That lie detector tests should be admitted as evidence into court? Such as criminal or divorce court?

Yep

yes, i think there 99 percent accurate if im correct, i could be wrong however

I'm not at liberty to discuss,

It is possible for an emotionaly distraught person to tell the truth and yet fail the test so no. Especially not in divorce court.

I think they should.

No, because some people can fool lie detector tests. As mechanical devices, they are not 100% accurate, plus the person running the test can make mistakes. These are the reasons the results are not allowed into courtrooms as evidence. Police use them as an investigative tool. Unfortunately, inaccurate results can either cause them to go after an innocent person or let the real culprit go.

What is their need in divorce court, as a demonstration how much both parties lie (as in maybe)?

If that is true the test should ALWAYS FAIL. I don't know of, or heard of anyone having taken a lie detector test and feel completely at ease....

to prove adultry or abuse

Course,cause ppl lie all the time...But you can always tell through body language too

I would like to see then mandated right here!

even if I was telling the absolute truth about something... I think I would be to scared to take one in the event something is off and it calls me a liar. Once you "fail" a lie detector test, no one believes you anymore.

I would have to say you never met someone with psychopathic personality disorders from this statement.

You really want to judge a person by this?.....

From Wikepedia;

There is little scientific evidence to support the reliability of polygraphs. Despite claims of 90% - 95% reliability, critics charge that rather than a "test", the method amounts to an inherently unstandardizable interrogation technique whose accuracy cannot be established. A 1997 survey of 421 psychologists estimated the test's average accuracy at about 61%, a little better than chance. Critics also argue that even given high estimates of the polygraph's accuracy a significant number of subjects (e.g. 10% given a 90% accuracy) will appear to be lying, and would unfairly suffer the consequences of "failing" the polygraph. In the 1998 Supreme Court case, United States v. Scheffer, the majority stated that “There is simply no consensus that polygraph evidence is reliable” and “Unlike other expert witnesses who testify about factual matters outside the jurors' knowledge, such as the analysis of fingerprints, ballistics, or DNA found at a crime scene, a polygraph expert can supply the jury only with another opinion...”.

I plead the 5th

talk about a custom fit!


speaking of which... aw nevermind

hea I was going to say that

If a person is a compulsive liar who fools themselves into believing something is true then they'd fool the lie detector. On the flip side, someone who just has a tendency to feel guilty even when they've done nothing wrong might fail when in fact they are telling the truth. For those reasons, no. Seriously though, if someone is a bad liar, you can usually tell without one of those things.

nope, they're not reliable enough