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.)