136
Law / Re: The development and application of "Lie Detector" in criminal justice system
« on: August 25, 2019, 06:12:54 PM »
The Science Behind Lie Detector Tests
News:
Daffodil International University Forum contains information about Open Text material, which is only intended for the significant learning purposes of the university students, faculty, other members, and the knowledge seekers of the entire world and is hoped that the offerings will aide in the distribution of reliable information and data relating to the many areas of knowledge.
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
137
Law / The development and application of "Lie Detector" in criminal justice system
« on: August 20, 2019, 08:18:45 PM »
In 1983, US President Ronald Reagan issued the National Security Decision Directive 84, which authorized all federal agencies to use polygraphs (commonly known as lie detectors) to test if any of their employees had leaked classified information. As of 4 February 2015, the US Intelligence Community is once again authorized to investigate its members’ potential involvement in the leaking of classified information via the use of the polygraph. The US polygraph examinations are to be conducted in adherence to the standards set by the National Center for Credibility Assessment, which means that any such examination will be based on a Comparative Question Test (CQT), as opposed to a Concealed Information Test (CIT). The CQT and CIT represent the two predominant types of polygraph testing procedures, which use the same physical apparatus, but differ in terms of their theoretical underpinning and commercial/academic utilization.
The polygraph machine was invented in 1921 in Berkeley, California. "Berkeley was a town with a very famous police chief, August Vollmer, and he was in charge of police reform and a leader of police professionalisation in the United States," says Ken Alder, professor of history at Northwestern University in Chicago."He actually wanted to use the science to make the cops more law-abiding themselves, to substitute this new scientific interrogation for what was formerly known as the third degree, which was a way of getting information from people by beating them up." Berkeley police officer John Larson created the first machine, basing it on the systolic blood pressure test pioneered by psychologist William Moulton Marston, who would later become a comic book writer and create Wonder Woman. Marston believed blood pressure changes could show whether someone was lying. The modern polygraph measures a range of physical changes such as pulse and breathing as well as blood-pressure. But the credibility of the polygraph was challenged almost as soon as it was invented.
In 1923, in what became a historic Supreme Court judgement, Frye v United States, it was ruled that scientific evidence, like that obtained through the polygraph, should only be admissible if it was "sufficiently established to have gained general acceptance" in the scientific community. The polygraph was backed by Leonarde Keeler, who in 1930 helped set up the scientific crime detection laboratory at Northwestern, the first forensic lab in the US, a year before the FBI.
In 2003, Gary Ridgway admitted he was the Green River Killer, having murdered 49 women in the Seattle area. Ridgway had passed a lie detector test in 1987, while another man - who turned out to be innocent - failed. It has been argued that psychopaths like Ridgway or serial killer Ted Bundy are able to trick the polygraph because they have lower anxiety levels than normal people but the research into this has had mixed results.
It was not until 1965, 41 years after the Frye standard was established, that the first empirical review of the polygraph was conducted. This occurred when a proposal to use the polygraph to screen federal employees prompted the US Committee on Government Operations to evaluate the relevant evidence. It concluded: ‘There is no lie detector, neither man nor machine. People have been deceived by a myth that a metal box in the hands of an investigator can detect truth or falsehood’.
Modern polygraphs no longer use pens attached to tambours to write in ink onto a roll of paper driven by clockwork in the way the original Keeler polygraph models used to work. Modern polygraphs produce digital outputs that go directly from the measuring instruments into a computer with the appropriate polygraph software.
The polygraph machine was invented in 1921 in Berkeley, California. "Berkeley was a town with a very famous police chief, August Vollmer, and he was in charge of police reform and a leader of police professionalisation in the United States," says Ken Alder, professor of history at Northwestern University in Chicago."He actually wanted to use the science to make the cops more law-abiding themselves, to substitute this new scientific interrogation for what was formerly known as the third degree, which was a way of getting information from people by beating them up." Berkeley police officer John Larson created the first machine, basing it on the systolic blood pressure test pioneered by psychologist William Moulton Marston, who would later become a comic book writer and create Wonder Woman. Marston believed blood pressure changes could show whether someone was lying. The modern polygraph measures a range of physical changes such as pulse and breathing as well as blood-pressure. But the credibility of the polygraph was challenged almost as soon as it was invented.
