Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

What does this say about the use of lie detectors?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
NNN0LHI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-16-05 05:09 PM
Original message
What does this say about the use of lie detectors?
http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050415/NEWS03/104150077/-1/news

FBI doubted tip on explosives

<snip>The tip came from imprisoned mobster Gregory Scarpa Jr., 53, a law enforcement official said this week. Scarpa is an inmate in the same maximum-security federal prison in Florence, Colo., where Nichols is serving life sentences for his role in the 1995 bombing of the Alfred Murrah federal building that killed 168 people. Timothy McVeigh was convicted of federal conspiracy and murder charges in the bombing and executed in 2001.

Scarpa learned about the explosives from Nichols, mainly through notes passed between them, said Stephen Dresch, a Michigan man who is Scarpa’s informal advocate.

Dresch gave the information to the FBI in early March. But FBI agents did not search the vacant house until March 31. The bureau did not act more quickly because Scarpa failed a lie detector test, said the law enforcement official, who declined to be identified because of the sensitivity of the investigation.

The FBI lab continues to examine the materials for fingerprints and other clues that might show where the explosives originated and who may have had them before they got into Nichols’ home.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Pepperbelly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-16-05 05:11 PM
Response to Original message
1. I was an investigator for a number of years and ...
I do not believe that the polygraph is particularly accurate in assessing deception. It can tell how fast the subject is breathing, their blood pressure and how much their fingers are sweating. None of those things, btw, are actually decent indicators of veracity.

But ...

Some people will spill their guts before they get on the damned things.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NNN0LHI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-16-05 05:16 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. In some states the results can be admitted as evidence in a court of law
Holy shit!

Don

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Richard Steele Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-16-05 05:21 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. They should NEVER be admissable, IMO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pepperbelly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-16-05 05:22 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. but ONLY if both sides agree ...
And even then I wonder ... evidence of what?

Slowed down breathing, increased perpiration on the fingertips, and blood pressure going up a bit.

Sounds like Tuesday for me.

:smoke:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kliljedahl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-16-05 05:22 PM
Response to Original message
5. It doesn't matter
Under the HSD definitions, Nichols, Tim Mcveigh, Eric Rudolph & other wingnut aren't terrorists. Only groups from the left are listed. Under their definitions, even the KKK wouldn't be listed. Go figure.


Keith’s Barbeque Central
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreedomAngel82 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-16-05 05:51 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. Oy
That's what really pisses me off. We're the terrorist because we can be onto their shit I guess and they feel threatned to the democratic groups. :eyes: But Eric Rudolph is no terrorist. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HawkerHurricane Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-16-05 05:49 PM
Response to Original message
6. A friend took a lie detector recently...
and failed. The detector operator claimed he lied when he said he did not use drugs in 2001. In 2001, my friend was a military police officer, in charge of the station armory... he was tested once a month by the Navy, if so much of a hint of drug use had come out he would have been dishonorably discharged... so my friend cannot work for the civilian police because he 'failed' a lie detector test that claimed he did the impossible.

Lie detectors do not work.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DoYouEverWonder Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-16-05 05:55 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. I took one once for a job
the guy told me I passed with flying colors and I had lied my ass off.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue May 07th 2024, 02:20 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC