Editing Truth serum (section)

=== United States ===
[[Hyoscine hydrobromide|Scopolamine]] was promoted by obstetrician Robert Ernest House as an advance that would prevent false convictions, beginning in 1922. He had noted that women in childbirth who were given scopolamine could answer questions accurately even while in a state of [[twilight sleep]], and were oftentimes "exceedingly candid" in their remarks. House proposed that scopolamine could be used when interrogating suspected criminals. He even arranged to administer scopolamine to prisoners in the [[Dallas County, Texas|Dallas County]] jail. Both men were believed to be guilty, both denied guilt under scopolamine, and both were eventually acquitted.<ref name=cia1961/> In 1926, the use of scopolamine was rejected in a court case, by Judge Robert Walker Franklin, who questioned both its scientific origin, and the uncertainty of its effect.<ref name="Winter"/><ref name="Rinde"/>

The United States [[Office of Strategic Services]] (OSS) experimented with the use of [[mescaline]], [[scopolamine]], and [[marijuana]] as possible truth drugs during [[World War II]]. They concluded that the effects were not much different from those of [[alcohol (drug)|alcohol]]: subjects became more talkative but that did not mean they were more truthful. Like [[hypnosis]], there were also issues of suggestibility and interviewer influence. Cases involving scopolamine resulted in a mixture of testimonies both for and against those suspected, at times directly contradicting each other.<ref name="Rinde"/><ref name="Lee"/>

[[LSD]] was also considered as a possible truth serum, but found unreliable.<ref name="Rinde"/> During the 1950s and 1960s, the United States [[Central Intelligence Agency]] (CIA) carried out a number of investigations including [[Project MKUltra]]<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2013/09/one-shocking-cia-programs-time-project-mkultra/|title=One of the Most Shocking CIA Programs of All Time: Project MKUltra|date=2013-09-23|language=en-US|access-date=2016-08-18}}</ref> and [[Project MKDELTA]]{{cn|date=December 2023}}, which involved illegal use of truth drugs including LSD.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://archive.org/stream/finalreportofsel01unit#page/390/mode/2up |title=Final report of the Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities, United States Senate: together with additional, supplemental, and separate views |year=1976 |access-date=2014-07-17}}</ref><ref name="Lee">{{cite book|last1=Lee|first1=Martin A.|last2=Shlain|first2=Bruce|title=Acid dreams: the complete social history of LSD: the CIA, the sixties, and beyond|date=1992|publisher=Grove Press|location=New York|isbn=978-0-8021-3062-4|edition=Rev. Evergreen|url=https://archive.org/details/aciddreamscomple00leem|url-access=registration}}</ref><ref name="Brown">{{cite news|last1=Brown|first1=David|title=Some Believe 'Truth Serums Will Come Back|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/19/AR2006111900891_pf.html|access-date=4 January 2017|newspaper=[[The Washington Post]]|agency=A08|date=20 November 2006}}</ref> A CIA report from 1961, released in 1993, concludes:

{{blockquote|The salient points that emerge from this discussion are the following. No such magic brew as the popular notion of truth serum exists. The barbiturates, by disrupting defensive patterns, may sometimes be helpful in interrogation, but even under the best conditions they will elicit an output contaminated by deception, fantasy, garbled speech, etc. A major vulnerability they produce in the subject is a tendency to believe he has revealed more than he has. It is possible, however, for both normal individuals and psychopaths to resist drug interrogation; it seems likely that any individual who can withstand ordinary intensive interrogation can hold out in narcosis. The best aid to a defense against narco-interrogation is foreknowledge of the process and its limitations. There is an acute need for controlled experimental studies of drug reaction, not only to depressants but also to stimulants and to combinations of depressants, stimulants, and ataraxics.<ref name="cia1961"/>}}

