Brain Fingerprinting

Overview of fingerprints, Forensic Sciences, DNA and brain fingerprint. Currently, there are 2 high profile cases in court. One murder and one pedofile. I do not believe brainwavescience technology can be used in the Lacy Peterson criminal case, not enough crime scene evidence. Pedophile cases may be different, most know they are doing wrong - but some, such as Michael Jackson; believe they have done nothing wrong. In such cases, I wonder if the P300 algorithm would have to be modified. This is untested territory of the spike wavelength. Even though dealing with the subconcious mind, for those that believe no wrong done - would the spike be in a similar but different range? Well, one way to find out. Should I fill out the questionnaire?

Fingerprint

On the palm of the hand is semi rough skin with ridges. This rough skin increases friction, which aids the fingers in grasping objects. Minute sweat pores are on the top of these skin ridges, constantly exuding perspiration. This perspiration adheres to the outline of these ridges. These impressions or prints are left behind on surfaces we touch. Patent prints are visible, while latent we term as invisible. Latents are made visible or developed by the application of powders, chemicals or electronic means. More on "what is a fingerprint" can be found here. Another short page on patterns, from a school in the UK.

700's  Chinese used fingerprints to establish identity of documents and clay sculpture, but without any formal classification system.
1880  Henry Faulds, a Scottish physician working in Tokyo, published a paper in the journal Nature suggesting that fingerprints at the scene of a crime could identify the offender. In one of the first recorded uses of fingerprints to solve a crime, Faulds used fingerprints to eliminate an innocent suspect and indicate a perpetrator in a Tokyo burglary.

Sir Francis Galton, a British anthropologist and a cousin of Charles Darwin, began his observations of fingerprints as a means of identification in the 1880's. In 1892, he published his book, "Fingerprints", establishing the individuality and permanence of fingerprints. The book included the first classification system for fingerprints.

Galton's primary interest in fingerprints was as an aid in determining heredity and racial background. While he soon discovered that fingerprints offered no firm clues to an individual's intelligence or genetic history, he was able to scientifically prove what Herschel and Faulds already suspected: that fingerprints do not change over the course of an individual's lifetime, and that no two fingerprints are exactly the same. According to his calculations, the odds of two individual fingerprints being the same were 1 in 64 billion.

Polygraphs record:
PHYSIOLOGICAL phenomena, respiration, galvanic skin response, and cardiac activities.
RESPIRATION, the word respiration means "one inspiration, plus one expiration". A healthy adult has an average of 12 cycles per minute.
GALVANIC SKIN RESPONSE, "a reaction to certain stimuli as indicated by a change in the electrical resistance of the skin". The galvanometer is basis for the galvanic skin response tracings recorded by a polygraph. Galvanometers are also used in many diagnostic instruments, such a electrocardiographs.
CARDIAC ACTIVITY increases and decreases in blood pressure, change of heartbeat, movement of the dicrotic notch.
"Blood pressure (BP) refers to the pressure in arteries exerted by the left ventricle when it undergoes systole and the pressure remaining in the arteries when the ventricle is in diastole".

COURT ADMISSIBILITY:    Admissibility varies from state to state and jurisdiction to jurisdiction, generally in Indiana polygraph evidence is only admissible under stipulation. A stipulation is a legal document prepared and agreed to by attorneyís for both the defense and the prosecution. Admissibility is always however at the discretion of the court. Different rules of evidence apply for the federal and state courts.

Forensic Science

Forensic investigation uses science to examine evidence and solve crimes. Traditional fields of study include examination of physical evidence; firearms, fingerprints, basic psychology and criminology. Scientific disciplines include pathology, biology, botany, physical anthropology, odonthology, genetics, toxicology, psychophysiology, etc. Forensics is a team effort between investigators and scientists.

Forensic Science can be broadly defined as the use of science in law. In practice the term can cover the investigation of, recording of, and collection and preservation of evidence from a crime scene, the laboratory analysis and interpretation of that material and documentation thereof, and the presentation of results and conclusions as an expert witness in a court of law.

