The Judicial Branch Court Support Services Division (JBCSSD) of the State of Connecticut recently released public information indicating the EyeDetect lie detection technology is now being used for assessment and testing by Adult Sex Offender Services on a multi-year plan beginning Jan. 1, 2021. The contract calls for the state to administer 2,300 EyeDetect and polygraph exams annually.
One Converus Service Partner based in Jacksonville, Florida, Dr. George Deitchman, an expert who has evaluated and treated sex offenders for 30+ years, a polygraph examiner since 2009 and an expert and trainer in the use of EyeDetect, has successfully used EyeDetect to test sex offenders in Florida since 2017.
“I’ve used EyeDetect with a number of clients to test for specific and maintenance issues, as well as sexual histories,” said Deitchman. “While traditionally we’ve used polygraph testing, the use of a pupillometry technology like EyeDetect — and its ability to measure subject physiological responses to test questions in an entirely different way — is helpful for some clients with extraneous movement or other testing issues. In addition, EyeDetect’s automation achieves similar or better results than other methods that require an examiner to do the testing and scoring.”
EyeDetect is even worse than a polygraph, the results of which are openly available. The raw digitized data are recorded and available to any authorized persons. Interpretations may vary, but the data are there. With EyeDetect, the data are sent to the company an analyzed by a proprietary algorithm for which no peer-reviewed accuracy studies are available.
The algorithm can be set to various levels of sensitivity. That allows for human bias, and probably means low sensitivity for law enforcement and maximum sensitivity for sex offenders. According to a company representative, the system “uses an eye tracker to record changes in pupil size along with about 100 other factors, including how fast you read the question and how fast you answer.” What are those 100 factors and how are they weighted in the algorithm? Sounds like smoke and mirrors to me.
Wired magazine published a useful article in 2018. It is worth reading for anyone interested in the subject. https://www.wired.com/story/eye-scanning-lie-detector-polygraph-forging-a-dystopian-future/
Veritas.
Ed
If they ever try and force me to do the eye test thing-ah-ma-bob, I am going to prepare for it before the test. I will simple do the Cheech and Chong “Up in Smoke” routine. My eyes will be so glazed over that they won’t read on the Rickter scale.
If they accuse me of being under the influence, I will cite the Native American act which states while on the reservation, we can partake in the Peyote. That is mostly used along the border towns as it is more of a Mexican tradition. HAHA
“EyeDetect’s automation achieves similar or better results than other methods”
PROVE IT! Where is the independent, peer-reviewed data to support that whopper?
This is how they hoodwink the easily swayed public: “We should focus on false narratives instead of reality.”
Facts should matter
I wonder what the total number of women was that had to die in the Salem witch trials before they realized they were all telling the truth. None of them were witches.
I have Aspergers, a high functioning form of Autism, so if they used this on me it would drive me crazy due to sensitivity to light. My body, my choice and I don’t want their junk science anywhere near my front/back yards. Instead of using cons to get people arrested, why not put the cons in the constitution. Anyway to make a buck while ethics be damned.
Georgia Attaches it to ones penis, no coeds allowed
I am sure that method is accurate and definitive for determining risk. Am I correct to presume that a man who has an erection upon seeing porn or nudity is deemed more likely to offend. What about those individuals with erectile dysfunction issues?
Talk about putting the “con” in CONnecticut! Next month they’ll be using tea leaf reading and Ouija boards.
I left a comment on that page about how EyeDetect is essentially the same as a polygraph, just recording a different but equally meaningless body function subject to interpretation. It has since been deleted. Interesting.
I do not know about the eye test thingy but I can tell you polygraphs are NOT accurate. I have taken over 40 polygraphs in my life (you have to take one for every law enforcement agency you apply for).
In once instance I was asked if I ever used cocaine. I had never even seen cocaine other than in movies. Didn’t get the job failed test. The next agency I was asked about marijuana usage. I said yes , I failed the test.
The next agency asked about marijuana usage, I said no(I had used it when I was younger) I passed.
It all depends on how nervous you are, if you are someone who always carries guilt around, if you are a hardened jerk with no emotions etc. Also If you have heart issues, a nervous tic, breathing problems and so on.
To base someone’s future on a polygraph result is paramount to insanity.
It depends more on the administrator. Polygraph results are predetermined more often than not.
And yet it is still inadmissable in Courts, go figure!!
Sc
Seems to me if you pass they do not want to bring it up. However if you fail, some prosecutors will sneak it into the conversation and then have it struck from the record. However, the jury cannot just erase what they heard from their memory drive.
Just odd that when I was a cop, everyone seemed to either catch a break on sentencing or get out of the charges completely. Then the one time I was accused of something, I somehow got the judge who sentenced Charles Manson.
Not mandated by statute. Refuse unless of course you are on probation because that will get you to jail.
Refusal won’t necessarily get you tossed in jail because anyone can claim the Fifth at anytime. See US v. Von Behren, 822 F.3d 1139 (10th Cir. 2016)
because anyone can claim the Fifth at anytime. Except registraints.