3 ms·
This article touches on it but to me the most offensive part of a polygraph is the presumption of guilt if you refuse to take one. This is very much on purpose,
by JohnMakin 2y ago
This article touches on it but to me the most offensive part of a polygraph is the presumption of guilt if you refuse to take one. This is very much on purpose, of course, given as the author accurately states, its purpose isn't to detect lies, it's a tool used for coercion.
There was a big robbery at a place I worked, luckily I was not a suspect but the FBI came and administered polygraphs to anyone who could have done it. I asked what happens if someone refuses, and the answer was basically "they won't."
Of course it ended up being someone that didn't even work there. The test was clearly for intimidation purposes, at least from the view I had.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- mmmlinux 2y agoAren't polygraphs not acceptable evidence in the US courts?
- bityard 2y agoPolygraph tests are not usually acceptable as evidence in court. HOWEVER. Law enforcement can still use them as another tool in their questioning process to produce a confession when there is other evidence pointing to the guilt of the suspect. But of course is only effective against defendants who represent themselves, don't seek their lawyer's advice, or ignore their lawyer's advice.
- RIMR 2y agoPolygraphs can be used as evidence, but you would have to be a moron to submit to one, and refusing one cannot be used as evidence of guilt.
- singleshot_ 2y agoI’m very curious about your last sentence. Are you basing this on the fifth amendment, or something else.
- dfxm12 2y agoFWIW, in PA, it can't be brought up in court as evidence that you refused to take a polygraph. Nationally, we have a right to remain silent, so I imagine it's not much different elsewhere, but IANAL, so there could be some tricks cops/prosecutors can play in other states. There's no connection to the fifth amendment.