<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=windows-1252">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2716.2200" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff><STRONG>New technology for catching liars poses privacy,
moral problems<BR><BR></STRONG>By CHRISTOPHER NEWTON, Associated
Press<BR>Published 12:41 p.m. PDT Friday, June 21, 2002<BR><BR>WASHINGTON (AP) -
The world is becoming a trickier place for people who tell lies - even little
white ones.<BR><BR>From thermal-imaging cameras, designed to read guilty eyes,
to brain-wave scanners, which essentially watch a lie in motion, the technology
of truth- seeking is leaping forward.<BR><BR>At the same time, more people are
finding their words put to the test, especially those who work for the
<BR>government.<BR><BR>FBI agents, themselves subjected to more polygraphs as a
result of the Robert Hanssen spy case, have been administering lie detection
tests at Fort Detrick, Md., and Dugway Proving Ground in Utah, bases with stores
of anthrax. Nuclear plant workers also are getting the tests in greater numbers
since Sept. 11.<BR><BR>"There has been a reawakening of our interest in being
able to determine the truth from each other," said sociologist Barbara Hetnick,
who teaches a course on lying at Wooster College. "As technology advances, we
may have to decide whether we want to let a machine decide guilt or
innocence."<BR><BR>The new frontiers of lie detection claim to offer greater
reliability than the decades-old polygraph, which measures heart and respiratory
rates as a person answers questions. They also pose new privacy problems, moral
dilemmas and the possibility that the average person will unwittingly face a
test.<BR><BR>At the Mayo Clinic, researchers hope to perfect a heat-sensing
camera that could scan people's faces and find subtle changes associated with
lying. In a small study of 20 people, the high-resolution thermal imaging camera
detected a faint blushing around the eyes of those who lied.<BR><BR>The
technique, still preliminary, could provide a simple and rapid way of scanning
people being questioned at airports or border crossings, researchers
say.<BR><BR>But would it be legal?<BR><BR>"As long as no one was being arrested
or detained solely on the basis of the test, there is no law against
<BR>scanning someone's face with a device," said Justin Hammerstein, a civil
liberties attorney in New York.<BR><BR>"You could use the device to subject
someone to greater scrutiny in a physical search or background check, and it
would be hard to argue that it is illegal."<BR><BR>Barry Steinhardt of the
American Civil Liberties Union said any technology that isn't 100 percent
effective could lead unfairly to innocent travelers being stranded at
airports.<BR><BR>"You would be introducing chaos into the situation and
inevitably focusing on people who are innocent," Steinhardt said.<BR><BR>At the
University of Pennsylvania, researcher Daniel Langleben is using a magnetic
resonance imaging machine, the device used to detect tumors, to identify parts
of the brain that people use when they lie.<BR><BR>"In the brain, you never get
something for nothing," Langleben said. "The process for telling a lie is more
complicated than telling the truth, resulting in more neuron
activity."<BR><BR>Even for the smoothest-talker, lying is tough work for the
brain.<BR><BR>First, the liar must hear the question and process it. Almost by
instinct, a liar will first think of the true <BR>answer before devising or
speaking an already devised false answer.<BR><BR>All that thinking adds up to a
lot of electrical signals shooting back and forth. Langleben says the extra
<BR>thought makes some sections of the brain light up like a bulb when viewed
with an MRI.<BR><BR>MRI machines are bulky, but their potential as lie detectors
could lead to the invention of smaller, more <BR>specialized versions, Langleben
said.<BR><BR>Other tests are on the market, although how well they perform is an
open question.<BR><BR>Hand-held "voice stress" detectors already are being sold
for $300 to $600 at some department stores and on the Internet.<BR><BR>Makers
claim the devices show when a person's voice trembles under the stress of a lie.
Although skeptics say there is no proof they work, police in Philadelphia, Los
Angeles and Miami are using more advanced versions and say they sometimes prompt
confessions.<BR><BR>Also, the subject need not be present. Police can record a
suspect's voice and check it for stress later.<BR><BR>Not everyone is sold on
it.<BR><BR>"Voices can shake because people are scared about being interrogated
by police," said Thomas Jakes, president of People for Civil Rights. "This
technology is nothing but a way to scare people."<BR><BR>Critics say failure on
any lie detector test can have unfair consequences, regardless of what the truth
may be.<BR><BR>Mark Mallah says he was suspended and put under 24-hour
surveillance after failing a routine polygraph test in 1994, when he was an FBI
counterintelligence agent.<BR><BR>He was finally cleared and reinstated 19
months later. He quit.<BR><BR>"They never produced any evidence or came forward
with anything, but the polygraph still undermined my career," said Mallah, who
practices law in San Francisco.<BR><BR>In the CIA, routine polygraphs led to the
suspicion of dozens of agents in the 1980s. Many were kept in <BR>professional
limbo for years, according to an FBI report.<BR><BR>"We should try to avoid a
society where suspicion is based on a machine and not on evidence," said Dale
Jenang, a sociologist and philosophy researcher at the University of California,
Berkeley. "Guilt and innocence are too important to leave to a
machine."<BR></BODY></HTML>