Add Poll
 
Options: Text Color Split Pie
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
days and minutes. Leave it blank if you don't want to set it now.

Please type the characters that appear in the image. The characters must be typed in the same order, and they are case-sensitive.
Open Preview Preview

You can resize the textbox by dragging the right or bottom border.
Insert Hyperlink Insert FTP Link Insert Image Insert E-mail Insert Media Insert Table Insert Table Row Insert Table Column Insert Horizontal Rule Insert Teletype Insert Code Insert Quote Edited Superscript Subscript Insert List /me - my name Insert Marquee Insert Timestamp No Parse
Bold Italicized Underline Insert Strikethrough Highlight
                       
Change Text Color
Insert Preformatted Text Left Align Centered Right Align
resize_wb
resize_hb







Max 200000 characters. Remaining characters:
Text size: pt
More Smilies
View All Smilies
Collapse additional features Collapse/Expand additional features Smiley Wink Cheesy Grin Angry Sad Shocked Cool Huh Roll Eyes Tongue Embarrassed Lips Sealed Undecided Kiss Cry
Attachments More Attachments Allowed file types: txt doc docx ics psd pdf bmp jpe jpg jpeg gif png swf zip rar tar gz 7z odt ods mp3 mp4 wav avi mov 3gp html maff pgp gpg
Maximum Attachment size: 500000 KB
Attachment 1:
X
Topic Summary - Displaying 2 post(s).
Posted by: Marty
Posted on: Nov 6th, 2003 at 7:26pm
  Mark & Quote
Quote:
In a ruling handed down Wed., 5 November 2003 in Idaho v. Perry, the Idaho Supreme Court ruled polygraph evidence inadmissible. Perry had sought the admission of testimony by Dr. Charles R. Honts regarding a polygraph examination that he administered. The 9-page ruling may be downloaded here:

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/idahostatecases/sc/10311/perry.pdf


George,

Fascinating opinion. Yet another opinion tossing polygraph testimony which would have been favorable to the defense. And no less than by Hont's himself. It was interesting to see how the NAS report was cited to include the polygraph testimony. That's a new one.

The polygraph seems to be ok to be used for screening, widely agreed to be less accurate than specific incident tests, but not good enough that a defendant can even bring it up (in a specific incidence test) to a jury to defend themselves from a murder charge.

In any case it tells you what the prosecutors think of how valid a polygraph is even when given by one of the best known experts.

-Marty
Posted by: George W. Maschke
Posted on: Nov 6th, 2003 at 6:14pm
  Mark & QuoteQuote
In a ruling handed down Wed., 5 November 2003 in Idaho v. Perry, the Idaho Supreme Court ruled polygraph evidence inadmissible. Perry had sought the admission of testimony by Dr. Charles R. Honts regarding a polygraph examination that he administered. The 9-page ruling may be downloaded here:

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/idahostatecases/sc/10311/perry.pdf
 
  Top