Terrorist ‘lie test’ plans defended
THE Justice Secretary has defended plans to make terrorists take a lie detector test to prove they have reformed and are not planning to carry out another attack.
Plans to introduce “polygraph testing” were announced by the Government as part of a wave of measures being described as a “major overhaul” in the way terrorists are punished and monitored – including tougher sentences to see them locked up for longer – in the wake of the London Bridge attack, where convicted terrorist Usman Khan embarked on a killing spree while out on licence.
When questions were raised over their accuracy, Robert Buckland insisted lie detectors were important to identify “sleepers” and that they will not be the only measure used.
He said: “You can get people who are in effect sleepers for many years and then suddenly back come the hatreds and the prejudices and we see atrocities like the one we did at Fishmongers’ Hall.”
Pressed on accuracy of the tests being as low as 60%, Mr Buckland said: “I’m not pretending on their own, polygraphs, lie detectors, are the be-all-and-end-all, which is why what we are also doing is doubling the number of specialised counter-terrorism probation officers... improving training, getting more psychologists in there, specialist imams as well will be working with these people.”
He said the proposal was “not a new concept”, with detectors introduced about seven years ago to assess the risk posed to the public by sex offenders.
He insisted it was a “sensible measure in order to help maximise the understanding of the risks that some of these prisoners pose to society” which would not form part of a criminal investigation or evidence used in court.
Some experts have questioned the credibility of polygraph tests, claiming there are ways of cheating to manipulate the results.
The British Psychological Society said polygraph testing had “inherent weaknesses” like all procedures, and error rates in deception detection “can be high”.
A spokeswoman said: “Error rates in polygraphic deception detection can be high and the procedure should not be ascribed a special status.
“Based on the available psychological evidence we must not deceive ourselves into thinking that there will ever be an error-free way of detecting deception.”
Professor Aldert Vrij, a senior lecturer in psychology at the University of Portsmouth who has written extensively on the subject, told the BBC in 2018: “It does not measure deception, which is the core problem.”
Others have suggested because taking the test is a stressful experience this could provide the wrong results by indicating an innocent person is lying.
The FBI reportedly asks new staff to submit to a test when they join, but according to the American Psychological Association “there is little evidence that polygraph tests can accurately detect lies”.