| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"stoney" |
| Date: |
26 Apr 2004 02:17:05 PM |
| Object: |
OT: Shades of Zardoz |
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1202765,00.html
It's the thought that counts for the guilty
Robin McKie, science editor
Sunday April 25, 2004
The Observer
You have just been arrested for robbing a shop with a shotgun and
dragged to the local police station. A sergeant takes a cloth helmet
bristling with electrodes and pulls it over your head. Pictures of the
crime scene are flashed before you on a computer screen: an image of the
shopkeeper victim; a picture of a man standing in the store; a photo of
the gun used in the hold-up.
You remain silent - but to no avail, for your brain has already revealed
your complicity by emitting tiny electrical signals as each image
matches your own memories of the robbery that you recently committed.
It sounds fantastic. Nevertheless, such scenes have already been played
out in lawyers' offices and police stations in America as the fledgling
technique of brain fingerprinting has been introduced to solve crimes.
Success suggests that in the near future criminals may betray their
guilt - not through physical evidence but through their own unconscious
thoughts.
'People remember the major events in their life, even a serial killer,'
said Lawrence Farwell, the inventor of brain fingerprinting. 'That tends
to have a solid record in the brain.'
Unlike discredited lie-detecting techniques, which measure changes in
breathing, heart rate and other variables to determine if suspects are
trying to deceive their interrogators, brain fingerprinting is designed
to discover if specific information is stored in a person's brain. The
technique exploits the fact that the brain emits an electrical signal
known as a P300 exactly 300 milliseconds after it is confronted with a
stimulus that has special significance to that individual - for example,
a victim's face.
'The fundamental difference between the perpetrator of a crime and an
innocent person is that the former has the details of it stored in his
brain,' added Farwell. 'The innocent suspect does not.'
Thus a robber will inadvertently emit a P300 signal - which can be
picked up using electrodes fitted to his skull - when shown an image of
his victim or the gun he used to rob him. An innocent person who has
never met the victim or used a gun will not emit such signal.
Farwell told The Observer he had already used the technique with total
success in mock crimes created using FBI agents in order to reveal those
who possessed knowledge hidden from others. He believes the technique
could have vital criminal and security uses. A terrorist attempting to
hijack and crash a jumbo jet would reveal his intent through his
reactions to photographs of aircraft cockpits, for example.
Farwell - who has received substantial US government backing - has now
set up his own company, Brain Fingerprinting Laboratories, to market the
technique, though his technology is not without critics.
Prof Peter Rosenfeld, of Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois,
believes that not enough attention has been paid to factors that could
distort the outcomes of brain fingerprint profiles. Memories change over
time, as he points out. And it could be discovered that psychopaths have
very different responses than others. 'It will take a substantial amount
of research before this is ready,' Rosenfeld told the journal Nature.
Nevertheless, brain fingerprinting has already claimed several legal
successes, including the case of Terry Harrington who was given a life
sentence after being convicted of a night watchman's murder in Iowa in
1978. Farwell showed Harrington's electronic brain patterns were not
consistent with someone who had been present at the crime scene. The
evidence was rated as admissible at a post-conviction hearing and played
a key role in having Harrington freed late last year.
But now brain fingerprinting faces its most controversial case. A few
weeks ago, Farwell used his technique to show that Jimmy Ray Slaughter -
convicted and sentenced to death for the murder of his daughter Jessica
and his partner Melody - lacked any knowledge of key details about the
crime scene, including the positions of the victims' bodies.
Nevertheless, prosecutors last month asked the Oklahoma Court of
Criminal Appeals to set an execution date for Slaughter. Brain
fingerprinting is now expected to play a key role in attempts to block
his execution.
(c) 2004 The Guardian
Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"
When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert
alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}
.
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
