Scientists call forensic psychophysiology detecting lies through the physical reaction of suspicious persons. Who’s lying, attracted to this and the resulting emotions show physically – that is the fundamental assumption of lie detection. Applications of lie detectors above all in the United States used polygraph, at the police station to identify offenders, as well as by the Government in sensitive security areas. All American intelligence agencies use the lie detector settings and regular security checks of employees. Total lie detectors used in more than 50 countries regularly, sometimes by companies, to check their staff. This includes even Japan, Australia, South Africa, China and Israel except the United States. Controversial results of Lugendetektors this comparatively high usage area of lie detectors is so amazing because the physiological signs of lying are disputed to this day under the psychologists.
It is known that the devices have a margin of error of at least 20 percent. In addition, that rapidly growing, if inexperienced people as interviewers conduct the tests. Even if the participant before the test took sedatives, that soothe the respiratory and heart rate”and thus change the test result can be affected significantly. Repeatedly, even supporters of polygraph claim that intelligence services were capable of their staff to train that you could systematically outwit the polygraph (perfect liar). Psychopaths use is extremely controversial, because they constantly manipulate not only others, but also notoriously lie without physically particularly respond to.
The lack of guilt that often occurs among offenders in the area of sexual abuse, will tend to be wrong results. A study by the Institute for prevention research and safety management in Munster was in the year 2000 to the clear conclusion that the crime prevention reach of the examination procedure with a lie detector to zero tends. The researchers succeeded in the present project contrary to worldwide opinion, arbitrarily mislead even experienced users of the Lugendetektors in the desired direction of the statement without having them would have noticed it. This “deception” is methodically simple and in the principle of each within a day to learn. This fails the lie detector test as a truth-finding tool and developed in this respect no crime prevention operating range. On the contrary, the mandatory application could kriminogen look, because experienced in deception behavior “could prove his presumed innocence,”. These findings are likely to have worldwide impact on the application of the procedure. No evidence in Germany in Germany, the polygraph is considered unreliable and is therefore not admissible as evidence. 2002, the Bavarian Interior Ministry stopped a foray of the Munich police, an attempt with Lie detectors had planned. Last the Federal Court to stop the practice in civil cases, decided in 2003 that potential abusers presented lie detector tests in its redress procedures, to prove their innocence. Conclusion due to the significantly high error rate of at least 20 percent should trust no one hundred percent to the results of a polygraph examination as the sole means of proof. Important decisions should be made on the basis of hard facts and not due to inaccurate analyses. This conclusion supports also Marcus Lentz, Managing Director of the economic detective agency Lentz. He advises refrain the polygraph in suspected cases and instead using a detective agency instead through a targeted observation (monitoring) to obtain evidence, which are then also legally permitted and appropriately recycled. What is generally to be observed to obtain legally actionable evidence in an investigation, is to read in detail under wirtschaftsdetektei.lentz-detektei.de