In this case, ____________________
of _______________________________ was called as an expert in the
administration and evaluation of polygraph or lie-detector tests. Particularly in regard to a polygraph test
(he/she) administered to the defendant, __________________ on
_________________.
Neither the State nor the defendant
may offer in evidence the results of a polygraph test administered to the
defendant. The results of such test are
not considered as conclusive under the law.
However, where the State and the
defendant agree before trial to the administering of a polygraph test to the
defendant, and also agree that either party may offer in evidence at the trial the results of that test, whether
favorable or unfavorable, then the opinion of the expert who administered the
test as to the results of that test are admissible in evidence. In this case, both sides have so agreed and
the results have been presented in evidence to you.
I instruct you that the expert's
opinion testimony as to the results of his examination does not by itself prove
any element of the crime charged under the indictment, but merely indicates
that at the time he questioned the defendant, in his expert opinion, the
defendant was not answering truthfully the relevant questions asked.[2]
However, you are not bound by this
expert opinion. You should consider this
opinion, but it is for you to determine what weight to give to this evidence,
whether that be great or slight, or you may reject it. In examining this opinion, you may consider
the reasons given for it, if any, and you may also consider the expert's
qualifications and credibility.
It is always within the special
function of the jury to decide whether the facts on which the answer of an
expert is based actually exist, and the value or weight of the opinion of the
expert is dependent upon and no stronger than the facts on which it is
predicated.
Depending upon your decision as to
the credibility and weight to give the evidence, after considering the
polygraph evidence along with all of the other evidence, if you are convinced
that the State has proven all of the elements of the crime charged beyond a
reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant guilty. If, on the other hand, the State has failed
to prove any element beyond a reasonable doubt, you must find the defendant not
guilty. (You should consider each charge
or count of the indictment separately.)