1 00:00:01,440 --> 00:00:04,160 Speaker 1: Hey, folks, Kate Judson here. I'm a lawyer and the 2 00:00:04,200 --> 00:00:07,720 Speaker 1: executive director of the Center for Integrity and Forensic Sciences. 3 00:00:10,360 --> 00:00:13,560 Speaker 1: We're back with another episode of Junk Science, a series 4 00:00:13,600 --> 00:00:17,239 Speaker 1: we first released in twenty twenty, but these stories are 5 00:00:17,440 --> 00:00:21,680 Speaker 1: just as relevant as ever. This week we'll hear about 6 00:00:21,720 --> 00:00:25,680 Speaker 1: eyewitness testimony. Of all the types of forensic evidence we've 7 00:00:25,720 --> 00:00:28,680 Speaker 1: heard about in this series, this one is the most 8 00:00:28,720 --> 00:00:32,559 Speaker 1: personal and mind bending, because each of us hold memories 9 00:00:32,640 --> 00:00:36,480 Speaker 1: we believe are one hundred percent true, even when they aren't. 10 00:00:37,600 --> 00:00:40,640 Speaker 1: Imagine what you did last weekend, where you were, who 11 00:00:40,680 --> 00:00:44,239 Speaker 1: you saw, what you did. It feels like you can 12 00:00:44,320 --> 00:00:46,840 Speaker 1: playback specific events in your mind like a movie. 13 00:00:47,000 --> 00:00:47,159 Speaker 2: Right. 14 00:00:50,360 --> 00:00:53,920 Speaker 1: But science and psychology have shown us over and over 15 00:00:54,040 --> 00:00:57,400 Speaker 1: again that our minds are not tape recorders and that 16 00:00:57,480 --> 00:01:02,520 Speaker 1: our memories aren't easily changed. It can be uncomfortable to 17 00:01:02,640 --> 00:01:05,800 Speaker 1: admit our own fallibility, but when it comes to a 18 00:01:05,880 --> 00:01:09,880 Speaker 1: decision that will decide someone's life, it's worth keeping that 19 00:01:10,040 --> 00:01:15,520 Speaker 1: fallibility in mind. 20 00:01:17,080 --> 00:01:20,520 Speaker 3: It's a warm summer evening in Virginia where a nine 21 00:01:20,560 --> 00:01:23,840 Speaker 3: to one to one operator answers a call. There's a 22 00:01:23,880 --> 00:01:26,920 Speaker 3: woman on the other end of the line. She says 23 00:01:27,440 --> 00:01:33,640 Speaker 3: she's been attacked. Police arrive at the victim's home and 24 00:01:33,680 --> 00:01:38,120 Speaker 3: they take a statement. The victim, a white woman, says 25 00:01:38,160 --> 00:01:40,840 Speaker 3: that as she was walking to her apartment, she came 26 00:01:40,880 --> 00:01:44,640 Speaker 3: across a man laying on the ground. He was clutching 27 00:01:44,720 --> 00:01:47,440 Speaker 3: his leg. She thought he must have fallen off the 28 00:01:47,440 --> 00:01:50,280 Speaker 3: bike that was toppled over next to him, so she 29 00:01:50,400 --> 00:01:53,480 Speaker 3: bent down to help him, and that's when he grabbed her, 30 00:01:54,240 --> 00:01:58,640 Speaker 3: beat her, and raped her. The victim told the police 31 00:01:58,800 --> 00:02:02,200 Speaker 3: everything she could remember about her attacker. She said the 32 00:02:02,240 --> 00:02:06,480 Speaker 3: man was black with a light complexion. He had a mustache, 33 00:02:06,840 --> 00:02:11,160 Speaker 3: a beard, and some scratches on his face. Before the 34 00:02:11,200 --> 00:02:13,920 Speaker 3: attacker left the scene of the crime, he told the 35 00:02:13,960 --> 00:02:17,600 Speaker 3: victims some vague details about his life. He told her 36 00:02:17,639 --> 00:02:21,600 Speaker 3: that he had quote had other white women. The police 37 00:02:21,720 --> 00:02:24,720 Speaker 3: escort the victims of the hospital, where a rape kit 38 00:02:24,800 --> 00:02:35,760 Speaker 3: is taken and sent off to a crime lab. You're 39 00:02:35,800 --> 00:02:40,280 Speaker 3: eighteen years old, just graduated from high school. Since you 40 00:02:40,320 --> 00:02:43,320 Speaker 3: were thirteen, you knew that you wanted to be a firefighter, 41 00:02:44,080 --> 00:02:47,600 Speaker 3: and now you're doing it. You're attending the fire academy 42 00:02:47,639 --> 00:02:51,959 Speaker 3: this summer. You're also working at a theme park collecting tickets, 43 00:02:52,160 --> 00:02:55,120 Speaker 3: running the rides. It's not the most glamorous job, but 44 00:02:55,480 --> 00:02:59,680 Speaker 3: hey pays the rent. A few months ago, you moved 45 00:02:59,720 --> 00:03:01,840 Speaker 3: out of her parents' house and into an apartment with 46 00:03:01,880 --> 00:03:05,760 Speaker 3: your girlfriend. Everyone says you're too young, but you don't 47 00:03:05,760 --> 00:03:10,520 Speaker 3: care what they think. You're planning your future together. One evening, 48 00:03:10,800 --> 00:03:12,840 Speaker 3: you finish up your shift at the theme park and 49 00:03:13,120 --> 00:03:15,960 Speaker 3: you head to the office to clock out. You see 50 00:03:15,960 --> 00:03:19,280 Speaker 3: a cop there chatting with your boss. You don't think 51 00:03:19,360 --> 00:03:22,360 Speaker 3: much of it. There's always some security or police at 52 00:03:22,360 --> 00:03:25,200 Speaker 3: the park, but then you see your boss sort of 53 00:03:25,440 --> 00:03:28,440 Speaker 3: flick his head in your direction, and when you try 54 00:03:28,480 --> 00:03:33,720 Speaker 3: to leave the office, the cop stops you. He says, hey, 55 00:03:33,800 --> 00:03:36,280 Speaker 3: let me talk to you for a minute. Have you 56 00:03:36,320 --> 00:03:38,240 Speaker 3: heard about the rape that took place a few days 57 00:03:38,280 --> 00:03:42,040 Speaker 3: ago not too far from here. It's like he knew 58 00:03:42,040 --> 00:03:44,760 Speaker 3: that this crime had been on your mind. You've been 59 00:03:44,800 --> 00:03:47,520 Speaker 3: making your girlfriend lock the door behind you every time 60 00:03:47,560 --> 00:03:51,520 Speaker 3: you leave the house. You say, yes, sir, I did 61 00:03:51,560 --> 00:03:55,080 Speaker 3: hear about it? Do you know who did it? The 62 00:03:55,120 --> 00:03:57,880 Speaker 3: officer says he has some questions and asks you if 63 00:03:57,920 --> 00:04:01,240 Speaker 3: you'll come to the police station with him. When you 64 00:04:01,280 --> 00:04:04,240 Speaker 3: get there, the officer takes you into a small room 65 00:04:04,440 --> 00:04:08,520 Speaker 3: with a table and a few chairs. He says, Wait here, 66 00:04:09,240 --> 00:04:11,720 Speaker 3: you'll stand in as part of a police lineup, and 67 00:04:11,880 --> 00:04:13,800 Speaker 3: I'll come back and get you in a few minutes. 68 00:04:15,200 --> 00:04:18,719 Speaker 3: It dawns on you you're not just here to answer questions. 69 00:04:19,279 --> 00:04:22,680 Speaker 3: You're a suspect in this crime. You call out to 70 00:04:22,720 --> 00:04:27,039 Speaker 3: the officer, Wait what am I doing here? He says, 71 00:04:27,960 --> 00:04:31,400 Speaker 3: The rapists said that he had been with other white women. 