In 1923, in what became a historic Supreme Court judgement, Frye v United States, it was ruled that scientific evidence, like that obtained through the polygraph, should only be admissible if it was "sufficiently established to have gained general acceptance" in the scientific community. The polygraph was backed by Leonarde Keeler, who in 1930 helped set up the scientific crime detection laboratory at Northwestern, the first forensic lab in the US, a year before the FBI.
In 2003, Gary Ridgway admitted he was the Green River Killer, having murdered 49 women in the Seattle area. Ridgway had passed a lie detector test in 1987, while another man - who turned out to be innocent - failed. It has been argued that psychopaths like Ridgway or serial killer Ted Bundy are able to trick the polygraph because they have lower anxiety levels than normal people but the research into this has had mixed results.
It was not until 1965, 41 years after the Frye standard was established, that the first empirical review of the polygraph was conducted. This occurred when a proposal to use the polygraph to screen federal employees prompted the US Committee on Government Operations to evaluate the relevant evidence. It concluded: ‘There is no lie detector, neither man nor machine. People have been deceived by a myth that a metal box in the hands of an investigator can detect truth or falsehood’.
Modern polygraphs no longer use pens attached to tambours to write in ink onto a roll of paper driven by clockwork in the way the original Keeler polygraph models used to work. Modern polygraphs produce digital outputs that go directly from the measuring instruments into a computer with the appropriate polygraph software.
139
Law / Re: The People of the State of Colorado VS Thomas Lee Johnson
« on: July 30, 2019, 02:48:18 PM »
Thank you for your comment Mr. Johir. I have corrected the case name.
140
Law / Re: Rethinking miscarriage of justice
« on: July 29, 2019, 07:13:32 PM »
The glory of justice and the majesty of law are created not just by the Constitution - nor by the courts - nor by the officers of the law - nor by the lawyers - but by the men and women who constitute our society - who are the protectors of the law as they are themselves protected by the law. 
141
Law / The People of the State of Colorado VS Thomas Lee Johnson
« on: July 29, 2019, 01:19:17 PM »
Texas v. Johnson (Extent of the freedom of speech)
The 1984 Republican National Convention was held in Dallas, Texas. During the convention Gregory Lee Johnson and a group of political activists marched through the streets protesting. When the demonstrators reached Dallas City Hall, Johnson poured kerosene on an American flag and burned it. Johnson was arrested and convicted under a Texas state law. In an appeal, Johnson argued that burning the American flag was symbolic speech and protected by the First Amendment. The Texas appeals court agreed and overturned his conviction. Unsatisfied with the decision, the state of Texas, appealed the ruling to the United States Supreme Court.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision in favor of Johnson. The high court agreed that symbolic speech – no matter how offensive to some – is protected under the First Amendment.
The majority of the Court, according to Justice William Brennan, agreed with Johnson and held that flag burning constitutes a form of "symbolic speech" that is protected by the First Amendment. The majority noted that freedom of speech protects actions that society may find very offensive, but society's outrage alone is not justification for suppressing free speech.
In particular, the majority noted that the Texas law discriminated upon viewpoint, i.e., although the law punished actions, such as flag burning, that might arouse anger in others, it specifically exempted from prosecution actions that were respectful of venerated objects, e.g., burning and burying a worn-out flag. The majority said that the government could not discriminate in this manner based solely upon viewpoint.
The 1984 Republican National Convention was held in Dallas, Texas. During the convention Gregory Lee Johnson and a group of political activists marched through the streets protesting. When the demonstrators reached Dallas City Hall, Johnson poured kerosene on an American flag and burned it. Johnson was arrested and convicted under a Texas state law. In an appeal, Johnson argued that burning the American flag was symbolic speech and protected by the First Amendment. The Texas appeals court agreed and overturned his conviction. Unsatisfied with the decision, the state of Texas, appealed the ruling to the United States Supreme Court.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision in favor of Johnson. The high court agreed that symbolic speech – no matter how offensive to some – is protected under the First Amendment.
