If not why?
If so why are they not used that much?
2006-12-23 10:04:27 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
No, they are not admissible. They are too easy to beat and that's the truth. They may help break a suspect down,make it easier to spot weaknesses in his or her statement but, no it will not hold up in court.
2006-12-23 10:09:32 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
The results have been disproven. Part of the reason is that the machine measures your reaction instead of the claims that it measures whether you tell the truth. Because it measures the reaction, adverse thoughts can enter your mind and make you appear to be guilty when you are not. Also some people are capable of denying incidents and appear innocent when they are not. The main purpose of the machine is to fool the person into believing that it knows everything and that they should confess.
2006-12-23 18:12:07 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
no they are not used. b/c the results are only as good as the person who is giving the test. so if the administrator to the test really sucks at reading the answers, well then, you can figure out what would happen to the defendant.
2006-12-23 20:07:58 · answer #3 · answered by Katie 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No. (I have a little experience with them.)
They are not trustworthy.
Pathological liars, like Bill Clinton, can pass them easily.
Old prison cons can pass them.
The person giving the test can make anyone appear guilty, if he wants.
2006-12-23 18:10:16 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
No, they are not admissible, however defendants/suspwcta will often take one to try and establish their innocence.
Employers sometimes use them in the hiring process where theft is a concern.
2006-12-23 18:16:25 · answer #5 · answered by SantaBud 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