Mind Reader
Brain-Reading Technology Becomes New Tool in Courts
March 9— Now it may be impossible for even the best liars to conceal
their crimes.

Lawrence Farwell asks crime-related questions to Jimmy Ray Slaughter
as a computer looks for signals in his brain. Slaughter, a convicted
murderer on death row, is seeking exoneration.

The latest technology in forensic science uses details known only to
investigators and the criminal to prove a suspect's guilt or
innocence. Developed by Harvard-trained Lawrence Farwell, brain
fingerprinting uses brainwaves to measure what Farwell calls the "a-
ha" of recognition.

Traditional lie detectors rely on reading emotional reactions such as
sweating or heart rate as a suspect is asked questions. The problem
is that well-practiced liars can control these reactions before the
polygraph has a chance to detect them.

That's not a possibility in a brain fingerprint test, says Farwell,
chief scientist and founder of the Seattle, Washington-based Brain
Fingerprinting Laboratories.

Identifying `A-ha' in the Brain

During the test, the suspect wears a headband equipped with sensors
to measure activity in response to recognition of a word or image
relating to the crime in question. When the brain recognizes a word
or picture, it releases an involuntary wave that Farwell calls a P
300/MERMER (memory and encoding related multifaceted
electroencephalographic response). That's used to determine whether
suspects were ever at the scene of the crime.

"People remember the very major events in their life, even a serial
killer," says Farwell. "That tends to have a very solid record in the
brain."

The technology may sound like science fiction, but it has been tested
by the FBI and used as evidence in U.S. courts.

According to Farwell and his brain wave results, accused killer Terry
Harrington didn't have the details of the 1978 murder he was
convicted of stored in his brain. An Iowa judge allowed the new
technology into evidence in Herrington's appeal in 2003 — and now
he's a free man.

In Missouri, J.B. Grinder confessed and was sentenced to life in 1998
after Farwell's test revealed he did have special knowledge of the
1984 rape-murder of which he was accused.

Now Farwell's technology could exonerate Jimmy Ray Slaughter, a
convict on Oklahoma's death row for the murder of his ex-girlfriend
and their infant daughter.

Farwell tested Slaughter on details Slaughter claimed he didn't know.
When Farwell questioned Slaughter on the location of the bodies at
the murder scene and the position of the woman's body on the floor,
there was no brain wave of recognition.

The Supreme Court is due to issue a verdict soon on Slaughter's
appeal.

Farwell adds that brain fingerprinting could also be used to address
the controversial issue of repressed memories of sexual abuse by
testing those accused of the abuse.

Acceptance Too Swift?

This isn't the first time investigators have turned to advanced
technology to gauge a person's innocence. Researchers have
experimented with other computerized brain scans that reveal the
amount of blood flow to different sections of the brain. Early tests
suggest people use more sections of their brain when they lie than
when they tell the truth and this is evident in increased blood flow
throughout the brain.

Other law enforcement agencies have used a device that measures
changes in the voice. Computer voice stress analyzers are designed to
detect lies by monitoring voice frequencies. However, there is a
movement in the United States to ban the use of these devices, since
there are concerns the analyzers are inaccurate and flawed.

Some argue that acceptance of brain fingerprinting technology has
also moved too fast and needs to be refined and tested more before
it's used to convict or exonerate suspects.

"There's a lot of value in looking at brain wave activity, but
there's also a lot of hype," Frank Horvath, a professor of
criminology at Michigan State University told the Seattle Times.

The National Academy of Sciences recently issued a brief assessment
of the technology, saying it showed promise, but still needs more
study.

Farwell contends plenty of studies have already been done. He
invented the test more than 15 years ago and then conducted research
with the FBI, the CIA and the U.S. Navy.

"The government spent over $1 million on brain fingerprinting," he
says. "We showed not only in the laboratory but in over 100 actual
real-life situations that the technology was effective."


http://abcnews.go.com/sections/GMA/SciTech/brain_fingerprinting_040309
.html