Polygraph in a criminal case. Is a polygraph evidence in court? To increase the objectivity and reliability of the conclusions, it is advisable to provide for the possibility of conducting in controversial cases an additional psychophysiological examination by a commission of experts

(Aliev T., Ulyanova M.)

(“Arbitration and civil procedure”, 2008, No. 1)

Publication information

“Arbitration and civil procedure”, 2008, N 1

OBTAINING EVIDENCE USING POLYGRAPH IN CIVIL PROCEDURES

T. ALIEV, M. ULYANOVA

Aliev T., head Department of Justice and Procedural Law, State Educational Institution of Higher Professional Education “Saratov State Socio-Economic University”, Doctor of Law, Professor.

Ulyanova M., Candidate of Legal Sciences, senior lecturer at the Saratov Law Institute of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia.

Practice in resolving various issues within the framework of legal proceedings indicates that the expert status of these studies has appeared in civil proceedings recently and is still debatable in science<1>, there is practically no interest in it on the part of subjects of civil proceedings. At the same time, it should be noted that the research of a polygraph expert may be another piece of evidence in the case, which the party will present to confirm and substantiate its position in the case<2>.

The research can be presented both in the form of written evidence and in the form of an expert’s opinion on the case, which is drawn up in accordance with the requirements of procedural legal norms and taking into account the requirements for evidence and means of proof (relevance and admissibility) in civil proceedings, i.e. .e. be a means of proof in a case that the court will evaluate in conjunction with other evidence. The same conclusion can be drawn based on an analysis of existing regulations, including those regulating expert activities.<3>.

In addition, as statistics show, a polygraph is an effective means of assessing the reliability of information, including information obtained previously, as well as in cases where it is problematic to obtain it in the traditional way<4>.

——————————–

<1>Komisarova Y.V. Applied aspects of using the polygraph in criminal proceedings. P. 6; Instrumental lie detection: realities and prospects for use in the fight against crime: Materials of the international scientific and practical forum / Ed. V.N. Khrustaleva, L.N. Ivanova. Saratov: SuiUI Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia. P. 104; Belenski R. Evidentiary value of forensic examination using a polygraph. See: Ibid. pp. 48 – 52.

<2>The purpose of the research is to obtain evidence in the case. The issue of using a polygraph examination has been controversial in the Russian Federation for many years. See: Pertley V.A. Obtaining information using a polygraph: current problems. See: Ibid. P. 35.

<3>Federal Law “On State Forensic Expert Activities in the Russian Federation” (as amended on December 30, 2001).

According to Order of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation dated May 14, 2003 N 114, forensic psychophysiological examination was included in the List of expert specialties for which the right to independently conduct forensic examinations is granted in forensic institutions of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation. In addition, in accordance with Order No. 15 of January 15, 2003 of the Minister of Justice of the Russian Federation on the approval of standards for providing the forensic examination institutions of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation with instruments and equipment for conducting forensic examinations, giving forensic psychological examination an official status predetermined the possibility of equipping regional forensic institutions of Russia with polygraphs .

<4>Pertley V.A. Obtaining information using a polygraph: current problems. P. 34.

The relevance of psychophysiological studies using a polygraph is explained by the fact that in an adversarial process, the parties (other persons participating in the case) must themselves collect and provide evidence to the court in support of their claims (Articles 56, 57 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation). Features are of interest<5>personal means of proof (explanations of the parties and testimony of witnesses). In addition, in a number of categories of cases, difficulties arise in collecting evidence confirming the circumstances substantiating the demands and objections of the parties.

——————————–

<5>The author means their reliability, the person is not responsible for giving false testimony, their reliability can be verified only on the basis of the totality of evidence.

In accordance with Art. 55 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, evidence in a case is understood as information about facts obtained in the manner prescribed by law, on the basis of which the court establishes the presence or absence of circumstances justifying the demands and objections of the parties, as well as other circumstances that are important for the correct consideration and resolution of the case. This information can be obtained from explanations of the parties and third parties, testimony of witnesses, written and physical evidence, audio and video recordings, and expert opinions. From which it follows that the list of procedural means of proof in civil cases is strictly limited.

