Third degree has travelled quite a long way from being an intensive qualifying examination for a member in Freemasonry to become eligible for Masonic meetings to a brutal and ruthless method of interrogation routinely being employed by police all over the world to elicit information from suspects. As young IPS officer recruits, we were taught in the National Police Academy to follow scientific methods of investigation and eschew third degree at all costs. But third-degree methods in police investigation have existed since British times and continue to exist even today despite several Supreme Court guidelines, the establishment of National Human Rights Commission in 1993 and the State Human Rights Commission at Chennai in 1997. Is there any approach or a way available for police to conduct the sustained interrogation of suspects scientifically without violating the human rights? Brain fingerprinting, though inadmissible as evidence in courts, could be one such cool tool to get to the bottom of the truth during an investigation.
James B. Grinder for 15 years was the primary suspect in the brutal murder of Julie Helton who went missing in 1984 in Missouri, USA, but sufficient evidence could never be dug out to bring him to trial. Terry Harrington was convicted of murder in 1978 and sentenced to life imprisonment. In 1997, 19 years after his conviction, Harrington petitioned the Iowa District court for post-conviction relief listing out several grounds for granting him a new trial. Laying bare the truth in the cited cases, especially after massive efflux of time seems next to impossible. But the mind-blowing fact is - truth in both the cases mentioned above was elicited in less than an hour’s time, scientifically without any torture, through a revolutionary technique called brain fingerprinting. In the first case, Mr Grinder, when confronted with the results of his brain fingerprinting test, confessed not only to the murder of Julie Helton but to three other murders committed by him. In the other case, Terry Harrington after the brainwave test was able to overturn his conviction and became a free man after 24 years in prison.
In India, a woman named Aditi Sharma was suspected of killing her boyfriend Udit Bharathi in June 2008. They were living in Pune when Ms Sharma met another man and eloped with him to Delhi. Later Ms Sharma returned to Pune and, asked Mr Bharati to meet her at a local McDonald’s where she poisoned him by feeding him with arsenic-laced sweet. In order to unearth the truth, Aditi was put through brain fingerprinting, during the test, her responses indicated knowledge of planning to poison him with arsenic and purchasing it for the murder. Based on which Judge Shalini Phansalkar Joshi convicted her for murder.
American biological psychologist Lawrence Farwell in the 1980s developed forensic brain wave analysis called brain fingerprinting. Brain fingerprinting is based on a finding that the brain generates a unique brainwave pattern which helps 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. It is, therefore, a revolutionary scientific technology for solving crimes, identifying criminal offenders, and exonerating innocent suspects with mind-boggling accuracy. This based on the premise that brain plans, executes as well as records the crime, therefore, the perpetrator having committed the crime has the details of the crime stored in his brain. The brain fingerprinting precisely detects this scientifically by measuring brain wave responses to given stimulus. Every crime committed leave some shreds of evidence, while physical evidence can be annihilated and tampered but the evidence stored in a criminal’s mind will remain embedded in his grey matter.
In brain fingerprinting, a headset with two electrodes is put on the head of the suspect. One electrode is placed on the forehead between the eyebrows while the other is put on the back of the head where the brain stores experiential memory. The electrodes are connected to a laptop with brain fingerprinting software via Bluetooth. Details and photographs of the crime scene which are not in public domain are projected on the screen in front of the suspect. If the suspect is involved in the crime the moment he sees the details, his brain recognises the picture and sends a specific, measurable brain response known as a P300 to the software. This movement is called P 300 MERMER (“Memory and Encoding Related Multifaceted Electroencephalographic Response”), which is captured on the computer.
The P300 is not the only brainwave used by brain fingerprinting technologies. In 1997, Indian neuroscientist Champadi Raman Mukundan developed a different technique called the Brain Electrical Oscillatory Signature (Beos) test, which measures the recall of memory through a smorgasbord of subtle changes in brain activity data. Mukundan says, done properly, the Beos test can tell whether the suspect has direct knowledge of an event or has gained information through second-hand sources. He says it has a 95% accuracy rate. It's this Beos test that is now used in India.
Police in India have used brain fingerprinting since 2003. This technology is being increasingly put to use, as a matter of fact, it is often seen playing a part in separating the guilty from the innocent. Police Officers believe that it assists an overworked police force to amplify their evidence and expedite the often tortuously drawn-out process of conviction. The results of the brain fingerprinting test may not be admissible in the Indian courts, but the technique helps investigative agencies find clues in complicated cases. It may be necessary to amend existing laws to conduct investigations using brain fingerprinting and the consent of the suspect and permission of the court would be mandatory as well. I shall focus on the status of the technology in India and its limitations in my next write-up.
Tamil Nadu is yet to acquire brain fingerprinting technology. States like Karnataka, Maharashtra, Gujarat etc have installed brain fingerprinting technology for police investigation purposes. Brain fingerprinting being a non invasive forensic technique uses electroencephalography (EEG) to determine whether information about the crime is stored in the subject's brain, it does not violate human rights as the suspect takes the test in the comfort of an air-conditioned room sitting in front of a computer where no third degree is ever necessary. The equipment is also instant and cost-effective, it approximately costs ?2 crores per unit and it generates results within a short span of 1-2 hours thus exonerating the innocents instantly and fixing the accused swiftly and scientifically. In the final analysis, brain fingerprinting is a cool tool which can go a long way in enhancing police image by diminishing police brutality and torture during the investigation with a concomitant reduction in custodial deaths.
