Science magazine recently reported on a Tennessee federal magistrate judge’s decision recommending the exclusion of brain-based lie detection (the first federal case of its kind).
The Tennessee decision cited an article co-authored by Teneille Brown, an assistant professor of law at the University of Utah S.J. Quinney College of Law, and her colleague Emily Murphy, which was published in the Stanford Law Review. Brown said that she spoke to the prosecuting attorney earlier this year, and he relied in part on an argument she and Murphy advanced in the same article. Furthermore, the magistrate judge adopted the Federal Rules of Evidence 403 analysis Brown and Murphy advocated for — that the brain images are overly prejudicial.
To read the Science article, click here.
To read the opinion, click here: fMRI Report and Recommendation