The above can draw on a wide range of scientific disciplines and specialist expertise. In the USA, the broad term "Criminalistics" has been coined to describe the above chain of activities. This term embraces the cross-disciplinary nature of this kind of forensic science, and could include both biological and chemical work, along with specialist areas such as photography and toxicology. The term is in widespread use in the forensic science, law enforcement and legal communities in the US.

DNA

Understanding the basic concept of DNA is fairly simple, we carry about 200,000 genes in each cell. This comprises about 3 billion "base pairs", four nucleotide bases are the building blocks of every piece of DNA. Each cell has another enzyme called a primase that actually makes the first few nucleotides to copy the DNA in each cell. Current technology does not permit analysis of all these base pairs and gene combinations to identify an individual. A "marker" consists of one sequence of a DNA region. A "probe" is a small piece of DNA that will seek out and bind to a complementary DNA sequence. A series of probes bound to a DNA sample creates a distinctive pattern for an individual. The future of DNA testing is in chip technology (in which thousands of short DNA sequences are embedded in a tiny chip), which will enable a more rapid analysis using many more probes, and raising the odds against coincidental matches. This is where "simple" ends! The following are snips and pages to better understand the complexity of the "DNA Fingerprint":

The chemical structure of everyone's DNA is the same. The only difference between people (or any animal) is the order of the base pairs. There are so many millions of base pairs in each person's DNA that every person has a different sequence.
Using these sequences, every person could be identified solely by the sequence of their base pairs. However, because there are so many millions of base pairs, the task would be very time-consuming. Instead, scientists are able to use a shorter method, because of repeating patterns in DNA. These patterns do not, however, give an individual "fingerprint", but they are able to determine whether two DNA samples are from the same person, related people, or non-related people.

Mitochondrial DNA Analysis
Mitochondrial DNA analysis (mtDNA) can be used to examine the DNA from samples that cannot be analyzed by RFLP or STR. Nuclear DNA must be extracted from samples for use in RFLP, PCR, and STR; however, mtDNA analysis uses DNA extracted from another cellular organelle called a mitochondrion. While older biological samples that lack nucleated cellular material, such as hair, bones, and teeth, cannot be analyzed with STR and RFLP, they can be analyzed with mtDNA. In the investigation of cases that have gone unsolved for many years, mtDNA is extremely valuable.
All mothers have the same mitochondrial DNA as their daughters. This is because the mitochondria of each new embryo comes from the mother's egg cell. The father's sperm contributes only nuclear DNA. Comparing the mtDNA profile of unidentified remains with the profile of a potential maternal relative can be an important technique in missing person investigations.
Y-Chromosome Analysis
The Y chromosome is passed directly from father to son, so the analysis of genetic markers on the Y chromosome is especially useful for tracing relationships among males or for analyzing biological evidence involving multiple male contributors.

Brain Fingerprint

First some terminology:
EEG   (electroencephalograph):   records brain wave patterns
neuron activity charge:   change in electrical activity relative to a baseline electrode (often placed on earlobe). Measurement is a summation of electrical activity at a particular point on the scalp. P300 is a positive relative change in neural activity at 300 msec following stimulus onset (answer to question or visual stimuli). This positive charge or spike is above the baseline electrode electical activity. A negative change would be opposite or below the baseline.
detection of deception:   (method of determining when an individual is lying)
P3 or P300 response:   wavelength is in the cognitive, decision-making, and processing of short-term memory area of brain. A distinctive wave because it occurs about 300 milliseconds after the stimulus.
ERP   (event-related-potential):   index for examining the processing of information in the human brain. P3 is the most promising index of activity because P3 is elicited by meaningful events.
GKT   (guilty knowledge test):   uses both relevant stimulus and irrelevant stimuli. A relevant stimulus is an item of information known by the investigators to be associated with the matter under investigation (e.g., the caliber of the weapon used in a murder). Irrelevant stimuli are control items of relevant stimulus. The large amplitude of P3 to relevant stimuli is interpreted to mean that the subject recognized the relevant stimulus as more meaningful information than irrelevant stimuli. Thus, GKT by P3 detects the information processing for relevant stimulus. If subjects can ignore the relevant stimulus, P3 amplitudes to the relevant stimulus will not be increased. This is similar to what can happen in a polygraph exam, a fallacy of both tests. One deals with electrode activity change in the brain, the other with physical autonomic changes in the body.
Brain Fingerprinting:   controversial (both law and science) computer-based method of memory detection, designed to determine whether an individual recognizes specific information related to an event or activity by measuring electrical brain wave responses to words, phrases, or pictures presented on a computer screen. An image or word the person recognizes presents a distinct brainwave pattern (P300 paradigm - mathematical algorithm) when compared with an unrecognized image or word. The person cannot consciously control this response. This methodology merely proves whether certain information is present in the brain, not whether the person committed the crime or not. Entirely under computer control, at no time during the analysis does bias and interpretation of a stysem expert affect the presentation and result of each stimulus presentation.. Has to be used in conjunction with other forensic sciences.
Relevency:   evidence is admitted in a courtroom, but each jurist will decide how much "relevancy" to place on the evidence as it pertains to the case on trial. Lawyers analyse this subjective area of the jurist's mind in deciding which evidence to present. This factor is important in the DNA evidence against Scott Peterson.
Rules of Evidence:   a somewhat technical but comprehensive page that explains expert testimony and admissability in court. Forensic evidence of Frye standard in 1923, Congress adopts the Federal Rules of Evidence in 1975, Daubert standard in 1993. There has only been two court cases where brain fingerprint science has been admissable in court. Each state may have different admissability rules. The science is in its infacy with many acceptance hurdles to overcome, in both the scientific community and the judicial proceedings community.

