with things on automated lie detecters but the question is really what is this technology and the information it provides going to be used for? the ai companies are advertising this tech has life saving capabilities. it can help save lives by improving the times of rescue operations. alerting authorities to people in distress faster. but what we have found with this investigation is we looked into the deadliest incident ins the english channel last year. where four people died. and we found no evidence this technology was used. and we found it was part of the campaign of deterrents. have a watch of what we found. it is 3:00 in the morning on the 14th of december, 2022 in the middle of the english channel. a fisherman has spotted multiple people and tried to
have mercy. if there is an electrical chair and i m a suspect, give it to me right now. put me out of my misery. i want to die. shortly after 9:00 p.m., detective alison brought up the idea of a lie detector test. i take a hundred lie detecters. i do whatever you want me to do. at this point i m hoping i am completely wrong. if she passes, i m going crazy in my own head. there s no way she did this. may also agreed to be polygraphed but then narcy got cold feet about taking hers. and the daughter is saying to her mother, what is wrong with you? why don t you just take it? what s the problem? the mother finally agreed to the polygraph. may would pass her test but how did the lie detector test go for narcy? it didn t go well. she flunked it all the way through? yes. when the cops were finally
then she was asked whether lie detecters would be used to determine who is doing what. she said, well, they may. they may not. how likely would that tactic be employed, joey jackson? is there any legal red light you see going off? i see so many legal red lights. we are living in different times. i think what will happen to the broader issue is that this president, through his attorney general, will push this issue, i mean, as far as it can be pushed. let s be clear about something, obviously, the intent of even releasing information and saying, look, we re going after you now, is to deter it from occurring, right? in the event you don t want leaking, you have to serve notice that there will be action taken against the leakers. but then, of course, when you start talking about, okay, lie detecters, who is going to take the test? call in members of the press, your administration? it s not admissible in court. what is the theme to deter it? i think what we all need to
his boss, and they may come after me. the deterrent value is substantial, but it mostly deters the people getting and releasing the information, not the fine journalists who have an obligation to give the public information as to what s going on. okay. kellyann conway said it is easier to figure out who is leaking than the leakers may realize. when she was asked if lie detecters will be used to try to determine that in the white house, she said, well, they may. they may not. how likely is that tactic to be employed? yeah, this is outrageous, isn t it? if they have to go to that extent, it really says something. i have to say, i find jeff sessions comments outrageous. the veiled threat against journalists and the idea that he might go after them is just completely outrageous to me. if they re worried about leaks, maybe they should think about what the source of the problem is. i think anthony scaramucci, the