You know I think I found a ultimite weopon to see if one is guilty or innocent. Lie Detectors! If the court rooms used lie detectors we'd automatically know if one is is guilty or innocent. Alot of my friends were mad that Micheal Jackson was found innocent. They believe if he had a lie detector test he'd be guilty. Course I think he got off scott free is cause hes a celeb. What do you guys think about the lie detector idea.

Lie detectors aren't foolproof, plus their use in a court room would be protested by rights advocates.

Of course thier foolproof. You probably dont know how lie detectors can detect a lie.

Who are you calling kid. I'm not a kid(anymore). Besides they can be foolproof. I forgot most the info, I say what I know. Every time you lie your heart gives a irregular heartbeat the lie detector well detects those irregular heartbeats. That sounds foolproof to me.

How do you know so much about it? Oh well even if the lie detector isnt always foolproof at least my idea was a decent one.

No they are not foolproof, they do not work if the person actually believes they are right, if they think they are telling the trueth then their heart beat will not alter, however if the are lieing, then the heart beat will disrupt and show on the lie detector.

Plus Michael Jackson wasn't guilty because they didn't have the evidence to convict him.

Good God, kid. Learn how the justice system works. Then come and talk to us.

Hey, look at me, I'm winning in slow motion.

There's not really much evidence that polygraphs are even reliable. Some people say that the accuracy is 70-90% (though it's not so much a test as it is a technique that can't be standardized and therefore the accuracy of which cannot be measured. Anyway, even if you were somehow able to say for sure that it was 90% accurate, 10% isn't a very small number. If you interrogated a million people, then you would potentially have 100,000 that would be in the margin of error. There's been no studies at all that prove that polygraphs work. In fact, they used it on a man they already knew was guilty (the Russian spy Aldrich Ames) and he passed it. Three times.

Now, there are other ways of telling whether or not someone is lying.

First, there's the good old Truth Serum. Unfortunately, we've got nothing that we can count on. The CIA tried to do one with MK-ULTRA. Oh boy, was that a failure. But facial microexpressions, on the other hand, are very reliable. You just have to know what to look for. See, when someone lies, their face is likely--though not guaranteed--to send off a slight "distress" expression.

And of course, science is showing that lying actually causes different parts of your brain to activate during MRIs. Now, it's reliable, but I'll let you imagine how easy that is to do in a real situation.

Edited by Mega X.exe on June 18, 2006 at 22:59:34.

I know! We can use that machine in Power Rangers SPD! You know, the one that blips an X and O back and forth, and whichever one it stops on tells whether he's guilty or not guilty? And if they are, we can shoot him with the Canine Crossbow!

I don't think there's a surefire solution, or else it would probably already be in practice.

Your DEFINTLY TOO OLD to watch power rangers. Besides I haerd SPD was the most dunb one. One of my friends said once change the P in SPD to a T. And you get Power Rangers STD.

Unfortunately, the things that lie detectors pick up on are also signs of being nervous. The problem is that 99% of those facing a trial in which they could be sent to prison are likely to be nervous, regardless of their guilt. You might as well sod the trial and lock them up regardless.

Yeah, that joke's a lot more mature than Power Rangers.



Edited by Mega X.exe on June 20, 2006 at 10:07:34.

Yeah, and as a result of such, the polygraph would already start making noises when there hasn't even been an ACTUAL question.

lie detectors work different ways

some use blood pressure, when it rise dramaticly, you´re propably lying and others use brainwaves or other stuff

people can train their body to fake everything and let the lie detector think they are not guilty.

Okay no, the worst one goes to Ninja crap in a heartbeat. Also, you don't remember our little fad from about 2 or 3 weeks ago.

Also, my dad is a lawyer so let me say a few things about this. Lie detector are really only at most an 80% chance of lying. Also, Int terms of legality, it's doable in say an interrogation session, but usually a judge would have to order it even then. Now what would really prove it, logic and evidence.

Also Ray is right about different types, an average person can even fool it, Usually when you lie your Blood pressure spikes for a few heartbeats, however, over time you can turn this off merely with experience.


Edited by Black Dranzer.exe on June 20, 2006 at 15:48:57.

The most common lie detectors use a combination.. they measure breathing rate, heart rate, and perspiration. There are a number of ways to get false positives and trick the machine. Get nervous easy? Your elevated heart rate during interrogation will make the readings spike, even if you are innocent. Anyone with a real cool head could fool one of these things by keeping their heart rate and respiration down within normal range.

CURRENTLY.. there is work being done on a technique called "brain mapping". A number of electrodes are placed on the scalp of a suspect, and they measure the electrical activity of the brain. The subject sits in a chair, and looks at a computer screen. Images flash on screen for a few seconds, followed by a large "X", and then another images. Some images are related to the crime (for example, if a murder victim was strangled and hung, they'll use an image of a noose, or a rope), some are images totally unrelated to the crime.. like a cloud, or something. The reactions of the suspect's brain to each image are recorded. It is very easy to see what the suspect relates to that came on-screen.. it creates a huge spike in the readings.

They aren't using it widely yet, but it's showing a lot of promise. They can easily tell if a person was connected with the crime, and it's thought to be impossible to fake.. after all.. you can slow your breathing, calm your heart.. but it's pretty difficult to alter your own memory.

Edited by Shadowfire on June 20, 2006 at 15:16:36.

I dunno. You could always commit a crime and then have a hypnotist help you completely repress the memory or something.

Is it possible to completely hide a memory? I'd imagine it would take some sort of actual form of amnesia to cover a thought so completely that the brain would not even respond to a corresponding image.

But I guess that's more so a question of a belief in the system of hypnotism, isn't it? I really don't know enough about it to speak on the subject.

1 N0SE! WH33'LL UZ3 OWR L33T P0W3R R4NG3R MYZT1C F0RC3 C3LL PH0N3S!

What if you went to a website that shows dead people, and you saw a picture of someone who hung themselves? Wouldn't your memory go "oh yeah I saw that before"?

Yeah, that's called false incrimination. Or what if the killer used a breathable gas to kill the person, wouldn't and you were innocent, but just looked up that gas on wikipedia because you were bored.

They don't let your browse during the test, they show their own images. And they have many, many images. So, if there's a false positive on one image related to the crime, it's highly unlikely that they'll get a false positive on ALL of them. Anyway, it's much more accurate and reliable than the lie detector.

I dunno. People aren't very creative with murders these days. What if a loved one of the person had been murdered in the same way? Then you'd get some positives, right?

Some, but I've heard about this method as well. I think they use more than just some randoms images that can correspond to the crime. They sometimes use actual crime scene photos, sometimes ones not directly related to the crime, but show recognition of the location itself. Of course I could be wrong.