Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Teen rape victims needn't take polygraph tests, judge decides

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
The Straight Story Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 05:35 PM
Original message
Teen rape victims needn't take polygraph tests, judge decides
Teen rape victims needn't take polygraph tests, judge decides


CLEVELAND -- A judge here has backed off an order seeking polygraph tests on three teenage rape victims.

The order had angered victim advocates and prosecutors.

Cuyahoga County Juvenile Judge Alison Floyd said in a recent court filing that she lacked authority to order the tests to check the girls' truthfulness after the cases were resolved. Floyd found four teenage boys delinquent, the juvenile court equivalent of guilty.

None of the girls complied with the order to take the polygraph tests.

The judge, who hasn't publicly explained her original ruling, could not be reached for comment today. A message seeking comment was left at her office.

http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2010/04/27/rape-victim-polygraph.html?type=rss&cat=&sid=101
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
dixiegrrrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 05:41 PM
Response to Original message
1. Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
American Taliban at work again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lint Head Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 05:49 PM
Response to Original message
2. A polygraph test is not admissible a evidence in a court of law.
It is a intimidation tool and not proof of anything.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mojeoux Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 05:52 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Wow that's right.
What kind of hoaky-shlamokey justice system do they have in Cleveland?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beyurslf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 06:43 PM
Response to Original message
4. As the father of 4 teenage boys, one of whom was falsely accused of rape,
I can sympathize with whoever is on the side of the truth. The boys have already resolved their cases. Why shouldn't the boys take a polygraph now and then see what happens. If the tests show they are telling then truth, I would look again at the girls. Rape is not joking matter, but neither is falsely accusing someone of it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
miscsoc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 06:51 PM
Response to Reply #4
8. polygraphs aren't reliable measures of anything
Edited on Tue Apr-27-10 06:52 PM by miscsoc
if your son hdd gotten one there's a good chance he'd have been accused of lying even if he told the truth. Even if the results weren't admissible evidence the false result can be used as an intimidation tool (imagine yourself the victim of a false result to see what i mean)

link i posted downthread http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2002-09-09-lie_x.htm

it's just irresponsible to use this technology in rape cases or any criminal cases
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beyurslf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 06:44 PM
Response to Original message
5. dupe
Edited on Tue Apr-27-10 06:44 PM by beyurslf
posted twice. sorry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
miscsoc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 06:46 PM
Response to Original message
6. also afaik polygraphs barely work at all
Edited on Tue Apr-27-10 06:48 PM by miscsoc
the perception that they do mean something is largely a matter of good marketing and the fact that pretending you can engineer a reliable "lie detector" suits a lot of powerful people (media, law enforcement, tv scriptwriters etc). Serious scientists disagree.

This is an interesting link: http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2002-09-09-lie_x.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Odin2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 06:48 PM
Response to Original message
7. GOOD!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 01:53 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC