In the absence of constitutional objections or other policy reasons, and assuming the validity of the polygraph technique, each issue of admissibility of polygraph evidence should be a balancing test whereby the court weighs the probative value against the dangers of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury and other considerations of undue delay, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence. While a court will thus be free to find the polygraph evidence needless or prejudicial, it seems more likely that the court would be inclined to admit the evidence once the probative value has been established. Requirements for a finding of probative value can be defined so as to dispel some of the most commonly raised objections to admissibility. Similarly, rules controlling when and by whom polygraph testimony may be admitted will avoid its overuse and may overcome fears that reliance on it will replace the jury system as the arbiter of guilt or innocence. The use of videotape of all polygraph examinations administered, including the giving of pretest warnings and the pretest interview, will provide answers to a great many objections to admissibility, foremost of which have been the inability to replicate the test and the lack of a basis from which to demonstrate the expert's conclusions. A total of 247 footnotes are listed. (Author summary modified)