In the present, there is the rising number of frauds whistleblowers, thefts of corporate secrets, industrial or product sabotage, and many other valid motives. Detecting lies is an essential factor when hiring someone in positions of trust.
It is also a useful instrument for immigration, customs officials as well as law enforcement agencies. In states that lie detector reports might not be considered evidence admissible and are not admissible as evidence, they can be a valuable asset during the initial stage of integration. Because it’s a method to determine if the suspect is worthy of more investigation, and/or if they are reasonably confident of the fact that the person in question is innocent so further questioning and a thorough investigation is necessary. This method is in the process of becoming is likely to become a standard routine because of the ever-changing techniques for detecting the truth.
For many years, we have conducted “polygraph tests” since it has been tested and tested for a long time. However, the truth is that it relies heavily on the expertise and experience that the examiner has. Our examiner has worked consistently successful in establishing truth, even in complicated cases such as an ex-president who was corrupt as well as arson incidents on a cruise ship and many other instances that have led to the determination of the guilt or innocence of a person. The key is not the equipment, but rather the well phrased questions asked to the person taking the examination.
The most widely reported case was one was that of “Colin Stag” who, in 1992, was the subject of a fervent police investigation for his involvement in the accused murder of TV star Rachel Nickell. Due to police announcements as well as investigation by the media’s own journalists the man was being accused of guilt before being given a fair trial. He was determined be able to show his innocence, and was in agreement with the “News of the World” to take an examination for polygraphs. The newspaper called We. Colin Stag with the ‘News of the World’ reporter was brought into the We Office located in Mayfair, London. Our expert polygraph examiner took the test of Colin Stag, that consisted of 60 questions. The test was conclusively concluded that Mr. Stagg DIDN’T NOT KO Rachel Nickell.
The trial began in August of 1993. Colin Stag is charged with murder in the case of Rachel Nickell. In his trial in September 1994 the judge was Mr. Justice Ognall, condemned a police undercover operation where an officer’s wife exchanged a series of pornographic emails with Stagg. The case of defence for Colin Stage was never heard in court due to legal issues, and the judge disqualified the case against the defendant.
In UK laws, an individual cannot be found guilty of the same offense twice and even though the case was dismissed by law-related technicalities since he wasn’t in need have a fair trial before jurors, many doubted his innocence as well as the credibility of the findings from the We lie detection test.
In November 2007, fifteen years later, we claimed of Colin Stage was innocent was totally justifiable. In November 2007, Robert Napper was charged with murdering Rachel Nickell and was ultimately found guilty due to his confession and the reliable DNA tests. The legal system was not able to help Colin Stage, as he was judged unfairly and was in custody for 13 months in the midst of a his trial. Upon finding evident that he was innocent, he received compensation of PS706,000 by the UK Government.
While we recognize that the polygraph and various lie detection systems might never be completely accurate. In the instances given we believe they’re a great tool to use in the case of an earlier interrogation of suspects. If the person passes the test and is found to be a good candidate, although they might not be completely eliminated at this time and the investigator could save time and money by pursuing investigations that are related to potential suspects.
Additionally, lie detection is used is used to recruit employees who are in an environment of trust as well as for employees who are currently employed by businesses to take a test as part of an annual ‘trust policy’. The test of lie detection is not just a safeguard for the company however, it also works to the interest of the employees who consent to the test since the business is aware of the loyalty of employees. This, in turn, enhances the employee’s long-term job stability and , often, chances to be promoted.
We have an open mind in regards to the many methods of Lie Detection and we remain abreast of the new technology, have intensive discussions with developers , and assess the capabilities through our own test. We believe that the different situations related to the needs of a customer and requirements, mean that certain methods will be more effective in comparison to other systems.
We offer a custom service to our clients by assessing the goals the client wants to accomplish, taking into the probability of individuals who cooperate to undergo an examination, the amount of tests needed within a particular time period and the general situation of the undertaking. After that, we’ll suggest the best method to use and offer the professional lie detection services that the client can count on.
We are currently engaged in four different lie detection methods dependent on the type of system specified, tests may be administered to subjects willing to consent, or even secretly without their awareness.
Polygraph (requires an experienced examiner ), every test that includes a pre-interview could be a long time and requires attachments of the device to the test subject. The test is suggested for people who are involved in any crime or intent to prove their innocence. Because this technique allows the examiner to re-readjust the questions he was anticipating and made up, in answer to earlier questions by the person who is taking the test. This gives the examiner complete flexibility to determine what is true.)
Tested Automated Screening Technique (a quick 20-minute test with a high percentage of success with no examiner required, the test subject responds to a pre-written questionnaire on a screen. the system requires device attachments with the test subject. It is perfect for large-scale screening or for reducing the suspects who can be able to take a more diverse the polygraph.)
Eye Analysis (subject has a screen-based questionnaire, but no devices attached to subject. Another quick test, with pre-programmed questions that subjects read and responds on an LCD screen)
Face Expressions (can take place with the subjects consent or in secret, and can be recorded in real time or via audio-only video recordings This is great for an vetting procedure, at the initial stages of the basic questions)
Another advantage of the use of We to provide the Lie Detection service is that we’re your single-source of assistance in the event of current security measures or investigations require the use of information obtained in a Lie Detection exam and analysis .