18 ms·

Sadly, not All-American anymore. The US police force doesn't exist in a vacuum. There is a whole industry of pseudoscientific interrogation techniques that has

Sadly, not All-American anymore. The US police force doesn't exist in a vacuum. There is a whole industry of pseudoscientific interrogation techniques that has set itself up in other nations and regressed their policing by decades. Several states in Australia, and I believe parts of the UK, removed the polygraph as a discredited technique and now accept it as evidence once more.

n4r9 2y ago
UK here, just looked it up and although it's not admissible as evidence in court, since 2021 it can be used as a requirement for release from prison for domestic abusers. Bloody hell, that is scary.
- xnorswap 2y ago
  That is scary! Well, we've recently got a new prisons minister, this might actually motivate me to write to them about this.
  - n4r9 2y ago
    I looked them up: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Timpson https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Timpson Woah. It's actually the MD of Timpson, whom Starmer has parachuted into the role along with a peerage. So an unelected Minister, but apparently he's very into prison reform, so there's that.
    - xnorswap 2y ago
      Indeed, Timpson's are a leading employer of people who have served their sentence: > The company is well known for its policy of employing ex-convicts, who make up over 10% of its workforce
Quarrel 2y ago
Where in Australia? I've been out of Aus for a few years, but in NSW I understand they're still largely banned (Lie Detectors Act) for employment, courts / evidence, insurance etc (and if they weren't by legislation, they would be for evidence by precedent, which is how the Act came about). As I understood it, this and the Canadian precedent that NSW relied upon, have basically made them a non-starter for courts in Australia ever since. It's a bit horrifying if they're making a comeback, but then our politicians have always been a bit prone to right wing shock jock rhethoric around election time.

n4r9 2y ago

UK here, just looked it up and although it's not admissible as evidence in court, since 2021 it can be used as a requirement for release from prison for domestic abusers. Bloody hell, that is scary.

xnorswap 2y ago
That is scary! Well, we've recently got a new prisons minister, this might actually motivate me to write to them about this.
- n4r9 2y ago
  I looked them up: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Timpson https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Timpson Woah. It's actually the MD of Timpson, whom Starmer has parachuted into the role along with a peerage. So an unelected Minister, but apparently he's very into prison reform, so there's that.
  - xnorswap 2y ago
    Indeed, Timpson's are a leading employer of people who have served their sentence: > The company is well known for its policy of employing ex-convicts, who make up over 10% of its workforce

Quarrel 2y ago

Where in Australia? I've been out of Aus for a few years, but in NSW I understand they're still largely banned (Lie Detectors Act) for employment, courts / evidence, insurance etc (and if they weren't by legislation, they would be for evidence by precedent, which is how the Act came about). As I understood it, this and the Canadian precedent that NSW relied upon, have basically made them a non-starter for courts in Australia ever since. It's a bit horrifying if they're making a comeback, but then our politicians have always been a bit prone to right wing shock jock rhethoric around election time.