are polygraphs legal and or acurate?to prove that you were at home and that you never left the house?
494270
They are "legal" but are generally inadmissable in a court of law.  In order for scientific evidence to be allowed in court, generally it must pass what is called the Frey test.  The frey test is too long to explain on here, but you can research it online or at any law library.
259052
As far as an actual statistic, I'm not sure.  However, I think that people lie in court all the time.  People are either honest or dishonest... I don't think that swearing to tell the truth will automaticaly want to make a dishonest person want to tell the truth... it just means that if they don't tell the truth when they swore to, then it's illegal.  And hey, if they are already on trial for something illegal, it's probably not going to bother them if they do something ELSE that's illegal.
968649
Why yes, we actually have, courtesy of my creep stepson ("I didn't steal it, honest!" yeah right. \nThey were very nice about it, they handed me the search warrant, explained and pointed to the appropriate signatures and started looking. They did not "toss" the house---I asked them and they said "that's only for people giving us a hard time!" and they honored my request NOT to search my bedroom (I wouldnt have been able to sleep in there again, and it was always secured against the punk anyway)...\nAnyway, don't be a jerk to them and they'll be nice. Maybe. \n\nPS, that was the last night my stepson spent in my home again.
771471
Yes, because the polygraph test measures pulse,  respiration, heart rate, etc.you can flunk a polygraph if you are the extreme nervous type.  They clain that experience examiners can tell the difference between nervousness and deception. If this were the case, why is it that polygraphy results are inadmissable as court evidence?\nPathological liars can pass polygraph tests easy, because they cannot distinguish a lie from the truth, and wholeheartedly belive in their own lies.
643674
No. The police actually have to have you clocked on radar to prove the violation.
804776
Hi\nAs far as I know, it is against the law without peole knowing. It also wont be used as viable evidence in any court/tribunal.\n\nYou should, by law be entitled to a witness. IS someone stating otherwise?
363372
They never were. It has always been legal to videotape in your own house, even without the person's permission.
791621
in no way whatsoever ( it is not accurate enough for court ) sorry for the pause - at work\n\neven if we ever get a test that is 100% accurate the effect will be minimal \n\nwe would not use it in crime solving ( self incrimination ) nor in business ( right to privacy )
239464
there wouldn't really be one. they can't prove you possessed a drug in the past, they have to roll you when you have it.
488076
Was the arrest based on a complaint when you were out in public? It would seem that your home would be private. If you were not in public, you might report this arrest to the ACLU. They are short-staffed, but at least you would be on record. I won't let a cop in my house without a warrant, but it's a little late for that to help you now.
188943
Absolutely.  The fact that the device can pinpoint your location is an ironclad alibi to prove you weren't somewhere else -- as long as there is no suspicion or evidence that you somehow removed the device.
716733
Polygraph tests are NOT admissible.  This is due to the fact, no evidence can be provided to support the responses.  Ive myself have seen where people have been found Innocent, even when the test result showed they probably have committed the offence.  The key word "probably"  would not stand up in a criminal court of law... you have to prove your case "beyond reasonable doubt".
1016917
they ask questions that have a yes or a no answer,nothing that you have to explain or go into detail. \nRemember a polygraph is a test to see if you are lying.
888368
I went for employment once and they sent me to get a polygraph (then it was the law for certain employment, but that law has now changed) and I took the test, and the guy reviewed it for 10 minutes and came back in and gave me the results.  So your answer is yes, they could give them to you before you leave.
695234
My idea comes right from the book The Runaway Jury:\n\nSomewhere inconspicuous, where it won't be found and can see the door (or the area near the door), position a video camera, and set it on the longest record setting.  Then review it when you get home.  This way, not only do you have confirmed evidence that someone broke in, you actually know who did it.\n\nGood luck.
642543
In the UK, background checks include what you have mentioned - Criminal records, Employment records, Tax returns, also checks with DSS and Local police Day book (reports/complaints by members of the community).\nThey cannot check Bank transactions without a court order.\nThey cannot check your home life.\n\nYou are right in telling him not falsify his employment status, it's too easily checked, either via DSS, or if not, the question then asked is "How did you live without money?" - these can lead to even more questions.\n\nGaping gaps in employment need not work against him, depending on what he was doing during those times.\n\nRemember - people are naturally trusting so will only start 'deep' questions if given a reason to.
805877
polygraphs are not allowed to be used in any US courts for criminal charges,  they have never been proven to be reliable.\n\n( although all police departments require them as part of the hireing procedure)\n\nthe aging programs only work assuming no serious illness, average weight gain,  and other factors,  one could change slightly a varible or two and the photo can change.  But it can be a close idea that is still better than none