In life you will come across many obstacles, some of these you may have caused, others you may have not. How do we determine which is which? How do we determine what is the truth and what is a lie? In 1917, William M. Marston would say the polygraph test or lie detector as it is often called. In the twenty-first century, it would probably be witnesses and physical evidence. Which is more accurate and efficient? Is it fair to determine a person 's life sentence just by asking a few questions regarding whether or not they are lying? In this modern day, we not only need to focus on the “victims” but the “criminals” as well. Not saying that we should cater to criminals, but give them a chance. The old saying goes that a defendant is innocent …show more content…
You go into the police station and have to take a polygraph test. You are nervous, so you fail the test and they sentence you for this crime, you know for a fact you didn’t commit. Just because of the anxiety, you failed and now are in prison for a crime that you did not commit. Is this morally right to determine a person 's future if it is not one hundred percent accurate? Authorities should prohibit the use of a polygraph test to determine a criminal 's punishment for a few main reasons. Polygraph tests are simply not reliable enough to determine a person 's punishment that can be life changing. There are quite a few things that make a polygraph test tick and not all of them are as reliable as they may seem. There are a few different factors that come into play when someone is taking a lie detector test. “William M. Marston invented the first lie detector in 1917,” (Hammiett, 2016 p.1). His attentions were great, and he thought that it would be accurate and efficient with no problems. “However, in 1923, the D.C. Court of Appeals stated that there was not enough scientific evidence to support Matson’s lie detector machine,” (Hammiett, 2016 p.1). If there wasn’t enough evidence, then what makes us think that there is now? It is the same as it has always been and if the D.C. Court of Appeals says that there isn’t enough scientific evidence to support it, then we shouldn 't use something that is
In the data-collection phase, the examiner will complete polygraph charts, the charts and questions will vary depending on different cases. The examiner then analyzes the collected data in the data analysis phase. The examinee then has the opportunity to explain or rationalize answers to different questions asked during the exam. Although some may criticize the polygraph tests, advances in technology, and science improves the polygraph exams. Multiple factors play a key role in the accuracy of a polygraph, including the experience of the examiner, the obediance of the examinee, and the way the exam is constructed. It is important to consider body language when interviewing examinees as well. This includes things that examinees may be saying, how they say it, and when they say it. One’s body does things that it cannot control, both inside and out, which plays an essential role in exams. When a polygraph test is administered perfectly, and appropriately the accuracy rate is above ninety percent. On the other hand, false positives on the polygraph exams may happen. A good examiner will try to identify, and get away from false positives. When Ruby has a false
of the lie detector in criminal investigation. John Larson, a “college cop”, student of Vollmer, who built the first lie detector in the Berkeley department, later said that he felt the technique had
This is the most self-damaging form a criminal can use. Delusion is when the one who’s lying actually believes their own lies. It might happen from day one or just eventually from saying it so frequently. While non criminals use delusion as a survival mechanism (Ericcson), criminals use it to give reason for their sinful acts. Given that lie detectors only pick up on body cues that arise when the one being tested believes it’s a lie, this would benefit the criminal to believe in their lies, or delusions.
Facts of the case: Imagine you are an HR manager and your boss and owner of the company, Bill, comes to you suspecting his assistant, Paige, is stealing money from the company. Bill would like a polygraph test conducted to see if Paige is stealing from the company. He would also like you to conduct electronic surveillance on Paige’s work e-mail for anything suspicious.
“No matter how convinced we are that someone is nasty, evil or just plain criminal, if they have not been convicted of any crime and support views that are upheld and defended by many law-abiding citizens, the only way to tackle them is through democratic debate.”, Julian Baggini. The first thing that needs to change in the battle to keep those who are innocent out of prison is our mindset. Often times police officers, prosecutors, jurors, and American Citizens get caught up in the chase of a criminal and feel that they need to convict someone, whether or not they are guilty. While there is no great option, many feel that it is better to imprison someone than no one when in actuality, it is preferable to have a criminal roaming the streets than it is to have an innocent human unjustly facing the horrors of prison. Many prefer not to be involved in the conversation of wrongful conviction.
