View Poll Results: How confident are you that Person B lied?

Voters
24. You may not vote on this poll
  • 100% Person B was definitely lying.

    0 0%
  • 95% or more. There's a shred of doubt, but they almost certainly lied.

    2 8.33%
  • 80% they probably lied, but I'd allow it in court.

    1 4.17%
  • 80%, but that's not good enough to serve even as evidence in court.

    4 16.67%
  • It's a 50/50 crap shoot you have no idea.

    17 70.83%
  • I trust person B before I trust person A.

    0 0%
Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 38

Thread: Lie Detectors

  1. #1
    Sage
    MrWonka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    Charleston, SC
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    6,031

    Lie Detectors

    I realize that lie detectors are not admissible in court, and they certainly have their faults and criticisms, but most experts do seem to think they are fairly reliable in most cases when the operator is a professional who really knows what they're doing. Certainly, if the only evidence you had against someone that they committed a crime was that they failed a lie detector test when they were asked if they'd committed the crime I would have to say that's not enough to justify a guilty verdict and it shouldn't be allowed in court, but what about a scenario like this...

    Two different people who both witnessed an event are both required to take a polygraph with a certified professional operator. The session can be filmed and recorded in case there are any anomalies that look weird they can be challenged. One person(person A)passes the test. The other person(person B) tells a contradicting story to the first person and fails the test. The person who failed is then allowed to take a second polygraph, on a different day, on a different machine, with a different certified professional operator and once again fails the test. What level of confidence would you have that Person B was lying?
    Obstruction of Justice also applies to overt coercion of court or government officials via the means of threats or actual physical harm and also applying to deliberate sedition against a court official to undermine the appearance of legitimate authority.

  2. #2
    Engineer
    RabidAlpaca's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    American Refugee in Europe
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:30 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,381

    Re: Lie Detectors

    Zero because polygraphs are bull****. There is no physiological indicator of lying, only stress and anxiety, and a person can, and often is, stressed and anxious when being interrogated by cops. Lie detectors should only be used as an aid to cops to help them know where to look, it should not be used as evidence, primary or supporting, to convict anyone.

    "It's a 50/50 crap shoot, you have no idea."

  3. #3
    Sage
    celticwar17's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    6,381

    Re: Lie Detectors

    Polygraph tests are a interrogation tactic.... nothing else.

  4. #4
    Sage
    Bodhisattva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    New Zealand
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:14 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    70,211

    Re: Lie Detectors

    Quote Originally Posted by MrWonka View Post
    I realize that lie detectors are not admissible in court, and they certainly have their faults and criticisms, but most experts do seem to think they are fairly reliable in most cases when the operator is a professional who really knows what they're doing. Certainly, if the only evidence you had against someone that they committed a crime was that they failed a lie detector test when they were asked if they'd committed the crime I would have to say that's not enough to justify a guilty verdict and it shouldn't be allowed in court, but what about a scenario like this...

    Two different people who both witnessed an event are both required to take a polygraph with a certified professional operator. The session can be filmed and recorded in case there are any anomalies that look weird they can be challenged. One person(person A)passes the test. The other person(person B) tells a contradicting story to the first person and fails the test. The person who failed is then allowed to take a second polygraph, on a different day, on a different machine, with a different certified professional operator and once again fails the test. What level of confidence would you have that Person B was lying?
    None... lie detectors do not detect lies... they detect STRESS.

    Take two people... on who gets stressed when talking to cops and another who is basically a pathological liar... who would pass the lie detector?
    Quote Originally Posted by Rucker61 View Post
    Interesting but useless.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bodhisattva View Post
    That also describes Bodhi...

  5. #5
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    40,196
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Lie Detectors

    Quote Originally Posted by MrWonka View Post
    I realize that lie detectors are not admissible in court, and they certainly have their faults and criticisms, but most experts do seem to think they are fairly reliable in most cases when the operator is a professional who really knows what they're doing. Certainly, if the only evidence you had against someone that they committed a crime was that they failed a lie detector test when they were asked if they'd committed the crime I would have to say that's not enough to justify a guilty verdict and it shouldn't be allowed in court, but what about a scenario like this...

