In the previous article [Evaluation of evidence (I): past and present known] commented more or less which were based assessment techniques and also the oldest witness the best known of this. The poorly known as "truth machine", and correctly as polygraph, has many uses, is a tool that can be used rightly or wrongly, and technical precision you do, what you need is to know to take it. There is a little used and lesser-known assessment of testimony given polygraph rings around the popular, in an obvious sense once known the method I will explain briefly. Indeed, once read, I encourage you to tell me a movie, or TV series on which it is used, so that at least you see that there is life beyond this instrument that would make you believe.
Advantages:
-
The evaluated need not decide the truth or lie, but simply repeat what they say. It also may not even have to talk, using pictures.
-
is virtually impossible that someone is innocent found guilty, since the system itself does only know the truth if he is guilty, complicit, direct witness, victim or police officer in charge, and obviously the last three would not be evaluated.
Disadvantages:
-
It is possible that one offender is considered innocent (especially psychopaths).
-
can be evaluated only crimes in which there are sufficient details are not publicly known to make a sufficient number of items. So, someone has to know the truth, and it needed to have objective evidence of facts or details about the crime. No questions generic assumptions or events.
-
can not always do, and we must take a minimum precautions to be reliable. Which evaluates nor should know the truth (assessor 'blind') to be chosen for the oral version and that could mean slightly different ways correct, implying an innocent subject that these are the real thing.
As above, we know that anyone who knows the true positive finding has been there and possibly the cause or an accomplice. Even if the result is negative not have to exclude the possibility, only positive is conclusive that at least was this and knows things he should not know. And we put a case in which the details of the crime are unknown popularly, an individual is connected to the polygraph and someone will say the following, and the subject repeating:
- beating at home using a key. (Repeat) home
- Among forcing the door. (Repeat)
- beating at home by the window. (Repeat)
- Mate (name) in the kitchen. (Repeat)
- Mate (name) in the classroom. (Repeat)
- Mate (name) in the driveway. (Repeat)
- Mate (name) using a knife. (Repeat)
- Mate (name) choked on a thread. (Repeat)
- Mate (name) with a gun. (Repeat)
- When I left the body was lying face down. (Repeat)
- When I left the body was tilted. (Repeat)
- When I left the body was face up. (Repeat)
And so dozens of questions about facts unknown to any innocent person who does not work in the case. If the crime was coming through the window in the kitchen, choking the victim and the body is upside down, and many other details, and the subject be sympathetic activity in these points can not be attributed to a general nervousness about the burden of the question. The chances that an innocent is just as active in the real option that says would be more or less the same as going to an exam with 100 multiple choice questions, with 3 options and get a 90/100 without having even opened the book and gone to school. Virtually impossible. Of course, there is the possibility that a not guilty tense ever, so I say that is proof of guilt, but not necessarily innocent, but as I said in previous post, is the moral ideal.
before I could also be done in cases showing images of different weapons, different habitats ... someone who has studied more thoroughly will be able to do these things with 5 options and hundreds of details.
In all play very important also another group that is often too interested in the whole world knows the truth as soon as possible. When the details of a crime go to press, before it can no longer do, at least not with these details, and sometimes may not be many more, which just avoided a great way to recognize the guilt or this serves as further proof is, of course, much more accurate than what we know from movies and television.
With this system could not be done TV as they are made, as it has to be part of a police investigation in order, with data known only to participants and police, and there must be some risk to doing it. Can not be generic or abstract questions, but simply that known data (which excludes questions as it is often heard: "You're racist" or "would never cheated on my wife.")
probably more guilty let out, but what is clear is that it includes as many innocents as other evidence (there is room for all: an accomplice who believes is better to charge him only with guilt or a witness threatened .. . Of all ways compared to what would be the current system [previous post] is clearly better. At least, study more about this other option does not consider it an error. It is not as perfect as Pinocchio's nose, but it is a despicable, that anyone who sees it says it is false and can easily miss. And of course, may not always be used, but might be a good tool in cases where it is.
As noted, there are other techniques for the assessment of testimony that have nothing to do with biological markers, which are based on sound scientific studies and proven, but have more to do with the speech, narration. Some are very effective and none perfect, but I would like to know what operation you can make in ensuring the success you: I still remember when I put a foil to get a neurological exam and had to sign a paper stating that he admitted to me undertake with a risk of 1 to 10000 to die. And just to see if I had something, I do not want to imagine if I have to remove.
And then a video that has nothing to do with this particular polygraph, but with the general theme. I first saw it on the blog jaded screenwriter, and now I see that it went so well so thank you:
Links:
· Antipolygraph.org: but is solely based on the popular polygraph, the "yes" or "no." And their figures show the effectiveness of the polygraph as if it could be used in different ways. The polygraph is very effective, now, the polygraph used to evaluate the truth or lie, the guilt or innocence ... That depends on many things, and one of them is art.
0 comments:
Post a Comment