Analog instrument needed for filming in Los Angeles
peoamail@aol.com
Friday, June 29, 2012
Tuesday, June 12, 2012
57 requests for polygraph exams in one day!
Polygraph Examiners Of America (http://www.peoa.us/) has 200 websites bringing work to its members nationwide and in Canada & Mexico. Usually, this brings about 20 to 30 exam requests per day. However, on a recent day, 57 requests for lie-detector tests came in.
No other polygraph organization, association, or network brings a flood of possible work to its members-- only PEOA does!
No other polygraph organization, association, or network brings a flood of possible work to its members-- only PEOA does!
Thursday, June 7, 2012
Promotional exams needed in 6 major cities for a syndicated TV talk show
Promotional exams needed in 6 major cities for a syndicated TV talk show
Information distributed to PEOA members in those cities
peoamail@aol.com
Information distributed to PEOA members in those cities
peoamail@aol.com
California State Parole seeking bids on PCSOT exams
California State Parole seeking bids on PCSOT exams
Details, and direct contact information already sent to PEOA members
peoamail@aol.com
Details, and direct contact information already sent to PEOA members
peoamail@aol.com
Wednesday, June 6, 2012
Reid Tip--- To Lie or Not to Lie: The Use of Deception During An Interrogation
To Lie or Not to Lie: The Use of Deception During An Interrogation
If the agents involved in the recent Colombia incident are interrogated, should the investigators tell them they have evidence that they don't really have? It depends on a number of considerations.
Earlier this year a case was reported in which a detective doctored a crime lab report to use as a prop during an interrogation. While the suspect did not confess, the detective's tactics spurred legal questions regarding the use of deception during an interrogation. The legal twist was that even though the report used as an interrogation prop was manufactured by the investigator, it was based on factual verbal information provided by the crime lab. In other words, the manufactured evidence contained truthful information that incriminated the suspect but the report was not a bona fide report from the crime lab.
Legal Considerations
The legal test for deceptive practices during an interrogation has remain unchanged for more than 40 years. The use of deception during an interrogation must be considered within the totality of circumstances when deciding the admissibility of a confession. Deception that shocks the conscience of the court or community will generally result in a suppressed confession. An example of deception that "shocks the conscience" is lying to the suspect about the possible consequences he faces, e.g., telling a homicide suspect that the legislature just dropped first degree murder to a misdemeanor. Similarly, an investigator who elicits a confession after falsely telling the suspect that he is his court appointed public defender has "shocked the conscience".
(PEOA is a long-time member of the Reid Group of Preferred Associations; discounts available for Reid seminars and products)
If the agents involved in the recent Colombia incident are interrogated, should the investigators tell them they have evidence that they don't really have? It depends on a number of considerations.
Earlier this year a case was reported in which a detective doctored a crime lab report to use as a prop during an interrogation. While the suspect did not confess, the detective's tactics spurred legal questions regarding the use of deception during an interrogation. The legal twist was that even though the report used as an interrogation prop was manufactured by the investigator, it was based on factual verbal information provided by the crime lab. In other words, the manufactured evidence contained truthful information that incriminated the suspect but the report was not a bona fide report from the crime lab.
Legal Considerations
The legal test for deceptive practices during an interrogation has remain unchanged for more than 40 years. The use of deception during an interrogation must be considered within the totality of circumstances when deciding the admissibility of a confession. Deception that shocks the conscience of the court or community will generally result in a suppressed confession. An example of deception that "shocks the conscience" is lying to the suspect about the possible consequences he faces, e.g., telling a homicide suspect that the legislature just dropped first degree murder to a misdemeanor. Similarly, an investigator who elicits a confession after falsely telling the suspect that he is his court appointed public defender has "shocked the conscience".
(PEOA is a long-time member of the Reid Group of Preferred Associations; discounts available for Reid seminars and products)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