It is important to note that the trial judge did admit the evidence of the brain fingerprinting technique offered by Dr. Farwell. While the Daubert requirements for admission of scientific evidence are not applicable in Iowa courts, the Pottawattamie County District Court judge nevertheless used the Daubert factors in deciding to admit the testimony, and ruled that brain fingerprinting met all four of the Supreme Court's criteria. He found that the science had been tested, was peer reviewed and published, deemed to be accurate, and well accepted in the scientific community.

How Brain Fingerprinting works

Farwell Brain Fingerprinting works as follows. Words or pictures relevant to a crime are flashed on a computer screen, along with other, irrelevant words or pictures. Electrical brain responses are measured non-invasively through a patented headband equipped with sensors. Dr. Farwell has discovered that a specific brain-wave response called a MERMER (memory and encoding related multifaceted electroencephalographic response) is elicited when the brain processes noteworthy information it recognizes. Thus, when details of the crime that only the perpetrator would know are presented, a MERMER is emitted by the brain of a perpetrator, but not by the brain of an innocent suspect. In Farwell Brain Fingerprinting, a computer analyzes the brain response to detect the MERMER, and thus determines scientifically whether or not the specific crime-relevant information is stored in the brain of the suspect.

Brain Central to Crime and Criminal Investigations
As the human brain is central to all human acts, the human brain is central to the criminal act. The only reason that the brain has not yet become central to criminal investigations is that, until Dr. Farwell's discovery of Brain Fingerprinting, there was no scientific, objective way to match the evidence stored in the brain with evidence from the crime scene. Now that this new technology is available, it is inevitable that the brain will take its rightful place as a central facet of criminal investigations.

Informational Evidence Detection
The detection of concealed information stored in the brains of suspects, witnesses, intelligence sources, and others is of central concern to all phases of law enforcement, corporate, and intelligence operations. Farwell Brain Fingerprinting (for multifaceted electroencephalographic response analysis - MERA) presents a new paradigm in forensic science. This new system detects information directly, on the basis of the electrophysiological manifestations of information-processing brain activity, measured non-invasively from the scalp. Since Farwell Brain Fingerprinting depends only on brain information processing, it does not depend on the emotional response of the subject.

Scientific Procedure
Farwell Brain Fingerprinting incorporates the following procedure. A sequence of words or pictures is presented on a video monitor under computer control. Each stimulus appears for a fraction of a second. Three types of stimuli are presented: "targets," "irrelevants," and "probes." The targets are made relevant and noteworthy to all subjects: the subject is given a list of the target stimuli and instructed to press a particular button in response to targets and 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, having no relation to the situation under investigation. These irrelevants do not elicit a MERMER. Some of the non-target stimuli are relevant to the situation under investigation. These relevant stimuli are referred to as probes. For a subject with knowledge of the investigated situation ("information present" -- stored in the brain), the probes are noteworthy due to that knowledge, and therefore probes elicit a brain MERMER. For a subject lacking this knowledge ("information absent" - not stored in the brain), probes are indistinguishable from the irrelevants, and thus probes do not elicit a MERMER. When the information tested is crime-relevant and known only to the perpetrator and investigators, then "information present" implies guilt and "information absent" implies innocence. Similarly, when the information tested is information known only to members of a particular organization or group (e.g., an intelligence agency or a terrorist group), then "information present" indicates affiliation with the group in question.

