Lie Detection Techniques

Villarazo, Lovejanne L.
1st Facilitator

People v. Adoviso
People v. Daniel

page 02 of 38
 Defendant Pablo Adoviso was convicted of Two
Counts of Murder by the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of
Camarines Sur in March 25, 1994. Adoviso undergone
polygraph test in the National Bureau of Investigation
administered by Ernesto A. Lucena.

page 03 of 38
According to Lucena, "Adoviso's polygrams revealed
that there were no specific reactions indicative of
deception to pertinent questions relevant" to the
investigation of the crime.

page 04 of 38
On defendant's appeal with the Supreme Court,
defendant contend that the RTC rendered the
judgement of conviction on the basis of "mere
conjectures and speculations"

page 05 of 38
The defendant was indicted and convicted of the
crime of rape by the Court of First instance of
Baguio City in May 30, 1966.

page 06 of 38
The appellant voluntarily submitted to a lie detector
test with the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI)
and the report of the lie detector examinee is an
appellant's favor.

page 07 of 38
 The Supreme Court ruled that:

"On this matter, we find the trial Judge's observations and

conclusions meritorious, and we quote from his decision that
as to the NBI lie detector test report, the Court does not put
much faith and credit on it. it is well known that the same is
not conclusive. Its efficacy depends upon the time, place and
circumstances when taken and the nature of the subject"

page 08 of 38
Rule 130 section 49 of the Rules on Evidence provides that:

"The opinion of a witness on matter requiring

special knowledge, skill, experience or training
which he shown to possess, may be received in
evidence."

page 09 of 38
Segunto, Rafhael G.
2nd Facilitator

United States vs. Frye

page 10 of 38
 In 1921, a young Negro named James A. Frye was
picked up for questioning about a robbery and was
interrogated about the murder of a wealthy Negro
physician who had been shot to death in his office in
November 1920. Frye denied any knowledge of the
murder.

page 11 of 38
In an attempt to arrive at the truth, Frye’s attorney solicited
the aid of Dr. William Marston, a scientist and inventor of
systolic blood pressure during questioning, using a
standard medical blood pressure cuff and stethoscope,
requiring repeated inflation of the pressure cuff to obtain
recordings at intervals during examination. For that reason,
it was called the “discontinuous technique”.

page 12 of 38
 The court rejected Marston's systolic blood pressure
deception test as evidence, holding that the lie detection
test has not yet received general acceptance in the
scientific holding that the lie detector test has not y
community as a valid means of verifying the truth and
detecting deception.

page 13 of 38
 Three years later, Frye was freed as a result of further
investigation which revealed that his friend who had dupe
him into making a false confession was the real murderer
of the wealthy physician. The district court held that
polygraph result is inadmissible as evidence and stated
that scientific evidence to be admissible it must have
"gained general acceptance" in the particular field in
which it belongs.

page 14 of 38
 For several years, the Frye Opinion became the basis of
determining the admissibility of scientific evidence in
United States an ad an international influence in
admitting scientific evidence especially polygraph result
in different courts throughout the world but not until in the
case of Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals decided
by the U.S Supreme Court in 1993.

page 15 of 38
Villagracia, Jeramae C.
3rd Facilitator

Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals

page 16 of 38
• In the 1950s, Merrell Dow Pharmaceutical develop a
drug called Bendectin.
• Despite the allegations against Merrell Dow, it was
never clear that Bendectin caused birth defects.
• Daubert brought a case against Merrell Dow
Pharmaceuticals.

page 17 of 38
• It was revealed that the plaintiff’s evidence didn’t meet
the standard of “general acceptance” for admission of
expert testimony.
• Therefore, the defendants won the case.
• The US Supreme Court ruled that the 1923 Frye test was
superseded by the 1975 Federal Rules of Evidence,
specifically Rule 702 governing expert testimony.

page 18 of 38
• Rule 702
• The testimony is based upon sufficient facts or data.
• The testimony is the product of reliable principles
and methods.
• The witness has applied the principles and methods
reliably to the facts of the case.

page 19 of 38
 • In Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals (1993), the old
Frye Standard was lifted and all forensic evidence
including polygraph had to meet the new Daubert
Standard.
Daubert Standard – underlying reasoning or methodology is
scientifically valid and properly can be applied to the facts.
• Daubert opened the door for new techniques or methods
to be used in federal cases.

page 20 of 38
Suganob, Cyrus D.
4th Facilitator

United States vs. Posado, et al.