72 00:04:32,000 --> 00:04:35,960 Speaker 3: Don't you live with your white girlfriend? He closes and 73 00:04:36,000 --> 00:04:41,080 Speaker 3: locks the door behind him. You lean over in your 74 00:04:41,120 --> 00:04:44,760 Speaker 3: seat and cover your face with your hands. Who would 75 00:04:44,800 --> 00:04:49,159 Speaker 3: have known information about your personal life and try to 76 00:04:49,240 --> 00:04:52,839 Speaker 3: use it against you? Was it one of those cops 77 00:04:52,880 --> 00:04:55,200 Speaker 3: that used to stop by the fire station when you 78 00:04:55,200 --> 00:04:58,960 Speaker 3: were at the training academy. Maybe they saw your girlfriend 79 00:04:59,000 --> 00:05:02,760 Speaker 3: dropping off dinner at the fire station one night. You 80 00:05:02,800 --> 00:05:06,600 Speaker 3: stop and take a deep breath, reminding yourself that being 81 00:05:06,640 --> 00:05:10,080 Speaker 3: a black man living with your white girlfriend isn't a crime. 82 00:05:10,839 --> 00:05:15,320 Speaker 3: At least it's not supposed to be, not anymore. And 83 00:05:15,400 --> 00:05:19,120 Speaker 3: yet none of this seems to matter someone. Some cop 84 00:05:19,680 --> 00:05:22,840 Speaker 3: already had their eye on you for this very reason. 85 00:05:23,839 --> 00:05:26,440 Speaker 3: But you didn't do anything wrong, and you're hopeful that 86 00:05:26,480 --> 00:05:29,520 Speaker 3: the victim's memory of her attacker will set things straight. 87 00:05:31,080 --> 00:05:33,760 Speaker 3: What you don't know is that just down the hall 88 00:05:33,800 --> 00:05:37,000 Speaker 3: from where you're sitting, the woman who called nine to 89 00:05:37,000 --> 00:05:40,239 Speaker 3: one one a few days ago is sitting in front 90 00:05:40,240 --> 00:05:44,200 Speaker 3: of six pictures. An officer tells her to pick out 91 00:05:44,240 --> 00:05:47,560 Speaker 3: the face of the man who attacked her. All of 92 00:05:47,600 --> 00:05:50,560 Speaker 3: the photos set out in front of her are black 93 00:05:50,600 --> 00:05:56,160 Speaker 3: and white mugshots except for one, yours. You've never been 94 00:05:56,160 --> 00:05:58,680 Speaker 3: in trouble with the law, and so you don't have 95 00:05:58,760 --> 00:06:03,160 Speaker 3: a mugshot. Instead, the cop that showed up at your 96 00:06:03,279 --> 00:06:06,560 Speaker 3: job took a picture of your ID card from the 97 00:06:06,560 --> 00:06:11,160 Speaker 3: theme park and slipped it into the photo lineup. Yours 98 00:06:11,240 --> 00:06:13,960 Speaker 3: is not just the only one that's not a mugshot, 99 00:06:14,360 --> 00:06:18,240 Speaker 3: it's also the only one that's printed in color, so 100 00:06:18,320 --> 00:06:23,560 Speaker 3: it immediately grabs the woman's attention. She chooses your photo 101 00:06:23,640 --> 00:06:30,520 Speaker 3: and says, I think that's him. The officer comes back 102 00:06:30,520 --> 00:06:33,320 Speaker 3: in to get you. He brings you into a room 103 00:06:33,360 --> 00:06:35,640 Speaker 3: with a window in it and asks you to stand 104 00:06:35,640 --> 00:06:38,840 Speaker 3: in a line with some men. These other men are 105 00:06:38,839 --> 00:06:42,720 Speaker 3: known as fillers. None of these fillers are potential suspects. 