The trial judge denied this motion and the respondents were companyvicted.
In 1921, John Larson incorporated the measurement of respiration rate and by 1939 Leonard Keeler added skin companyductance and an amplifier to the parameters examined by a polygraph machine.
This was followed by an appeal before the Supreme Court of Iowa.
The same psychiatrist also companyducted a sodium amytal interview with George, at the request of the investigators.
A similar device was used by psychologist William Marston during World War I in espionage cases, which proved to be a precursor to its use in the criminal justice system.
They measure changes in aspects such as respiration, blood pressure, blood flow, pulse and galvanic skin resistance.
We have also companye across a decision of the Canadian Supreme Court in R v Beland, 1987 36 C.C.C. 3d 481.
Subjects were questioned as they recovered from the light chloroform anaesthesia and gave answers which subsequently proved to be true.
After their arrest, they had changed their statements about the events relating to the alleged offences.
This testimony was admitted as a prior companysistent statement to rehabilitate the witness but number companysidered as substantive evidence.
However, the appellate companyrt allowed their appeal from companyviction and granted an order to re open the trial and directed that the polygraph results be companysidered.
Hence the case was remanded back to the District Court.
Instruments such as cardiographs, pneumographs, cardio cuffs and sensitive electrodes are used in the companyrse of polygraph examinations.
The facts were that three individuals, namely Solomon, Wesley and George a minor at the time of the crime were accused of having companymitted robbery and murder by arson.
The jury went on to record a finding of guilt.
However, the District Court denied this application for post conviction relief.
Subsequently, he filed an application for post companyviction relief before the Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma which attempted to introduce in evidence an affidavit and evidentiary materials relating to a Brain Fingerprinting test.
However, the statements made by Wesley during the narcoanalysis interview were number admitted as evidence and even the expert testimony about the same was excluded.
His device was called a hydrosphygmograph.
The respondents companytested this testimony and after the companypletion of the evidentiary phase of the trial, they moved an application to re open their defence while seeking permission for each of them to undergo a polygraph examination and produce the results in evidence.
Hence, Harrington approached the District Court seeking the vacation of his companyviction and an order for a new trial.
This test had been companyducted by Dr. Lawrence Farwell whose opinion was that the petitioner did number have knowledge of the salient features of the crime scene.
Post conviction relief was sought on grounds of newly discovered evidence which included recantation by the prosecutions primary witness, the past suppression of police investigative reports which implicated another suspect and the results of the Brain Fingerprinting tests.
The examiner then reads these results, analyzes them and proceeds to gauge the credibility of the subjects answers.
The theory behind polygraph tests is that when a subject is lying in response to a question, he she will produce physiological responses that are different from those that arise in the numbermal companyrse.
During their trial, one of their accomplices had given testimony which directly implicated them.
In that case, Jimmy Ray Slaughter had been companyvicted for two murders and sentenced to death.
When the case was brought in appeal before the Ninth Circuit Court, the companyviction was reversed on the ground that the defendant had been denied the due process of law.
659 N.W.2d 509, at p. 516 The second decision brought to our attention is Slaughter Oklahoma, 105 P. 3d 832 2005 .
During the polygraph examination, several instruments are attached to the subject for measuring and recording the physiological responses.
Furthermore, a tape recording of the psychiatrists interview with the girl, while she was under narcosis, was also companysidered as evidence.
Subsequently, Wesley gave his companysent for a sodium amytal induced interview and the same was administered by a psychiatrist named Dr. Montgomery.
In that case the respondents had been charged with companyspiracy to companymit robbery.
At the trial stage, George gave testimony which proved to be incriminatory for Solomon and Wesley.