Written evidence means acts, contracts, certificates, business correspondence, other documents and materials made in the form of digital and graphic recordings, including those received by fax, electronic or other communication or in any other way that allows us to establish the reliability of the document containing information about the circumstances that are important for the consideration and resolution of the case (Article 71 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation).

If issues arise during the consideration of the case that require special knowledge in various fields of science, technology, art, craft, the court appoints an examination. I believe that if the court has doubts about the reliability of the testimony of witnesses or the explanations of the parties (although the final assessment of the evidence occurs only when a court decision is made), they may be assigned a psychophysiological examination (PFE) using a polygraph.

The conclusion of a polygraph expert is an independent means of proof in the case and is distinguished by the specifics of its formation and content. Special psychophysiological studies are intended primarily to objectify reality, i.e. identifying hidden information relevant to the case, or its legalization (confirmation). Information collected in this way cannot be obtained by the court in any other procedural way, and therefore it should be regarded as an initial means of proof.

The validity of using the opinion of a polygraph expert in civil proceedings can be reduced to the following main points.

1. Evidence in the case.

2. An independent means of proof - in the form of an examination or written evidence.

3. Method of checking the reliability of evidence (testimonies of witnesses and explanations of the parties).

1. The subject of proof in the case includes facts that have material and legal significance.

So, for example, in cases of protection of property rights (vindication and negatory claims, Article 301 and Article 304 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation), when there is a violation of the rights of the owner, in addition to the contract, evidence of illegal possession is the testimony of the parties, if, due to the absence of contractual relations, the plaintiff has no written evidence. In addition, when establishing facts that are relevant to the case, for example, when establishing the fact of cohabitation, which can usually be proven only by personal means of evidence.

2. Persons participating in the case, wanting to strengthen their “evidence base,” undergo a psychophysiological study and present it to the court in conjunction with other evidence.

I believe that such research will be considered as written evidence of “another document”, taking into account the nature of its formation<6>.

——————————–

<6>In theory, the distinctive features of written evidence are distinguished, the presence of a material object and the content of evidence, i.e. information about the circumstances of the case, and it does not matter how they are presented (through signs, numbers, letters, symbols, etc.) (see: Vikut M.A., Zaitsev I.M. Civil process of Russia. M.: Yurist, 1999. P. 178 (chapter written by I.M. Zaitsev). M.K. Treushnikov highlights another feature of written evidence. Written evidence arises before the legal proceedings, without connection with it (see: Treushnikov M.K. Judicial evidence. M.: Gorodets, 1997. P. 221). In this situation, the sign indicated by M.K. Treushnikov is not entirely suitable, but a qualified expert’s opinion is not provided for in the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation as an independent means of proof in the case.

During the trial, one of the parties may apply for the appointment and conduct of a forensic psychophysiological examination (SPFE). The initiative to appoint a primary examination belongs to the court, the parties and other persons participating in the case, and the burden of expenses for conducting the examination rests with the parties. Thus, a person participating in the case may apply for an SPFE in relation to himself (wishing to support his testimony with the conclusion of a polygraph expert, while simultaneously raising the rating of the entire body of evidence presented to him), and other persons if doubts arise about the reliability of personal means of proof.

It can be said that in relation to civil proceedings, the general subject of research is establishing the circumstances of the case. Issues resolved by forensic psychiatric and forensic psychological examinations can be divided into general and specific.

The general question to be resolved when conducting a forensic psychophysiological examination using a polygraph in civil cases should be formulated as follows:

– do the research reveal psychophysiological reactions indicating that the person has information about the circumstances of the incident, if so, what kind of information?

Private questions:

– did a fact (circumstance) from among those to be established take place?

– what specific actions were performed by the citizen in relation to another person (time and place of their commission)?

In accordance with the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation (clause 3.1, part 2, article 74), evidence is the conclusion and testimony of a specialist, which allows the study of a polygraph expert to be classified as this subtype of evidence in criminal proceedings. Civil procedural legislation does not provide for a specialist’s opinion as a means of proof in a case (Article 55 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation).

The participation of a specialist in the process is provided for in Art. 188 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation in the form of consultation, just like an expert, he belongs to the group of persons contributing to the administration of justice.

The legislation provides for the participation of a specialist:

1) when performing a number of procedural actions (Articles 188, 185 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation);

2) to provide consultations to the court. In this connection, the question arises about the procedural status of the documents that record these consultations. The specialist’s research activities are not aimed at obtaining new information, but at explaining what is at the disposal of the court and accessible to its perception.

