Polygraphs ?

[leebean]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Michigan or Oregon

Long story short - my Mentally impaired son stayed with my Biological mom for a few years when he was 14-16. I joined the Army to provide for the family. she had some kids that she adopted, one being a girl that was roughly 3-5 years at that time. That was 1999-2001. About 3 years ago, my Bio mom's husband was arrested for improperly "touching" when he was drunk. And also said another "man" touched her. But didn't know his name. This all during the time that she was with Her bio family with a known sex offender for a short time at 3 yrs old, when my son enterred the home. So, 3 years ago.. I'm told of all this, and Oregon charged and put my bio mom's hubby (who really is a good guy), in jail for mandatory 6 yrs. Since then, the child admits that she lied. States that the police and her sisters made her tell the lie. 3 years later, a detective from Oregon is "following up on the case from a while back", and just wants to ask if he knows anything about what happened and begins interrogating my son over the phone here in Michigan, and then follows up the 21 minute call with whether or not my son would agree to a Polygraph test. My son is innocent. I know this. My son has Pervasive Development disorder, with possible Schizophrenia, and severe anxiety. Are there not laws to protect him? Would he really have to take one ?

 

[xylene]

A polygraph is NEVER required and you should absolutely refuse to allow one.

A polygraph is junk science, and it is SUPER JUNK science when applied to a developmentally disabled MINOR.

You need to be on notice and get a lawyer. The police consider your son a suspect in a serious set of sex crimes.

You also need to be candid with your self on you son about the possibility that he did this, even unknowingly. You were not there so don't say you know what happened or did not.

Good luck

 

[leebean]

Re: Polygraphs

Thank you for your response.. and I do understand what you are saying..

I say, that I know my son is innocent, as does the rest of the bio family that I have talked with. My son was 14-16 at that time.. and is now almost 24. My son did not have the mental capacity at that time, to even think up some of the things that this girl is saying. (keep in mind, she admits to lying previously - and at the time of the "incident" would have been 3, and "told" on her dad when she was about 10 - who, by the way, passed His polygraph that he wasn't lying when he said he didn't do anything wrong but was still convicted). And the rest of the family knows the kind of lies this girl tells, but the Oregon officers have a viewpoint that a child never lies..

So he's almost 24 now.. still mentally impaired, and I want to call and tell this detective in Oregon that my son will Not be taking this test here in Mich - after waiting 3 years to follow up on something that was resolved already.. I just don't know how to word it without sounding like a bumbling idiot and super protective mom..

 

[outonbail]

I want to call and tell this detective in Oregon that my son will Not be taking this test here in Mich - after waiting 3 years to follow up on something that was resolved already.. I just don't know how to word it without sounding like a bumbling idiot and super protective mom..

This is why you should have an attorney contact the detective. Call the local Bar association and ask them to refer you to an attorney who has experience in these matters. You should be able to find one who will give you a free consultation and make a phone call or write a letter on you/your son's behalf for a small fee.

Frankly I think this detective must have nothing better to do with his time if he's looking to hang a mentally disabled individual for a crime which is alleged to have happened when said individual was 14 years old.

Don't lose sleep over this detective's intimidating style of investigation. Have an attorney contact him and set him straight. You are under no obligation to either receive or return this detective's calls.

 

[CdwJava]

Just HOW is it "intimidating" to ask questions?? Even to ask if the person will take a polygraph?

The detective likely only knows he is talking to a 24 year old male, not that he has any developmental issues. And, unless the young man has a conservator, he is legally capable of making his own decisions.

Understand that child molestation cases are one of the few things that law enforcement in most every state MUST investigate - like it or not. The detective MUST look into the allegations. It is also a common practice to ask someone if they will take a polygraph, but there's a reason to ask the question even if the officer knows that it won't be done or that it is inadmissible.

And while a polygraph is not yet accepted in any court for criminal prosecutions, it is hardly "junk" science. It can be a very valuable tool and can be very accurate when in the hands of a properly trained analyst. However, at this point there is NO STANDARD either for the equipment or the training of the technician, and since much of the data is subject to subjective interpretation, it cannot be seen as sufficiently reliable at this point.

The young man is certainly under no obligation to talk to the police. But the police ARE under an obligation to investigate these offenses.

- Carl

 

[tranquility]

I would never take a polygraph even if I were innocent. But, with a well trained expert and modern equipment where *specific* issue(s) are addressed (over a more generalized fishing trip), they do seem to have some level of reliability.

 

[LSCAP]

They’ve been playing with polygraphs for ( a heck of a long time) many years, and still are not trusted.
That’s part of the reason you can pass the test and still be found guilty.

I would never, never, consider telling someone to take the test.

A sociopath soars through it, and - too often - the innocent person fails.

As a good detective pointed out, arrest two people, put them in a holding cell, and the guilty one takes a nap, while the innocent frets, and worries etc.

 

[LSCAP]

And Carl is right about the detective having to follow up.

If he didn't, and the crime was commited, we'd want to hang the detective.

 

[quincy]

I agree with those who say that polygraphs are unreliable and should NEVER be voluntarily taken by anyone, regardless of who is doing the testing.

The federal courts adopted a four-prong standard in 1993, to determine what testing would be allowed as evidence in the courts and what wouldn't. If a theory has been proven by testing, and the testing has been positively reviewed by the scientific community, and the theory has an acceptable error rate, and the theory has gained acceptance in the scientific community, then the courts allow it. (see Daubert v Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 1993)

Under this standard, DNA tests and fingerprints are allowed as evidence in the courts. Polygraph results are not.

In 1998, the Supreme Court stated in United States v Scheffer that polygraph experts can only offer "opinions" and that there is no consensus among the scientific community that polygraph evidence is in any way conclusive.

In 2003, the National Academy of Sciences did a study showing that polygraphs work only slightly better than random chance - about as reliable as a coin toss. "Its accuracy in distinguishing actual or potential [security] violators from innocent test takers is insufficient to justify reliance on its use..." After the study was released, the Department of Justice stopped using polygraphs as a screening tool.

I understand the need of the detective to ask questions of your son, but your son should not answer these questions without having an attorney present with him when these questions are asked. This is for the protection of your son. And your son should definitely not take a polygraph test.