PRASAD V POTLURI SIDDHARTHA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY,Kanuru
ABSTRACT The secrets of Brain Fingerprinting Brain
co compu mpute terr-bas based ed tech techno nolo logy gy to iden identi tify fy the the perpetrator
responses to crime-relevant words or pictures presented
Fingerprinting has proven 100% accurate in over 120 tests, including tests on FBI agents, tests for a US intelligence agency and for the US Navy Navy,, and test testss on re real al-l -lif ifee si situ tuat atio ions ns including felony crimes.
Matching evidence at the crime scene with evidence in the brain
When a crime is committed, a record is stored in the brain of the perpetrator. Brain Fingerprinting provides a means to objectively and scient scientif ifica ically lly connect connect evidenc evidencee from from the crime scene with evidence stored in the brain. (This is similar to the process of connecting DNA DN A sa samp mple less fr from om th thee pe perp rpet etra rato torr wi with th biological evidence found at the scene of the crime; only the evidence evaluated by Brain
Why Brain Fingerprin Fingerprinting??? ting???
Fingerprint Finger printing ing is evidence stored stored in the brain.)
Brain Fingerprinting measures electrical brain activity in response to crime-relevant words or
Brain Fingerprinting is based on the
principle that the brain is central to all human acts. In a criminal act, there may or may not be many ma ny kind kindss of pe peri riph pher eral al ev evid iden ence ce,, bu butt the the brain is always there, planning, executing, and recordin ding
fun und damental
difference between a perpetrator and a falsely accused, innocent person is that the perpetrator, having committed the crime, has the details of
pictures presented on a computer screen, and revea evealls a br brai ain n MERME ERMER R (mem memor ory y an and d encoding
electroence elect roencephalogr phalographic aphic response) response) when, and only when, the evidence stored in the brain matche mat chess the eviden evidence ce fr from om the cri crime me scene. scene. Thus Th us,, th thee guil guilty ty ca can n be id iden enti tifi fied ed an and d th thee innoc nnocen entt can can be cl clea eare red d in an ac accu currat ate, e,
the crime stored in his brain, and the innocent suspect does not. This is what Brain Fingerprinting detects scientifically
sc scie ient ntif ific ic,,
ob obje ject ctiv ive, e,
nonnon-in inva vasi sive ve,,
stressful, and non-testimonial manner
MERMER Methodology The proced procedure ure used used is simila similarr to the Guilty Guilty
indicating that the information is absent from
Knowledge Test; a series of words, sounds, or
their mind. Note that there does not have to be
pictures are presented via computer to the
an emot emotio iona nall re resp spon onse se of an any y ki kind nd to th thee
subject for a fraction of a second each. Each of
st stim imul ulii- th this is te test st is en enti tire rely ly re reli lian antt up upon on
these stimuli are organised by the test-giver to be a “Target,” “Irrelevant,” or a “Probe.” The
recognition response to the stimuli, and relies upon upo n a differ differenc encee in recogni recognitio tionn- hence hence the
Targ Target et stim stimul ulii are are ch chos osen en to be re rele leva vant nt
association with the Oddball effect
information to the tested subject, and are used to es esta tabl blis ish h a base baseli line ne brai brain n re resp spon onse se for for inform inf ormati ation on that that is signif significa icant nt to the subjec subjectt being tested. The subject is instructed to press on button for Targets, and another button for all all othe otherr stim stimul uli. i. Most Most of the the nonnon-Ta Targ rget et stimuli are Irrelevant, and are totally unrelated to the situation that the subject is being tested for. for. The The Irre Irrele leva vant nt stim stimul ulii do no nott el elic icit it a MERMER, and so establish a baseline brain response for information that is insignificant to the subject in this context. Some of the nonTa Targ rget et are are rele relevan vantt to the the si situ tuat atio ion n that that the the su subj bjec ectt is be bein ing g test tested ed for. for. Thes Thesee st stim imul uli, i, Prob Probes es,, are are relev elevan antt to the the tes estt, and and ar aree signi signifi fica cant nt to the the su subj bjec ect, t, and and wi will ll el elic icit it a MERM ME RMER ER,, sign signif ifyi ying ng that that the the su subj bjec ectt ha hass underst unde rstood ood that that stimul stimulii to be signif significa icant. nt. A subject lacking this information in their brain, thee resp th respon onse se to the the Pr Prob obee st stim imul ulus us wi will ll be indistinguishable from the irrelevant stimulus.
THE FANTASTIC FOUR!!! The
Fingerprinting In fi fing nger erpr prin inti ting ng and DNA DNA fi finge ngerp rpri rint ntin ing, g, evidence recognized and collected at the crime scene, and preserved properly until a suspect is apprehended, appreh ended, is scientifica scientifically lly compared compared with evidence eviden ce on the person of the suspect suspect to detect a match that would place the suspect at the cr crim imee
sc scen ene. e.
