Polygraph Testing
Before the trial on 7 May 1997, Woodward decided to undergo a polygraph examination conducted by Dr David C. Raskin, a polygraph examiner hired by her own lawyers. During the course of this Woodward was asked questions about whether she caused injury to Matthew Eappen while he was in her care on 4 February 1997. Woodward denied having caused any injuries to Matthew Eappen, and Dr Raskin concluded that her answers to these questions were truthful to a confidence level of 95 percent. Dr Raskin's results were evaluated by Dr Charles Honts, another polygrapher hired by Woodward's defence lawyers, who also claimed that Woodward had answered truthfully when responding to relevant questions about whether she had injured Matthew.
The validity of the polygraph test was questioned, and expert witnesses testified, based on research conducted by Congress's independent Office of Technological Advancement, that the polygraph was inadmissible in court.
Read more about this topic: Louise Woodward Case
Famous quotes containing the word testing:
“Traditional scientific method has always been at the very best 20-20 hindsight. It’s good for seeing where you’ve been. It’s good for testing the truth of what you think you know, but it can’t tell you where you ought to go.”
—Robert M. Pirsig (b. 1928)