| Abstract [eng] |
The aim of this paper is to analyse the possibilities of using the results of polygraph examinations in evidence in Lithuania and the USA. The USA is a leader among all the countries of the world in the field of polygraph use. The practice of polygraph examinations in this country is incomparably higher than in Lithuania. Therefore, it is relevant to compare how the issue of the use of psychophysiological test results in criminal proceedings is regulated, as well as what is the court practice in these countries. The study revealed that in Lithuania the legal regulation is strict and limited. The scope of application of polygraph examinations covers only a narrow range of persons. The use of polygraphs to investigate other criminal offences is limited under the Law on the Use of Polygraphs, although some sub-legislation extends this use, creating legal contradictions. Although police agencies and courts are not subject to polygraph examinations under the Law on the Use of the Polygraph, in practice they do apply/initiate such examinations. In the US, the legal framework allows for a wider use of polygraph results. However, the legal framework is highly state-specific. There is no uniform nationwide regulation on the use of polygraphs. New Mexico Evidence Code Rule 11-707 reflects the most liberal approach of all US states. This state allows the admission of the results of a polygraph examination as evidence without the consent of both parties. However, these specific types of evidence are subject to very strict admissibility requirements. Lithuanian case law is clear on the results of polygraph examinations: they are not considered evidence and can only be used as an auxiliary tool to reinforce the court's inner conviction, but cannot be decisive for the decision. By contrast, in US courts, the results of polygraph examinations can be admitted as evidence. They are generally only admissible if they are agreed by the prosecution and the defence, if the investigation is carried out by a qualified professional who can be cross-examined, and if the court assesses their reliability. However, such results are not automatically considered as evidence and their admissibility is determined by the court on a case by case basis. The author proposes to include the Lithuanian police and courts in the list of subjects of the Law on the Use of Polygraph. |
