Frye Case

The case Frye V. The United States dealt with the admissibility of the systolic blood pressure test or better known as a lie detector test in court. Frye was convicted of murder in the second degree when he made the request to take the test and call an expert witness to read the test at his appeal. The test was to tell if he was telling the truth about the murder by monitoring his systolic blood pressure. If he was lying then his blood pressure would go up and if he was telling the truth it would start high and then gradually go down.
The court denied his request to use the test in the murder case. The courts decided that the evidence was not a reliable source to be used. They concluded that the evidence was still being used as experimental and not yet scientifically sound to use as evidence. During the case Frye V. The United States it developed the Frye Standard. The Frye Standard states that any evidence that is being question has to be generally acknowledged by the scientific society. Meaning that this test has to be accepted by the majority of the scientific world to be permissible in court.
The Frye Standard is the important principle that has come out of this case because it is still used in society today. This method is used …show more content…
They want to thoroughly look at the scene before anyone comes in and compromises anything. When people come into the scene like investigators or patrolmen the scene will no longer be exactly like it was when the person committed the crime. Something could be touched or moved by accident and any physical evidence could be compromised or disturbed to the point where you can’t use that piece of evidence anymore. Everything needs to be properly documented and collected to be able to use it while looking for the perpetrator. If this isn’t done correctly then the case could be dismissed in court and the perpetrator may go free on a