The majority of the Court, according to Justice William Brennan, agreed with Johnson and held that flag burning constitutes a form of "symbolic speech" that is protected by the First Amendment. The majority noted that freedom of speech protects actions that society may find very offensive, but society's outrage alone is not justification for suppressing free speech.
In particular, the majority noted that the Texas law discriminated upon viewpoint, i.e., although the law punished actions, such as flag burning, that might arouse anger in others, it specifically exempted from prosecution actions that were respectful of venerated objects, e.g., burning and burying a worn-out flag. The majority said that the government could not discriminate in this manner based solely upon viewpoint.
142
Law / Re: HC declares local companies citizens of the country
« on: July 29, 2019, 11:05:05 AM »
Thank you
143
Law / Re: The Constitutional doctrine of ultra vires
« on: July 29, 2019, 11:02:55 AM »
Welcome Mr. Johir
144
Law / Re: Short Note on Judicialization of Politics
« on: July 29, 2019, 11:02:26 AM »
Thank you.
145
Law / Criminal Profiling of Theodore Robert Bundy (Ted Bundy)
« on: June 13, 2019, 05:04:19 PM »
American serial killer and rapist Ted Bundy was one of the most notorious criminals of the late 20th century. Ted Bundy was a 1970s serial murderer, rapist and necrophiliac. Ted Bundy admitted to 36 killings of young women across several states in the 1970s, but experts believe that the final tally may be closer to 100 or more. The exact number of women Bundy killed will never been known. On January 24, 1989, Ted Bundy was put to death around 7 a.m. at the Florida State Prison in an electric chair. Outside the prison, crowds cheered and even set off fireworks after Bundy's execution.
Family and Childhood:
Ted Bundy was born in Burlington, Vermont on November, starting life as his mother's secret shame. Eleanor Cowell was 22 years old and unmarried when she had her son Ted, which humiliated her deeply religious parents. She delivered the child at a home for unwed mothers in Vermont and later brought her son to her parents in Philadelphia. To hide the fact he was an illegitimate child, Bundy was raised as the adopted son of his grandparents and was told that his mother was his sister.
Interests and Education:
Bundy showed an unusual interest in the macabre at an early age. Around the age of three, he became fascinated by knives. Bundy was a shy but bright child who did well in school, but not with his peers. As a teenager, a darker side of his character started to emerge. Bundy liked to peer in other people's windows.
While a student at the University of Washington, Bundy fell in love with a wealthy, pretty young woman from California. He was devastated by their breakup. Many of his later victims resembled his college girlfriend—attractive students with long, dark hair. His killings also usually followed a gruesome pattern. He often raped his victims before beating them to death.
Career:
He graduated from University of Washington with a degree in psychology in 1972 and had been accepted to law school in Utah. By the mid 1970s, Bundy had transformed himself, becoming more outwardly confident and active in social and political matters. Bundy even got a letter of recommendation from the Republican governor of Washington after working on his campaign.
Psychological Profile:
Bundy was a sexual psychopath suffering from a chronic mental disorder with abnormal or violent social behavior. A sexual psychopath is a condition of a psychopathic personality that manifests itself through sexually sadistic behavior – i.e. hurting victims sexually.
Bundy was a highly intelligent man who was also very insecure – partly because of a feeling of inferiority because of his lack of wealth while being surrounded by wealthy classmates. He was acutely shy and a psychological evaluation done later showed that he had a strong dependency on women; that he had a fear of being humiliated in his relationships with women.
Quotes:
1. "Guilt. It’s this mechanism we use to control people. It’s an illusion. It’s a kind of social control mechanism and it’s very unhealthy. It does terrible things to the body".
2. "Those of us who have been so much influenced by violence in the media, in particular pornographic violence, are not some kinds of inherent monsters. We are your sons, and we are your husbands. And we grew up in regular families. And pornography can reach out and snatch a kid out of any house today. It snatched me out of my home 20, 30 years ago".
