Polygraph: Its Admissibility in Court - Report Example

Polygraph- Its Admissibility in Court Permissibility OF Polygraph in the Court Proceeding Standards of Its Acceptance in Trial Kanti Mohan Pandit July10, 2007 Polygraph: It’s Admissibility in Court Polygraph is an instrument with the help of which physiological responses in a suspect are noted when he is questioned in order to determine if the answer given by him is true or false. Polygraph as a ‘lie detector test’ has been a subject of controversy from the beginning of its introduction. Scientists do not consider polygraph as reliable and accurate lie-detector. The main debate around polygraph is whether its results should be admitted as evidence in a court proceeding Polygraph evidence was admissible in civil cases but in criminal cases it remained inadmissible on the basis of unreliability. Yet polygraph has remained in use in law enforcement, industry and government. . The standard of polygraph was first addressed in US courts in 1923 (Frye v.United States, 54, App DC 46,293F 1013[1923]) when the court refused to admit polygraph evidence in a murder case. The legal standard set by the court ruling popularly known as Frye rule lasted for 70 years. The evidence to be admissible in court must have gained general acceptance in its scientific world. Later in 1970 adoption of the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 702 set another standard for the scientific evidence to be admitted in courts if such specialized and technical knowledge could assist the court to understand the evidence or determine a fact in issue. .. The court changed the old law of admissibility based on scientific expert evidence and stated that the Frye test was not consistent with the Federal Rules of Evidence in case of Daubert v. Merrill Dow Pharmaceuticals 148. The court altered the manner in which they evaluated the subject of ‘admissibility’ of scientific evidence that includes use of polygraph evidence as well This opened the door for polygraph to be admitted in the court proceedings as per the discretion of the court.. Five factors were recommended for courts to be followed to weigh evidence before admitting it in trial process: 1. whether the theory or technique is testable or falsifiable 2. whether the method has been subjected to peer review, 3.whether the rate of error is too high; 4.the existence and maintenance of standards controlling the technique’s operation and 5.whether the method has received ‘general acceptance. In course of application of the new guidelines by the court the polygraph results a). have been admitted in some occasions, b).have been considered inadmissible in some other occasions and c). in many other cases have been admitted under certain specific conditions only. Apart from the standard set by the Supreme Court in the Daubert case, Federal Rule of Evidence 403 also is considered to be ‘standard’ that is to be cleared to prove an evidence to be scientific. Following the adoption of the Federal rules of Evidence and the Supreme Court’s decision the standard for admissibility of polygraph evidence in criminal cases changed. Those accepted and turned to polygraphs had to change their opinions. The Supreme Court decisions in General Electric co. v. Joiner and United States v. Scheffer complicated the issue further. In the notes given by the court it was stated that the results of polygraph examinations as they are conducted today should not be admissible as evidence in the federal courts. .The court recognized the lack of prove about the reliability of polygraph used in several police cases. Polygraph cannot be used aggressively in every case to address all problems of evidence. It is only after understanding the entire case matter in detail and after focusing on the prime suspect the polygraph could be used to confirm the suspicion. The debate is still continuing. The issue is whether polygraph should be banned or allowed limited use in presenting evidence in the court or should be used as a tool to screen out evidences and secure the trustworthy ones. There are expert opinions on the subject that court should not allow admissibility of testimony from a witness who has tested to be deceptive in the case, provided the opposite party of the two sides corroborates the result by becoming non-deceptive. The exclusion of testimony will reduce the incidence of perjury. The chances for verdict likely to be wrong based on such witness would also minimize. The decision of exclusion should be as far as possible be made before the trial starts. . If a witness refuses to accept polygraph examination he should be treated as a deceptive in civil cases and in criminal cases as well provided he is not a defendant in that case. The objective of using polygraph should be to exclude testimony that is likely to be false in court cases. Supreme Court in its judgment in Chambers v. Mississippi 410 US 384 remarked that the ‘Exclusion’ would be favorable since admission would lead to the frequent presentation of perjured testimony to the jury. A defendant has a Sixth Amendment right to present ‘relevant and reliable’ vidence to protect him. In this connection there is an interesting case of a former airman Edward Scheffer convicted of illegal drug use after he was tested positive. He tried to introduce the result of polygraph test which confirmed that he did not take drug knowingly. But he was not permitted to place the evidence of polygraph and was sentenced. Even the remark of military appeal court which commented that the military’s ban on polygraph was unconstitutional was rejected by Supreme Court with statement that exclusion of the polygraph evidence did not violet Sheffer’s Sixth Amendment right to adequately defend him. According to the majority opinion in the military ruling it was stated clearly that military rules of evidence call for only reliable evidence to be introduced in trial and that scientists and legal experts have never agreed that polygraph results are reliable. With a view to this broad disagreement from scientific community about the ability of a machine to tell truth from fabrication the US Supreme court has decided to ban it from state and federal court proceedings. Polygraph examination can not be administered to a child in custody under Section 54.02 of Family Code without the consent of child’s attorney or the juvenile court. This is possible only when the child is transferred to criminal court for proceeding under Section 54.02 of the Family Code. There is a fear that a child in course of polygraph examination might give unfounded statement out of fear, suggestion, or fantasy that could be of substantial legal consequences concerning the child. It is, therefore, advisable to take the parents’ consent before the child is subjected to polygraph testing. A statement made by the child in polygraph testing if becomes admissible in a perjury trial as a result of testimony given in the court it might harm the interest of the child. In Romero v. State, 493 S.W.2d 206( Tex.Crim.App.1973) the court while detailing the rights, privileges, duties and powers of a parent under Section 12.04 of the Family Code stated that while courts have been reluctant to admit the results of polygraph examination because of its lack of reliability , under certain circumstances statements made during the examination have been held admissible. The decisions of courts and Supreme Courts on polygraph admissibility have been varying depending upon case to case basis and different circumstances. However, their views are not considered to be final. The court did not reject polygraph testing outright but pointed out the gross disagreeability of scientists on this issue of polygraph testing and therefore its validity was questioned. Polygraph testing has no scientific backing though its results are very good. Many human factors that come in between the process of examination and the final test, the result of testing has been doubted. Again the polygraph examinations are based on controlled questions test that are designed to question criminal suspects. The questions are such that even innocent subjects would start doubting their own honesty and integrity. The method is designed to identify the non-deceivers and not the liars that make the test inconclusive. Polygraph tests results are more or less inadmissible evidence in criminal courts of USA or many other democratic countries because it does not meet the required standards for admissible scientific evidence. Polygraph can be admissible in the court from the perspective of criminal law if it meets the standard of protecting the innocent suspects. It should not be or be less vulnerable to false-positive errors. The rate of false-positive errors should be specified and presented to the court along with the outcomes of the specific test administered to a specific defendant. If the expected rate of false –positive errors is ascertained and presented to court it would enable the court to extend weight in favor of that evidence and thus the polygraph tests would be able to stand in the court as admissible. Reference Internet Google Search Friedman, Daniel S The State of Judicial Gate keeping in Florida. - Harvard Law School Last Modified on March 8, 1999 Marin, Jonathan He Said/She Said*** How to Keep Liars Out of Court Sleek, Scott, The Judicial Gate Keeping Project, The Florida Paper on The Florida Judicial Conference Published by Find Law Gallia David Polygraph evidence in federal courts: should it be admissible? Ben-Shakhar1 Gershon & Elaad2Eitan The Guilty Knowledge Test (GKT), Application Of Psychophysiology: Future Prospects and Obstacles Maine Law officer’s Bulletin No 39 Read More