Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
History of Lie Detection Current Methods What is the validity of lie detectors? Legal Issues Can you beat a lie detector? How to tell when someone is lying How to lie
In 1948, following the horrific abuses of World War II, the General Assembly of the United Nations inserted the prohibition against torture in the landmark Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Article 5 states: "No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment." The prohibition against torture is well established under customary international law as jus cogens. The Supreme Court in 1963 ruled that a confession extracted under truth serum drugs such as sodium pentothal, sodium amytal, and scopolamine - violated a defendant's constitutional right against self-incrimination. Should torture/ truth serum be permitted if its use would save lives or benefit society?
Current Methods
Modern polygraphy: uses physiological changes in the peripheral nervous system (PNS) measure deception 1. Skin conductance changes (sweating) 2. Blood pressure 3. Respiration 4. Heart rate Facial Micro-expressions (developed by Paul Ekman) It would have the advantage of not requiring any obvious intervention with the subject. Could be used secretively by videotaping. Neurotechnological Lie Detection (NTLD): Measurements of blood flow or electrical impulses in the brain to identify distinct indicators of deceptive communication. Measure lying more directly by measuring brain activity rather than second-order indicators like pulse or respiration. Advantages over polygraph testing: Fear or other strong emotions may affect physiological responses and thus may confound the data in polygraphy. Polygraphy requires trained experts to read the graphs, while NTLDs would only require computers. Does this mean that NTLDs are reliable evidence in court?
1.
Patterns of Recognition Use event related potentials (ERPs) through electroencephalogram (EEG) to identify patterns of recognition for the wave pattern of the P300 wave. With EEG, the researcher uses electrodes placed on the subjects scalp to detect and measure patterns of electrical activity emanating from the brain. Brain fingerprinting attempts to discern whether a person has knowledge of a particular event or an image stored in his brain. The P300 wave occurs when a subject recognizes information or a familiar stimulus. It is the only technique considered for admission into evidence.
Is this ethical?
Because these methods rely on correlations to determine lies, are they reliable? Should personal privacy be sacrificed for the better of society because NTLDs could serve forensic, security, and military purposes? Is personal privacy even being invaded? What about the self-incrimination clause of the Fifth Amendment that states that no person shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself?
Garnering the evidence vs. entering the suspects mind is violating
Brain imaging and brain fingerprinting require clear testimonial response from the suspect, such as pressing a button. Is this the same as blood or hand writing samples used to solve a crime? Previously, in order for the contents of a persons mind to be exposed, he had to communicate that content actively, whether by speaking, writing, gesticulating, or some other deliberate means. Is this still considered communicating?
How can lie detection be verified as accurately recording the truth or not?
Brain fingerprinting: Is this an accurate method when people have memory problems? What if someone is telling the truth but is factually wrong? There is not a 100% accurate way lie detection method
Legal Issues
Frye vs. United States: The Frye standard is a legal precedent regarding the admissibility of scientific examinations or experiments in legal precedings. To meet the Frye standard, scientific evidence presented to the court must be interpreted by the court as "generally accepted" by a meaningful segment of the associated scientific community. Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals (1993): The Daubert standard is a legal precedent regarding the admissibility of expert witnesses testimony during legal proceedings. United States v. Scheffer (1998): Military Rule of Evidence 707 (failure to take, or taking a polygraph examination shall not be admitted into evidence) v. 6th Amendment (right to defend oneself) After United States v. Scheffer, most jurisdictions exclude all polygraphic evidence. However, two federal circuits held that polygraphic tests could be admitted on a case-by-case basis and New Mexico admitted polygraphic evidence. The Employee Polygraph Protection Act of 1988: Established guidelines for polygraph testing and imposed restrictions on private employers such as companies and corporations Does NOT affect public employers such as police agencies or other governmental institutions. Should public employers be trusted more than private employers?
By allowing scientific testimony regarding truthfulness into evidence, is the court invading the purview of the jury? Can you test defendants? Can you test nondefendant witnesses? Bias detection: can we test a jury to see if they will be biased? Should lie detection methods be used in courts?
Eye Movement
How to lie
The first thing you do when lying is to tell the truth -- not the whole truth, but just enough to make the lie itself seem true. If you sense that someone else suspects you of lying, admit to something small or untrue. Think of some specific true thing (place, person, event, story) that your lie will fit into and use those details if you are questioned. This gives you a bank of specific details to draw on so you don't have to keep making things up as you go along. The trick is convincing your sub-conscious mind that you're telling the truth. An example of this may be, "Did I wreck the car? Well, I drove it into a wall. So, the wall wrecked the car. I just moved it! Look the person you are lying to in the eye. Don't look around. Try making your eyes go big and letting your mouth hang open a little for an innocent/shocked look. Never forget about your lie, and treat it like it actually happened. Mention it in conversations the way you would if it was true. Silence about a certain subject can arouse suspicion, especially in retrospect. Use named, recognizable people.