Furthermore, the techniques the police investigators use may not be 100% in determining deception in a person. For example, in the case of Tom Sawyer, he was accused of murder and sexual assault. The police investigators interrogated him for 16 hours and they got a confession out of him. The reason he was the main suspect in the case was because his face was red and he seemed to be embarrassed while doing the interview, which were signs of deception. Little did the investigators know Tom Sawyer was a recovering alcoholic who also had social anxiety disorder. Which was the reason he was sweating uncontrollably and getting
In his 2008 Columbia Law Review Article “Judging Innocence,” Brandon L. Garrett claims that there are four major factors responsible for a majority of wrongful convictions, all of which I will discuss in detail. In short, however, these four factors are: (a) false confessions, (b) testimony of informants (or “snitches”), (c) improper use of forensics, and (d) witness misidentification (p. 55). Through Garrett’s (2008) study of the first 200 DNA exonerees in the U.S., we see a breakdown of the percentage of cases in which these four types of evidence may be used to secure a confession: 79% of the 200 cases involved witness identification of the subject, 57% involved forensic evidence, 18% were convicted with the aid of informant testimony, and 16% of exonerees had given a false confession that was ultimately presented at trial (p. 76). Some of these exonerees were even sentenced to death (p. 75).
Everyone lies, no one can avoid it. If someone says they have never lied before, they just did. Lying has been a controversial topic of human nature, whether it is considered “evil” or not. It has often been taught that telling the truth is the best thing to do, but this is not always the thing to do. World War I poets express this idea in their poems, literature has described this issue in plays. Even today there are articles written about this topic. Lying is a habit that has become part of society, however, there are cases where concealing the truth seems to be the most appropriate thing to do.
In eyewitness identification, in criminal law, evidence is received from a witness "who has actually seen an event and can so testify in court.” (Law.com Legal Online Dictionary) While this could be an important piece of the investigation, it can never take the place of DNA, or forensic evidence. Unfortunately, that happens all too much, with our overburdened legal and criminal justice systems. “Eyewitness misidentification is widely recognized as the leading cause of wrongful conviction in the U.S., accounting for more wrongful convictions than all other cause combined.” (Boston College Journal of Law and Social Justice, Volume 35:1, p.2) While we have been aware of this problem for many years, innocent people are still being convicted daily. Too many people
“Although numerous cases of wrongful convictions have been documented in the literature and in the media, criminologists have yet to devise a methodology for estimating the extent of such errors in the criminal justice system.” (Poveda, 2001) Since DNA testing has been utilized in the justice system, wrongful convictions have become less frequent and exoneration rates have increased. “There are many factors involved when consider the causes of wrongful convictions. Eyewitness misidentification is a leading cause for wrongful convictions.” (Innocence
Credibility- Now, I would like to consider myself an expert lie detector, but apparently binge-watching 12 seasons of Criminal Minds in 3 months does not give me those qualifications. So to better inform and assist you, my lovely audience, I did some research, mostly utilizing online materials.
The polygraph test is one of the most controversial criminal investigative techniques of all-time. From the initial years of the invention to today, there is not a consensus about the investigative tool. That is why there are many people for and against the administration of polygraph tests. Therefore, in order to develop a clear picture of the polygraph test the history of the test must be established. Although, there are many sources that have well documented concerns about the invention, the polygraph test is still around after almost 80 years.
What are lies? A lie is defined as follows: To make a statement that one knows to be false, especially with the intent to deceive. There are several ways that lies are told for instance, there are white lies, lies of omission, bold faced lies, and lies of exaggeration. No matter what type of lie that one chooses to tell many people believe that lies do more harm than good.
However, although this is useful for social interaction, it is a serious problem in other areas. Deception can be a problem when people actively deceive in job applications, giving evidence and in court. Being able to detect whether a person is lying or
Truth can be defined as conformity to reality or actuality and in order for something to be “true” it must be public, eternal, and independent. If the “truth” does not follow these guidelines then it cannot be “true.” Obviously in contrary anything that goes against the boundaries of “truth” is inevitably false. True and false, in many cases does not seem to be a simple black and white situation, there could sometimes be no grounds to decide what is true and what is false. All truths are a matter of opinion. Truth is relative to culture, historical era, language, and society. All the truths that we know are subjective truths (i.e. mind-dependent truths) and there is nothing more to truth than what we are willing to assert as true