Post reply

Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
Log in
Sign up

May 13, 2026, 03:21 AM

AntiPolygraph.org Message Board
► Polygraph and CVSA Forums
► Polygraph Policy
► Post reply ( Re: Idaho Supreme Court Rejects Polygraph Evidence )

Post reply

The message has the following error or errors that must be corrected before continuing:: Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.

Name
Email
Subject
Message icon

[quote author=Marty link=msg=11352 date=1068146817]
[quote author=George W. Maschke link=topic=0.0 date=1068142483]In a ruling handed down Wed., 5 November 2003 in [i]Idaho[/i] v. [i]Perry,[/i] 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
[/quote]

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 [b]include[/b] 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
[/quote]

Attachments: (Clear attachments)

Restrictions: 4 per post (4 remaining), maximum total size 192 KB, maximum individual size 64.00 MB

Uncheck the attachments you no longer want attached

Click or drag files here to attach them.

Insert width (px):

Insert height (px):

(Clear attachments)

Other options

Return to this topic
Don't use smileys

Verification:

Please leave this box empty:

Listen to the letters / Request another image

Type the letters shown in the picture:

What is the last month of the year?:

Shortcuts: ALT+S post or ALT+P preview

Topic summary

Posted by Marty

- Nov 06, 2003, 02:26 PM

Quote from: George W. Maschke on Nov 06, 2003, 01:14 PMIn 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

- Nov 06, 2003, 01:14 PM

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