{"id":4080,"date":"2003-11-05T16:30:17","date_gmt":"2003-11-05T21:30:17","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/?p=4080"},"modified":"2021-03-13T13:01:54","modified_gmt":"2021-03-13T18:01:54","slug":"idaho-supreme-court-rejects-polygraph-testimony","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/2003\/11\/05\/idaho-supreme-court-rejects-polygraph-testimony\/","title":{"rendered":"Idaho Supreme Court Rejects Polygraph Testimony"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"entry\">\n\n\n<p>In a ruling handed down Wed., 5 November 2003 in <em>Idaho v. Perry,<\/em> the Idaho Supreme Court ruled polygraph evidence inadmissible. Craig T. Perry had sought the admission of testimony by Dr. Charles R. Honts regarding a polygraph examination that he administered. <a href=\"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/litigation\/perry\/perry.pdf\">Download<\/a> Idaho Supreme Court 2003 Ruling No. 109 (33 kb PDF).<\/p>\n\n\n<\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>In a ruling handed down Wed., 5 November 2003 in Idaho v. Perry, the Idaho Supreme Court ruled polygraph evidence inadmissible. Craig T. Perry had sought the admission of testimony by Dr. Charles R. Honts regarding a polygraph examination that he administered. Download Idaho Supreme Court 2003 Ruling No. 109 (33 kb PDF).<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[95,486],"class_list":{"0":"post-4080","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","6":"category-polygraph","7":"tag-admissibility","8":"tag-idaho","9":"anons"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4080","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4080"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4080\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4081,"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4080\/revisions\/4081"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4080"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4080"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/antipolygraph.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4080"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}