| Subject: Virginia does not allow Voice Stress although most law enforcement agencies use it |
Author:
JD Bishop
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 11/11/06 2:12am
In reply to:
JD Bishop
's message, "Voice Stress vs Polygraph - ask which one DA uses" on 11/11/06 1:40am
Other States, Government agencies and voice stress analyzers
Currently, the Commonwealth of Virginia only recognizes and approves the use of the polygraph instrument to detect deception. On this foundation, Mr. Daniele in his comments at the Roanoke public hearing session made a valid point. He states: (Reference Transcript)
“We trust the fact that state says that it (reference to the polygraph) is a valid, truth-seeking instrument to be used. If you approve this (reference to voice stress analyzers) then automatically just by the appearance of it, that everyone is going to believe that the state, Commonwealth of Virginia, is agreeing that this is a valid instrument”.
Written comment letters (Newby, David) and public hearing sessions (Hughes, David and Brick, Michael – Richmond session) made note that the Department of Defense and other federal agencies are using voice stress technology on a regular basis for homeland security and terrorism investigations. However, the statement received from the American Polygraph Association, after investigating this claim, states: “No Department of Defense agency uses any form of voice stress analysis for investigative purposes.” (Written comment – Baum, Sandi).
The only information that this study was able to verify relates to the recent aviation security measures signed by President Bush, S.1447 Sec. 109 (7). This authorizes the Secretary of Transportation to take certain measures, including but not limited to using the computer voice stress analyzer (see Appendix C). It could not be verified if the Secretary of Transportation is presently utilizing the computer voice stress analyzer with success under this provision.
Recent legislation shows that in January 2003, the State of Illinois recently rejected a bill that would:
Amend the Detection of Deception Examines Act. Allows an examiner who is a qualified operator of a Computer Voice Stress Analyzer that records voice stress factors pertinent to the detection of deception to use a Computer Voice Stress
Analyzer in place of the instrument that records the subject’s cardiovascular, respiratory, and galvanic skin response patterns. Sets the minimum training standards for a qualified operator.
Other states that have recently rejected similar bills are Texas (1999) and Oklahoma. It appears that out of the 50 states, there are currently only nine states that do not recognize or approve the use of computer voice analyzers.
The complete list:
- Illinois
- Oklahoma
- Michigan
- Texas
- Vermont
- Virginia
- South Carolina
- Kentucky
- North Dakota
* USA TODAY article (2002)
Conclusions & Recommendations
A review of the current literature and summarization of the four public hearing sessions and written comments uncover a continuing polarized debate between the polygraph and voice stress communities. The conflict arises from the lengthy history and regulation of the polygraph compared to the mostly unregulated new technology of voice analyzer equipment. There have been several scientific studies conducted on the polygraph over the years, and while no study has indicated the polygraph to be 100% accurate, it has still been deemed a reliable instrument to detect deception when used correctly. On the other hand, there has been no independent scientific evidence to indicate that the computer voice analyzer is a valid instrument to detect
deception. The only evidence that has been presented and reviewed, to date, consists of testimonials and other anecdotal evidence.
It is not discounted or overlooked that the computer stress analyzers currently in use, are very well received by the law enforcement at large in the United States. In spite of this, the Polygraph Examiners Advisory Board must rely upon scientific data and research available.
Because there have been no independent scientific studies conducted on the reliability of the computer voice analyzer to detect deception, the Board recommends to the Director of the Department of Professional and Occupational regulation that computer voice analyzer equipment should not be approved in Virginia at this time.
http://www.polygraph.org/images/virginiavoicestressstudy.pdf
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
| |
Feedback: 