ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Legal Research Blogs -> Oregon Legal Research

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Legal Research

: Oregon Legal Research

Truth, Lies, Polygraphs, Constitutional Rights, Bernie Madoff (and the Oregon Court of Appeals)

ADVERTISEMENTS
Whew. The same week I?ve been thoroughly absorbed by the, what I can truly call thrilling, Harry Markopolos book, ?No One Would Listen,? about Markopolos? 8-year battle to get the SEC and others to listen to his warnings about Bernie Madoff, I bring you these two stories:

1) The April 22, 2010, OPB broadcast of The April 18th edition of Philosophy Talk on Lies Faces, Feelings, and Lies (blog post on the program). The April 18, 2010, program had guest Paul Ekman, author of "Telling Lies: Clues to Deceit in the Marketplace, Politics, and Marriage."

Professor Ekman teaches (free, online) a one-hour program on reading micro-expressions - and more!

2) And, on April 21, there was this Oregon Court of Appeals case: In the Matter of R. C., a Child. Department of Human Services, Petitioner-Respondent, v. K. L.R., Appellant. Brewer, C. J.

Excerpt from April 21, 2010, Media Release (or link to full case): "Mother appeals from a dispositional order in this juvenile case that requires that she complete a polygraph test. Parents stipulated to dependency jurisdiction over their child, a three-month-old who suffered multiple unexplained injuries. As part of the dispositional order, the trial court included a provision that each parent complete a polygraph test. The court explained that, if the parents were asked by the polygraph examiner how the injuries occurred "and they remain silent, then I guess the inference is whatever it is that the court can draw or the polygraph examiner can draw." Mother objected to the provision on the ground that it violated her right not to incriminate herself pursuant to the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Held: Requiring an admission of abuse as a condition of family reunification violates a parent's Fifth Amendment rights;...." (Link to 4/21/10 Media Release or full case.)

(OPB Radio airs Philosophy Talk on Thursdays, from 8-9 p.m.)

Full post as published by Oregon Legal Research on April 23, 2010 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Law Articles

Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0242 secs (new cache)