Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 4 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2 YR OLD DEORR KUNZ JR, MISSING FROM IDAHO CAMPGROUND
#82
(07-25-2015, 05:43 AM)thekid65 Wrote: 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.

Everything you said is correct according to my experience and research, Kid (I did a thesis on polygraph tests many moons ago).

However, in the case of a missing child, if there's little evidence pointing in a specific direction (as is true in this case), suspicion will lie on the parents or caregivers who lost the child -- no matter what police say publicly.

If those parents or caregivers refuse to take the poly, that suspicion is reinforced, "what are they trying to hide; what could be more important than moving the investigation forward to help find their child?" And, sadly, many times the parents or caregivers are involved.

So, I agree with Mark Klaas and other advocates for missing children that the parents or caregivers should take the test as soon as possible. Sometimes they pass with flying colors. Sometimes the results are inconclusive (which can be due to many factors, and that's still better for the parents or caregivers than refusing to take the test). And, sometimes they fail because they're lying about their involvement or they're lying about drug use or something unrelated to the disappearance. If the latter, it can be sorted out and the parents or caregivers can cop to unrelated lies and take the test again; they can show that they put finding their missing child ahead of anything else.

If my child went missing, I'd demand to take the polygraph test immediately. If I was suspected of any other crime, however, I'd probably refuse to take one in most cases, whether I was innocent or guilty.
Reply


Messages In This Thread
RE: 2 YR OLD DEORR KUNZ JR, MISSING FROM IDAHO CAMPGROUND - by HairOfTheDog - 07-25-2015, 01:45 PM