Excerpt:
The defense tried to use brain scans of the defendant to prove its client had not intentionally defrauded the government. In a 39-page opinion, Judge Tu Pham provided both a rebuke of this kind of fMRI evidence now, and a roadmap for how future defendants may be able to satisfy the Daubert standard, which governs the admissibility of scientific evidence.
“It has no automatic binding force on any other
court, but because it’s been so carefully done, it will very likely carry a lot of persuasive value,” said Owen Jones, a professor of law and biological sciences at Vanderbilt University, who observed the entire hearing.
The specific facts of the Tennessee case revolve around whether defendant Lorne Semrau, CEO of two nursing home facilities, intentionally had his employees fraudulently fill out Medicare and Medicaid forms. Semrau claims he acted in good faith and that the government directions were unclear; the government argues his companies made an extra $3 million by marking up a variety of services beyond their assigned value. The brain scans were intended to show Semrau is telling the truth today about his behavior in the past.
As Jones pointed out to Wired.com in May, with the fMRI scans, “the defense is attempting to introduce evidence of the brain’s current assessment of the brain’s former mental state.”
To get the brain scans into Federal court, the evidence had to meet the Daubert standard, so-named for the 1993 Supreme Court case that established rules for scientific testimony. Daubert has multiple prongs, but they don’t form a literal checklist: Judges are allowed to examine the evidence holistically.
Click to read the rest of "Brain Scan Lie-Detection Deemed Far From Ready for Courtroom" (Wired Science).
Comments