Brain Fingerprinting as an Evidence of Criminal Guilt

Criminal proof and crime detection are the most important issues that receive the attention of criminal investigation officials, aggrieved parties, and the judiciary. It requires a strong evidence of crime perpetration to be attributed to the criminal. No truth can be established without an evidence. The perpetration of crimes, especially terrorist crimes, has witnessed great development. Accordingly, there is a severe need for using advanced scientific techniques to establish guilt. These techniques should be based on carefully studied scientific evidences. Brain Fingerprinting, the subject of this study, is one such advanced technique. It is defined as: “A method for interpreting the electric signals made by a human brain when seeing some pictures of information related to a crime or event”. The brain sends waves and signals related to the crime contained in the human memory. These waves and signals are recorded and analyzed when restoring such information through a computer. They are given the code (p300).

The Options and Limitations of the Brain Fingerprinting Lie Detection Method in the Criminal Proceeding1

The aim of this study is to introduce the new lie detection method of brain fingerprinting already introduced in the United States of America. According to some scholars, the method of a brain-focused instrumental credibility examination of testimonies still unknown in Hungary is highly reliable, establishing their concept on their belief that the human brain does not lie. First of all, we shall examine the possibilities lying in the measure, and second of all, we shall introduce the doubts causing the delay of its admission in Hungary.

Can criminals use propranolol to erase crime-related memories? A response to McGorrery (2017)

Technology for detecting incriminating knowledge in suspects, such as ‘brain fingerprinting’, raises several ethical and practical difficulties. In a recent article, McGorrery suggests that criminals may use propranolol to modify their memories for a crime and thereby trick ‘brain fingerprinting’ technology. While we agree that there are many limitations and concerns regarding the use of such technology in criminal proceedings, we explain why propranolol usage by offenders is unlikely to undermine knowledge detection technology.