Udumula Sudhakar Reddy
Though the AP Forensic Science Laboratory and State police
headquarters were trying to push the Brain Fingerprinting several top police officials on
Saturday expressed their apprehensions on the validity of the forensic psychology
technique.
During the interaction held at APFSL the CID Additional DG Mr. T Krishna Prasad raised
questions over its admissibility as evidence in the court under Indian Evidence Act.
“There is no doubt about the scientific aspects of brain mapping but the legal aspects
have to be looked into. Under the Indian Evidence Act it can’t be considered as for
convicting an accused,” said Mr. Krishna Prasad.
Representatives from AP Judicial Academy and legal experts from AP Police Academy said it
can be used a corroborative evidence and not a primary evidence. They opined that it is
an investigation tool to zero in on suspects but not for convicting the accused.
Some of the forensic experts have raised a doubt that if the neighbors who visit the
crime scene may also have memory in their brain and if they are in the suspects list the
brain fingerprinting test may nail them too. Top police officials who participated in the
interaction said that the expertise of investigating official is more important while
choosing the probes. The accuracy of results depend too much on the investigating
official’s selection of probes like visuals of crime scene, murder weapon or words and
phrases. However if the accused and investigator has now knowledge of crime the
hypothetical questions can’t be used.
“The equipment can only be used if the suspect or accused gives consent. We don’t know
how many cases they give consent. We should not hurry up in buying such a costly
equipment,” said a police official.
Brain finger printing is based on the finding that the brain generates a unique
brain-wave pattern when a person encounters a familiar stimulus and this is read in a
fraction of second by using electrodes placed on head. A by-stander who witnessed a
murder could potentially be implicated as an accused if the test reveals that the said
person was familiar with the information related to the same
. Similarly, little is known about the impact of viewing portrayal of crime scene in the
media such as television, movies and newspaper on brain mapping. Hence, this test cannot
be used to prosecute an accused but can be used by an innocent as an ‘alibi’ by proving
that he/she does not have any memory about the crime on this test.
However Director General of Police Mr. B Prasada Rao said ,”Brain mapping helps to
identify the criminals and it can be useful. More than Lie Detector and Narco Analysis
the lie detector test was a success in abroad. We are thinking over to bring in this
technology to the State,”
Former DGP Mr Swaranjit Sen whose agency Swarna Suraksha is trying to promote the
equipment said ,”Third degree torture on criminals by the police can be put to an end,”
Though the AP Forensic Science Laboratory and State police
headquarters were trying to push the Brain Fingerprinting several top police officials on
Saturday expressed their apprehensions on the validity of the forensic psychology
technique.
During the interaction held at APFSL the CID Additional DG Mr. T Krishna Prasad raised
questions over its admissibility as evidence in the court under Indian Evidence Act.
“There is no doubt about the scientific aspects of brain mapping but the legal aspects
have to be looked into. Under the Indian Evidence Act it can’t be considered as for
convicting an accused,” said Mr. Krishna Prasad.
Representatives from AP Judicial Academy and legal experts from AP Police Academy said it
can be used a corroborative evidence and not a primary evidence. They opined that it is
an investigation tool to zero in on suspects but not for convicting the accused.
Some of the forensic experts have raised a doubt that if the neighbors who visit the
crime scene may also have memory in their brain and if they are in the suspects list the
brain fingerprinting test may nail them too. Top police officials who participated in the
interaction said that the expertise of investigating official is more important while
choosing the probes. The accuracy of results depend too much on the investigating
official’s selection of probes like visuals of crime scene, murder weapon or words and
phrases. However if the accused and investigator has now knowledge of crime the
hypothetical questions can’t be used.
“The equipment can only be used if the suspect or accused gives consent. We don’t know
how many cases they give consent. We should not hurry up in buying such a costly
equipment,” said a police official.
Brain finger printing is based on the finding that the brain generates a unique
brain-wave pattern when a person encounters a familiar stimulus and this is read in a
fraction of second by using electrodes placed on head. A by-stander who witnessed a
murder could potentially be implicated as an accused if the test reveals that the said
person was familiar with the information related to the same
. Similarly, little is known about the impact of viewing portrayal of crime scene in the
media such as television, movies and newspaper on brain mapping. Hence, this test cannot
be used to prosecute an accused but can be used by an innocent as an ‘alibi’ by proving
that he/she does not have any memory about the crime on this test.
However Director General of Police Mr. B Prasada Rao said ,”Brain mapping helps to
identify the criminals and it can be useful. More than Lie Detector and Narco Analysis
the lie detector test was a success in abroad. We are thinking over to bring in this
technology to the State,”
Former DGP Mr Swaranjit Sen whose agency Swarna Suraksha is trying to promote the
equipment said ,”Third degree torture on criminals by the police can be put to an end,”
No comments:
Post a Comment