Casey Anthony Trial

[Memories for Life]

Originally Posted by slave1987

Believe that they are generally inadmisable in court but a false reading could tie up resources and stop other avenues of investigation being looked at.

I can't believe people actually believe it a common thing to beat a lie detector! It takes skilled techniques to create a "false positive" or an incompetent detector operator. In this instance, I'm sure neither of those factors would be present to get less than an accurate reading. Forget about what you've read about a "thumbtack under the toe" or "biting your tongue" -- those are easily detected by a skilled operator.

[Bigbear]

Originally Posted by nellybell

Sooooooo what actually happened to the child then?

Nobody will ever know for sure

[cbtslave4u2]

the verdict was complete, pure bull crap. what else did they need to say she was guilty?! watching her kill her baby in front of them?! the defense said she drowned in the pool. there, retry her for child neglict, she admitted it. i guess if you want to get away with murder go to florida.

[Bigbear]

To all who are asking if lie detector test/polygraph test are admissible they are not weather both prosecution and defense agree because those test dont detect the truth they detect when a person becomes irritated or uncomfortable they arent definitive either so no they are inadmissible in all courts no matter what

[nellybell]

Originally Posted by Memories for Life

I can't believe people actually believe it a common thing to beat a lie detector! It takes skilled techniques to create a "false positive" or an incompetent detector operator. In this instance, I'm sure neither of those factors would be present to get less than an accurate reading. Forget about what you've read about a "thumbtack under the toe" or "biting your tongue" -- those are easily detected by a skilled operator.

A false positive is easy to get if the person is very nervous about the situation. You don't even have had to have done something to feel intimidated by the machine. That intimidation will present as stress which can be very similar to what the person expirences when lying. Stress is what the machine measures, and that is read as a lie or the truth.

"... innocent people have been known to fail polygraph tests. In Wichita, Kansas in 1986, after failing two polygraph tests (one police administered, the other given by an expert that he had hired), Bill Wegerle had to live under a cloud of suspicion of murdering his wife Vicki Wegerle, even though he was neither arrested nor convicted of her death. In March 2004, a letter was sent to The Wichita Eagle reporter Hurst Laviana that contained Vicki's drivers license and what first appeared to be crime scene photographs of her body. The photos had actually been taken by her true murderer, BTK,[37] the serial killer that had plagued the people of Wichita since 1974 and had recently resurfaced in February 2004 after an apparent 25 year period of dormancy (he had actually killed three women between 1985 and 1991, including Wegerle). That effectively cleared Bill Wegerle of the murder of his wife. In 2005 conclusive DNA evidence, including DNA retrieved from under the fingernails of Vicki Wegerle, demonstrated that the BTK Killer was Dennis Rader"

I imagine that their lawyer advised them against taking a lie detector test because there was no real reason for them too. They really had nothing to gain from taking it, but if they were to fail they could very easily have the finger pointed at them for something they could not have been involved in.

Some studies have shown that the accuracy of the test can be as low as 61% which is little better than a flip of the coin. As shown above, there has been a history of it being wrong to back it up. The polygraph isn't a scientifically accepted method, that's why it isn't usually admissible in court. Unlike soild evidence -DNA, fingerprints, ect- which give no other possiblity of an answer, the polygraph does and leaves a lot of doubt.

[PineForest]

I dislike how people say she should be found guilty and get the lethal injection. It is not your place to decide that, its the jury and the judge.
This whole thing kind of reminds me of that part in 'To kill a Mockingbird' where the townsfolk just assumed Tom Robinson abused Ewell's daughter and formed an angry mob.

[Kisune Karnon]

Originally Posted by PineForest

I dislike how people say she should be found guilty and get the lethal injection. It is not your place to decide that, its the jury and the judge.
This whole thing kind of reminds me of that part in 'To kill a Mockingbird' where the townsfolk just assumed Tom Robinson abused Ewell's daughter and formed an angry mob.

Except in this case, she actually did kill her child. Where as Tom didn't do anything.

[Voiceless_Frame]

Originally Posted by Kisunesoldier

Except in this case, she actually did kill her child. Where as Tom didn't do anything.

The key to that argument is that there is no real hard evidence, as it stands the prosecution screwed up by going for Murder One instead of Negligible Homicide, which would have more of a chance at winning. Most reasonable people will not condemn a woman to death based on nothing but weak evidence and a an even weaker motive.

