1

“INFORMATION PRESENT” and “INFORMATION ABSENT” SCENARIOS

We present three types of stimuli consisting of words, phrases, or pictures on a computer screen. Target stimuli are things that we know the suspect knows, whether he/she committed the crime or not. We make sure he/she knows these things before the test. Since he/she recognizes the targets as significant in this context, his brain emits an “Aha!” response. This is called a P300-MERMER (memory and encoding related multifaceted electroencephalographic response). It has a positive followed by a negative voltage at the midline parietal area (middle of the top of the head near the back). It looks like a peak followed by a valley in the red line. Brain-Wave Responses to Crime-Scene Information Target Stimuli

We present irrelevant stimuli, phrases unrelated to the crime. The response to irrelevant or unknown information, represented by the green line, does not have this P300-MERMER “aha” response. Mixed in with the target and irrelevant stimuli were a third type of stimuli known as probes. Probes contain information relevant to the crime that the subject has not been told, and that he denies knowing. We tell the subject the significance of the probes, but do not tell him which stimuli are the real, crime-relevant probes and which are irrelevant. (Example: “Mr. Subject, you will see several items – a knife, a pistol, a rifle, and a baseball bat. One of these is the murder weapon. You have told us that you do now know which one, right? So you will not recognize the real murder weapon when it is presented.”) Now we will see the suspect response to the probes, represented by the blue line. You will clearly see whether or not he/she knows the details of the crime that would be known only to the perpetrator and investigators. Brain-Wave Responses to Crime-Scene Information Target and Irrelevant Stimuli

Does the suspect have a record of the crime stored in his brain? Yes, he/she does. His/her brain recognizes – and shows a P300-MERMER response to -- not only the targets (red line) which we know he knows, but also the probes (blue line) that are known only to the perpetrator and investigators. The result is clear from looking at the brain responses, but that’s not how we make the determination. The computer analyzes the waveforms and objectively produces statistical confidence of information present or absent with highest accuracy. Brain-Wave Responses to Crime-Scene Information Target, Irrelevant, and Probe Stimuli “INFORMATION PRESENT” SCENARIO

The record stored in the subject brain did not match the crime. There is no P300-MERMER in response to the probes. Brain-Wave Responses to Crime-Scene Information Target, Irrelevant, and Probe Stimuli “INFORMATION ABSENT” SCENARIO

Brain Fingerprinting Head Set Examinee during Brain Fingerprinting Test

 The victim, Julie Helton, was an administrative assistant at the Wallsworth company. Brain Fingerprinting Technology Helps Put a Serial Killer in Prison for Life  On the evening of Saturday, January 8 th, the perpetrator cut the radiator hose in Julie Helton's car, which was parked by the MFA Propane Plant in New Cambria, Missouri, when she was about to drive home through a sparsely populated area.  The perpetrator waited at Lingo Road until her car stalled on an overpass, then approached her and offered her a ride.  They proceeded to bind her hands with baling twine, raped her, and murdered her.  During the course of the crime, the perpetrator took the victim to a trailer, where they raped her, and then back to Lingo Road, where they killed her with a knife in the neck.  In the course of the assault, the victim sustained bruises on her face and cuts on her hand.  The victim's body was left near railroad tracks.  The perpetrator and the victim both left footprints in the snow at the scene of the crime.  In the struggle, the victim lost some false fingernails at the scene of the crime.  The victim was wearing penny loafers.  According to an informant, one of the perpetrator or an accomplice was wearing a green stocking cap, and the perpetrator used cocaine that may have come from the victim's purse.  The perpetrator took a camera and a purse from the victim, and later disposed of the camera and the knife in the bushes by a road near the crime scene.

P robes: Probes contain information that the subject has no way of knowing if he did not participate in the crime or other situation of interest. And here are some Probes presented in this case Targets: Target stimuli present situation-relevant information that is known to be known to the subject and are disclosed to the subject before the test. Here are some Targets Presented in this case. Probes, Targets and Irrelevants Presented to James B. Grinder

Irrelevants: Irrelevant stimuli contain plausible, but incorrect, information about the crime. Here are some Irrelevants presented to Grinder Hung by rope, Bullet in back, Friday morning, Thursday afternoon, Flat tire, Dead battery, Henderson, Morgan, Nylon rope, Duct tape, Ethel, Callao, Lake Road, Axtel Road, Woods, Office, Gun, Bat, In apartment, Under house, Necklace, Ring, In river, Near pond, Door left unlocked, Window wide open, Wing tips, Green tie, Large lake, Wheat field, Green pumps, Red heels, Twisted ankle, Broken elbow, Sprained wrist, Scraped knee, By stream, Under bridge, Lock of hair, White sweater, Opium, Heroin, Solo Cup Factory, Fuller Brush, Company, Shoe, Watch, February 20, 1983, March 15, 1985 Irrelevants Probes, Targets and Irrelevants Presented to James B. Grinder

James B Grinder Case Study Grinder’s Brain-Wave Responses to Crime-Scene Information Target, Irrelevant, and Probe Stimuli Statistical confidence, computed by Bootstrapping Index Determination: Information Present Statistical Confidence: 100 % Brain Fingerprinting Test Result Subject Name: James B. Grinder

Brain Fingerprinting Results for James B. Grinder Determination: Information Present Statistical Confidence: 100 % James B. Grinder confessed, pled guilty, and was sentenced to life in prison.