November 14, 2005
Kids can remember events even if they can't remember times: Finding has significant implications for child testimony
Society for Research in Child Development, press release 14-Nov-2005
Remembering when an event occurred is particularly important when you're a witness in the legal system. But while adults are pretty good at determining the time of an event based on reconstructing that event (i.e., if the event occurred at the beach, it must have been summer), a new study finds that isn't the case for children.
The study, published in the November/December issue of the journal Child Development, finds that while children aged 4 through 13 can recall the details of an event fairly well, they are unable to extrapolate further and link those details with a specific time of year, even when it occurs around a major holiday. [...]
The findings have significant implications when it comes to the use of children's testimony in legal cases, says lead researcher William J. Friedman, Ph.D., professor of psychology at Oberlin College. "These findings are at odds with the practice of attorneys who attempt to discredit the content of a child's testimony if the child cannot remember when an alleged event occurred," he said. "Just because a child doesn't remember when the event occurred, doesn't mean that child doesn't remember the details of the event."
Summarized from Child Development, Vol. 76, Issue 6, The Development of Temporal-Reconstructive Abilities by Friedman WJ (Oberlin College) and Lyon TD (University of Southern California).
Posted by Emma at 11:46 AM | Comments (0)
October 26, 2005
Memory expert is final witness: Loftus says police suggested details
Columbia Daily Tribune, October 21, 2005
A world-renowned cognitive psychologist who took the stand this morning as an expert witness on memory for Ryan Ferguson's defense team testified that police detectives planted details of the killing of Tribune Sports Editor Kent Heitholt in the mind of Chuck Erickson. Elizabeth Loftus, a research professor at the University of California-Irvine, said police videos of interviews with Erickson on the day he was arrested more than a year ago show detectives offering information about the slaying that she believes were later adopted into the suspect's memory of the event.
Posted by Emma at 07:46 AM | Comments (0)
August 28, 2005
The problem with eyewitnesses
BBC News online, 24 August 2005
The aftermath of the shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes at Stockwell Tube station has shown that eyewitness testimony may not always be as reliable as it seems.
On the day Mr Menezes was killed, a picture was quickly painted by eyewitnesses of a suspect who had vaulted over a ticket barrier, ran away from police, and had worn a bulky jacket that could have concealed a device. [...] Over the last month, the image of Mr Menezes' conduct has been slowly dispelled, before being completely shattered by Independent Police Complaints Commission documents leaked to ITV News.
Posted by Emma at 09:55 AM | Comments (0)
July 30, 2005
Law Probablity and Risk 4(1/2)
Law Probablity and Risk 4(1/2), March 2005
Articles on statistical testimony of expert witnesses; ethical issues in being an expert witness; negative conclusion cases; posterior probabilities for the assessment of scientific evidence; sampling error in DNA profiles
Some issues arising in the presentation of statistical testimony
Joseph L. Gastwirth
Ethical issues in being an expert witness
Joseph B. Kadane
A lawyer's view of the statistical expert
Steven L. Willborn
If wishes were horses: discursive comments on attempts to prevent individuals from being unfairly burdened by their reference classes
Peter Tillers
Equitable and adversarial pricing for items under warranty
Nozer D. Singpurwalla and Byeon Joon Seung
Negative conclusion cases: a proposal for likelihood ratio evaluation
Bruno Cardinetti and Camillo Cammarota
Inadequacies of posterior probabilities for the assessment of scientific evidence
F. Taroni and A. Biedermann
An introduction to Bayesian credible intervals for sampling error in DNA profiles
James M. Curran
Posted by Emma at 09:03 AM | Comments (0)
May 19, 2005
Judges think children more honest but less reliable than adults, says Queen's study
Queen's University Press Release 18-May-2005
Judges perceive child witnesses as being more honest than adults when testifying in court, but recognize that children's limited memory and communication skills, and greater suggestibility may make them less reliable than adults. The multi-disciplinary research, the first of its kind to examine judges' perceptions of child witnesses, was led by Queen's Child and Family Law scholar Nick Bala. It addresses how judges assess the honesty and reliability of children's court testimony, and how accurate their observations are. It also makes recommendations for how to train child protection professionals and judges to most effectively frame their questions to child witnesses. The research, to be published in next month's Alberta Law Review, has important implications for educating child-protection professionals, including judges.
The findings are based on two related studies that merge traditional legal scholarship on children's truth telling, and a national survey of child-protection professionals that assesses perceptions of child witnesses and truth telling, with judges' responses to mock interviews. [...]
Posted by Emma at 01:15 PM | Comments (0)
September 13, 2004
Repressed memories take the stand
Repressed memories take the stand
Portsmouth Herald (US), 12 Sept 04
Hoping to show repressed memories are not measurably reliable enough to be
admissible in court, the defense began dismantling the prosecution recently
in what may yet prove to be a landmark sexual abuse case. Eighteen-year-old
Rhianna Light claims her father, Exeter resident Phil Bourgelais, sexually
abused her as a child. In 2001, she began to recall what she says were
repressed memories of the abuse. But a state law known as the Hungerford
Law prevents such memories from being admissible in court unless eight
criteria are met. [...] When the state Supreme Court heard Hungerford in
1996, expert witnesses on both sides of the aisle testified about memory
repression. One of them, Dan Brown, a Massachusetts psychologist and an
expert on repressed trauma memories, returned to court last month as a
witness for the prosecution in the Bourgelais case. This past Tuesday, when
the hearing resumed in Rockingham County Superior Court, everything from
Brown's credentials to his methodologies were under siege. [...] States with
similar rules governing the admissibility of repressed memories will be
watching closely. If Nadeau finds, as assistant county prosecutor Brad
Bolton hopes, that the science of memory recovery has caught up with the
phenomenon, she could modify the state's Hungerford Law. If that happens,
it also could mark the end of an era, and change the way some sexual assault
cases are tried.
http://www.yorkweekly.com/news/09122004/news/37107.htm
Posted by Emma at 07:42 AM | Comments (0)