ADVERTISEMENT
Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Legal News Blogs -> International and UK Law
OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Legal News
: International and UK LawCourts do not rely on a person’s memory alone
ADVERTISEMENTS
How much should the courts rely on a person’s memory? Today’s report by the
British Psychological Society has put memory to the test – and found it
wanting.
Research that illuminates the deficiencies of memory is clearly welcome:
courts and those who work in them can only benefit from knowing how memory
is fallible and varies according to the age of the witness, the kind of
event recalled, how long ago it took place and any questioning by police or
lawyers to elicit recall.
The failings of memory cannot be avoided, but the key question is how
evidence is used and the extent to which courts rely on it. Getting the
balance right between too much reliance and too little is difficult. So many
key points in civil and criminal trials swing on the accuracy, reliability
and honesty of human evidence.
Professor Martin Conway, the main author, is right to call for more caution
over using memory evidence that is uncorroborated. Cynicism over “recovered”
memories of child-sex abuse led to the coining of “false memory syndrome”.
But without any other evidence, such allegations would not succeed. Judges
already give careful guidance to juries when relying on memory.
Professor Conway, however, also urges greater use of memory experts to advise
courts on when and to what extent a memory may be credible. Such changes
would not, in my view, bring significant improvements. The use of large
numbers of memory experts would add to the cost and length of trials, and
lead to many unwarranted acquittals. Where memory is an important issue,
there is nothing now to stop counsel calling an expert witness to help the
court.
The criminal justice system already has many good protections against unfair
convictions. A criminal trial requires the case to be proved “beyond a
reasonable doubt”. That is a high standard: if there is significant doubt
about the memory of a key witness, the prosecution will fail.Full post as published by International and UK Law on July 10, 2008 (boomark / email).
Related Law Articles
Selection of State Supreme Court Judges
How State Court Judges are Selected
Lawsuits and Settlements
Oklahoma Bacterial Outbreak
One Person Dead, 14 Hospitalized
Composix Kugel Mesh Patches
alleging the memory recoil ring has the potential to break and cause bowel perforation or chronic enteric fistulae.
Related Searches
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.

She didn’t sell the plane on eBay
If you want to increase your intelligence, train your working memory
US Patent 7352007 - Phosphorescent nanotube memory
Social Security Disability SSI and Memory Loss








