| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立臺北大學 === 犯罪學研究所 === 96 === ABSTRACT
APPLICATION OF POLYGRAPH IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE TRIAL
-- AND EVALUATION OF POLYGRAPH IN EVIDENCE RULE
By
SHIH, I-LIN
January 2008
ADVISOR: Dr. WU, CHING-FANG
DEPARTMENT: GRADUATE SCHOOL OF CRIMINOLOGY
MAJOR: POLYGRAPH IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE TRIAL
DEGREE: MASTER OF LAW
In order to evaluate the application of polygraph in criminal justice trial in domestic district courts, the study method was to search the internet with the keyword of “polygraph” appearing in the “decisions by district courts” limited to “criminal decisions”, by using the law and regulations retrieving system of Judicial Yuan of Republic of China from the year of 2004 to 2006. Therefore, the study materials included the “criminal decisions” with keyword of “polygraph”. The evidence-based study during the 3 years found that the district courts considered 70.8% polygraph results to have evidentiary effect and brought in a verdict of guilty in 42.6% defendants with adopting the polygraph results; in the other hand, 29.2% polygraph results were considered to have no evidentiary effect and a verdict of no guilty was made in18.3% defendants. The results of our study showed that most the polygraph results were adopted by the courts, and therefore, polygraph play a significant role in criminal justice trial.
However, polygraph is to try to explore the awareness and thinking of defendants by analyzing and interpreting the polygraph results through a polygraph instrument delivered by the officers, and the polygraph results might be the evidentiary of a verdict. During the process of polygraph, the individual freedom of thinking and control of determination have been deprived and limited, and the defendant would be forced to confess the crime against the defendant’s own will. Therefore, in addition to an unjustifiable interrogation and an involuntary confess, the polygraph might invade the privilege of silence and violate the basic right of privilege against self-incrimination under the protection of constitutional law. Based on exclusionary rule and constitution law, the results of polygraph should be considered to have no evidentiary effect, and the polygraph should be, at most, a reference of criminal investigation; under these considerations, the privilege of silence proved by criminal litigation law and violate the right of privilege against self-incrimination under the protection of constitutional law.
|
|---|