page 21 of 38
In 1995, in United States v. Miriam Henao Posado, Pablo
Ramirez and Irma Clemencio Hurtado, the defendants
were each indicted and subsequently convicted of one
count of conspiracy to possess and one count of
possession with intent to distribute in excess of five
kilograms of cocaine.

page 22 of 38
 Prior to the trial, the defendants arranged to submit to polygraph
tests to establish the truth of the assertions in their affidavits. Well,
before the test was given, counsel for the defendants contacted the
prosecution and extended the opportunity to participate in the tests.
The defendants also offered to stipulate that the results would be
admissible in any way the government wanted to use them at trial
or otherwise. The prosecution declined this opportunity.
Subsequently, the defendants were examined by polygraph experts
Paul K. Minor and Ernie Hulsey in separate examinations.

page 23 of 38
 Both Minor and Hulsey concluded that in each case
“deception was not indicated”. Thereafter, the defendants
moved for an order allowing Minor and Hulsey to testify
regarding the results of the three tests at the pretrial hearing
or, in the alternative for a hearing on the admissibility of
polygraph results as expert evidence under the Federal Rules
of Evidence and the standards enunciated by the Supreme
Court in Daubert v. Merrill Dow Pharmaceutical.

page 24 of 38
 On appeal, the defendants contend that Daubert required the
district court to conduct a hearing on the admissibility of the
polygraph evidence as expert testimony under Federal Rule of
Evidence 702. The District court’s decision was reversed, the
defendant’s convictions were vacated and the case was
remanded to the district court for consideration of the evidentiary
reliability and relevance of the polygraph evidence proffered by
the defendants under the principles embodied in the Federal Rules
of Evidence and the Supreme Court’s decision in Daubert.

page 25 of 38
Torres, Roy Ryan S.
5th Facilitator

United states vs. Galbreth

page 26 of 38
Again in 1995, in united states v. Galbreth, this case had
a motion submitted for a Daubert hearing for the
admissibility of polygraph evidence. Defendant William
Galbreth was inducted of three counts of willful tax
evasion for intentionally filing returns which
underreported his income.

page 27 of 38
 Defendant failed to include on his income tax returns
certain items of income which should have been
reported. The defendant filed a motion to determine
whether Dr. Raskin’s testimony is admissible pursuant to
the standard enunciated by the united states supreme
court in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

page 29 of 38
 The court ruled:

“Wherefore it is ordered that defendants motion

to admit expert opinion evidence regarding
polygraph results be and her by is granted.”

page 29 of 38
Vargas, John Kerby E.
6th Facilitator

United States vs. Piccinonna

page 30 of 38
 In 1989, in US vs. Piccinona, the U.S. Court of Appeals
held that the results of a polygraph examination are
admissible in evidence either upon stipulation of the
parties or to impeach or corroborate the testimony of a
witness at trial.

page 31 of 38
The pre-requisites for the results to be admissible must be
considered whether:

• the party planning to use the evidence at trial must provide

adequate notice to the opposing party that the expert
testimony will be offered;
• the opposing party must be given reasonable opportunity
to have its own polygraph expert administer a test covering
substantially the same questions;

page 32 of 38
The pre-requisites for the results to be admissible must be
considered whether:

• the admissibility of the polygraph administrator’s

testimony will be governed by Federal Rules of Evidence
for the admissibility of corroboration or impeachment
testimony.

page 33 of 38
Zaballa, Dave Angelo M.
7th Facilitator

State of Mexico vs. Dorsey

page 34 of 38
 In New Mexico, the Supreme Court, in State v. Dorsey in
1973, ruled that "Polygraph results are admissible as long
as (1) the polygraph operator is competent, (2) the
procedure used is reliable, and (3) the "tests made on
the subject" are valid."

page 35 of 38
 In 1983, New Mexico then codified the admissibility of
polygraph results with the Rules of Evidence, which states that:

"Subject to the provisions of these rules, the opinion of a

polygraph examiner may in the discretion of the trial
judge be admitted as evidence as to the truthfulness of
any person called as a witness if the examination was
performed by a person who is qualified as an expert
polygraph examiner."
page 36 of 38
The impact of the cited cases have had not to mention
other cases decided by the US Courts, primarily of
Daubert, polygraph examination admissibility is
changing in many states and countries. It only shows
that polygraphy has progress to a level of acceptance
sufficient to be admitted as evidence.

page 37 of 38
Most often, polygraph results are not admitted as evidence. However, there are some
countries that accept polygraph examination as evidence.

Lie Detection Techniques

page 38 of 38