SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Pastimes : Murder Mystery: Who Killed Yale Student Suzanne Jovin?
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: James R. Barrett who wrote (219)1/10/2000 8:27:00 PM
From: Jeffrey S. Mitchell  Read Replies (1) of 1397
 
Jim offered to take a lie detector test at the beginning of the investigation and the police refused.

Now the police want to give Jim a lie detector test and Jim has refused as a matter of principle. WHY?????????

At first glance it sounds like a good deal. But when you start to analyze it there are big gotchas. For example, are the New Haven police willing to exonerate Jim if he passes? No, they aren't. Should Jim take it anyway just to sway the court of public opinion? There is no guarantee this will happen either. The police will argue that people can fool lie detector tests. People will still be left with the nagging and very unfair question "if not Jim, then who?"

I recall seeing a story on Dateline a month or two ago about a priest who had stolen more than a million dollars from the collection plates in his churches over an extended period of time. In the last few years before he died, he had had a relationship with a woman who was caring for him. On his deathbed the priest confessed to what he had done and somewhere along the line gave someone the impression the woman who cared for him had a role. She was charged with theft although she vehemently denied any part. She took a lie detector test (I think maybe even more than one), and passed. The police did not drop the charges and Dateline even aired an interview with someone who maintained that lie detector tests are not always accurate.

I told Jim (not that I have any sway in the matter) that if pressed by the NH Police to take a lie detector test this late in the "game" that he only do so if a) he is officially dropped as a suspect, and b) the police chief apologizes to him and resigns. The reason for the second part is that there still is an inherent risk an innocent person might fail the test or the test might be inconclusive. Thus, I'm just trying to even up the risk/reward ratio (g).

- Jeff
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News