Indian Woman Convicted of Murder By Brain Scan

Kaseijin writes "Neuroscientist Champadi Raman Mukundan claims his Brain Electrical Oscillations Signature test is so accurate, it can tell whether a person committed or only witnessed an act. In June, an Indian judge agreed, using BEOS to find a woman guilty of killing her former fiancé. Scientific experts are calling the decision 'ridiculous' and 'unconscionable,' protesting that Mukundan's work has not even been peer reviewed. How reliable should a test have to be, when eyewitnesses are notoriously fallible? Does a person have a right to privacy over their own memories, or should society's interest in holding criminals accountable come first?"

Comments

I did not post here.

[mfh]

Yes, yes you did.

Re:5th

[morgan_greywolf]

Psychics are fake, but brainwaves are real.

Not entirely true. In the strictest sense of the term, the police have consulted psychics in crime investigation. How much psychics help vs. old-fashioned police detective work is a matter for debate. But psychics are real despite what the blowhard freak James Randi would have you believe.

then what is the reason we can't lend brainwave scans credence in the real world?

Because science must be peer-reviewed before it can be accepted for general applicability in the real world.

Re:5th

[Jurily]

but is rather physically relevant to the case

How are my thoughts physically relevant to anything, again? Remember, we're talking about the same country that wants to teach Intelligent Design in science class.

This is good news people.

[dogdick]

Maybe this will teach women to stay in the kitchen.