3. "Society wants to believe it can identify evil people or bad or harmful people, but it’s not practical. There are no stereotypes".
4. "We serial killers are your sons, we are your husbands, we are everywhere. And there will be more of your children dead tomorrow".
Family and Childhood:
Ted Bundy was born in Burlington, Vermont on November, starting life as his mother's secret shame. Eleanor Cowell was 22 years old and unmarried when she had her son Ted, which humiliated her deeply religious parents. She delivered the child at a home for unwed mothers in Vermont and later brought her son to her parents in Philadelphia. To hide the fact he was an illegitimate child, Bundy was raised as the adopted son of his grandparents and was told that his mother was his sister.
Interests and Education:
Bundy showed an unusual interest in the macabre at an early age. Around the age of three, he became fascinated by knives. Bundy was a shy but bright child who did well in school, but not with his peers. As a teenager, a darker side of his character started to emerge. Bundy liked to peer in other people's windows.
While a student at the University of Washington, Bundy fell in love with a wealthy, pretty young woman from California. He was devastated by their breakup. Many of his later victims resembled his college girlfriend—attractive students with long, dark hair. His killings also usually followed a gruesome pattern. He often raped his victims before beating them to death.
Career:
He graduated from University of Washington with a degree in psychology in 1972 and had been accepted to law school in Utah. By the mid 1970s, Bundy had transformed himself, becoming more outwardly confident and active in social and political matters. Bundy even got a letter of recommendation from the Republican governor of Washington after working on his campaign.
Psychological Profile:
Bundy was a sexual psychopath suffering from a chronic mental disorder with abnormal or violent social behavior. A sexual psychopath is a condition of a psychopathic personality that manifests itself through sexually sadistic behavior – i.e. hurting victims sexually.
Bundy was a highly intelligent man who was also very insecure – partly because of a feeling of inferiority because of his lack of wealth while being surrounded by wealthy classmates. He was acutely shy and a psychological evaluation done later showed that he had a strong dependency on women; that he had a fear of being humiliated in his relationships with women.
Quotes:
1. "Guilt. It’s this mechanism we use to control people. It’s an illusion. It’s a kind of social control mechanism and it’s very unhealthy. It does terrible things to the body".
2. "Those of us who have been so much influenced by violence in the media, in particular pornographic violence, are not some kinds of inherent monsters. We are your sons, and we are your husbands. And we grew up in regular families. And pornography can reach out and snatch a kid out of any house today. It snatched me out of my home 20, 30 years ago".
3. "Society wants to believe it can identify evil people or bad or harmful people, but it’s not practical. There are no stereotypes".
4. "We serial killers are your sons, we are your husbands, we are everywhere. And there will be more of your children dead tomorrow".
146
Bangladesh Judicial Service Commission / Re: Separation of the Judiciary
« on: April 30, 2019, 03:01:48 PM »
Thank you.
147
Law / The Constitutional doctrine of ultra vires
« on: March 24, 2019, 07:01:19 PM »
This two word, ultra and vires mean Access and Power accordingly, When a person does something that is beyond his jurisdiction shall be declared as ultra vires. Ultra vires acts can be challenged by writ [under Article 102 of Bangladesh Constitution], one of its forms is Public Interest Litigation (PIL); which is a litigation that is intended not for the benefit of one individual but for the benefit of a group of people, PIL can be placed before a court who has no interest on it.
PIL is properly explained in the case S.P. Gupta Vs. Union of India in the judgement it was held that, “Where a legal injury or wrong has happened to a person or persons due to violation of constitutional rights or any other guaranteed rights and the aggrieved persons are not in a position to challenge the illegality due to poverty or helplessness or financial inability or can not got to court such act or cause of action can be brought before the court by any individual who feels that justice must be brought to these aggrieved
persons”
PIL has successfully established in Bangladesh via the case, Dr. Mohiuddin Farooque and Another vs. Bangladesh, 1997 where similar observation like India were made in the case the court held that “Aggrieved party” means not the only person who is personally aggrieved but also one whose heart bleeds for his unfortunate fellow beings for wrong done by the government or local authority not fulfilling it’s constitutional or other statutory obligation.
