• Árpád Budaházi National University of Public Service Faculty of Law Enforcement Department of Criminal Procedure Law


lie detection, brain fingerprinting, P300, electroencephalography, testimony


According to some researchers, the brain fingerprinting technique is suitable for lie detection. Others see concerns about the method, and they doubt the applicability of brain fingerprinting. The technique is based on electroencephalography (EEG). The experts examine the electrical activity of the brain with it. Electrodes are placed on the scalp and connected to an electrically neutral area of the head (e.g., the earlobe). The technique also includes a screen on which the subject sees images. The experts examine with the method how the brain responds to the pictures shown one by one. The paper presents the experiments related to the brain fingerprinting technique. We search how the technique works and analyzes criminal cases in the United States in which brain fingerprinting has been used. We describe the brain fingerprinting examination process and methodology and examine whether the technique is suitable for lie detection. We also answer the question of whether the procedure is ideal for use in criminal cases.


Ahuja, D. & Singh B. (2012): Brain fingerprinting. Journal of Engineering and Technology Research, 4(6), 98-103.
Budaházi, Á., Fantoly, Zs., Kakuszi, B., Bitter I. & Czobor P. (2021). A műszeres vallomásellenőrzés fejlődési irányai. Budapest: Ludovika Egyetemi Kiadó
Clark County Prosecuting Attorney (2021): Jimmie Ray Slaughter. Downloaded July 20, 2021
Farwell Brain Fingerprinting (2021a): Helps to Free an Innocent Man, Downloaded July 20, 2021
Farwell Brain Fingrprinting (2021b): Catches a Serial Killer, Downloaded July 20, 2021
Farwell, L. A. – Richardson, D. C. – Richardson, G. M. (2014): Brain fingerprinting field studies comparing P300-MERMER and P300 brainwave responses in the detection of concealed information. Cognitive Neurodynamics, 7(4), 263–299. https://doi. org/10.1007/s11571-012-9230-0
Farwell, L. A. & Donchin, E. (1991): The Truth Will Out: Interrogative Polygraphy (“Lie Detection”) with event-related brain potentials, Psychophysiology, 28(5), 531–547. DOI:
Farwell, L. A. & Donchin, Emanuel (1986): The „brain detector”: P300 in the detection of deception, Psychophysiology, 23(4). 434–450.
Farwell, L. A. (2012): Brain fingerprinting: a comprehensive tutorial review of detection of concealed information with event-related brain potentials, Cognitive Neurodynamics, Vol. 6, No. 2. 115–154.
Fox, Dov (2008): Brain Imaging and the Bill of Rights: Memory Detection Technologies and American Criminal Justice, The American Journal of Bioethics, 8(1), 34–36. DOI:
Hurd, A. J. (2012): Reaching Past Fingertips with Forensic Neuroimaging – Non-Testimonial Evidence Exceeding the Fifth Amendment’s Grasp, Loyola Law Review, Vol. 58, No. 1. 213.
Littlefield, M. (2009): Constructing the Organ of Deceit: The Rhetoric of fMRI and Brain Fingerprinting in Post-9/11 America, Science Technology, & Human Values, 34(3), 365-392.
Lumpkin, J. (2021): Slaughter v. State – Opinion, Downloaded July 20, 2021
Matsuda, I. – Nittono, H. (2018): A concealment-specific frontal negative slow wave is generated from the right prefrontal cortex in the Concealed Information Test, Biological Psychology, 135 (May), 194–203. DOI:
Moenssens, A. A. (2002): Brain Fingerprinting – Can It Be Used to Detect the Innocence of Persons Charged with a Crime? UMKC Law Review, 70, 891–920.
Póczos, E. (2006): A hazugságvizsgálat jövőképe, Belügyi Szemle, 54(5), 100–109.
Rosenfeld, J. P. – Hu, X. – Labkovsky, E. – Meixner, J. & Winograd, M. R. (2013): Review of recent studies and issues regarding the P300-based complex trial protocol for detection of concealed information. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 90(2) 118–134. DOI:
Rosenfeld, J. P. – Nasman, V. T. – Whalen, R. – Cantwell, B. & Mazzeri, L. (1987): Late Vertex Positivity in Event-Related Potentials as a Guilty Knowledge Indicator: A New Method of Lie Detection, International Journal of Neuroscience, 34(1–2), 125–129. DOI:
Rosenfeld, J. Peter (2005): ‘Brain Fingerprinting’: A Critical Analysis. The Scientific Review of Mental Health Practice, 4(1), 20–37.
Stoller, S. E. & Wolpe, P. R. (2007): Emerging Neurotechnologies for Lie Detection and the Fifth Amendment, American Journal of Law & Medicine, 33(2–3), 359–375. DOI:
Sutton, S. – Braren, M. – Zubin, J. & John, E. R. (1965): Evoked potential correlates of stimulus uncertainty. Science, 150(3700), 1187–1188.
Wilcoxson, R., Brooks, N., Duckett, P. & Browne M. (2020): Brain Fingerprinting: A Warning Against Early Implementation, Downloaded July 20, 2021






Criminalistic and Criminal Justice Aspects in Solving and Proving of Criminal Of