Bfp
In any situation involving human memory, questions can be raised regarding the fallibility of human memory and factors that might influence memory. Such questions can in principle be raised in the Harrington and Harris cases. The same issues can be raised in any other forensic situation involving human memory – and this includes all situations involving testimony by witnesses, victims, or perpetrators, alleged or actual.
In the Harrington and Harris cases, Brain Fingerprinting® testing proved that the two men who had been convicted of murder did not have salient, significant facts regarding the respective murders stored in their brains. Does this really prove they are innocent? What if they committed the murders, and did not notice what they were doing, or forgot the important facts? What if they had a physical or mental illness that impaired their memory? What if they were under the influence of alcohol or drugs that tend to impair memory?
This document seeks to clarify the issues related to memory in the application of Brain Fingerprinting, and to delineate what Brain Fingerprinting testing can prove scientifically, and what must be decided not by science or scientific experts but by a judge or jury.
In both the Harrington and Harris cases, Brain Fingerprinting testing proved two things: 1) that salient features of the crime were not stored in the suspect’s brain, and 2) that salient features of the alibi were stored in the suspect’s brain. The latter finding shows that the suspect did not suffer from a failure of memory. Brain Fingerprinting testing proved that both suspects’ brains contained a clear record of the events of the evening of the crime. This record matched the respective accounts of the events of the evening of the crime, as told by the alibi witnesses. The records stored in the brains of the two suspects did not match the respective crime scenes.
...
View Full Essay