Detecting deceit during trials: limits in the implementation of lie detection research - a comment on Snook, McCardle, Fahmy and House

In their 2017 paper Assessing Truthfulness on the Witness Stand: Eradicating Deeply Rooted Pseudoscientific Beliefs about Credibility Assessment by Triers of Fact, Snook, McCardle, Fahmy and House (“Snook et al.”) conclude that the Supreme Court of Canada’s position regarding the use of nonverbal communication for credibility assessment by trial judges is unfounded. However, due to the fact that they did not consider distinctive characteristics of trials as well as additional research into nonverbal communication and deception detection, we argue that using Snook et al. to refute the position of Canada’s highest court on the importance of nonverbal communication during trials is unwarranted. Trial judges should not underestimate the importance of nonverbal communication in courtrooms based on Snook et al.