In some cases, the participation of a specialist is necessary to determine the need for examination (formulation of questions to be submitted for examination, to evaluate the expert’s conclusion, etc.).

On the one hand, according to the law, no independent evidentiary value is attached to the consultations and explanations of a specialist. On the other hand, in fact, the expert’s explanations can play an independent evidentiary role, since they can contain information about circumstances that are important for the correct consideration of the case<7>.

——————————–

<7>See: Sakhnova T.V. Forensic examination. M., 1999. S. 54 – 55.

Explanations and consultations with a specialist can be made in written and oral form. Therefore, we believe that a consultation made in writing is announced and attached to the case, and one given orally at a court hearing is entered into the minutes. Then the question arises about the quality of the written explanations attached to the case.

The law does not contain such an answer. Accordingly, it is hardly worth classifying the research of a polygraph expert as a consultation with a specialist in civil proceedings, especially since in practice written consultations with a specialist are assessed as a type of written evidence.

2. Judicial evidence must be reliable.

With regard to written evidence, if doubt arises about the authenticity of the evidence, the court may order an examination (Article 186 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation). If doubts arise in the testimony of certain persons, the court evaluates them in conjunction with other evidence and according to its internal conviction.

There was no other independent verification. In addition, the opposing party, who has grounds to challenge the reliability of the testimony of the person in respect of whom the examination is ordered, may petition the court to conduct an SPFE using a polygraph. This is a kind of verification of the reliability of the testimony of the party or persons participating in the case, witnesses that were given at the court hearing.

Civil proceedings are an example of an adversarial process. Competitiveness has various manifestations. The scientific literature has repeatedly noted the features of such a means of proof as the explanation of the parties and other interested parties, which must be taken into account when assessing by the court.

Thus, a party, having the necessary information, strives for a certain satisfactory outcome of the case, wants to achieve it and can deliberately distort the information set out in the statement of claim. Thus, the party tries to substantiate the stated requirements and protect its right, believing that it has been violated.

In order to have in its arsenal proof of the truth and reliability of its testimony, the party may request the appointment of such an examination. In addition, the literature identifies such a type of witness as qualified, from whom abuse of rights is possible, and in relation to them it is also possible to assign PFE.

Witness testimony in civil proceedings also contains the necessary information about the case.

The witness has no legal interest in the case; he can provide the court with any information about the circumstances of the case, but one should not forget that one of the parties to the case requests to call the witness (the burden of collecting and presenting evidence rests with the parties). This is taken into account when the court evaluates the totality of evidence in the case.

Therefore, the totality of testimony, confirmed by the conclusion of a polygraph expert, represents the optimal body of evidence.

Unlike traditional forensic psychological examination<8>, aimed at studying the mental phenomena of a person, which are important for establishing the circumstances of the case, the conclusion of a polygraph expert has a number of features that need to be considered in more detail.

——————————–

<8>SPFE is classified as a subtype of forensic psychological examination.

1. The use of a polygraph and SPFE is permitted only with the voluntary consent of the subject<9>. It seems that the refusal should not be recorded in any procedural document.

——————————–

<9>Speaking about the admissibility of using a polygraph in civil proceedings in the form of an examination, one cannot help but touch upon the issue of the fundamental principle of conducting polygraph tests - their methodologically determined voluntariness. Giving polygraph tests the status of an examination does not predetermine the possibility of their forced production. I believe that the voluntary nature of SPFE production using a polygraph should be discussed in the courtroom when it is appointed.

2. The presumption enshrined in Part 3 of Art. 79 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation (the guilt of a person evading an examination is assumed) cannot be applied to a person who refuses SPFE at any stage of the appointment or conduct of the study. Otherwise, there is a violation of the adversarial principle and a transition to investigative proceedings.

Thus, if doubts arise about the reliability of certain personal evidence, the court may invite the parties to request an SPFE using a polygraph and, as a result of consent, will order it.

