Lie Detectors: Pros and Cons
...r bodily functions and as such they argue that lie detectors are valid and useful (Keogh, 2006). Those who argue against lie detectors indicate that the lie detector can measure a personˇ¦s responses, but that it cannot measure the amount of truth being told (Keogh, 2006). For example, a personˇ¦s ˇ§reactions could be triggered by emotions, such as anger or fearˇ¨ and ˇ§Concerns that medical conditions, including colds and muscle problems, may distort resultsˇ¨ (Keogh, 2006). There are also individuals who claim that the use of lie detectors is actually an invasion of privacy (Keogh, 2006). In one respect, concerning some particular cases, it was argued that, ˇ§ˇ¦Allowing the executive branch to submit the legislative branch to lie-detector tests raises constitutional issues of separation of powersˇ¦ˇ¨ (Vergano, 2002). One particular author, a criminal defense attorney, indicates that they believe the lie detector test is useful in some respects and they have personally sent several of their clients to use one (Granick, 2006). But, at the same time this individual indicates that there is really very little evidence that the lie detector is honestly accurate (Granick, 2006). They claim that ˇ§most courts won't admit test results as evidence. But many people in law enforcement, including the FBI, believe in lie detectors, so strapping a defendant to a polygraph can be a useful tool in convincing prosecutors to drop borderline chargesˇ¨ (Granick, 2006). Another author argues that the practice of using a lie detector is not an exact science and that even reading the results of such testing prove incredibly inaccurate and highly subjective (Kantor, 2004). ˇ§In short, lie detectors don't work. But people's lives have been ruined by themˇ¨ (Kantor, 2004). This particular critic indicates that several television investigative shows, such as 20/20, have shown, numerous times, that ˇ§Lie detectors show what the examiners wan...