[Kisune Karnon]

The only issue they had was the link. The rest was all hard evidence and motive. The prosecution just couldn't link it.

[Voiceless_Frame]

Originally Posted by Kisunesoldier

The only issue they had was the link. The rest was all hard evidence and motive. The prosecution just couldn't link it.

How was the motive in any way solid?

[Memories for Life]

Originally Posted by cbtslave4u2

the verdict was complete, pure bull crap. what else did they need to say she was guilty?! watching her kill her baby in front of them?! the defense said she drowned in the pool. there, retry her for child neglict, she admitted it. i guess if you want to get away with murder go to florida.

OJ didn't have to go to Florida!

BTW: she NEVER admitted to anything! that's why she has 4 guilty verdicts of lying to the police!

[PineForest]

Originally Posted by Kisunesoldier

Except in this case, she actually did kill her child. Where as Tom didn't do anything.

It is the same. You didn't know that Tom was innocent until Atticus proved it.

[Memories for Life]

Which case should be a "no-brainer, even if I haven't got a shred of evidence and I'm the stupidest prosecutor on the planet" lock-down conviction?
(You may choose ONLY one):

The Caylee Anthony murder case

The Strauss-Kahn sex assault case

The Nidal Hasan murder case

Remember you can ONLY choose one case! Good Luck!

[Damned]

I don't care what ya'll think. The bitch should've gotten the death sentence. There is no way in hell that she should have been found not guilty. The evidence pointed to her, but the legal systems are fucked up and they'll ignore it. She deserves to be dead, for killing her daughter. Hate me all you want, I don't fucking care. She killed an innocent two year old, who had done NOTHING. Personally if my daughter had gone missing, I would have reported it immediately, not 31 days later. The bitch did kill Caylee, its obvious.

[Memories for Life]

Originally Posted by nellybell

A false positive is easy to get if the person is very nervous about the situation. You don't even have had to have done something to feel intimidated by the machine. That intimidation will present as stress which can be very similar to what the person expirences when lying. Stress is what the machine measures, and that is read as a lie or the truth.

"... innocent people have been known to fail polygraph tests. In Wichita, Kansas in 1986, after failing two polygraph tests (one police administered, the other given by an expert that he had hired), Bill Wegerle had to live under a cloud of suspicion of murdering his wife Vicki Wegerle, even though he was neither arrested nor convicted of her death. In March 2004, a letter was sent to The Wichita Eagle reporter Hurst Laviana that contained Vicki's drivers license and what first appeared to be crime scene photographs of her body. The photos had actually been taken by her true murderer, BTK,[37] the serial killer that had plagued the people of Wichita since 1974 and had recently resurfaced in February 2004 after an apparent 25 year period of dormancy (he had actually killed three women between 1985 and 1991, including Wegerle). That effectively cleared Bill Wegerle of the murder of his wife. In 2005 conclusive DNA evidence, including DNA retrieved from under the fingernails of Vicki Wegerle, demonstrated that the BTK Killer was Dennis Rader"

I imagine that their lawyer advised them against taking a lie detector test because there was no real reason for them too. They really had nothing to gain from taking it, but if they were to fail they could very easily have the finger pointed at them for something they could not have been involved in.

Some studies have shown that the accuracy of the test can be as low as 61% which is little better than a flip of the coin. As shown above, there has been a history of it being wrong to back it up. The polygraph isn't a scientifically accepted method, that's why it isn't usually admissible in court. Unlike soild evidence -DNA, fingerprints, ect- which give no other possiblity of an answer, the polygraph does and leaves a lot of doubt.

You couldn't find a more relevant case of a "false positive" in the last 25 years???

In the Wegerle case, both "technicians" were unskilled in setting a baseline reading before any questions are initiated. The police tech was already biased in the case as the police were already steering their investigation directly at the husband! The "expert" that the Wegerle defense team found used the test "failure" to prove their client's innocence (the test results showed Wegerle had "lied" about his age, his address and his own name)!

Modern polygraph technicians are degreed professionals who are employed based on a consensus of their peers. They are rated on each test they perform and the results are double AND triple checked by other technicians, all who are skilled at identifying psychological and physiological abnormalities of each testee prior to the test to establish a proper baseline measurement. The modern method doesn't just have a "EKG" like strap on the chest and finger of the individual being tested. A video technician monitors an infrared camera which detects skin temperature patterns while a separate audio technician monitors voice inflection variances.