    Two different people who both witnessed an event are both required to take a polygraph with a certified professional operator. The session can be filmed and recorded in case there are any anomalies that look weird they can be challenged. One person(person A)passes the test. The other person(person B) tells a contradicting story to the first person and fails the test. The person who failed is then allowed to take a second polygraph, on a different day, on a different machine, with a different certified professional operator and once again fails the test. What level of confidence would you have that Person B was lying?
    Polygraphs are notoriously unreliable. It's a useful interrogation technique, particularly for the gullible. Otherwise they're worthless.
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang
    Sick Boy This is us.

  6. #6
    SirCumAlot
    MovingPictures's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:57 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    5,580
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Lie Detectors

    Quote Originally Posted by RabidAlpaca View Post
    Zero because polygraphs are bull****. There is no physiological indicator of lying, only stress and anxiety, and a person can, and often is, stressed and anxious when being interrogated by cops. Lie detectors should only be used as an aid to cops to help them know where to look, it should not be used as evidence, primary or supporting, to convict anyone.

    "It's a 50/50 crap shoot, you have no idea."
    These shows that conduct polygraph tests are so fake it's actually comedic.

  7. #7
    Sometimes wrong
    ttwtt78640's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Uhland, Texas
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    43,541

    Re: Lie Detectors

    Quote Originally Posted by MrWonka View Post
    I realize that lie detectors are not admissible in court, and they certainly have their faults and criticisms, but most experts do seem to think they are fairly reliable in most cases when the operator is a professional who really knows what they're doing. Certainly, if the only evidence you had against someone that they committed a crime was that they failed a lie detector test when they were asked if they'd committed the crime I would have to say that's not enough to justify a guilty verdict and it shouldn't be allowed in court, but what about a scenario like this...

    Two different people who both witnessed an event are both required to take a polygraph with a certified professional operator. The session can be filmed and recorded in case there are any anomalies that look weird they can be challenged. One person(person A)passes the test. The other person(person B) tells a contradicting story to the first person and fails the test. The person who failed is then allowed to take a second polygraph, on a different day, on a different machine, with a different certified professional operator and once again fails the test. What level of confidence would you have that Person B was lying?
    These tests do not detect lies or liars - they detect one's stress to certain subject matter. That stress may be to the subject matter rather than the response given to questions about that subject matter. The use of 'control' questions concerning benign subjects can help to eliminate stress simply due to the interrogation environment but not to subject matter which causes a stress reaction.
    “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself.
    Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.” ― George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman

  8. #8
    Sage

    Skeptic Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    14,416

    Re: Lie Detectors

    On the majority of people they seem to be right more often than not. I voted 80% but I don’t know if I would actually go that high. And yes, what they are detecting is nervousness but in a testing situation, after controlling for baseline nervousness, the correlation between spiked nervousness and deception is greater than 50% in the average person. I have taken 5 counter-intelligence polys in my life. They aren’t fun. Up there with going to the dentist.
    “Good people don’t smoke marijuana.” - Jeff Sessions, Attorney General of the United States

  9. #9
    Sage
    Crosscheck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:58 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    7,190

    Re: Lie Detectors

    Can you imagine if they were truly reliable.

    Would totally change our judicial system. No more hung juries. Most likely a sharp increase in confessions.


    Heck, they could even bring a lie detector to a political debate. Get out the popcorn.

  10. #10
    Sage
    akyron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    7,201

    Re: Lie Detectors

    Quote Originally Posted by RabidAlpaca View Post
    Zero because polygraphs are bull****. There is no physiological indicator of lying, only stress and anxiety, and a person can, and often is, stressed and anxious when being interrogated by cops. Lie detectors should only be used as an aid to cops to help them know where to look, it should not be used as evidence, primary or supporting, to convict anyone.

    "It's a 50/50 crap shoot, you have no idea."
    I...agree with you...Now I need to go lay down.....ouch.
    Thank you

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •