Quote Originally Posted by awdleyfuturehalloffamer View Post
Polygraph evidence is presently inadmissible in Canada and many jurisdictions of the United States. One of the major reasons for its exclusion lies in the belief (held by members of the judiciary) that jurors would accept such evidence without question due to its technical/scientific nature. The question of such blind acceptance was examined in two experiments on the influence of polygraph evidence on people's judgements of guilt. A second question that was also raised was whether a caution on the limitations of the polygraph would be effective in reducing people's weighting of such evidence. Although polygraph evidence was expected to exert some influence over judgements of guilt, it was not expected to be so great as to result in blind acceptance

SpringerLink - Journal Article
Don't really know what the point is here, but the fact remains that polygraphs have sent people back to jail and polygraphs have exonerated people in the United States and in other countries. You can't argue with facts, man. Fact: Man sex offenders in the US must take routine polygraph tests and some are violated and sent to prison for failing them.Law.com - 2nd Circuit Approves Post-Release Use of Polygraph In the UK, they are required in some cases too Offender Management Act 2007 (c. 21) BTW, your law journal link is research and an empirical (relying on experience or observation alone often without due regard for system and theory) study of a hypothesis (assumption). It is NOT fact of law or the result of an actual adjudicated case - so it might as well be from something you saw in a movie. Plus you should probably read the full text and not just the abstract.