Science works to tap the minds of the dead

Decoding how brain stores information would revolutionize forensic police work

In criminal trials of the future, juries may find out whodunit by tapping into the memories of victims, even when those victims are dead, according to futurists advising the British government.

Within 20 years, scientists will decode the complex system of chemical markers with which the human brain stores information, says a paper compiled by the consultants.

"Neuro-chemical technology may provide greater access to the memories of the living and possibly the recently deceased," says the paper, which was submitted to the "Foresight" program of the British Department of Trade and Industry.

Canada's best-known futurist, Frank Ogden, a Vancouver-based science consultant who goes by the name of Dr. Tomorrow, said he agrees that such technology is on its way.

"I believe it," Mr. Ogden said. "(Memory) is just information like anything else. The mind is similar to a computer. And even when you erase something on a computer, by putting it in the trash, it's still there."

Just as a good computer technician can find supposedly erased information on a hard-drive, Mr. Ogden said, skilled biotechnicians will be able to find and read human memory.

"Once we learn to read the chemical formula, we'll be able to read memories," he said. "I don't think it will be next week, or before the next election, but today anything is possible."

Myrna Raeder, a legal expert on evidence at the Southwestern University School of Law in Los Angeles, said the opportunity to collect evidence from the mind of the murder victim would have a huge impact on trial law.

"What stronger evidence could there ever be?" she asked. The very power of such evidence will likely give pause to judges, she said, who often worry about jurors being overwhelmed by high-tech evidence to the point of ignoring other useful evidence gathered by more traditional methods.

For this reason, the admissibility of even DNA evidence, now in common use in criminal trials, is still often challenged, Ms. Raeder said. And lie detectors, despite the fact that they've been around for most of the 20th century, are still regularly disallowed as evidence, partly for fear that jurors will overvalue them.

But without question, future technology will have definite consequences for those on trial.

Lawrence Kobilinsky, a City University of New York criminal justice professor who keeps a close eye on evidence technology, said that although less ambitious than the brain-reading, research is already under way to analyse stress-related chemicals produced by murder victims.

Other evidence-related technology on the horizon, he said, will include a much increased ability of police to analyse crime-scene clues.

"A lot of the current predictions will come true," Mr. Kobilinsky said. As technology brings about miniaturization of sophisticated equipment, more of the evidence that must now be sent to the lab will be tested right at the scene, leading to quicker arrests, he said.

DNA testing itself will become more sophisticated as well, Mr. Kobilinsky said, allowing full DNA sequencing. This will allow testing to positively identify a person, instead of merely narrowing down the genetic field, which current partial DNA matches now do.