h a l f b a k e r yNot so much a thought experiment as a single neuron misfire.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
This Idea is for all those who are scooped up by Law
Enforcement,
who
claim they are innocent, but there is difficulty verifying the
alibi.
Under hypnosis an innocent person can recall all sorts of
verifiable
details, regarding where he or she was, besides being at the
scene
of
the
crime.
Note such hypnosis must be voluntary not mandatory, due to the
right to avoid self-incrimination. Logically, though, innocent
persons should be quite willing to be hypnotized, unless guilty of
some OTHER crime at the relevant date and time. Perhaps the
hypnotist needs to be a "3rd party", such that if some other
crime is revealed, the confession of that crime can remain
sealed, while the hypnotist can verify that the accused is in
fact innocent of the crime for which the arrest was made.
What about this guy?
http://www.latimes....20140623-story.html
what about him? [2 fries shy of a happy meal, May 12 2015]
Please log in.
If you're not logged in,
you can see what this page
looks like, but you will
not be able to add anything.
Destination URL.
E.g., https://www.coffee.com/
Description (displayed with the short name and URL.)
|
| |
[Vernon], please tell my why you came up with this idea. |
|
| |
Please tell me why you came up with this idea. |
|
| |
Please tell me why you... |
|
| |
(you are becoming very sleepy...) |
|
| |
[normzone], certainly. I was contemplating the data
indicating that most crimes are committed by about 2%
of the population, and that the death penalty often
does tend to inhibit would-be criminals. The problem
with simply executing that 2% of the population is that
some percentage of those currently "serving time" are
actually innocent. |
|
| |
Therefore, how might the justice system be improved to
make it more likely that innocent persons will NOT get
convicted? This Idea seemed to offer a possibility. |
|
| |
Now, I am aware that it is known that an unscrupulous
hypnotist can guide a session toward a nefarious end.
That means we need the "3rd party" in the main text to
be more than one hypnotist, making sure that the
session is conducted as Objectively as possible. |
|
| |
[Vernon] Are you sure you won't be introducing a case within a case? Two sets of juries. Scientific facts even can be contentious. |
|
| |
Aren't there some folks who can't be hypnotised? Would it even be possible to tell if someone was faking it? |
|
| |
The secret to hypnosis, is making the subject
believe in hypnosis. There are some types of mini-
hypno techniques that take advantage of cognitive
functions and kind of 'jam' them - but the "get on
stage and act like a chicken" style of hypnosis is
more about being given permission to be silly
rather than anything special.
There's probably something to calming the mind
before trying to remember past events, and the
relaxation-techniques normally associated with
hypnosis might help here - but I wouldn't say it
was real or reliable evidentially.
|
|
| |
So... we shouldn't throw out the sodium pentothal quite yet is what your saying. |
|
| |
[zen tom], did you miss the part of the original text that
indicated that hypnosis might dredge up some VERIFIABLE
data about where the innocent person was or was doing, at
the time of the crime? |
|
| |
The only problem I can see with this is that if
someone fails to respond to hypnosis, it would imply
(falsely, perhaps) that they were guilty. |
|
| |
[MaxwellBuchanan], if this Idea can REDUCE the rate at
which innocent persons are convicted, that alone should be
a valid reason to implement it. And it is well-known that
not everyone can be hypnotized. Therefore, that should
not count against anyone. The detectives would simply
need to try harder, to either prove the accused was guilty,
or to prove the accused was innocent --just as they are
SUPPOSED to do already. |
|
| |
"When you awake, you will hypnotize the witness from a neutral stance and not try to influence his testimony in any way..." |
|
| |
Now that you've drawn my attention to it, I accept, it's
clearer than before - but that still leaves the body of my
points intact - i.e. all but the part about relaxation-
techniques helping people relive/recall events they might
otherwise feel levels of stress over - but I don't think
that's anything different than someone talking to you
gently and calmly and building trust that way. Yes, that's
one way of defining hypnosis, but it's important to clear
the decks of all the remaining "you are getting sleepy"
Mesmirism baggage - it was after-all invented as a
parlour-trick/stage-show by the same Victorians who
brought you spiritualism and the ouija-board. |
|
| |
[zt] I'm skeptical, but I have been put into a very light trancelike state, by a hypnotist doing his stuff on stage in a club. It was noticeably different from simply "calm and relaxed". I had just arrived, so prodigious amounts of alcohol wasn't a factor. |
|
| |
//This Idea is for all those who are scooped up by Law Enforcement//
That's a touchingly sentimental image of law enforcement there, Vernon! |
|
| |
[FT] it's not an experience I've had - though I must admit to
being curious - however, I think I may have spoiled it for
myself having arrived at the conclusion described above -
that doesn't mean it doesn't work, or isn't real, just that it
may be a subjective experience that relies on a fair amount
of psychology - a psychology that many of us share, but
which might not be universal. |
|
| |