Abstract:
Brain fingerprinting is a forensic science technique that uses electroencephalography to determine whether specific information is stored in a subject's brain by measuring electrical brainwaves and recording a brain response known as a P300-MERMER (memory and encoding related multifaceted electroencephalographic response) in response to words, phrases, or pictures that are presented on a computer screen. The hypothesis is that the brain processes known and relevant information differently from the way it processes unknown or irrelevant information. The brain’s processing of known information ,such as the details of a crime stored in the brain ,is revealed by a specific pattern in the EEG. Farwell’s brain fingerprinting originally…show more content… It does not detect how that information is stored in the subject’s brain. It does not detect how that information got there. This fact has implications for how and when the technique can be applied. In case where a suspect claims not to have been at the crime scene and has no legitimate reason for knowing the details of the crime and investigators have information that has not been related to the public, brain fingerprinting can determine objectively whether or not the subject possesses that information. In such a case ,brain finger printing can provide useful evidence. If however the suspect knows everything that the investigators know about the crime for some legitimate reason, then the test cannot be applied. There are several circumstances in which this may be the case. If a suspect acknowledges being at the scene of the crime, but claims to be a witness and not a perpetator,then the fact that he knows details about the crime would not be incriminating. There would be no reason to conduct a test, because the resulting “information present” response would simply show that the suspect knew the details about the crime-knowledge which he already admits and which he gained at the crime scene whether he was a witness or a perpetrator. Another case where this cannot be applicable would be one were in a suspect and an alleged victim-say, of an alleged sexual assault-agree on the details of what was said and done ,but disagree about on the intent of the parties. This brain fingerprinting detects only information and not intent. The fact that the suspect knows the uncontested facts of the circumstance does not tell us which party’s version of the intent is
