beating, or rape kit evidence.

Answer 10

Yes I believe there are a lot of women that just hate men enough to sleep with them just to get to yell rape knowing the man is going to be in big trouble. The burden is on the man.