Reply To: Brain-based fact or interrogator’s fiction?

#8040
Avatar
Laura

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
NEWNAN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
v.
LAURA CHAPMAN,
Defendant.

NO. 3: 1O-CR-001-R WS

ORDER

An issue has arisen regarding a requirement that Defendant submit to a specific incident polygraph as part of her treatment at Highland Institute. Defendant has objected to the polygraph out of concern that she may be asked about incidents outside the conduct about which she has pled guilty. She wishes to protect her right not to incriminate herself. However, the Highland Institute has indicated that she may not continue her treatment, which is a condition of her supervision, if she does not submit to the polygraph. The Court finds that it would be improper to order Defendant to incriminate herself as a part of her treatment. The undersigned recognizes that this may compromise the treatment plan for Defendant. However, the constitutional rights of the Defendant take priority in this circumstance. Therefore, Defendant is not required to answer questions in a polygraph examination concerning incidents about which she has not pied guilty. If this ruling disqualifies her from treatment at the Highland Institute, then an alternative treatment program will need to be found or the case will need to be brought back before the Court for further consideration.

SO ORDERED this day of November, 2016.
‘Richard Story
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE