In my opinion this violates a suspects constitutional right to protection from self incrimination, if the MRI is done without the suspects' permission. If used and a person on trial lied during testimony the court would know that the witness was committing perjury and could not stop themselves from divulging this information. If you can lie but cannot hide the fact you are giving testimony against yourself with out your permission, It seem to be the equivilent of being forced to do so, or being drugged when questioned. Just because the process isn't painful does not mean you are not being tortured.
it is disturbing that we have reached the threshold of insanity were we actually discuss the feasibility of criminalizing cognitive thought. The potential for inaccuracy, abuses miscarriages of justice are clearly apparent. Our current bill of rights the forth amendment,and constitutional laws should protect our citizens from illegal search and seizure, that include on your person in your mind, does consent factor in in a free society that gives each individual the right to decide what goes into his body, as he would have the right to decide who enters his home. Does that right become even more enforceable as the intrusion become more invasive such as his mind. Is it ethical to disregard a persons god given free will and intrude into his consciousness forcefully. if go down that path, where will it end. what safeguards the public against abuse, how do we enforce the boundaries of what law enforcement or intelligence agencies can see and collect. should a cop be able to see my private memories of my naked wife while he's searching for evidence of a traffic violation. what will be deemed acceptable and reliable evidence pictures of your memories, third party written data or misinterpretation of thoughts. is that enough to condemn someone for decades of their lives. Our misguided justice system once condemned thousands of innocent people on rape and murder charges before the development of DNA research. and has had exonerate thousands of convicts based on what is now deemed as inaccurate evidence after the fact. these men have lost their lives in prison, their livelihood, and quality of life as a result of overzealous desire to prosecute rather than to seek justice. I think that its irresponsible to utilize this technology in trials cases when We don't know enough about the long term ethical and legal ramifications of it. I would hope that any judge who irresponsibly allows evidence of fMRi technology to justify a conviction. would have the verdicts in those cases reviewed and appealed. this technology is being developed by private sector companies, they can be sold to anyone even terrorist what protects the public from unlawful intrusions, what protects our personal information in the minds of those who have access to it, what protects sensitive information from being gleaned from military officials.crimes involving invasion of privacy, or to steal personal information. what technology protects our citizens privacy from violations of the law, When we violate the law, to enforce the law, we degenerate the integrity of the law.
Dissent All this is going on in my country without our consent. They are well on the way of using it extensively wether we like it or not. I am one of the victims and for 25 year I've been subjected to all kinds of abuse you wouldn't imagine.
Why did y'all shorten up the video about the wallet and ring I made a couple comments about it
Lie detectors should be mandatory. Every case, from small claims to the Supreme Court- should use them as evidence.
Agreed
In my opinion this violates a suspects constitutional right to protection from self incrimination, if the MRI is done without the suspects' permission. If used and a person on trial lied during testimony the court would know that the witness was committing perjury and could not stop themselves from divulging this information. If you can lie but cannot hide the fact you are giving testimony against yourself with out your permission, It seem to be the equivilent of being forced to do so, or being drugged when questioned. Just because the process isn't painful does not mean you are not being tortured.
Like the fact of it being his ring
there is no way your brain can bring up information on the scan unless you have knowledge of the incident in the first plae
it is disturbing that we have reached the threshold of insanity were we actually discuss the feasibility of criminalizing cognitive thought. The potential for inaccuracy, abuses miscarriages of justice are clearly apparent. Our current bill of rights the forth amendment,and constitutional laws should protect our citizens from illegal search and seizure, that include on your person in your mind, does consent factor in in a free society that gives each individual the right to decide what goes into his body, as he would have the right to decide who enters his home. Does that right become even more enforceable as the intrusion become more invasive such as his mind. Is it ethical to disregard a persons god given free will and intrude into his consciousness forcefully. if go down that path, where will it end. what safeguards the public against abuse, how do we enforce the boundaries of what law enforcement or intelligence agencies can see and collect. should a cop be able to see my private memories of my naked wife while he's searching for evidence of a traffic violation. what will be deemed acceptable and reliable evidence pictures of your memories, third party written data or misinterpretation of thoughts. is that enough to condemn someone for decades of their lives. Our misguided justice system once condemned thousands of innocent people on rape and murder charges before the development of DNA research. and has had exonerate thousands of convicts based on what is now deemed as inaccurate evidence after the fact. these men have lost their lives in prison, their livelihood, and quality of life as a result of overzealous desire to prosecute rather than to seek justice. I think that its irresponsible to utilize this technology in trials cases when We don't know enough about the long term ethical and legal ramifications of it. I would hope that any judge who irresponsibly allows evidence of fMRi technology to justify a conviction. would have the verdicts in those cases reviewed and appealed. this technology is being developed by private sector companies, they can be sold to anyone even terrorist what protects the public from unlawful intrusions, what protects our personal information in the minds of those who have access to it, what protects sensitive information from being gleaned from military officials.crimes involving invasion of privacy, or to steal personal information. what technology protects our citizens privacy from violations of the law,
When we violate the law, to enforce the law, we degenerate the integrity of the law.
Dissent All this is going on in my country without our consent. They are well on the way of using it extensively wether we like it or not. I am one of the victims and for 25 year I've been subjected to all kinds of abuse you wouldn't imagine.
Helmaerl Cheny
what country are you in and have you tried traveling somewhere else
Even fake memories been put there still shows the truth
It looks like pretty precise technology too me this technology needs to be used in our judiciary system NOW!
How come y'all don't like this is it money