Posted on 10/07/2001 12:19:41 AM PDT by Mike from California
Brain Wave Science Human Brain Research Laboratory, Inc. BrainWaveScience.com email: Farwell@BrainWaveScience.com P. O. Box 176, Fairfield, IA 52556 Phone (641) 469-5649 Fax (208) 692-5884 or 641-469-6639 Lawrence A. Farwell, PhD President and Chief Scientist Former Faculty Member Harvard Medical School ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Executive Summary: Farwell Brain Fingerprinting
Dr. Lawrence A. Farwell has invented, developed, proven, and patented the technique of Farwell Brain Fingerprinting, a new computer-based technology to identify the perpetrator of a crime accurately and scientifically by measuring brain-wave responses to crime-relevant words or pictures presented on a computer screen. Farwell Brain Fingerprinting has proven 100% accurate in over 100 tests, including tests on FBI agents and tests for a US intelligence agency and for the US Navy. Dr. Farwell recently presented Brain Fingerprinting in court in defence of a man falsely convicted of murder.
Brain Fingerprinting has been featured on CBS 60 Minutes, CBS Evening News, ABC World News, CNN Headline News, and the Discovery Channel, in U.S. News and World Report, the New York Times, and in print and electronic media throughout the world.
Dr. Farwell recently presented Brain Fingerprinting in court for the first time in the case of Terry Harrington. Harrington, 41, has spent over half of his life in prison for murder. Now, 23 years after the crime, Brain Fingerprinting has allowed scientists to determine the truth regarding the crime. A Brain Fingerprinting test conducted by Dr. Farwell has shown that the record of the night of the crime stored in Harrington's brain does not match the crime scene, and does match his alibi.
Brain Fingerprinting correctly identified serial killer J. B. Grinder as the perpetrator of the rape and murder of Julie Helton in Macon, MO, after which Grinder pleaded guilty and was sentenced to life in prison.
On November 14, 2000 Dr. Farwell presented the Brain Fingerprinting results in a court hearing in Council Bluffs, Iowa. "Scientifically, we can conclude with a 99.99% confidence that the critical details of the crime are not stored in Harrington's brain," said Dr. Farwell. "This is like finding that Harrington's fingerprints or DNA do not match the fingerprints or DNA found at the crime scene."
Dr. Farwell used Brain Fingerprinting to test Harrington's brain for the presence or absence of information about the crime. He measured Harrington's brain-wave responses to words and phrases flashed on a computer screen that were relevant to the murder -- details that the perpetrator must have encountered in committing the crime. Farwell's computer determined that the critical information about the crime was not stored in Harrington's brain.
When Dr. Farwell confronted Kevin Hughes, the only alleged witness to the crime with the Brain Fingerprinting results, Hughes admitted that the story he told at Harrington's trial was a fabrication that he made up to avoid being prosecuted for the murder himself. He recanted his testimony in a sworn deposition.
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 kinds of peripheral evidence, but the brain is always there, planning, executing, and recording the crime. The fundamental difference between a perpetrator and a falsely accused, innocent person is that the perpetrator, having committed the crime, has the details of the crime stored in his brain, and the innocent suspect does not. This is what Brain Fingerprinting detects scientifically.
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. 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. (The MERMER contains another, well known and scientifically established brain response known as a P300.)
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 Fingerprinting has proven 100% accurate in previous applications and research, including research conducted by Dr. Farwell for US government agencies and the US Navy. In collaboration with Dr. Drew Richardson of the FBI Laboratory, Dr. Farwell used Brain Fingerprinting to detect with 100% accuracy which people in a group were FBI agents, by measuring brain responses to words and phrases that only FBI agents would recognize. Dr. Farwell is also currently publishing a paper on Brain Fingerprinting with FBI scientist Sharon Smith, an instructor at the FBI Academy.
Local, state, and federal governments in America now spend approximately $100 billion per year to operate the criminal justice system. In addition, individuals and corporations spend approximately $65 billion on security operations, including internal investigations. The total global government budget devoted to crime has been estimated at approximately $750 billion annually. Including private sector security operations, the figure is over $1 trillion.
This does not include crime-related insurance costs, military and intelligence applications, the costs incurred by defendants in criminal cases and litigants in civil cases, or the cost in life and property to crime victims. Brain Fingerprinting can provide key evidence that can be used in many, perhaps most of these crimes, potentially making it possible to solve them more quickly, accurately, and scientifically than has been possible before, and thus can save billions of dollars annually in the US alone.
Dr. Farwell holds three patents on the technology, and no competing technology exists.
The goal of Brain Wave Science and the Human Brain Research Laboratory is to implement Brain Fingerprinting worldwide as quickly as possible, and thereby to substantially reduce the human suffering and cost in money and resources resulting from crime in the world today.
Dr. Nash Thompson (email: nashthomps@cs.com; phone 703-440-8070; web site: Truth-Justice.org) has established a charitable foundation known as The Truth and Justice Foundation to accept tax-deductible donations to make Brain Fingerprinting, DNA, and other scientific technologies available in every case where they are needed, regardless of ability to pay.
More information about Brain Fingerprinting and Dr. Farwell is available on the Web at BrainWaveScience.com or from Brain Wave Science at (641) 469-5649.
Don't forget Hitlery and Al Gore.
An enormous danger is that it amounts to thought control, and would result in the crushing of any opposition to tyrannical governments. Rebels could be culled out with 100% certainty and either killed or put in prison. Oppressive laws could be effectively enforced. In particular, a theocratic government could impose its strict moral views and codes of conduct and religious restrictions on both its own adherents and members of other faiths (or it could simply eliminate other faiths).
Given our own government's tendency to keep growing beyond its Constitutional bounds and to keep adding endless new laws and regulations, this technology is very worrisome. On the other hand I think a large majority of Americans will share the fears and concerns expressed above, which might keep the technology in check.
Being on "60 Minutes" is not exactly the most convincing endorsement in the world.
We could arrest everyone who was a terrorist, criminal, pervert, doesn't like gays, owns guns...
I think the downsides to this technology far outweigh the benefits.
You must be joking.
Technology "COMPELS", comrade.
Unless it's "hopeful" and quasi-moral (for the "living" at least) like the embryonic stem cell research to which Bush plans to draw the "best and the brightest" with government money.
That'd be one sure way to break the machine but-good.
I've read it, and it's very thought provoking. The book also effectively demonstrated how extremely difficult it would be to perfect a 100% accurate lie detector. Especially given the current rather-dismal status of lie detectors, the possibility of developing a truly-reliable lie detector seemed small and distant at best (or worst).
But this technology of brain fingerprinting, while not a lie detector per se, fulfills many of the same functions. And if it is indeed 100% accurate, then it will have many of the same ramifications, both good and ill.
A double-edge sword could be crafted to serve honest justice. .. No mater who the perpetrator is. Mr. Politician, does that law violate the United States Constitution? Mr. Politician, does that law violate the Bill Of Rights?
Neo-Tech Constitution
Article 1
No person, group of persons, or government may initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against any individual.
Article 2
Force may be morally and legally used only in self-defense against those who violate Article 1.
Article 3
No exceptions shall exist for Articles 1 and 2.
You're right, that's not nearly enough; far more testing needs to be done to establish the validity of this technology. Nevertheless, it's noteworthy (assuming it's true) that so far it has been 100% successful. I'd have expected at least a small percentage error rate with any such invention, especially during the early developmental stages. And even if further testing were to reveal an error rate of perhaps 0.5% or 0.1%, that would still be very impressive. Future refinements are certain to reduce whatever error rate (if any) presently exists.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.