Any number of current technologies show the tendency toward rapid, total control. ECHELON, the US National Security Agency's global communications monitoring system, currently has the capability of intercepting and processing millions of private communications. And Carnivore, the FBI-favored electronic eavesdropping apparatus, is capable of collecting private information under the guise of protecting Americans. Face recognition systems - similar to the one used at the 2000 Super Bowl - are now capable of making more than 1 million comparisons per second, based on algorithmic identity recognition and are being implemented in a number of contexts. The US government's national Automated Fingerprint Identification System makes rapid queries on fingerprints - up to 1000 matches a day - drawn from its centralized print database and, CODIS (the Combined DNA Index System) operated by the FBI, has the same in view for DNA data. While ostensibly, these surveillance applications are focused on criminals, the broad interpretation of "suspects" can lead to an erosion of civil liberties.

Data-Terrain of the Human Brain
After the Human Genome Project to "map" human DNA, we now have the "Human Brain Project", (HBP) an internationally orchestrated research project which hopes to - among other things - provide a blueprint on "normal" brain activity. Aside from assumptions implicit in deciding what constitutes a normal brain, the HBP does offer potential benefits for understanding brain functions, and will undoubtedly alleviate some peopleís suffering as this understanding percolates into healthcare praxis. The HBPís intention to "map" cognition, however, points to the trend whereby the possibility for autonomous, unrestricted thought may become threatened by its own simulations.

Criminal investigation is not science.  Investigation does involve a high degree of skill and expertise.  The details uncovered by investigation are used as evidence in virtually every trial.  Expert testimony by investigators in criminal trials is very common.  When found to be relevant and based on reliable methodology, such evidence and testimony are universally accepted as a viable part of the proceedings in court.  This still does not mean, however, that investigation is science.  Unraveling the case and determining what is significant and relevant will always depend on the skill of the investigator.  Each case is different, and there is an infinite variety of information that may be available to be discovered.  There are no standardized algorithms or procedures that will solve every case.  There will never be a time when we can simply feed all of the facts about a case into a computer, and the computer will tell us what is significant or how the case is to be solved.  Although investigation is not science, investigation contributes substantially to legal proceedings, and the evidence and expert testimony provided by investigators will continue to be a valuable part of the process.

We need a new approach. The best way to defeat terrorists is to: (a) disallow them entry into the US, (b) expel foreign nationals in the US who are terrorists, and (c) restrict the mobility of any terrorists who are US citizens (e.g., require those with a high risk factor to undergo higher screening and/or restrict passage to only those flights with sky marshals). However, to accomplish these objectives, we would need a relatively fast and reliable method to determine who is a terrorist and who is not. Fortunately, there is a technology that is applicable to this task. This technique, which has been known as brain fingerprinting but we shall refer to as  "computerized knowledge assessment" (CKA), was invented over 10 years ago by Dr. Larry Farwell, a former faculty member of the Harvard Medical School. It has proven infallible in tests by the FBI and US Navy. Unlike lie detector tests which can be fooled, brain responses cannot be faked. For this reason, brain fingerprint evidence has been ruled admissible in US courts where it has been used both to exonerate and convict.

How far would you be willing to let the government go to prevent crime? Retinal scans for all citizens? "Brain fingerprinting"? In the new hit film Minority Report Tom Cruise's Precrime Unit, consisting of law enforcement aided by psychics, can stop crime before it's committed. Is this just fantasy? What civil liberties would you be willing to give up to reduce lawbreaking? Talk to Barry Steinhardt, director of the science and liberty program at the ACLU, about the present and future reality in technology and law enforcement.

Excellent link pages for further investigation: