You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #10: The point is polygraphs don't work either way. [View All]

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 (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
miscsoc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-31-10 05:50 PM
Response to Reply #6
10. The point is polygraphs don't work either way.
Even if they pass the test, they could still be lying, and vice versa. If we had reliable lie detectors maybe using them would make sense, but we just don't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
  -Judge Orders Rape Survivors to Take Lie-Detection Test XanaDUer  Jul-31-10 04:44 PM   #0 
  - Despicable.  laconicsax   Jul-31-10 04:50 PM   #1 
  - You know a lie detector  rock   Jul-31-10 04:51 PM   #2 
  - yeah, that's kind of an important point  miscsoc   Jul-31-10 05:46 PM   #9 
  - Actually, they're remarkably hard to beat  Warpy   Jul-31-10 06:43 PM   #28 
     - Rapists seem a bit like sociopaths to me. nt  Lucky Luciano   Jul-31-10 07:07 PM   #33 
     - Nonsense. Lie detectors are completely unreliable.  provis99   Jul-31-10 08:44 PM   #36 
     - About as remarkably hard as a coin flip  MajorChode   Jul-31-10 09:01 PM   #40 
     - Not hard to beat  Brooklyns_Finest   Aug-01-10 04:29 PM   #42 
        - That reminds me of story  JonLP24   Aug-01-10 04:34 PM   #43 
           - My buddy is cool as ice  Brooklyns_Finest   Aug-01-10 04:47 PM   #45 
  - it boggles.  nosmokes   Jul-31-10 05:10 PM   #3 
  - UPDATE, "Judge Alison Floyd backs away from ordering polygraphs"  uppityperson   Jul-31-10 05:13 PM   #4 
  - "All have refused."  Iggo   Jul-31-10 05:18 PM   #5 
  - What do the "victims" have to hide?  LAGC   Jul-31-10 05:24 PM   #6 
  - The point is polygraphs don't work either way.  miscsoc   Jul-31-10 05:50 PM   #10 
  - Because polygraph tests are not reliable, which is why they are inadmissible  myrna minx   Jul-31-10 05:54 PM   #13 
  - Most states use them to gauge sex offenders.  LAGC   Jul-31-10 06:02 PM   #16 
     - because there's money in horseshit  pitohui   Jul-31-10 06:56 PM   #30 
        - Well, I fully expect you to start advocating for an end to forced polygraphs for sex offenders then.  LAGC   Jul-31-10 06:58 PM   #31 
  - This judge backed down from this order.  uppityperson   Jul-31-10 06:04 PM   #19 
  - Polygraphs are an intimidation tool more than anything else  jmowreader   Jul-31-10 06:09 PM   #22 
  - Is that true?  JonLP24   Aug-01-10 04:48 PM   #46 
  - polygraphs don't work, and victims are already fragile  pitohui   Jul-31-10 06:53 PM   #29 
  - Badly phrased questions will do anyone in.  Mariana   Jul-31-10 07:29 PM   #34 
  - The defendants were found delinquent. No quotes necessary.  Pithlet   Jul-31-10 08:48 PM   #37 
  - Defendants don't have to take polygraph tests  JonLP24   Aug-01-10 04:37 PM   #44 
  - The victims' polygraphs were ordered AFTER  Mariana   Jul-31-10 05:36 PM   #7 
  - Juries find them guilty  dems_rightnow   Jul-31-10 05:53 PM   #12 
     - These are juveniles.  Mariana   Jul-31-10 06:08 PM   #21 
  - She needs to be removed from the bench.  LiberalFighter   Jul-31-10 05:42 PM   #8 
  - Y'know, I could see the value of determining the honesty of both alleged victims and  Better Today   Jul-31-10 05:51 PM   #11 
  - false accusations do happen  FooshIt   Jul-31-10 05:57 PM   #14 
  - They do, but would a polygraph honestly be able to tell the difference?  moriah   Jul-31-10 06:03 PM   #18 
  - Would you have felt better if your accuser was polygraphed  Mariana   Jul-31-10 06:17 PM   #24 
     - its just hard because the evidence is someones word  FooshIt   Jul-31-10 06:35 PM   #26 
        - Again, AFTER the guilty verdict?  Mariana   Jul-31-10 07:03 PM   #32 
  - Even if polygraphs were better than just a hair shy of reading tea leaves....  moriah   Jul-31-10 06:01 PM   #15 
  - This happened in April  lumberjack_jeff   Jul-31-10 06:03 PM   #17 
  - However, no one but us notices SHE RESCINDED THIS ORDER  uppityperson   Jul-31-10 06:06 PM   #20 
     - So she went to rehab instead of continuing to smoke whatever gave her such poor judgment.  moriah   Jul-31-10 06:15 PM   #23 
     - Sure, AFTER the victims refused to do it.  Mariana   Jul-31-10 06:21 PM   #25 
        - I agree. However it makes the OP outdated. Sorry if posting current info upsets you  uppityperson   Jul-31-10 06:40 PM   #27 
  - I don't disagree  howaboutme   Jul-31-10 07:37 PM   #35 
  - I can see your point about "he said she said" and false allegations.  Curmudgeoness   Jul-31-10 08:59 PM   #39 
  - It is not admissible in court because it is not 100% reliable  Omaha Steve   Jul-31-10 08:48 PM   #38 
  - I was under the impression that lie-detector results are not admissable in court..so what would be .  BrklynLiberal   Aug-01-10 04:13 PM   #41 
  - Aren't lie detectors inadmissible in court? And if so, how can a judge  Puregonzo1188   Aug-01-10 04:51 PM   #47 
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) 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