In addition, a person who voluntarily underwent a psychophysiological study (PFI), presenting it as evidence, certainly influences the internal conviction of the judge. The assessment of evidence is carried out by the court when making a decision (Article 196 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation). However, a person who knowingly informs the court of true information easily agrees to a polygraph examiner’s examination or offers to assign an SPFE to himself, which will certainly influence the internal conviction of the judge. In theory<10>There are several stages of evidence assessment:

——————————–

<10>For example, see: Fokina M.A. Judicial evidence in civil cases. Saratov: SVSh Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, 1995. P. 47; Ivanov O.V. Judicial evidence in civil proceedings: A course of lectures. Irkutsk, 1974. P. 113; Treushnikov M.K. Forensic evidence. M.: Gorodets, 1997. P. 164.

1) preliminary – during the consideration of the case on the merits (characteristic of logical cognitive activity);

2) final, which is regulated by law (Part 1 of Article 196 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation).

The court evaluates evidence according to its internal conviction (Article 67 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation). The court's assessment of the polygraph expert's conclusion is carried out according to the general rule for assessing evidence. The polygraph examiner's conclusion (as written evidence or as an expert opinion) is considered in conjunction with other evidence in the case and does not have pre-established force (Article 67 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation). The expert's conclusion does not have pre-established evidentiary value and is assessed based on the totality of evidence; the judge has the right to reject the expert opinion with appropriate motivation in his decision.

Based on the above, a number of conclusions can be drawn:

1. PFI is independent evidence in the case and serves as a way to verify the reliability of personal means of proof.

2. The use of a polygraph in civil proceedings is possible in the form of an examination (with appropriate additions to the law on voluntariness) and written evidence (research by a polygraph expert).

Thus, taking into account the legal regulation enshrined in the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation and the actual current situation, we can assume in the near future the active formation of the practice of prescribing and conducting forensic psychophysiological examinations using a polygraph in civil proceedings.

Good afternoon. I'm being accused of something I didn't do. These are quite serious accusations that could play the most destructive role in my life. The circumstances have developed in such a way that I do not yet know how to provide evidence of my innocence. Things are not going in my favor so far. It is very important for me to know whether a lie detector is evidence in court. I am ready to undergo any checks, since I have nothing to hide. Is there a chance to remove the undeserved stain from my reputation? I have read in many articles on the Internet that the court does not take lie detector evidence into account. But there are also articles stating the opposite. Which ones are true?

Whatever the situation in which you find yourself, according to the legislation of the Russian Federation, you have the right to take advantage of a psychophysiological examination using a polygraph. This is allowed even when the inquiry officer, investigator or judge refuses the request to conduct an investigative investigation. In this case, Part 3 of Article 80 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, Article 71 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation and Article 27.7 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation are used.

You, as the accused, should have a chance to prove your case. And the law of our state allows you to exercise this right. The lawyer involved in the case also has the right to collect evidence of his client’s innocence and use the SPFI as one of them. He can also order a printing examination in order to understand the essence of the issue and gain confidence that the client is frank with him.

It would be incorrect to say that lie detectors are not used in court. A lot depends on the circumstances of the case. Often, the testimony of a psychophysiological examination is the only basis for a court decision.

In many cases, the results of a lie detector are taken into account. It is important for you, as a person who will have to defend your rights in court, to understand that an examination does not always benefit the suspect.

As you know, there are three types of ships:

1. Arbitration;
2. Civilian;
3. Criminal.

In your case we are talking about criminal liability. Judicial practice shows that this is the most common option when the need for a polygraph arises.

Often the judge does not want to take into account the examination data. Lie detector testimony in court will be more in demand if the prosecution also requests it.

It will be very good if your opponents, like you, demonstrate their interest in printing expertise. Of course, this matters when prosecutors are interested in obtaining all possible evidence of the guilt of the accused.

Psychophysiological examination will be especially in demand in court if there is no other direct evidence or if the testimony heard contradicts what the investigation has established. The polygraph will also help if there are many unclear issues that make it difficult for the judge to make a final decision.

It is important to understand that the examination in some cases brought harm to those who applied for it. A good lawyer can warn you against mistakes. Enlist his support and together with him weigh all the positive and negative aspects of taking a lie detector test. If you are not guilty, there are other equally effective ways to prove that you are right.

Don't underestimate Russian justice. Be open and straightforward, and the court will appreciate it.

Based on the above, we can conclude that a lie detector is not evidence of guilt or innocence, however, psychophysiological examination can have a decisive influence on the court’s decision.

