Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [infoguys-list] Polygraph admissibility - I'm Done With Insufferable Fools

Expand Messages
  • oracleintl@aol.com
    In a message dated 5/22/2006 8:35:31 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, puncher113@yahoo.com writes: Before Bill and Rick go off to shop for an agreeable judge,
    Message 1 of 1 , May 22, 2006
      In a message dated 5/22/2006 8:35:31 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
      puncher113@... writes:

      Before Bill and Rick go off to shop for an agreeable judge, let's
      please put the brakes on this. Admissibility is NOT up to the
      discretion of the trial judge, or anyone reviewing the case on appeal.
      The judge is the trier of law, the law is the Evidence Code, and the
      Evidence Code recognizes a polygraph for what it is: an out-of-court
      statement presented to assert the truth of what it says. That's the
      classic definition of hearsay, so the polygraph will not be admissible
      unless it falls under one of the recognized exceptions to the hearsay
      rule -- which is possible, of course.
      Bryan Smith
      Cal. SBN 196500




      You Sir, are a fucking idiot.

      Did you even bother to read the damn cases I cited, or do you just get wound
      up and blow this out your ass.

      One more time -- take a deeeeeeep breath, focus on the words, one at a time.

      U.S. v. Piccinonna, 885 F.2d 1529 (11th Cir. 1989) (Polygraph evidence is
      not inadmissible per se. However, polygraph expert testimony will be
      admissible in this circuit when both parties stipulate in advance as to the
      circumstances of the test and as to the scope of its admissibility. Where the parties
      agree to these conditions in advance of the polygraph test, evidence of the
      test results are admissible. Polygraph evidence may also be used to impeach or
      corroborate the testimony of a witness at trial. Admission of polygraph
      evidence for these purposes is subject to three preliminary conditions. First, the
      party planning to use the evidence at trial must provide adequate notice to
      the opposing party that expert testimony will be offered. Second, polygraph
      expert testimony by a party will be admissible only if the opposing party was
      given a reasonable opportunity to have its own polygraph expert administer a
      test covering substantially the same questions. Third, failure to provide
      adequate notice or reasonable opportunity for the opposing side to administer
      its own test is proper grounds for exclusion of the evidence. Admission of
      polygraph evidence for impeachment or corroboration purposes, however, is still
      left entirely to the discretion of the trial judge.)

      I have enough experience with these things that we discuss on these lists
      that it is pretty damn ridiculous for me to spend the time to do the research,
      and then post the cases for you to read (including a link to the Polygraph
      Association so you can find information for wherever you happen to be) only to
      entertain comments from the peanut gallery.

      I have had E-Fukin-Nuff wasting my time that could obviously be put to
      better use - I'm done with the educational posts here.

      Take the ball and run with it Bryan -- the rest of you can address any
      questions, issues and concerns that you may have to him.

      Bill E. Branscum, Investigator
      Oracle International
      _http://www.fraudsandscams.com/_ (http://www.fraudsandscams.com/)
      _http://www.oracleinternational.com/_ (http://www.oracleinternational.com/)
      PO Box 10728
      Naples, FL 34101
      (239) 304-1639
      (239) 304-1640 Fax



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.