07-25-2015, 05:43 AM
(07-23-2015, 10:26 AM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: It's difficult for parents of missing children to refuse to take a poly. Whether they're involved in the disappearance or not, it looks bad and casts a shadow of guilt if they refuse.
Since polys are inadmissible in court for very good reason, I think taking one is actually the smart thing for both innocent and guilty parents looking to manage public/LE perception and push investigative focus off of them exclusively.
Probably a discussion for another thread, but I've got mixed feelings on this. I've occasionally wondered if I found myself in a situation to where I wanted to potentially eliminate myself as a suspect, if I'd take a lie detector. And I keep coming back to the same answer. No, I would not.
Although I have no facts or statistics to back this next statement up, I'm thinking the majority of lawyers would say no, do not take one. And there must be a reason for that, and as HotD correctly points out, generally, they are not admissible in court. Either the test itself is fallible, or perhaps it can be too subjective, or maybe it's because the administration of the test can not be done properly.
I simply would not want the focus of a criminal investigation to be on me simply because I was nervous as hell, or failed the test for any other possible reason.
We all know that innocent people do indeed get put in jail, and I'd hate for that reason to be based on what is obviously an unproven science. If it were a proven science, it would be admissible. If you fail a test, the focus pretty much turns solely on you.
Of the millions of sperm injected into your mother's pussy, you were the quickest?
You are no longer in the womb, friend. The competition is tougher out here.
You are no longer in the womb, friend. The competition is tougher out here.