The polygraph is used by officials in the investigation of criminal cases to obtaining the necessary information.

Court takes into account the results of the examination subject to all conditions of its implementation. But not everyone knows whether a polygraph is evidence in a criminal case?

Dear readers! Our articles talk about typical ways to resolve legal issues. If you want to know how to solve exactly your problem - call free consultation:

Use in investigations

Polygraph is a device that records the psychophysiological state of a person being examined.

Based on the results of the inspection, authorized persons can make indirect conclusions about the involvement of the person under investigation in the commission of a crime, about the citizen’s awareness of the crime committed (possession of the necessary information that may be useful to the investigation).

The polygraph is actively used in forensic science, in operational investigative activities, by the defense.

In criminology

All experts agree that the results of printing research can become source of additional information about the crime under investigation. For this reason, it is important to implement the obtained data in the interests of the investigation and not ignore it.

The main task of criminologists is to objectively interpret the research results and not overestimate the value of the information obtained.

Often, in the interests of the investigation, authorized persons try to establish, based on the results of a polygraph test, facts that cannot be unambiguously confirmed only by this examination. The polygraph in forensic science is additional, but not the only way to investigate.

The reactions demonstrated by the citizen are allow criminologists to come to the following conclusions:

• the correctness of the actions taken;
• the need to change tactics;
• ways to establish psychological contact with a citizen;
• objectivity of the data obtained.

The data obtained allows the investigator to formulate some opinion about the current state of affairs.

And, although they are not the main evidence, in the absence of other significant facts, the investigation of the crime can reach a new level.

In the ORD

Lawyers

The evidence base is collected not only by investigators, prosecutors and judges, but also by persons those speaking on the side of the defense accused - .

If necessary, a lawyer can, in the interests of his client, initiate conducting a special psychophysiological study conducted by an independent specialist (not an expert).

At the end of the research, the specialist issues a conclusion to the lawyer, which reflects the progress of the research, the information obtained and the opinion of the specialist himself.

According to the law, a lawyer has the right to file a petition with the court to include the information received in the case as evidence.

It should be noted that the court rarely accepts such conclusions as evidence. The results of studies ordered and conducted by the prosecution have a higher priority for the court than information of a similar nature provided by the lawyer.

When is a lie detector test scheduled?

The court orders an examination in the following situations:

Expert tasks

In a general sense, a polygraph allows you to reveal the truthfulness of the person being examined to the questions of a specialist. Polygraph universally applicable to people of any gender and age.

The device does not detect the fact of lying, but demonstrates a person’s reaction to the question asked, from which conclusions can be drawn about the truthfulness of the subject.

The reaction is understood as a set of indicators analyzed by the device: blood pressure, pulse, breathing rhythm, electrical resistance of the skin.

The specialist, formulating his questions, trying to solve the following problems:

What evidence is inadmissible? find out right now.

Refusal to be examined: consequences

The defendant or third parties involved in the case may refuse to conduct the examination. Polygraphic research is carried out exclusively on a voluntary basis.

This research does not constitute official evidence to be added to the legal process.

For this reason, refusal to conduct an examination is not included in any procedural documents and cannot affect the course of the trial.

Application of results

The use of a polygraph in criminal proceedings:

Author of the article -

The popularity of polygraph studies is gaining momentum. With its help, they identify adultery, dishonest employees, and dangerous criminals. How does a lie detector work? Is it possible to deceive him? What do investigators and judges think about such checks? The experts answered these questions, and the Pravo.ru correspondent spoke about her experience with the polygraph.

Meet the polygraph

William Marston is considered the inventor of the polygraph. In the 20s of the last century, he created a device for determining the falsity of statements, based on the connection of a person’s emotions with the physiological processes occurring inside the body, in particular, blood pressure. In 1933, the American Leonard Keeler designed a portable field polygraph, which added a channel for measuring skin resistance.

Modern lie detectors record breathing, sweating, blood filling of capillary vessels and blood pressure. All these processes are beyond the control of human consciousness and change if a person lies. By the way, calling a polygraph a lie detector is not entirely correct - the device does not detect lies, but only registers the psycho-physiological processes that occur in the human body when he tells a lie.

