{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.013836477987421384, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 4.827838827838828, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
SCANNING THE HORIZON : THE PAST , PRESENT , AND FUTURE OF NEUROIMAGING FOR LIE DETECTION IN COURT

What if there were a test to diagnose a lie as easily as a disease? How would the operation of the courts of society change to accommodate such an amazing development? We may find out sooner than you think. Our ability to understand the inner workings of the brain is rapidly advancing, and may shortly be so sophisticated that scientists will be able to reliably spot a liar based solely on how his or her brain fiinctions during the act of lying. To date, no judge has ruled the results of neuroimaging-based lie detection admissible in court, but briskly advancing scholarship may soon make it impossible to exclude. This Note will chart the course of scientific efforts to develop a reliable method of lie detection and analyze the laws of evidence related to the admissibility of the product of those efforts. More specifically, this Note will address the benefits and dangers of accurate lie detection, speak to the moral and constitutional difficulties posed by such technology, and offer a prediction for the role it may play in the ftiture of American jurisprudence. So why does this matter? Why should lawyers spend their scarce time trying to understand cutting-edge science when the function of a legal professional can seem so insulated from the modem technological world? Because that isolation cannot and should not last for much longer. From science is derived understanding and ability unimaginable to previous generations. It is commonplace to observe that new technologies