106 00:06:43,520 --> 00:06:45,960 Speaker 3: The point of them is to see if the victim 107 00:06:46,000 --> 00:06:49,560 Speaker 3: can identify your face. Amongst others who are supposed to 108 00:06:49,560 --> 00:06:53,800 Speaker 3: resemble the suspect. None of these other people's faces were 109 00:06:53,800 --> 00:06:57,679 Speaker 3: in any of the photos the victim saw except for yours, 110 00:06:58,520 --> 00:07:02,919 Speaker 3: your color photo ID. That's the only photo that matches 111 00:07:02,960 --> 00:07:07,279 Speaker 3: the face of anyone in this lineup. There's an officer 112 00:07:07,320 --> 00:07:09,880 Speaker 3: at the front of the room and he starts barking 113 00:07:09,880 --> 00:07:14,360 Speaker 3: out orders to you and the fillers. Stand there and 114 00:07:14,400 --> 00:07:21,800 Speaker 3: look straight ahead. Now turn to your right, Now turn 115 00:07:21,880 --> 00:07:25,200 Speaker 3: to your left. You follow the directions that are being 116 00:07:25,240 --> 00:07:29,480 Speaker 3: shouted out. You can't see her because she's on the 117 00:07:29,520 --> 00:07:32,640 Speaker 3: other side of a one way mirror, but the victim 118 00:07:33,120 --> 00:07:38,400 Speaker 3: points you out. She says it's him. I'm sure of it, 119 00:07:39,800 --> 00:07:42,840 Speaker 3: And that's all the information the cops need to hear, 120 00:07:43,800 --> 00:07:49,280 Speaker 3: and you are arrested on the spot. You sit in 121 00:07:49,360 --> 00:07:53,680 Speaker 3: jail wondering what in the world you're supposed to make of. 122 00:07:53,800 --> 00:07:58,160 Speaker 3: How this woman mistook you for someone else. You look 123 00:07:58,400 --> 00:08:02,840 Speaker 3: nothing like the witnesses of description of her attacker. She'd 124 00:08:02,880 --> 00:08:06,520 Speaker 3: reported that he had light skin, a mustache, a beard, 125 00:08:06,680 --> 00:08:10,800 Speaker 3: and scratches on his face. You have dark skin, you're 126 00:08:10,840 --> 00:08:14,960 Speaker 3: almost always clean shaven. There are no scratches or marks 127 00:08:15,000 --> 00:08:18,239 Speaker 3: on your eighteen year old face. How could that picture 128 00:08:18,320 --> 00:08:22,360 Speaker 3: in her head, the memory of her attacker changed so 129 00:08:22,600 --> 00:08:26,720 Speaker 3: much in such a short amount of time. What is 130 00:08:26,800 --> 00:08:34,280 Speaker 3: it about that lineup that made her choose you? You 131 00:08:34,400 --> 00:08:37,880 Speaker 3: eventually stand trial in front of an all white jury 132 00:08:38,160 --> 00:08:42,480 Speaker 3: of eight women and four men. You were taught your 133 00:08:42,720 --> 00:08:46,440 Speaker 3: entire life to trust law enforcement, to believe in this 134 00:08:46,559 --> 00:08:52,280 Speaker 3: system of justice. The police, officers, judges, lawyers, jurors. They 135 00:08:52,320 --> 00:08:55,319 Speaker 3: were all there to figure out the truth, to do 136 00:08:55,400 --> 00:09:00,920 Speaker 3: the right thing. But that image comes shattering down when 137 00:09:00,920 --> 00:09:08,080 Speaker 3: the jury comes back and finds you guilty of rape, abduction, robbery, 138 00:09:08,720 --> 00:09:14,760 Speaker 3: and for sodomy. The judge sentences you to two hundred 139 00:09:15,160 --> 00:09:19,760 Speaker 3: and ten years in prison. After the sentence is read, 140 00:09:20,559 --> 00:09:24,720 Speaker 3: you slowly look behind you. You try to find your mom, 141 00:09:25,120 --> 00:09:29,400 Speaker 3: your family. You know they're sitting just behind you, but 142 00:09:29,520 --> 00:09:35,560 Speaker 3: you can't see a foot ahead of you. Everything goes black. 143 00:09:39,880 --> 00:09:42,280 Speaker 3: The story you just heard is based on the true 144 00:09:42,280 --> 00:09:46,680 Speaker 3: events of Marvin Andersen's wrongful conviction. Six years after he 145 00:09:46,760 --> 00:09:50,080 Speaker 3: was sentenced to life in prison, another man confessed to 146 00:09:50,160 --> 00:09:54,200 Speaker 3: attacking the woman who had misidentified Marvin. The man that 147 00:09:54,280 --> 00:09:58,280 Speaker 3: confessed presented new details to a judge that seemed to 148 00:09:58,320 --> 00:10:03,160 Speaker 3: prove his guilt in Marvin's innocence. Still, the judge did 149 00:10:03,160 --> 00:10:07,280 Speaker 3: not vacate marvin sentence. Marvin wrote a letter to the 150 00:10:07,280 --> 00:10:12,640 Speaker 3: Innocence Project and they took up his case. After years 151 00:10:12,679 --> 00:10:16,240 Speaker 3: of work, lawyers of the Innocence Project were finally able 152 00:10:16,280 --> 00:10:19,760 Speaker 3: to convince the judge to compare Marvin's DNA with the 153 00:10:19,840 --> 00:10:23,040 Speaker 3: DNA from seamen recovered from the victim. When the rape 154 00:10:23,120 --> 00:10:27,640 Speaker 3: kit was performed, Marvin was not a match, but another 155 00:10:27,720 --> 00:10:31,360 Speaker 3: man was a match, the man who had confessed to 156 00:10:31,400 --> 00:10:37,520 Speaker 3: the crime. After fifteen long years in prison, Marvin walked 157 00:10:37,520 --> 00:10:41,400 Speaker 3: free and became the ninety ninth person to be exonerated 158 00:10:41,440 --> 00:10:46,079 Speaker 3: based on DNA evidence. He's since become chief of the Hanover, 159 00:10:46,240 --> 00:10:49,480 Speaker 3: Virginia Fire Department and serves on the board of the 160 00:10:49,480 --> 00:10:56,160 Speaker 3: Innocence Project. I'm Josh Dubin, civil rights and criminal defense attorney, 161 00:10:56,520 --> 00:11:00,720 Speaker 3: an innocent ambassador to the Innocence Project in New York. Today. 162 00:11:01,080 --> 00:11:07,079 Speaker 3: On wrongful conviction junk science, we examine eyewitness testimony. When 163 00:11:07,080 --> 00:11:10,120 Speaker 3: a witness points to a suspect and says that's the 164 00:11:10,160 --> 00:11:13,840 Speaker 3: person who committed this crime, there is nothing more convincing 165 00:11:13,880 --> 00:11:19,040 Speaker 3: to a jury, but it is dangerously inaccurate. Over two 166 00:11:19,080 --> 00:11:22,400 Speaker 3: thirds of people who are later exonerated based on DNA 167 00:11:22,520 --> 00:11:28,120 Speaker 3: evidence or convicted based on eyewitness testimony. It may sound 168 00:11:28,200 --> 00:11:32,080 Speaker 3: like a simple premise, but in order for eyewitness testimony 169 00:11:32,120 --> 00:11:35,679 Speaker 3: to work and be reliable, we need to rely on 170 00:11:35,720 --> 00:11:40,400 Speaker 3: our own memories and those of others. But it turns out, 171 00:11:41,320 --> 00:11:46,320 Speaker 3: just as physical evidence can be manipulated, contaminated, or even planted, 172 00:11:47,200 --> 00:12:00,480 Speaker 3: so too can memories. In the early eighteen eh eighties, 173 00:12:00,720 --> 00:12:05,120 Speaker 3: Professor Wilhelm Want, the father of modern psychology, was giving 174 00:12:05,120 --> 00:12:08,880 Speaker 3: a lecture at the University of Leipzig in Germany. One 175 00:12:08,880 --> 00:12:13,120 Speaker 3: of his students attending the lecture was Hugo Munsterberg and 176 00:12:13,280 --> 00:12:17,600 Speaker 3: Hugo when he heard this lecture, he was hooked. He 177 00:12:17,679 --> 00:12:21,200 Speaker 3: was so fascinated by