Today the polygraph has become so popular that many large companies have a dozen polygraph examiners on their staff. On average, the cost of one inspection is RUB. “There are cases when, after a corporate crime has been committed, companies independently conduct polygraphic examinations of personnel on the basis of internal policies. If the polygraph has determined that the employee has something to hide, the investigative authorities have the right to seize equipment and the results of the research as evidence and, on this basis, formulate their own versions reasons and motives for a crime. Therefore, before using a polygraph, not only as part of the process, but also for internal corporate purposes, it is necessary to think through, first of all, the negative consequences of such a study,” he warned. lawyer, partner of AB "", K.Yu. n. Valentin Petrov.

The questions that the polygraph examiner asks during the study are always known in advance to the subject. This avoids reacting to novelty. The questions are formulated in such a way that they can be answered in monosyllables: “yes” or “no.” Typically, each question is asked three times during the test. Compiling them correctly and correctly is also an art. MCA lawyer " " Natalya Nazarova told how her client agreed to take a polygraph, but when it became known that he would be asked, she had to refuse the test. According to Nazarova, the questions were written in such a way that the answers would indicate her client’s involvement in the crime.

On average, a polygraph test takes two hours. Most of the time is spent preparing for it - the polygraph examiner establishes contact with the subject, tells him about the principles of the polygraph and contraindications. Thus, persons with head injuries, diseases of the respiratory tract, cardiovascular system, as well as pregnant women do not pass the lie detector. This is due to the fact that their psycho-physiological processes proceed somewhat differently, and the results of the study may be unreliable. People with signs of alcohol or drug intoxication, severe fatigue, or under the influence of sedatives are also excluded from taking a polygraph.

Fool the lie detector

On the Internet you can find a lot of ways to deceive the polygraph: take alcohol or a sedative, spend the night before the test without sleep, treat your fingertips with deodorant or talcum powder. “This is very noticeable when a person is in an unnatural state. The subject can keep stories about insomnia and a “drink for courage” to himself. If I see that something is wrong with a person, I usually suggest rescheduling the test for another day. In addition, in my practice there were cases when the people being tested were so carried away by sedatives that they confessed to everything even before passing the polygraph,” says expert of the highest category, polygraph examiner of the independent expert center "Triumph" Gennady Utenkov.“Talc and deodorant won’t help either - before attaching the sensors, I ask you to wash your hands, and then touch your fingers and compare them with each other. If you still have doubts, I use a sensor with an electrically conductive gel, which can be attached to any part of the body,” continues Utenkov. “Having become familiar with the methods described on the Internet, a person will not be able to put them into practice without being exposed by a qualified polygraph examiner,” agreed Managing Director of AB "" Sergey Kovbasyuk. “Only people with a unique nervous system and a high level of self-control can resist a lie detector. In order to develop it, you need to undergo special training. All other techniques do not work,” said Utenkov.

If it is impossible to fool the detector, where do all these stories about people who managed to resist the polygraph come from? The fact is that the machine registers the presence of a person’s psychophysiological reaction to something: a question, a word, a color, a sound. Therefore, when receiving a reaction, it is extremely important to understand why it occurred. Expert psychologist of the Interregional Forensic Bureau named after. Sikorsky, Ph.D., Associate Professor Alexander Metelev says that the human psyche works according to the type of associative connections. When perceiving certain information, associations may arise that are not related to the act under study. The polygraph examiner's task is to interpret them correctly. “Yes, you cannot deceive a polygraph, but you can deceive a polygraph examiner. Unfortunately, practice shows that often a polygraph survey is superficial in nature, going beyond the scope of the subject of study. As a result, the specialist’s conclusions can be subjective and overly categorical,” Metelev explains. Nazarova agrees with him: “It is precisely to deceive such a would-be specialist that all methods of counteracting the subject are aimed.”

Polygraph testing activities are not licensed. There is also no unified federal inspection regulation. Therefore, each expert uses his own methodology, and also decides for himself whether to store the polygraph results and, if so, for how long.

