Brain-Based Lie Detection Leads to Murder Conviction in India

According to this article in the Herald Tribune, a woman in India was convicted of murder on the basis of what is purported to be a brain-based method of lie detection:

The various technologies, generally regarded as promising but unproved, have yet to be widely accepted as evidence - except in India, where in recent years judges have begun to admit brain scans. But it was only in June, in a murder case in Pune, in Maharashtra State, that a judge explicitly cited a scan as proof that the suspect's brain held ''experiential knowledge'' about the crime that only the killer could possess, sentencing her to life in prison.

The test was based on electroencephalography and appears to be related to so-called "brain fingerprinting"  technology developed by Lawrence Farwell in the United States.  (The article refers to the "brain images" generated from the technique, though I don't think EEG provides the sort of information that we would ordinarily think of as a "brain image").

Here's some more:

Here in Maharashtra, about 75 crime suspects and witnesses have undergone the test since late 2006. But the technique received its strongest official endorsement, forensic investigators here say, on June 12, when a judge convicted a woman of murder based on evidence that included polygraph and BEOS tests [the purported brain-based lie detection tests  -AK].

  The woman, Aditi Sharma, 24, was accused of killing her former fiancé, Udit Bharati. They were living in Pune when Sharma met another man and eloped with him to Delhi. Months later, Sharma returned to Pune and, according to prosecutors, asked Bharati to meet her at a McDonald's. She was accused of poisoning him with arsenic-laced food.

  Sharma agreed to take a BEOS test in Mumbai, the capital of Maharashtra.

  After placing 32 electrodes on Sharma's head, investigators said, they read aloud their version of events, making such first-person statements as ''I bought arsenic'' and ''I met Udit at McDonald's,'' along with neutral statements like ''The sky is blue,'' which help the software distinguish actual remembrance from normal cognition.

  For an hour, Sharma said nothing. But the relevant nooks of her brain where memories are thought to be stored buzzed when the crime was recounted, according to Joseph, the state investigator. The judge endorsed Joseph's assertion that the scans were proof of ''experiential knowledge'' of having committed the murder, rather than just having heard about it. In the only other significant judicial statement on BEOS, a judge in 2006 in Gujarat denied the test the status of ''concluded proof,'' but wrote that it corroborated already solid evidence from other sources.

  In any event, what do neuroscientists in the U.S. think of the technique?  Here's a good summary:

After passing an 18-page promotional dossier about the BEOS test to a few of his colleagues, Michael Gazzaniga, a neuroscientist and director of the SAGE Center for the Study of the Mind at the University of California, Santa Barbara, said: ''Well, the experts all agree. This work is shaky at best.''

Indeed!  The thought that such a technology could play a significant role in sending someone to prison for life, before the technology has been proven effective in peer-reviewed journals, is very troubling.

(Originally posted at Prawfsblawg)

(Hat tip: Emily Murphy)

Comments

[Dr. Lawrence A. Farwell]

You stated: "The test ... appears to be related to so-called 'brain fingerprinting' technology developed by Lawrence Farwell in the United States."
I agree that the test "appears to be related" to the Brain Fingerprinting technology which I invented, but even from the brief description in the newspaper it is clear that what they actually are doing in India bears very little resemblance to the technique that I use here. I have been to India, and I am aware of what they are doing there in this field. I agree with Michael Gazzaniga's assessment that the referenced work in India is "shaky at best."
Brain Fingerprinting as practiced by myself and colleagues, however, is entirely different. Brain Fingerprinting has been published in the best peer-reviewed journals in the fields of psychophysiology and forensic science; tested at the FBI, CIA, US Navy and elsewhere; shown to be over 99% accurate when properly applied; and ruled admissible as scientific evidence in court.
Brain Fingerprinting was instrumental in exonerating Terry Harrington, who was released after he had served 23 years of a life sentence for murder. Brain Fingerprinting was also instrumental in obtaining a guilty plea and confession from serial killer JB Grinder, who is now in prison for life.
The situation in India illustrates the dangers of new science and technology. Brain Fingerprinting, when properly applied according to the necessary scientific protocols, is highly accurate and can be a useful tool for exonerating innocent suspects and identifying the guilty. Brainwave-based techniques such as those practiced in India -- which lack the necessary scientific rigor and established track record of accuracy that Brain Fingerprinting has -- do indeed constitute a threat to human rights and flaw in the criminal justice system.

[Thomas]

It is not surprising that a quack scientist like "Dr". Lawerence Farwell would find other technologies "shaky".
It is public knowledge that Brain Fingerprinting has been rejected by the FBI, as documented by them.

http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/polygraph/brainfinger.pdf

Brain Fingerprinting is based on the silly P300 waveform, that can be monitored in any school lab.
To claim it is an invention has taken a crafty salesman an amazing amount of courage.
"Dr". Lawerence Farwell should be given an award for being such a good con job.
Perfect material for the 24x7 shopping channels.

The court rejected Brain Fingerprinting in the Terri Harrington case.
It is very easy to claim otherwise on a website.
Read the actual court proceedings to see how the court rejected BrainFingerprinting
saying that the response of the Brain to words like Grass, and Knife
cannot be construed as guilt or innocence.
http://truth.boisestate.edu/polygraph/Farwell.html

The interesting part of this court hearing is that "Dr" Lawerence Farwell did not even
qualify as an expert witness.

An ex real estate agent who has qualified his work experience in Maharishi International University
which specializes in "science of creative intelligence" must be good.

"Dr". Lawerence Farwell claims Brain Fingerprinting has been extensively Peer reviewed,
but not a single paper is available. It is easy to claim things on a HTML page.

BrainWaveScience is a company with 1 employee. "Dr" Lawrence Farwell.
Should we take inspiration from a Scientist/real estate agent who created so much so quickly.
Is there something wrong in this equation ?
Go figure :)

[tim]

someone plz help me answer thesr questions:

How does Brain Fingerprinting work?

When did this technique become used commonly?

Do many police departments use this technique?

What are the types of cases that it helps to solve?

What are the time frames associated with this technique being used?

What are some of the problems or drawbacks to this forensic technique?

[VA refinance]

I can not answer your question but im sure that there are not to many police dept that are using this. the sciience im sure has not been fully investigated.

[mac insleads]

Sounds more like science fiction to me, how can this be used as legal evidence?

[forensic]

Did you know they found arsenic in Aditi Sharma's hand bag :) That was never reported.
Her fiance died of arsenic poisoning, the day after she visited him in a city 1000 miles away from where she lived with her secretly wed husband.
Before dying her fiance told the doctors he ate a sweet given to him by Aditi. They found the same sweets laced with arsenic in her bag.
She left the city immediately the day after he was poisoned, and even registered in a hotel with her 'husband' under an alias for the night.
The evidence in the case was the arsenic that was found in her handbag in the same sweets, not some tests.
The interesting part is she is out on bail, cause some police officer forgot to sign on the individual evidences and instead sealed the whole handbag :)
You know how technicalities like conducting a search without a warrant work.
You can get away with murder if you can get the cops to make procedural mistakes.
Justice cooked and served.
Why don't these facts get reported.