Krauss, A. (2005) is an interview with Elizabeth Loftus, a professor of psychology and law at the University of California in Irvine. Loftus tells us that human memories are routinely wrong. Loftus has participated in research which has proved that eyewitness testimony can be flawed and that courtroom attorneys can influence a witness's memory of events. “In courtrooms, eyewitnesses who incorrectly recall the color of an accused perpetrator's shirt can send an innocent person to prison potentially for life.”(Krauss, A. (2005). Loftus's research has supported that eyewitness testimony can be flawed and that courtroom attorneys can influence a witness's memory of the events they experience. The most controversial of her premises is her assertion that adults and children who have long repressed memories of being sexually abused, yet seem to suddenly recall events when they are pressed in counseling sessions. Loftus says that in theory, these children are unwittingly “fabricating” the crime scenes. …show more content…
Loftus states that in the mid-1990s the repressed memory theory had become very popular among psychologists.
The repressed memory theory was coined by Debra A. Poole of Central Michigan University, who carried out a study in 1995 and found that in the U.S. and the U.K., about a fourth of all therapists were using methods that could be characterized as suggestive: which consisted of hypnosis, dream interpretation, and direct demands on patients to let them imagine that they had been sexually abused as children. Patients had long forgotten about their traumas, but as the psychologists attempted to help bring the memories back to life, Lotus says that there was an increasing chance that they would implant false memories in
patients. Loftus gives more support regarding a study which occurred in 1997. Psychiatrist David L. Corwin and Erna Olafson published an article about a girl they referred to as Jane Doe. When Jane was interviewed the first time, her divorced parents had already been fighting over her custody for five years. During the legal proceedings, the father accused his former wife of having sexually abused Jane. Loftus tells that Child Protective Services had come to the conclusion that Jane had been neither sexually nor physically abused. Another clinical psychologist also investigated the situation and found that it was unclear whether there really had been abuse by the mother or whether it had emerged from the imagination of the father, who then may have fed it all to Jane, who made the allegations. Loftus says that the effects of suggestive questioning can be amazing. In research studies that she participated in, she has been able to convince adult volunteers that they got lost in a supermarket as a child, even though their parents tell of the occurrence of it never happening. Many of the subjects even invent details to make the story more dramatic and believable. Loftus states that “Our memories are extremely malleable and open to suggestion. Whether we get lost in a supermarket as a kid, were supposedly sexually abused or, if we wrongly remember the color of the getaway car during trial, memories can be very unreliable or suggested.” (Krauss, A. (2005). The more often false memories are explicitly formulated, the livelier they become which makes them appear more credible. False memories can be deliberately implanted. This evidence from the interview with Loftus can support that children shouldn’t be used as eye-witnesses. Referring back to the Jane Doe case, her father may have told her to testify what she said for his own gain. Children are especially susceptible to suggestion, and when they say something in a testimony that didn’t occur, that could further contradict and complicate the case even more.
In chapter 6 of Unfair, Adam Benforado addresses the issues regarding human being’s poor memory and our justice systems outrageous reliability on eye witness testimony. Benforado believes that our real memories are severely obstructed by the human brains limit in perception. Our brains are not able to recall every moment of every day because there is simply no way to process everything we encounter in a day. Although most science supports the idea that our memories are unreliable and biased, most of us humans believe we have good and accurate memory. We also expect other to be able to perform basic memory task with accuracy and consistency, which is why for years, the United States so desperately depended on eye witness testimony to get a conviction. This desperation over the years has left hundreds, possibility thousands of innocent citizens paying for a crime they did not commit. According to the reading, of the first 250 exonerations in the United States, 190 of them happen to have involved mistaken identification’s
The influence of the investigators parallels the influence of therapists in cases of sexually abused children's recovered memories. Works Cited 1)Silverglate, Harvey A; Takei, Carl:Mistrial- The Capturing of Friedman's DVD sheds new light on the case.
This paper will consider eye witness testimony and its place in convicting accused criminals. Psychology online (2013) defines “eye witness testimony” as a statement from a person who has witnessed a crime, and is capable of communicating what they have seen, to a court of law under oath. Eye witness testimonies are used to convict accused criminals due to the first hand nature of the eye witnesses’ observations. There are however many faults within this system of identification. Characteristics of the crime is the first issue that will be discussed in this paper, and the flaws that have been identified. The second issue to be discussed will be the stress impact and the inability to correctly identify the accused in a violent or weapon focused crime. The third issue to be discussed is inter racial identification and the problems faced when this becomes a prominent issue. The fourth issue will be time lapse, meaning, the time between the crime and the eye witness making a statement and how the memory can be misconstrued in this time frame. To follow this will be the issue of how much trust jurors-who have no legal training-put on to the eye witness testimony, which may be faltered. This paper references the works of primarily Wells and Olsen (2003) and Rodin (1987) and Schmechel et al. (2006) it will be argued that eye witness testimony is not always accurate, due to many features; inter racial identification, characteristics of the crime, response latency, and line up procedures therefore this paper will confirm that eyewitness testimonies should not be utilised in the criminal ju...
