Lee v. Charlebois et al

Filing 12

ORDER denying 11 Request for Polygraph Test. Signed by Chief Judge Barbara B Crabb on 1/26/2009. (arw),(ps)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FO R THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN --------------------------------------------JOE LEE, P la i n t i f f , v. W ILL IAM CHARLEBOIS, Defendant. --------------------------------------------In an order entered in this case on December 12, 2008, I granted plaintiff Joe Lee leave to proceed in forma pauperis on his claim that defendant William Charlebois used excessive force against him during an arrest. On January 8. 2009, I denied plaintiff's motion for appointment of counsel because I concluded that he appears capable of prosecuting this law suit of minor complexity. Now, plaintiff has submitted a letter to which he has attached additional documentation of attorneys who have refused to represent him. This additional inform ation will be added to the record. Also, plaintiff advises the court that he may be transferred to Minnesota and that w hen he is he will notify the court of his new address. Finally, plaintiff asks that the court or d er that defendant submit to a polygraph test so that he can prove that defendant used excessive force against him. This request will be denied. It is plaintiff's responsibility, not ORDER 0 8 - cv -6 5 8 - b b c

the court's, to gather the evidence that he needs prove his claim. Even if plaintiff were to o btain defendant's agreement to take a polygraph test and to pay for the test, the results of th e test might not be admissible. United States v. Scheffler, 523 U.S. 303, 311 (1998) ("The lack of scientific consensus is reflected in the disagreement among state and federal cou rts concerning both the admissibility and the reliability of polygraph evidence"). Plaintiff sh ou ld consider carefully whether he wishes to pursue obtaining a polygraph test for defendan t.

OR DER IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff's request for an order requiring defendant William C harlebo is to take a polygraph test, dkt. # 11, is DENIED. E n tered this 26t h day of January, 2009. B Y THE COURT: /s/ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ B AR B AR A B. CRABB D istrict Judge