The development of brain-reading technologies has raised expectations that it will finally be possible to detect lies. However, the existence of these new technologies has also raised fears that the authorities might use them to read people’s minds without their consent and obtain evidence that could be used against them in criminal proceedings, a scenario that raises questions about possible violations of the right against self-incrimination. The aim of this Article is to analyze whether the obtaining of incriminating information through the non-consensual use of brain-reading technologies can violate the right against self-incrimination under its traditional interpretation, according to which the scope of application of this right includes only “testimonial evidence,” thus excluding “real or physical evidence.”