Expert Utenkov invited the Pravo.ru correspondent to try the polygraph on himself. For the sake of the experiment, it was decided to try to deceive the machine and hide your name from it. It seemed like a simple task - all you had to do was answer “no” to the question “is your name Alina?” It seemed that I was answering calmly and confidently. And here is the result:

Polygraph in criminal proceedings

It would seem that the polygraph should be actively used in the consideration of all categories of cases: civil, arbitration, administrative, criminal, as well as cases of administrative offenses. However, data from the Caselook search engine shows that over the past year the phrase “lie detector” has appeared in 35 criminal cases, 13 civil cases, 4 cases of administrative offenses, 2 arbitration and 2 administrative cases. So a tool such as a lie detector is most in demand in criminal proceedings.

A lie detector test as part of a criminal trial is usually recorded on a video camera. During testing, it is permissible to present physical evidence and documents (for example, photographs of the victim or the crime weapon) to identify psychophysiological reactions to them. Subsequently, the polygraph testimonies on paper - polygrams - are added to the case materials. In addition, the investigator may call a polygraph examiner to explain his opinion on issues within his professional competence.

All investigators have different attitudes towards polygraph testing. “I had to apply for an interrogation of my client using a polygraph. However, the investigator refused to satisfy this request. The reason for the refusal was that this type of research is not provided for by criminal procedural legislation and cannot be regarded as evidence in the case,” she said lawyer of the bureau "" Maryana Yukharanova. But it happens the other way around: investigators themselves recommend using a lie detector. For example, the polygraph is often used in the Main Investigative Directorate of the Russian Investigative Committee in Moscow.

Judges also evaluate the polygraph ambiguously. “The results of investigative actions carried out using a polygraph are considered by the courts as evidence along with others. But not a single court will accept such evidence as the only one confirming the guilt or innocence of the accused - only together with other circumstances of the case,” Yukharanova is sure. “Courts accept the conclusions of polygraph experts as evidence and refer to them in the verdict when these conclusions confirm the prosecution’s version. In our practice, there was a criminal case where two psychophysiological examinations were carried out in relation to two people accused of a particularly serious crime. At the same time, they were carried out not just in state expert institutions, but at the Institute of Forensic Sciences of the FSB and the ECC of the Ministry of Internal Affairs. Both of these examinations indicated the innocence of the defendants. However, the court ignored them and passed a guilty verdict,” he said. managing partner AB Ruslan Koblev. “The courts don’t take the polygraph seriously,” I’m sure Managing Partner Alexander Zabeida. “In any case, in my opinion, if the court orders a psychophysiological study, it means that he himself still has doubts, and this, as a rule, is good,” sums up Lawyer at AB "" Anastasia Naida.

In one of the cases, the Supreme Court clarified that the reference in the court decision to a specialist’s conclusion based on the results of a polygraph test does not comply with the requirements of the criminal procedure law. This kind of research, aimed at developing and verifying investigative versions, according to the Supreme Court, does not belong to evidence according to Art. 74 Code of Criminal Procedure ().

Some lawyers are sure that if their client has nothing to hide, it is better to initiate a polygraph test. “In my practice, there was a case when a person accused of a crime of a sexual nature against minors, at the initiative of the defense, was given a polygraph study. It confirmed the lack of sexual interest in minors. And although such a study was not used as the basis for an acquittal, its role in the emergence of the court certainly had doubts about the credibility of the prosecution’s position,” said lawyer of the Moscow City Court "" Alexey Gurov. Other lawyers, on the contrary, prefer to bypass the polygraph. “I’m afraid to apply for a polygraph. For example, a person is absolutely innocent of anything, but his psycho-emotional state may be such that when answering some questions, the person being interrogated will give certain reactions,” said senior partner of KA "", Associate Professor of the Department of Criminal Procedure Law of Moscow State Law Academy Mikhail Voronin. Koblev agrees with him, who also recommends that defendants refuse to participate in studies using a polygraph.

How does the court react to a refusal to take a polygraph? “In the absence of evidence of guilt, the presence in the case of information about the defendant’s refusal to undergo this study will eloquently tell the court that the client has something to hide,” Zabeida is sure. Naida shares the same opinion: “A person’s refusal to take a polygraph affects the formation of the judge’s internal conviction. Most often, the statement is true that a person who has nothing to hide and who has not given false testimony does not refuse a lie detector test.” “A request to use a polygraph may indicate the readiness of the suspect (accused) to prove his innocence, just as refusal to use it may lead to thoughts of his guilt. Of course, such a refusal cannot serve as direct evidence in the case,” Yukharanova agreed. Petrov categorically disagrees with this point of view: “Courts do not attach much importance to a person’s refusal to take a polygraph, and certainly do not perceive it as an admission of guilt.” Gurov also believes that since the results of a polygraphic study cannot be regarded as evidence, refusal to undergo such a study is in no way evidence of the guilt of the suspect or accused.