Unfortunately, the therapist Shawn Connerly, and Kee MacFarlane didn’t do a great job with their interviewing the children involved in the McMartin case. Within, the case supposedly the young children experienced sexual abuse from their daycare providers. Placing children on the witness stand; to repeat what occurred in the daycare. With no customary protocol interviewing a minor involved in a sexual abuse case. The McMartin case didn’t report the kid’s cognitive factors for understanding and their abilities of memory. Shawn starting his interview off with “yucky secrets” is suggestibility a leading question for the victim to answer. Then Kee MacFarlane way of doing the interview with the children was also very leading, and rewarding the
More than 200,000 children may be involved in the legal system in any given year, and 13,000 of these children are preschool age. Often with these cases involving young children, issues arise concerning credibility, vulnerability, and memory retrieval. Studies have shown that preschool age children are quite capable of providing accurate testimony, but they are also more vulnerable to distorting this memory and testimony. Public and professional opinion about the credibility of children as witnesses in court cases has been sharply divided. On one side, it is contended that when children disclose details of a circumstance, they must be believed, no matter what techniques were used to obtain this disclosure. For example, if a child is asked whether or not he/she was abused, and to describe this incident, we must believe that child because children cannot possibly generate a false report of their own sexual victimization. The other side depicts children as being helpless sponges ...
Memory is not reliable; memory can be altered and adjusted. Memory is stored in the brain just like files stored in a cabinet, you store it, save it and then later on retrieve and sometimes even alter and return it. In doing so that changes the original data that was first stored. Over time memory fades and becomes distorted, trauma and other events in life can cause the way we store memory to become faulty. So when focusing on eyewitnesses, sometimes our memory will not relay correct information due to different cues, questioning, and trauma and so forth, which makes eyewitness even harder to rely on. Yet it is still applied in the criminal justice system.
Eyewitness testimony plays a crucial role in criminal investigations. Thus, it is important to know how to eliminate factors that can negatively impact eyewitnesses’ recall ability. The result of eyewitness misidentification can lead to numerous inaccurate and wrongful convictions. One study suggests that more than 75,000 people a year become criminal defendants on the basis of eyewitness identifications (Schechel, O'Toole, Easterly, & Loftus, 2006, p.178). Another study has shown that approximately 100 people who were convicted have been exonerated by forensic evidence. Moreover, 75% of these people were known to be victims of mistaken identification. The known DNA exoneration cases are just a fragment of the innocent people who have been convicted based on mistaken eyewitness identification evidence (Wells & Olson, 2003).
Amici curiae is a social psychologist and legal scholar who studies the effects of the Recovered Memory Syndrome on individuals’ behaviors and judicial practices. Amici has conducted research and published several peer-reviewed articles explaining the role of hypnosis in uncovering repressed memories and related traumas that come along with it. This brief intends to provide the Court with relevant and current literature explaining the recovered memory phenomenon and its relationship with psychotherapeutic techniques where recovery of memories often occurs. Research presented by amici demonstrates that cases of sexual abuse, real or imagined, must be given careful consideration as victims undergo significant emotional
In Laurence Armand French Ph.D. and Thomas J. Young Ph.D.’s article The False Memory Syndrome: Clinical/Legal Issues for the Prosecution talks about memory recall being an unreliable form of evidence in the Criminal Justice System. French and Young state that hypnosis and lie detector tests are a misconception because “the cognitive interpretations of the emotional/autonomic aspects of the central nervous (CNS) and peripheral nervous systems are not true indicators of reality,” (p. 38).
False memories being created is obvious through many different ways, such as eye-witness testimonies and past experiments that were conducted, however repression is an issue that has many baffled. There seems to be little evidence on the factual basis of repressed memories, and many argue that it does not exist. The evidence for repression in laboratories is slowly emerging, but not as rapidly as the evidence for false memories. It has been hard to clinically experiment with repressed memories because most memories are unable to be examined during the actual event to corroborate stories. Experimenters are discovering new ways to eliminate this barrier by creating memories within the experiment’s initial phase. This is important for examining the creation of false memories during the study phase. This research study will explore the differences between recovered memories and false memories through research and experiments. Other terms and closely related terms will be discussed, while examining any differences, in relation to repressed memories. The possibility of decoding an actual difference between recovered memories and false memories, through biological techniques. Because false memories can be created, examining these creations in a laboratory setting can shed light on facts overlooked. Exploring these issues will also help with the development of better therapeutic techniques for therapists in dealing with memories. This can lead to an easier process for patients and therapists if they must go through the legal system in relation to an uncovered memory.
Elizabeth Loftus, is a psychologist, mainly concerned with how subsequent information can affect an eyewitness’s testimony. Loftus has focused on misleading information in both the difference in wording of questions and how these questions can influence eyewitness testimony. This research is important because frequently, eyewitness testimony is a crucial element in criminal proceedings. Throughout Loftus’s career she has found a witness’s memory is highly flexible and subject to being influenced. The classic study by Loftus and Palmer (1974), illustrates that eyewitness testimony can be influenced by leading questions and ultimately proved unreliable.
There has been considerable debate worldwide, regarding the accuracy of eyewitness testimony in the criminal justice system. Particularly, arguments have surrounded wrongful convictions that have resulted from incorrect eyewitness evidence (Areh, 2011; Howitt, 2012; Nelson, Laney, Bowman-Fowler, Knowles, Davis & Loftus, 2011). The purpose of this essay is to consider psychological research about the accuracy of eyewitness testimony and its placement in the criminal justice system. Firstly, this essay will define how eyewitnesses and their testimonies are used within the criminal justice system and the current debate surrounding its usage. Secondly, the impact of post-identification feedback will be used to show the affect on the confidence of a witness. Thirdly, studies around gender related differences will show how a witnesses gender can affect memory recall and accuracy. Fourthly, empirical studies will be used to highlight how a psychological experience called change blindness can cause mistakes in eyewitness identification. Finally, the effect of cross-examination will be used to explore the impact on eyewitness accuracy. It will be argued, that eyewitness testimony is not accurate and highly subjective, therefore, the criminal justice system must reduce the impact that eyewitness testimony is allowed to have. Developing better policies and procedures to avoid wrongful convictions by misled judges and jury members can do this.
Every day a child is called on to testify in a courtroom. Children who have to testify in open court are easily influenced by outside sources. This paper will show the reasons children should not be used as witnesses in a courtroom. I will show all the different influences that a child receives and prove them uncredible. The interview process can influence a child greatly. Ceci and Bruck (1995) found a study that shows that child witnesses may be questioned up to12 times during the course of an investigation. The questioning process can take up to a year and a half to be completed. Children are not capable of remembering exact details for that period. Their answers to questions will change each time he or she is asked. This is because they do not retain information in the same way as an adult. Most studies have shown that children start to lose their ability to recall an event accurately only 10 days after the original event has happened. Another factor in a child’s ability to recall an event is stress. A child can go into a shock stage and repress all memories of what has happened to them. These memories may not resurface for many years. This affects a child’s ability to identify the suspect in photo and live line-ups. The amount of stress a child goes through affects their ability to answer questions in an interview, if they cannot remember what has happened, how are they supposed to answer the myriad of questions the interviewer will ask them.
An alternative view to this debate, are from practicing therapist who argue that most recovered memories are true, and that there is still some evidence to support the concept of repressed memories (Briere & Conte, 1993). They claim that traumatic memories such as sexual abuse tend to be different from ordinary memories because they are encoded in a way that prevents them from being accessible in everyday life. In addition, they argue that certain procedures during therapy are necessary in order to bring the repressed memories back into conscious awareness, and this is deemed necessary in order to help the patient recover. Despite these claims, there is little evidence to support the validity of reported cases of recovered memories, and most of the theories are mainly based on speculation rather than scientific evidence. However, there have been some cases in which a recovered memory did corresponded to an actual event that occurred. For example, an article by Freyd (1999), reported a case in which a man called Frank Fitzpatrick recovered memories of sexual abuse from childhood. Although this
Eyewitness testimony is especially vulnerable to error when the question is misleading or when there’s a difference in ethnicity. However, using an eyewitness as a source of evidence can be risky and is rarely 100% accurate. This can be proven by the theory of the possibility of false memory formation and the question of whether or not a memory can lie. For instance, a group of students saw the face of a young man with straight hair, then heard a description of the face supposedly written by another witness, one that wrongly mentioned light, curly hair. When they reconstructed the face using a kit of facial features, a third of their reconstructions contained the misleading detail, whereas only 5 percent contained it when curly hair was not mentioned (Page 359). This situation shows how misleading information from other sources can be profoundly altered.