Br Brai ain n
Fi Fing nger erpr prin inti ting ng
simila sim ilarly rly,, except except that that the eviden evidence ce collec collected ted both at the crime scene and on the person of the susp suspec ectt (i (i.e .e., ., in th thee br brai ain n as re reve veal aled ed by electr ele ctrica icall brain brain respon responses ses)) is inform informati ational onal evidence rather than physical evidence. There are four stages to Brain Fingerprinting, which are similar to the steps in fingerprinting and DNA fingerprinting:
This response does not elicit a MERMER,
1. Brain Fingerprinting Crime Scene Evidence
("innocent") – the details of the crime is not
stored in the brain of the suspect
Brai Brain n
Fing Finger erpr prin inti ting ng Brain
Scie Sc ient ntif ific ic Pr Proc oced edure ure,, Re Rese sear arch ch,, an and d
3. Brain Brain Finger Fingerpri printi nting ng Comput Computer er Evidence Evidence
1. Informational Evidence Detection.
Analysis;; and Analysis The detection of concealed information stored 4. Brain Fingerprinting Scientific Result . In the Crime Crime Scene Scene Evidenc Evidencee Collec Collecti tion, on, an expert expe rt in Brain Brain Finger Fingerpri printi nting ng examine examiness the crime scene and other evidence connected with the crime to identify details of the crime that would be known only to the perpetrator. The ex expe pert rt then then co cond nduc ucts ts the the Brai Brain n Evid Eviden ence ce Collection in order to determine whether or not the evidenc evidencee from from the crime scene scene matche matchess evidence stored in the brain of the suspect. In the Comput Computer er Eviden Evidence ce Analys Analysis, is, the Brain Brain Fingerprint Finger printing ing system system makes a mathematic mathematical al determination as to whether or not this specific evidence eviden ce is stored stored in the brain, and computes computes a
in the brains of suspects, witnesses, intelligence sources, and others is of central concern to all phases of law enforcement, government and private
operations. Brain Fingerprinting presents a new paradigm in forensic science. This new system detects information directly, on the basis of the el elec ectr trop ophy hysi siol olog ogic ical al man anif ifes esttat atio ions ns of infor nforma mattio ionn-pr proc oces esssing
br brai ain n
ac acttiv iviity,
measured non-invasively from the scalp. Since Brain Bra in Finger Fingerpri printi nting ng depe depends nds only only on bra brain in information processing, it does not depend on the emotional response of the subject. 2 The Brain MERMER
statisti stat istical cal confidence confidence for that determinat determination. ion. This determinat determination ion and statisti statistical cal confidence confidence co cons nsti titu tute te the the Scie Scient ntif ific ic Re Resu sult lt of Brai Brain n
Br Brai ain n Fi Fing nger erpr prin inti ting ng ut util iliz izes es mult multif iface acete ted d electr ele ctroenc oencepha ephalog lograp raphic hic respon response se analys analysis is
Finger Fin gerpri printi nting: ng: either either "infor "informat mation ion presen present" t"
(MERA) (ME RA) to detect detect inform informati ation on stored stored in the
("guilty") – the details of the crime are stored
human brain. A memory and encoding related
in the brain of the suspect – or "information
multifaceted electroencephalographic response
(MER (M ERME MER) R) is el elic icit ited ed when when an in indi divi vidua duall
recognizes and processes an incoming stimulus
Some of the non-target stimuli are relevant to
that th at is sign signif ific icant ant or notew notewor orth thy. y. When When an
the the cr crim imee or si situ tuat atio ion n un unde derr in inve vest stig igat atio ion. n.
irrelevant irre levant stimulus is seen, it is insignifi insignificant cant
These relevant stimuli are referred to as probes.
For a subject who has committed the crime, the
not notewor eworth thy, y, an and d
the MER MERMER MER
resp respon onse se is ab abse sent nt.. The The MERM MERMER ER oc occu curs rs
probes are noteworthy due to his knowledge of
with within in ab abou outt a seco second nd af afte terr the the st stim imul ulus us
the details of the crime, and therefore probes
presentation, and can be readily detected using
el elic icit it a br brai ain n MERM MERMER ER.. For For an in inno noce cent nt
EEG amplif amplifier ierss and a comput computeri erized zed signal signal--
subject lacking this detailed knowledge of the
crime, crime, the probes probes are indist indisting inguis uishabl hablee fr from om the irrelevant stimuli. For such a subject, the
3. Scientific Procedure
Brain Fingerprinting incorporates the following procedure. A sequence of words or pictures is
probes are not noteworthy, and thus probes do not elicit a MERMER. 4. Computer Controlled
presented on a video monitor under computer control. Each stimulus appears for a fraction of
Thee entir Th entiree Br Brai ain n Fi Fing nger erpr prin inti ting ng Sy Syst stem em is
a second. Three types of stimuli are presented:
under computer control, including presentation
"targets," "irrelevants," and "probes."
of the stimuli and recording of electrical brain activity, as well as a mathematical data da ta analysis
The targets are made relevant and noteworthy to all subjects: the subject is given a list of the tar arge gett stimu timulli and and ins instruc tructe ted d to pres presss a particular button in response to targets, and to press another button in response to all other stimuli. Since the targets are noteworthy for the subject, they elicit a MERMER. Most of the non-target stimuli are irrelevant, havi having ng no rel relatio ation n to the cr criime. me. Thes Thesee
algorithm that compares the responses to the three
de dete term rmin inat atio ion n
pr pro oduc ucees
"i "inf nfor orma mati tion on
pr pres esen ent" t"
("guilty") or "information absent" ("innocent"), an and d a st stat atis isti tica call co conf nfid iden ence ce le leve vell fo forr th this is determination. At no time during the testing and
interp interpret retati ations ons of a system system expert expert affect affect the stimulus presentation or brain responses.
irrelevants do not elicit a MERMER.
