A little late for that
There is only one thing that matters, did he murder his wife ?Law
enforcement should use the brain wave based lie detectors which are proven to be
unbeatable. Offer all people about to be prosecuted a chance to prove they are
innocent. If they pass, they will not be prosecuted.How is it that I
can Google 'brain wave lie detector' and read about it and how
unbeatable it is, yet I never hear of its use anywhere? It could be used to
empty the prisons of innocent people, it could be used to determine who is a
terrorist and who isn't at airports.
They shouldn't have prevented him from suicide. This will never end, as
long as these attorneys continue to be able to bill the state for every appeal.
@cjbThere is only one thing that matters, did he murder his wife
?================In a perfect world, that would be true.
Sadly, there is much more at play. Each citizen is guaranteed a fair trial,
even someone as disgusting as a murderer. But only in guaranteeing them their
rights are our rights secure.One does not have to prove innocence,
the burden of proof lies with the State. All one has to do is provide doubt.
If removing this testimony would create doubt, our Constitution stipulates the
conviction be removed. Your brain wave lie detector would be
inadmissable as it would rely on violating the 5th ammendment rights of the
accused to not testify against themselves; and a refusal to take the test would
be/could be seen as an admission of guilt. If one truly believed their
innocence, or believed it enough to cast doubt, the test would not be
mcneil calling someone a liar. that is beautiful.
@cjb - Well if it's on Google then it MUST be true...Even if
they are the most reliable, they obviously aren't widespread, and
they're probably very expensive. But since regular polygraphs aren't
all that reliable, I'm betting that neuro-based polygraphs won't be
adopted very soon.
re Darrel Eagle Mountain, UT"Your brain wave lie detector
would be inadmissable as it would rely on violating the 5th ammendment rights of
the accused to not testify against themselves".Yes it would be
inadmissible, but so what? It wouldn't need to be admissible for it to
ensure that no innocent people are convicted. If anyone passes it, they
wouldn't be prosecuted. I would also propose a law that if the defendant
passed this test, and was still prosecuted, the defendant could admit this as
evidence if they want to.----On and yes, if he killed
his wife is the only thing that untimately matters. Perhaps not in our imperfect
system of justice as it exists now, but hopefully in time we will continue our
centuries long march of improvement the justice system and then factual
innocence (not counting the defendant being insane or a situation that requires
jury nullification due to the law being a bad law) will be the only thing that
Putting convicted criminals and jailhouse snitches on the witness stand has
always been problematic. It to easy to question their motives. Are they
telling the truth or lying for their own personal get out of jail card. Just a
i find the McNeil's note professing his innocence to be totally fishy.
That he is willing to kill himself shows a disrespect for life that is
consistent with a person willing to kill someone else. If he were innocent and
was disappointed with the jury's decision, murdering (himself, i.e.
suicide) would not be his reaction.
The brain wave lie detector tests have not been shown to be any more accurate
than the standard polygraph test. The polygraph test has been shown to be
inherently unreliable because it often finds people who are telling the truth to
be liars.The brain wave lie detector has the opposite problem. It
often finds liars to be telling the truth. Anyone who would submit to either
type of test is nuts. Both of these methods have been found to be very
unreliable and that is why the courts reject them.
This is nothing more than a delay tactic by the defense.
I think that the defense attorney has a valid reason to ask that the verdict be
thrown out. The Prosecuting attorney did say that no deal was made with the
inmates, in exchange for their testimony, but that wasn't the case. In
fact, it was a lie.I believe that McNeill will be cleared of the
charges and the state will have to pay a hefty settlement to avoid a suit.