PIL is properly explained in the case S.P. Gupta Vs. Union of India in the judgement it was held that, “Where a legal injury or wrong has happened to a person or persons due to violation of constitutional rights or any other guaranteed rights and the aggrieved persons are not in a position to challenge the illegality due to poverty or helplessness or financial inability or can not got to court such act or cause of action can be brought before the court by any individual who feels that justice must be brought to these aggrieved
persons”
PIL has successfully established in Bangladesh via the case, Dr. Mohiuddin Farooque and Another vs. Bangladesh, 1997 where similar observation like India were made in the case the court held that “Aggrieved party” means not the only person who is personally aggrieved but also one whose heart bleeds for his unfortunate fellow beings for wrong done by the government or local authority not fulfilling it’s constitutional or other statutory obligation.
148
Law / The Denise Johnson case
« on: March 18, 2019, 09:51:56 PM »
THE DENISE JOHNSON CASE
Case related to: Forensic evidence
Field of Study: Criminology
A 1992 murder case in Phoenix Arizona in which DNA analysis of plant evidence was used for the first time in criminal proceedings to help secure a conviction.
In May 1992 the body of a woman later identified as Denise Johnson was found outdoors in the brush near some paloverde trees in Maricopa County, Arizona. Her clothing was scattered about the area, and she had been bound with cloth and braided wire. She was from nearby Phoenix and appeared to have been murdered and left at the location recently. A pager recovered at the scene led the police to a suspect, a man named Mark Bogan. The investigation developed circumstantial, but not definitive, evidence against him. One of the paloverde trees at the scene appeared to have been damaged, possibly by a vehicle. A search of the suspect’s pickup, pursuant to a warrant, revealed seed pods from a paloverde tree in the truck bed.
The suspect admitted that he had picked up Johnson, who had been hitchhiking, and had sexual relations with her in the pickup. But he said he had made her get out of the truck after they had argued. He denied being at the crime scene, and he denied killing her.
Police obtained the assistance of a plant molecular genetics specialist, Dr. Timothy Helentjaris of the University of Arizona, who could compare the DNA profile of the seed pods recovered from the suspect’s pickup with those of the trees in the vicinity of the crime scene. The geneticist conducted blind tests on a number of paloverde trees, and the tests showed that each exhibited a different profile. The seed pods from the pickup truck showed identical profiles (indicating that they fell from the same tree), and their profile matched that of one particular tree at the scene. This evidence went a long way toward convincing the trial jury that the suspect’s pickup was indeed at the crime scene, a fact that he had denied.
The plant genetics expert in this case was a university professor. He used a DNA profiling technique called RAPD (randomly amplified polymorphic DNA) that is not regularly used in forensic labs but is common in research. It is a good technique for looking at genetic variation in organisms whose total genetic makeup, or genomes, have not been mapped or sequenced very thoroughly (as was the case with the paloverde trees). The court allowed the evidence because the expert did a good job of running his tests blind and of establishing that there was much detectable variation in the trees.
Read more at:
https://www.lawyersupdate.co.in/crime-file/the-denise-johnson-cae-the-seed-pods-convinction/
Case related to: Forensic evidence
Field of Study: Criminology
A 1992 murder case in Phoenix Arizona in which DNA analysis of plant evidence was used for the first time in criminal proceedings to help secure a conviction.
In May 1992 the body of a woman later identified as Denise Johnson was found outdoors in the brush near some paloverde trees in Maricopa County, Arizona. Her clothing was scattered about the area, and she had been bound with cloth and braided wire. She was from nearby Phoenix and appeared to have been murdered and left at the location recently. A pager recovered at the scene led the police to a suspect, a man named Mark Bogan. The investigation developed circumstantial, but not definitive, evidence against him. One of the paloverde trees at the scene appeared to have been damaged, possibly by a vehicle. A search of the suspect’s pickup, pursuant to a warrant, revealed seed pods from a paloverde tree in the truck bed.
The suspect admitted that he had picked up Johnson, who had been hitchhiking, and had sexual relations with her in the pickup. But he said he had made her get out of the truck after they had argued. He denied being at the crime scene, and he denied killing her.
