# Polygraphs are inadmissable as evidence in U.S. Courts, right?

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygraphs-are-inadmissable-as-evidence-in-u-s-courts-right/74770>\
**Category:** Factual Questions\
**Created:** [August 3, 2001, 1:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygraphs-are-inadmissable-as-evidence-in-u-s-courts-right/74770 "2001-08-03T13:52:20Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 3\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![bordelond](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bordelond/32/150_2.png) [@bordelond](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bordelond)\
**Post date:** [August 3, 2001, 1:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygraphs-are-inadmissable-as-evidence-in-u-s-courts-right/74770/1 "2001-08-03T13:52:20Z")

</div>

So why does it matter if Gary Condit takes a polygraph test or not? He can lie through his teeth, sweat through his sportcoat, and the needle can do the Macarena, but it proves nothing in court.

So why did the D.C. police EVER ONCE want to give him a lie detector test? To what ends?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Kent\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kent_clark/32/105_2.png) [@Kent\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kent_Clark)\
**Post date:** [August 3, 2001, 1:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygraphs-are-inadmissable-as-evidence-in-u-s-courts-right/74770/2 "2001-08-03T13:57:50Z")

</div>

Lie detector RESULTS are inadmissable. However, lie detectors are certainly used as investigative tools – often to see if police are going down the right or wrong road in the investigation. If Condit had taken a police or FBI lie detector test and the results had shown he was less than candid about his relationship with Levy, then investigators might conclude he’s trying to hide something. Conversely, if the results showed him being completely open, they might decide to take the investigation in another direction.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Otto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Otto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Otto)\
**Post date:** [August 3, 2001, 2:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygraphs-are-inadmissable-as-evidence-in-u-s-courts-right/74770/3 "2001-08-03T14:06:08Z")

</div>

IANAL, but in Wisconsin polygraph exams are admissible if both parties (prosecutor and defendant) agree prior to the test to admit them. I’m unsure if this is per statute or the rules of the court.