In judicial practice, it is important to be able to distinguish truth from lies. In this area, the most common lie is to obtain benefits, for example, to avoid punishment.

Since 2001, Russia began to accept the results of polygraph testing of participants in legal proceedings. In world practice, these studies have been used by various intelligence agencies and law enforcement agencies to obtain evidence of guilt for more than 80 years.
To answer the question: “Is a lie detector evidence for the court?”, it is worth considering its use in judicial practice in more detail.

Lying is a simple matter and accessible to everyone, and yet I have never seen a liar who could successfully lie three times in a row.
Jonathan Swift

Method for obtaining information by a polygraph examiner

Polygraph tests are a very powerful argument for many people, since the possibility of deceiving them is very small. This device only reads information about the subject's reaction to a question, for example, increased heart rate or trembling in the fingers.

The change in physiological response is read by the sensors of the device. The data obtained as a result of testing is processed - only he is able to distinguish a reaction caused by a lie from natural anxiety due to fear of examination or accusation. Therefore, when using a polygraph in court as evidence, it is important that the study is carried out by a qualified specialist.

Is there always an opportunity for a polygraph test in court?

The polygraph is widely used to test people in a variety of settings, but it can be most useful during litigation. There are different types of courts:

• criminal;
  arbitration;
  civilian.

Most often, polygraph studies serve as evidence in criminal and administrative cases. When considering a case in court, both parties involved in the process may file a motion to order psychophysiological testing. Most often, this measure is used if only in this way, and in no other way, can one of the parties prove that they are right.

It is worth noting that the court does not always order a lie detector test. Why this happens, consider the options:

• When considering criminal cases, if it is requested defense side to prove innocence, most often the judge refuses to conduct or the data obtained during the study have little influence on the final decision.
  The polygraph in court becomes a more powerful argument, if a request is submitted for testing representatives of the prosecution.

In what cases is a polygraph used in court?

According to the legislation of the Russian Federation, in a court considering any type of case, each party can prove its case by any methods, except those prohibited by law.

Let us consider, for example, what the results of an examination conducted using a lie detector during the consideration of a criminal case provide. In relation to the accused, psychophysiological testing helps in cases where:

• There is no other direct evidence.
  The testimony of witnesses in court or other participants in the process contradicts what was established during the investigation.
  There are still unanswered questions in the case or contradictions that the prosecution or defense representatives need to clarify in order for the court to make the right decision.

When can using a polygraph in court cause harm?

Testing using a polygraph does not always help the participants in the process who applied for it.

Let's look at an example:

In the Supreme Court, after the impossibility of a successful decision in one of the regional courts, one libel case was considered (before liability under the Criminal Code was returned). Two gentlemen M. and N participated in the civil process.

M., who started this trial, pointed to many witnesses who were ready to testify in his support. They were present at the moment when the accused N. repeatedly disseminated various information about M. They greatly spoiled the applicant’s reputation and the reputation of his business as a whole.

However, M., despite the full evidence base, lost the case due to the fact that he often petitioned for a psychophysiological examination using a lie detector to be carried out on his witnesses. Most of them did not want to participate in the process for this reason, because they considered this measure unnecessary or were unpleasantly surprised that M. did not trust their words and petitioned for an additional check.

The judge was unfavorable to M. due to the fact that he had to decide on a large number of applications submitted. Despite the seemingly winning positions, M. lost the process due to excessive litigiousness.

Based on the example, we can conclude that in a court case it is worth requesting a polygraph test only in the most extreme cases, when it is really necessary. It is not worth it to unnecessarily subject a witness who is already on your side, as M. did, because most people are very worried about such testing and do not want to subject themselves to such a test. It was for this reason that M. lost all his witnesses.

Conclusion

Returning to the main question: “Is a polygraph evidence in court?”, having considered all its advantages, we receive an affirmative answer. But as the main evidence, the data obtained and processed by a specialist in psychophysiological research cannot be used, but as indirect evidence they can help the court make a verdict in one favor or another.