The devices used in brain fingerprinting
-----Red -----Red:: information the suspect is expected to know -----Green:: information not known to suspect -----Green -----Blue:: information of the crime that only -----Blue perpetrator would know
NOT GUILTY: Lines closely correlate, suspect does Because the blue and green
GUILTY: Line Liness cl clos osel ely y co corr rrel elat ate, e, and and because the blue and red
susp suspec ectt
Not have critical knowledge of the crime critical knowledge of the crime Scie Scienti ntific fic Ex Exper perim imen ents, ts, Field Field Tests Tests,, and Criminal Cases
Sc Scie ient ntif ific ic st stud udie ies, s, fi fiel eld d
te test sts, s, an and d ac actu tual al
criminal cases involving over 120 individuals Using brain waves to detect guilt
described in various scientific publications and technical reports by Dr. Lawrence A. Farwell
How it works
A Suspect is tested by looking at three kinds of
ha have ve ve veri rifi fied ed th thee ex extr trem emel ely y hi high gh le leve vell of accura acc uracy cy and overal overalll effect effective ivenes nesss of Brain Brain
informati infor mation on represented represented by Different Different colored colored
Fingerprinting. The system had 100% accurate
scientific results in all studies, field tests, and
actual cases conducted at the Federal Bureau of Invest Inv estiga igati tion, on, a US intell intellige igence nce agency, agency, the
Determination: information absent.
Alex Alexan andr dria ia
Poli Police ce
Depa Depart rtme ment nt,,
offices of the Macon County (MO) Sheriff, and other organizations and individuals. Some of these tests are described below. Terry Harrington's Brain-Wave Responses
Statistical Confidence: 99.9% Conclusion: Certain significant details of the
murder of John Schweer are not stored in Terry Harrington's brain.
Y-axis: voltage in micro volts at the parietal
(Pz) scalp site. X-axis: time in milliseconds (msec). Stimulus
Determination: information present.
was presented at 0 msec. Statistical Confidence: 99.9% Conclusion: Certain significant details of the
murder of John Schweer are stored in Terry Harrington's brain.
Result Res ultss of the Bra Brain in Fin Finger gerpri print nting ing
test on Terry Harrington 1. La Lande nderr ES. ES. DNA DNA fi fing nger erpr prin inti ting ng on tr tria ial. l.
on Sc Sch hweer's
de dete term rmin inat atio ion n of Br Brai ain n Fing Finger erpr prin inti ting ng was was "i "inf nfor orm mati ation
abs absent, ent,""
wi with th
sta tattistic stical al
confidence of 99.9%. The information stored in Harrington's brain did not match the scenario in which Harrington went to the crime scene and commit com mitted ted the murder murder.. The determ determina inatio tion n of the Brain Fingerprinting test for alibi-relevant information was "information present," with a confidence of 99.9%. The information stored in Harrington' Harri ngton'ss brain did match the scenar scenario io in which Harrington was elsewhere (at a concert and with friends) at the time of the crime.
Nature 1989. 2. Simpson L. Courts Ready to Accept DNA Profiling As Evidence. Sydney Morning Herald 4 March 1989. 3. Lambourne GTC. The Use of Fingerprints in Identification. Med. Sci Law 1979. 4. Kasprzak J. Possibilities of Cheiloscopy. Forensic Sci Int. 1990. 5. Farw Farwel elll LA an and d Smit Smith h SS. Us Usin ing g Br Brai ain n MERMER To Dete Detect ctTesting Conc Concea eale led d Know Knowle ledg dgee Desp Despit itee Efforts To Conceal Journal of Forensic Sciences 2001. 6. Farwell LA and Donchin E. The Truth Will Out: Interrogative Polygraph (“Lie Detection”) With Event Related Potentials. 7. Farwell LA. brainwavescience.com. 8. Was Wasse serrman man S, Bo Bock cken enho holt lt U. (1989 1989). ). Bootstrapping: applications to bioinformatics
and secure secure authen authentic ticati ation on analysi analysiss Dept. Dept. of Defense Research. Brain Fingerprinting is a revolutionary new scie scient ntif ific ic iden id enti tify fyin ing g
tech techno nolo logy gy
pe perp rpet etra rato tors rs,,
solv solvin ing g an and d
cr crim imes es,,
ex exone onera rati ting ng
inno innoce cent nt susp suspec ects ts,, with with a re reco cord rd of 10 100% 0% ac accur curac acy y in rese resear arch ch wi with th US go gove vern rnme ment nt ag agenc encie ies, s, actu actual al crim crimin inal al ca case ses, s, an and d other other applications. The technology fulfills an urgent need need