Police obtained the assistance of a plant molecular genetics specialist, Dr. Timothy Helentjaris of the University of Arizona, who could compare the DNA profile of the seed pods recovered from the suspect’s pickup with those of the trees in the vicinity of the crime scene. The geneticist conducted blind tests on a number of paloverde trees, and the tests showed that each exhibited a different profile. The seed pods from the pickup truck showed identical profiles (indicating that they fell from the same tree), and their profile matched that of one particular tree at the scene. This evidence went a long way toward convincing the trial jury that the suspect’s pickup was indeed at the crime scene, a fact that he had denied.
The plant genetics expert in this case was a university professor. He used a DNA profiling technique called RAPD (randomly amplified polymorphic DNA) that is not regularly used in forensic labs but is common in research. It is a good technique for looking at genetic variation in organisms whose total genetic makeup, or genomes, have not been mapped or sequenced very thoroughly (as was the case with the paloverde trees). The court allowed the evidence because the expert did a good job of running his tests blind and of establishing that there was much detectable variation in the trees.
Read more at:
https://www.lawyersupdate.co.in/crime-file/the-denise-johnson-cae-the-seed-pods-convinction/
149
Law / The Locard’s Exchange Principle of Crime Scene Investigation
« on: March 10, 2019, 04:46:31 PM »
The key principle underlying crime scene investigation is a concept that has become known as Locard’s Exchange Principle. It states that whenever someone enters or exits an environment, something physical is added to and removed from the scene. This principle is generally summed up by stating: “Every contact leaves a trace.”
Dr. Locard believed that no matter where a criminal goes or what a criminal does, he will leave something at the scene of the crime. At the same time, he will also take something back with him. A criminal can leave all sorts of evidence, including fingerprints, footprints, hair, skin, blood, bodily fluids, pieces of clothing and more. By coming into contact with things at a crime scene, a criminal also takes part of that scene with him, whether it's dirt, hair or any other type of trace evidence.
Dr. Locard tested out this principle during many of his investigations. In 1912, for instance, a Frenchwoman named Marie Latelle was found dead in her parents' home. Her boyfriend at the time, Emile Gourbin, was questioned by police, but he claimed he had been playing cards with some friends the night of the murder. After the friends were questioned, Gourbin appeared to be telling the truth.
When Locard looked at the corpse, however, he was led to believe otherwise. He first examined Latelle's body and found clear evidence that she was strangled to death. He then scraped underneath Gourbin's fingernails for skin cell samples and later viewed the results underneath a microscope. Very soon, Locard noticed a pink dust among the samples, which he figured to be ladies makeup. Gourbin confessed the murder -- he had tricked his friends into believing his alibi by setting the clock in the game room ahead.
Dr. Locard believed that no matter where a criminal goes or what a criminal does, he will leave something at the scene of the crime. At the same time, he will also take something back with him. A criminal can leave all sorts of evidence, including fingerprints, footprints, hair, skin, blood, bodily fluids, pieces of clothing and more. By coming into contact with things at a crime scene, a criminal also takes part of that scene with him, whether it's dirt, hair or any other type of trace evidence.
Dr. Locard tested out this principle during many of his investigations. In 1912, for instance, a Frenchwoman named Marie Latelle was found dead in her parents' home. Her boyfriend at the time, Emile Gourbin, was questioned by police, but he claimed he had been playing cards with some friends the night of the murder. After the friends were questioned, Gourbin appeared to be telling the truth.
When Locard looked at the corpse, however, he was led to believe otherwise. He first examined Latelle's body and found clear evidence that she was strangled to death. He then scraped underneath Gourbin's fingernails for skin cell samples and later viewed the results underneath a microscope. Very soon, Locard noticed a pink dust among the samples, which he figured to be ladies makeup. Gourbin confessed the murder -- he had tricked his friends into believing his alibi by setting the clock in the game room ahead.
150
National & International Seminars / Re: Kathmandu School of Law Summer School
« on: February 27, 2019, 01:51:44 PM »
Thanks a lot