Expert Opinion based on Evidence from Forensic Hypnosis and Lie-detection

  • Lionel R. C. Haward
Part of the Oxford Socio-Legal Studies book series (OSLS)


Truth drugs, hypnosis and the polygraph are three techniques which share a common application and engender similar problems. They are used to elicit information which cannot be obtained by more orthodox means. So effective can these techniques fie that they are specifically proscribed in the USA in cases where the person concerned possesses classified information (e.g. Air Force Regulations 127–4: Section C. 12A). Such techniques are viewed by some as latter-day equivalents of the rack and thumbscrew of less happier times. Others see them as civilised alternatives to the rubber truncheon and genital electrodes employed in less democratic regimes. This paper is not concerned with the moral issues raised by the use of these techniques, important though these issues are: rather, attention is drawn to the nature of the information so obtained and the way such information is used.


Police Officer Rape Victim Legal Context Expert Evidence Forensic Psychologist 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. A. Ås, ‘Recovery of forgotten language through age-regression’, American Journal of Hypnosis, 5 (1962) 24–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. BAAS Science and the Police (London: British Association for the Advancement of Science, 1974).Google Scholar
  3. H. Brown, Advanced Suggestion (London: Bailliere, Tindall and Cox, 1918).Google Scholar
  4. W.J. Bryan, Legal Aspects of Hypnosis (Springfield, Ill.: Thomas, 1962).Google Scholar
  5. H. B. Gibson and M. E. Corcoran, ‘Hypnotic susceptibility in relation to personality, lying and sex’, Bulletin of the British Psychological Society, 28 (1975) 232–42.Google Scholar
  6. G. Gulotta, ‘Psychoanalysis and criminal responsibility’, (Milan: Giuffre Editore, 1976).Google Scholar
  7. A. Kennedy, ‘Medical use of hypnotism’, British Medical Journal, (1) (1957) 1317–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. J. F. Kubis, ‘Instrumental, chemical and psychological aids to the interrogation of witnesses’, Journal of Social Issues, 13 (1957) 40–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. S. S. Levy, ‘Hypnosis and legal immutability’, Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 46 (1855) 333–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. D. T. Lykken, ‘Psychology and the lie detection industry’, American Psychologist, 29 (1974) 725.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. R. Mikesell, ‘Hypnosis in the Conrey murder case’, Hypnosis Quarterly, 5 (1952) 1.Google Scholar
  12. H. Münsterberg, Psychology and Crime (London: T. Fisher Unwin, 1909).Google Scholar
  13. R. Reiff and M. Scheerer, Memory and Hypnotic Age-Regression (New York: International University Press, 1960).Google Scholar
  14. J. H. Skolnick, ‘Scientific theory and scientific evidence: analysis of lie-detection’, Yale Law Journal, 70 (1961) 695–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. J. Ungerman, ‘Admissibility of scientific evidence — tactograph’, South Western Law Journal, 14 (1959) 113.Google Scholar
  16. P. Watson, ‘Finding the bombers by hypnosis’, Sunday Times, 8th December 1974.Google Scholar
  17. L. Wolberg, Hypno-analysis (New York: Grune and Stratton, 1945).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Lionel R. C. Haward 1981

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lionel R. C. Haward

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations