Discussing UK law. Links: swarb.co.uk | law-index | Acts | Members Image galleries

Instructing jurors about bodylanguage

Instructing jurors about bodylanguage

Postby megaman » Wed Feb 08, 2017 8:16 pm

Studies have repeatedly shown that it is not possible to determine if someone is lying based on bodylanguage, demenour, facial expressions, tone of voice ect.

Yet I have seen barristers making comments about eye contact, fidgeting and a range of other behavior and telling the jury that it means a person is lying.

Are there any rules against this sort of thing
What should a barrister do if the other side try to make such a claim.
megaman
 
Posts: 136
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 8:55 pm

Re: Instructing juroros about bodylanguage

Postby Hairyloon » Wed Feb 08, 2017 8:48 pm

Stephen Fry made mention of research suggesting that people are, on the whole much better at detecting lies if they cannot see the person who is lying.

Sorry, I don't know the answer to your question.
Take me to your lizard...
User avatar
Hairyloon
 
Posts: 9562
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: From there to here and here to there... Funny things are everywhere.

Re: Instructing jurors about body language

Postby atticus » Wed Feb 08, 2017 9:06 pm

Judges can give directions to the jury.
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 19027
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

Re: Instructing jurors about bodylanguage

Postby 3.14 » Wed Feb 08, 2017 9:09 pm

megaman wrote:Studies have repeatedly shown that it is not possible to determine if someone is lying based on bodylanguage, demenour, facial expressions, tone of voice ect.
Please cite the studies.
Hide in the noise. #hackerwisdom
User avatar
3.14
 
Posts: 2074
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 2:58 pm

Re: Instructing jurors about bodylanguage

Postby Hairyloon » Wed Feb 08, 2017 11:36 pm

3.14 wrote:
megaman wrote:Studies have repeatedly shown that it is not possible to determine if someone is lying based on bodylanguage, demenour, facial expressions, tone of voice ect.
Please cite the studies.

I'm sure that is not meant to be as confrontational as it sounds to me...
Take me to your lizard...
User avatar
Hairyloon
 
Posts: 9562
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: From there to here and here to there... Funny things are everywhere.

Re: Instructing jurors about bodylanguage

Postby 3.14 » Wed Feb 08, 2017 11:54 pm

Hairyloon wrote:I'm sure that is not meant to be as confrontational as it sounds to me...
'Sounds' Does your computer read out loud to you?
Hide in the noise. #hackerwisdom
User avatar
3.14
 
Posts: 2074
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 2:58 pm

Re: Instructing jurors about bodylanguage

Postby Smouldering Stoat » Thu Feb 09, 2017 5:48 am

It reads like a polite request to me. I would also be interested to read these studies.
Smouldering Stoat
 
Posts: 6177
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 6:31 pm
Location: Near the Creek.

Re: Instructing jurors about bodylanguage

Postby megaman » Thu Feb 09, 2017 9:47 am

3.14 wrote:
megaman wrote:Studies have repeatedly shown that it is not possible to determine if someone is lying based on bodylanguage, demenour, facial expressions, tone of voice ect.
Please cite the studies.


Here is one

http://eprints.port.ac.uk/23/1/SAMJAP.pdf

I will cite more when i get time to look up the links (most likely at the weekend)

For now note the following points from this study

The following are a selection of relevant quotes which i have found inside this study.
The show that bodylanguage is irrelevant to detecting lies and that story cues are much more reliable ways to detect lies)

In a review of all the literature available at the time, Kraut (1980) found an
accuracy rate (percentage of correct answers) of 57%, which is a low score since 50%
accuracy can be expected by chance alone. (Guessing whether someone is lying or not gives
a 50% chance of being correct).

Vrij (2000a) reviewed a further 39 studies which were published after 1980 (the year of Kraut's publication) and found an almost identical accuracy
rate of 56.6%.

In a minority of studies, accuracy in detecting lies was computed separately
from accuracy in detecting truth. Where this did occur, results show a truth-bias, that is,
judges are more likely to consider that messages are truthful than deceptive and, as a result,
truthful messages are identified with relatively high accuracy (67%) and deceptive messages
with relatively low accuracy (44%). In fact, 44% is below the level of chance, and people
would be more accurate at detecting lies if they simply guessed.


The majority of police officers claimed that looking at gaze is a useful tool to detect
deceit. This discovery was in agreement with previous findings (Akehurst et al., 1996; Vrij &
Semin, 1996). On the one hand, this finding is surprising given the fact that deception
research has convincingly demonstrated that gaze behavior is not related to deception
(DePaulo et al., 2003; Vrij, 2000a).
Neither was gaze related to deception in the present
stimulus material (Mann et al., 2002). On the other hand, this finding is not so surprising
given the fact that police manuals, including Inbau's manual which is widely used, claim that
suspects typically show gaze aversion when they lie (Gordon & Fleisher, 2002; Hess, 1997;
Inbau et al. 1986/2001). In other words, police officers are taught to look for these incorrect
cues.


Several (modest) relationships occurred between cues mentioned by the officers as
useful to detect deceit and their accuracy in truth and lie detection. First, good lie detectors
mentioned story cues more often than poor lie detectors. Second, the more popular
stereotypical belief cues participants mentioned (gaze, fidget and self manipulations), and the
Detecting true lies
21
more they endorsed Inbau's view on cues to deception (liars show gaze aversion, display
unnatural posture changes, exhibit self manipulations and place the hand over the mouth or
eyes when speaking), the worse they became at distinguishing between truths and lies. In
other words, looking at Inbau et al.'s (1986/2001) cues is counterproductive. This is not
surprising as deception research has not supported Inbau's views (DePaulo et al., 2003; Vrij,
2000a). Female participants claimed to look more at Inbau cues than male participants, which
might explain why female participants were poorer at detecting truths than male participants.
megaman
 
Posts: 136
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 8:55 pm

Re: Instructing jurors about bodylanguage

Postby shootist » Thu Feb 09, 2017 12:26 pm

3.14 wrote:
Hairyloon wrote:I'm sure that is not meant to be as confrontational as it sounds to me...
'Sounds' Does your computer read out loud to you?


It may well do if he's blind.
"I do not agree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death my right to be offended by it."
User avatar
shootist
 
Posts: 3316
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 9:40 pm

Re: Instructing jurors about bodylanguage

Postby dls » Thu Feb 09, 2017 2:08 pm

There can be guidance given in particular circumstances where a judge feels it necessary, but there will not be general guidance of the sort you seek. We can share to some extent your doubts, but not accept that those doubts reach such a stage of certainty as to warrant a judicial direction.

Courts can be quite forgiving toward defendants for certain sorts of behaviour. The point about a jury is that they are making a real world assessment of all involved.

Some years ago, there were several large scale prosecutions alleging fraud. Juries kept dismissing the charges. Prosecutors called for abandonment of juries for such things. of course there were different and very particular factors for each case, but, and generalising, the theme which emerged was that an essential common element of the cases was that dishonesty was alleged, and the juries did not see it in the defendants. What they saw instead were bullies acting as prosecutors.

The 'real world' assessments can work both ways.
David Swarbrick (Admin) dswarb@gmail.com - 0795 457 9992
User avatar
dls
Site Admin
 
Posts: 11917
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 1:35 pm
Location: Brighouse, West Yorkshire

Next

Return to Other Law

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest