Hannah Frey
👤 SpeakerAppearances Over Time
Podcast Appearances
So the witness recanted.
30 years later.
And the guy was released.
So it wasn't because of the P300 brain scan.
But this was in Iowa, by the way.
The Iowa courts said that they would consider that evidence admissible.
However, it wasn't necessary for them to reverse his conviction.
Yeah, right.
Surely the neuroscience machine will vindicate me.
Now, ever since that Iowa case, a lot of other courts have said that P300 scans are inadmissible.
But if the defendant really wants to do it, then that's their right.
They can divulge whatever they can say, whatever they want, but they cannot be compelled to say or be scanned in the brain against their will.
But there isn't a constitutional amendment about this.
It comes down to what different courts have decided in different contexts.
I looked into this in a minefield episode.