<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/1.5.2" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Why Breathalyzers own Polygraphs</title>
	<link>http://defensology.com/2005/11/14/should-the-breathalyzer-go-the-way-of-the-polygraph/</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 23:36:40 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.2</generator>

	<item>
 		<title>Comment on Why Breathalyzers own Polygraphs by: &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Polygraphs Redux</title>
		<link>http://defensology.com/2005/11/14/should-the-breathalyzer-go-the-way-of-the-polygraph/#comment-644</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 May 2006 07:40:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://defensology.com/2005/11/14/should-the-breathalyzer-go-the-way-of-the-polygraph/#comment-644</guid>
					<description>[...] I&amp;#8217;m concerned that this renewed interest in shortcuts to the truth is going to push law enforcement in the direction of heavier reliance on polygraphs, and eventually pressure the courts to relent. After all, if courts are willing to allow the results of Breathalyzers in court, it&amp;#8217;s not that big a step to start admitting polygraph results. And that&amp;#8217;s just bad science. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>[&#8230;] I&#8217;m concerned that this renewed interest in shortcuts to the truth is going to push law enforcement in the direction of heavier reliance on polygraphs, and eventually pressure the courts to relent. After all, if courts are willing to allow the results of Breathalyzers in court, it&#8217;s not that big a step to start admitting polygraph results. And that&#8217;s just bad science. [&#8230;]
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
