161–170 of 196 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Partly its that. Partly its about tricking juries, "He failed/refused the polygraph" is a very nice way to discredit someone. At least 5 of the 12 people there will find that concerning and not know its BS.
Any lawyers in the house? I was under the impression that (in the US) refusing to take a polygraph was not considered an admission of guilt though could be grounds for dismissal from federal employment.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just like those dogs that indicate the presence of drugs. Except of course when there aren't any. I've had my car searched a couple of times at the Canadian/American border because a dog gave a signal. Given the number of times I've crossed that border the false positive rate must be ridiculously high. Since you don't have much in terms of rights when crossing a border I wondered why they even bother with the pretext…
Oh wow! I've never even considered that. I wonder if the dogs pick up on subtle behavior cues from their handlers, which the handler may not even be aware of. The dog ends up giving a seemingly legit outlet for some unconscious bias.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Citizen X is an American drama. If it depicts what you're saying (I've seen it but can't remember it) then it's just another Western dramatization depicting post-Stalin Soviet Union in cliches from the 1930s. In the real life case Citizen X is inspired by[0], nobody was tortured for a conviction, even the guilty man, who was simply put into a cell with a police informer to gather information and questioned normally b…
Post-Stalin Soviet Union clichés, of course. How do you think the wrongly arrested people confessed to the murders in the first place? "At his trial, Kravchenko retracted his confession and maintained his innocence, stating his confession had been obtained under extreme duress."
As in that example with Kravchenko, the same way false confessions occur in every country, pressure in some form from the police who want to convict their prime suspect / clear up a case.
It's indefensible but it's nothing unique to the Soviet Union and it's not uncommon.
https://theconversation.com/suspects-confess-to-crimes-they-...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What are the chances of an actual spy being able to beat a lie detector? I'd put those at about 100%. So you will end up with nervous people who will increase the size of the haystack with zero chance of identifying the needles, which is a net negative.
> What are the chances of an actual spy being able to beat a lie detector? I'd say not even remotely close to 100%. What is an "actual spy"? Those people are often regular employees with zero relevant training, that are simply recruited by a foreign intelligence agency via pressure, money, or manipulation, and are targeted based on their access to information. I'd say that a huge percentage of them won't be able to b…
Fun fact, lie detectors are completely ineffective on compulsive liars.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Any lawyers in the house? I was under the impression that (in the US) refusing to take a polygraph was not considered an admission of guilt though could be grounds for dismissal from federal employment.
What's legal has nothing to do with swaying a jury.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What are the chances of an actual spy being able to beat a lie detector? I'd put those at about 100%. So you will end up with nervous people who will increase the size of the haystack with zero chance of identifying the needles, which is a net negative.
> What are the chances of an actual spy being able to beat a lie detector? I'd say not even remotely close to 100%. What is an "actual spy"? Those people are often regular employees with zero relevant training, that are simply recruited by a foreign intelligence agency via pressure, money, or manipulation, and are targeted based on their access to information. I'd say that a huge percentage of them won't be able to b…
You can't really use them for anything. A polygraph machine might have an application though: doorstop.
Can't these just be beaten with some breath training and a short training in how to answer? All they measure is your physical reaction, right?
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/weird-news/how-cheat-lie-detec...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The story was around before The Wire.
Yes, in David Simon’s book Homicide: A Year on the Killing Streets, as well as the David Simon series Homicide: Life on the Street. David Simon also created The Wire.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/next-case-on-the-court-col...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's legal has nothing to do with swaying a jury.
If the opposing side brought up refusing to take a polygraph you would object and ask the judge to explain to the jury why that had to be disregarded, right?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just like those dogs that indicate the presence of drugs. Except of course when there aren't any. I've had my car searched a couple of times at the Canadian/American border because a dog gave a signal. Given the number of times I've crossed that border the false positive rate must be ridiculously high. Since you don't have much in terms of rights when crossing a border I wondered why they even bother with the pretext…
Oh wow! I've never even considered that. I wonder if the dogs pick up on subtle behavior cues from their handlers, which the handler may not even be aware of. The dog ends up giving a seemingly legit outlet for some unconscious bias.