Brain-Scan Lie Detection Rejected By Brooklyn Court

blair1q writes "A judge in Brooklyn has excluded Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) lie-detector evidence from a trial there. However, the decision will not set a precedent, as it was made without even conducting a hearing on the method's validity, but on the principle, argued by the defense, that 'juries are supposed to decide the credibility of the witness, and fMRI lie detection, even if it could be proven completely accurate, infringes on that right.' That principle can be tested in later hearings, such as one scheduled for May 13, 2010, in Tennessee; in this case, the defense wants to use fMRI evidence it has already collected to prove its client is innocent. fMRI has been shown to be 76-90% accurate. That number seems significantly larger than the rate of false convictions."

Comments

Re:Because they are unreliable.

[Paul Jakma]

This may come as a surprise to you, but this has been known to polygraph operators for roughly forever.

Let me guess, you're are such an operator, or you're affiliated to the polygraph industry in some other way. And you're here shilling. Not that it's surprising, for the polygraph requires the public to *believe* it works for it to have any use. As you don't have any actual science to convince people with, you instead have to bluster and dissemble about it being effective in public, to help reinforce the myth.