In 1963, the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] ruled, in ''[[Townsend v. Sain]]'', that confessions produced as a result of ingestion of truth serum were "unconstitutionally coerced" and therefore inadmissible.<ref>''Townsend'' v. ''Sain, Sheriff, et al.'', 372 U.S. 293, 307-308</ref> The viability of forensic evidence produced from truth sera has been addressed in lower courts – judges and expert witnesses have generally agreed that they are not reliable for lie detection.<ref>See for example {{cite court |litigants=State v. Pitts |vol=116 |reporter=N.J. |opinion=580 |court=The Supreme Court of New Jersey |date=1989 |url=http://www.leagle.com/xmlResult.aspx?page=27&xmldoc=1989696116NJ580_1669.xml&docbase=CSLWAR2-1986-2006&SizeDisp=7 |access-date=12 Mar 2013 |quote=Three experts ... agreed that sodium-amytal-induced interviews are not considered scientifically reliable for the purpose of ascertaining "truth."}}</ref>

In 1967, during his investigation into the [[assassination of President John F. Kennedy]], [[New Orleans]] District Attorney [[Jim Garrison]] arranged for his key witness, [[Perry Russo]], to be administered sodium pentothal before being questioned about his knowledge regarding an alleged [[John F. Kennedy assassination conspiracy theories|conspiracy]].<ref>[https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/docid-32136896.pdf JFK Assassination System] Archives.gov</ref> Russo would later describe "his conditioning by the DA's office as a complete brainwashing job."<ref>[http://www.jfk-online.com/russorecants.html Memo by Edward F. Wegmann of interview with Perry Russo], January 27, 1971.</ref>

In 1995, during the search for evidence that could acquit [[Andres English-Howard]], his defense attorney employed [[methohexital]].

More recently, a judge approved the use of narcoanalysis in the [[2012 Aurora, Colorado shooting]] trial to evaluate whether [[James Holmes (mass murderer)|James Eagan Holmes]]'s state of mind was valid for an [[Insanity defense|insanity plea]].<ref>{{cite news |title=Judge OKs medication for Colorado shooting suspect |author=P. Solomon Banda |author2=Dan Elliott |date=11 Mar 2013 |url=https://news.yahoo.com/judge-oks-medication-colorado-shooting-suspect-192015620.html |agency=[[Associated Press|AP]] |newspaper=[[Yahoo! News]]}}</ref> Judge William Sylvester ruled that prosecutors would be allowed to interrogate Holmes "under the influence of a medical drug designed to loosen him up and get him to talk", such as sodium amytal, if he filed an insanity plea.<ref name=guardian.co.uk/> The hope was that a 'narcoanalytic interview' could confirm whether or not he had been legally insane on 20 July, the date of the shootings.<ref name=guardian.co.uk>{{cite news|last=Pilkington|first=Ed|title=Judge approves use of 'truth serum' on accused Aurora shooter James Holmes|url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/mar/12/judge-approves-truth-serum-james-holmes|newspaper=The Guardian|date=12 March 2013}}</ref> It is not known whether such an examination was carried out.<ref name="Rinde"/>

William Shepherd, chair of the criminal justice section of the [[American Bar Association]], stated, with respect to the Holmes case, that use of a "truth drug" as proposed, "to ascertain the veracity of a defendant's plea of insanity... would provoke intense legal argument relating to Holmes's right to remain silent under the fifth amendment of the US constitution."<ref name="guardian.co.uk"/> Discussing possible effectiveness of such an examination, psychiatrist August Piper stated that "amytal's inhibition-lowering effects in no way prompt the subject to offer up true statements or memories."<ref name="salon.com">{{cite news|last1=Lennard|first1=Natasha|title=James Holmes and the ethics of "truth serum"|url=http://www.salon.com/2013/03/13/james_holmes_the_ethics_efficacy_of_truth_serum/|access-date=4 January 2017|work=Salon|date=March 13, 2013}}</ref> ''Psychology Today''{{'s}} Scott Linfield noted, as per Piper, that "there's good reason to believe that truth serums merely lower the threshold for reporting virtually all information, both true and false."<ref name="salon.com"/>