- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: If Vilma innocent then why not do a lie detector test and make GOoDell look bad
Posted on 5/13/12 at 8:45 am to Sophandros
Posted on 5/13/12 at 8:45 am to Sophandros
quote:
1) the burden of proof is on the commissioner
2) polygraphs are not 100% reliable
There is no burden of proof here. The burden of proof in the NFL is the whim of the commissioner.
1
Posted on 5/13/12 at 9:08 am to tigertown79
quote:
If Vilma innocent
If should be bolded and all caps
Posted on 5/13/12 at 9:37 am to Bayou
quote:
Why doesn't Godell just put forth to the public the evidence that proves the Saints were so wrong and then we can put an end to the chapter and move on to the season?
Just showing it to the punished players, coaches, and GM would suffice.
Posted on 5/13/12 at 10:10 am to s_i5
Because frick that.
Posted on 5/13/12 at 10:21 am to Hazelnut
quote:
Lie detectors can be beaten and falsely convict someone of lying. That's why they're bs. If they were as cut and dry as you make it sound, then it would be used as hard evidence in court. Which it isn't.
This. Lie detector tests detect reaction controlled by your autonomic (read: involuntary) nervous system. They can easily show someone as lying when in fact the person is just nervous or scared and are sweating abnormally or have changes in heart rate, which cannot really be controlled.
If you're being accused of some major crime and the authorities are there with you trying to get a confession, people naturally get nervous in that situation.
It's not that they never work, just that results can very easily be unreliable.
Posted on 5/13/12 at 11:32 am to hombreman9
quote:
There is no burden of proof here. The burden of proof in the NFL is the whim of the commissioner.
False.
Whenever a claim is made, the burden of proof lies with the person who made the assertion.
When this first broke, the media should have IMMEDIATELY demanded evidence. The public should have IMMEDIATELY demanded evidence. That's how logic works.
Posted on 5/14/12 at 12:59 pm to tigertown79
Because lie detectors are wrong 20-30% of the time.
Posted on 5/14/12 at 1:00 pm to UASports23
quote:
Depending on state. Lie detector tests are admissible in court.
Posted on 5/14/12 at 2:28 pm to Starchild
quote:This really isn't true. Part of it depends on the skill of the polygraph administrator, but polygraph results can either show someone to be clearly lying, clearly telling the truth, or unclear. Sometimes, someone can "beat" a polygraph by generating an unclear result. Being nervous or sweating really doesn't affect how they work. Also, because the data are now computerized, there is a much lower chance for error than in the past when results were generated by needles on paper.
This. Lie detector tests detect reaction controlled by your autonomic (read: involuntary) nervous system. They can easily show someone as lying when in fact the person is just nervous or scared and are sweating abnormally or have changes in heart rate, which cannot really be controlled.
If you're being accused of some major crime and the authorities are there with you trying to get a confession, people naturally get nervous in that situation.
It's not that they never work, just that results can very easily be unreliable.
Anyway, though, it could be a good PR move if Vilma wanted to increase the pressure on the commish.
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News