>he helped likely criminals escape the reach of justice The lie detector is ineffective, and "catching" someone based on it is not justice, regardless of their

>he helped likely criminals escape the reach of justice The lie detector is ineffective, and "catching" someone based on it is not justice, regardless of their guilt. Consider a thought experiment (which is admittedly loaded, but instructive, I think): suppose that the government is institutionally anti-Irish. During their interrogations, they routinely ask for documentation of family history, and if they find that you have Irish ancestry, that weighs heavily against you. As an objector to this unjust state of affairs, you specialize in falsification of documents to obscure Irish ancestry. Some of your clients admit to you that they have in fact committed crimes, but you help them anyway. Have you "committed a horrible deed" in ensuring that their fate is not decided by non-evidence? >Perhaps we as a society rely to much on this "so called" technology Perhaps?