Blog Editor


  • Copyright 2005-20012 by Adam Kolber
    All rights reserved.

« fMRI and End-of-Life Decisionmaking | Main | Lawrence Farwell Responds at the Neuroethics & Law Blog »


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.

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.

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.

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 :)

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?

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.

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

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.

The comments to this entry are closed.