psychology and it began to study 178 00:12:21,480 --> 00:12:26,640 Speaker 3: under the father of psychology himself. After completing his studies, 179 00:12:27,000 --> 00:12:30,400 Speaker 3: Hugo started working at Harvard University, where he led the 180 00:12:30,480 --> 00:12:36,559 Speaker 3: Experimental Psychology Lab. Hugo was especially interested in the concrete, 181 00:12:36,800 --> 00:12:41,680 Speaker 3: everyday applications of psychology. He wanted to study if in 182 00:12:41,920 --> 00:12:46,920 Speaker 3: how psychology impacted juries and trial outcomes, and so he 183 00:12:47,000 --> 00:12:52,040 Speaker 3: began to run experiments on the memory of eyewitnesses. In 184 00:12:52,080 --> 00:12:56,080 Speaker 3: one of his famous experiments, Hugo tested the memories of 185 00:12:56,120 --> 00:13:00,360 Speaker 3: both adults and children. He showed them a photo. In 186 00:13:00,440 --> 00:13:04,360 Speaker 3: it there was a farmer sitting at a table eating 187 00:13:04,400 --> 00:13:08,480 Speaker 3: some soup. Hugo had his test subjects looked closely at 188 00:13:08,520 --> 00:13:12,600 Speaker 3: the photo, then he took the photo away. Hugo then 189 00:13:12,679 --> 00:13:15,880 Speaker 3: asked him opened ended questions about it, like what did 190 00:13:15,960 --> 00:13:20,080 Speaker 3: you see in the photo? To these questions, the witnesses responded, 191 00:13:20,480 --> 00:13:23,040 Speaker 3: there was a man in the photo eating his soup. 192 00:13:23,640 --> 00:13:29,000 Speaker 3: Their memories were accurate, But then Hugo started asking what 193 00:13:29,080 --> 00:13:33,640 Speaker 3: he called suggestive questions. He asked, for example, did you 194 00:13:33,679 --> 00:13:37,439 Speaker 3: see the stove in the room. Many of the eyewitnesses 195 00:13:37,480 --> 00:13:41,440 Speaker 3: answered yes, they saw the stove, but there was no 196 00:13:41,600 --> 00:13:46,320 Speaker 3: stove in the photo. Hugo found that through asking suggestive 197 00:13:46,400 --> 00:13:49,400 Speaker 3: questions like these, he was able to get his test 198 00:13:49,400 --> 00:13:52,760 Speaker 3: subjects to remember dozens of objects in the photo that 199 00:13:52,920 --> 00:13:58,400 Speaker 3: never existed. In another experiment, Hugo sat at a desk 200 00:13:58,440 --> 00:14:01,239 Speaker 3: at the front of a room and told his students, 201 00:14:01,720 --> 00:14:06,800 Speaker 3: remember every detail of what I'm about to do. Starting now. 202 00:14:07,840 --> 00:14:10,960 Speaker 3: With his right hand, Hugo took out a colorful disc 203 00:14:11,040 --> 00:14:14,400 Speaker 3: and began to spin it While staring at the disc 204 00:14:14,480 --> 00:14:17,120 Speaker 3: that he was spinning with his right hand. He used 205 00:14:17,120 --> 00:14:19,840 Speaker 3: his left hand to take out a pencil and write 206 00:14:19,880 --> 00:14:23,280 Speaker 3: something down on a piece of paper, Keeping that disk 207 00:14:23,360 --> 00:14:26,240 Speaker 3: spinning in his right hand, he used his left hand 208 00:14:26,280 --> 00:14:30,360 Speaker 3: again to take out a cigarette case, open it, take 209 00:14:30,400 --> 00:14:33,480 Speaker 3: out a cigarette, shut the case with a loud click, 210 00:14:33,880 --> 00:14:38,280 Speaker 3: and put it back into his pocket. At one hundred 211 00:14:38,320 --> 00:14:42,880 Speaker 3: students who saw this demonstration, only eighteen of them were 212 00:14:42,920 --> 00:14:45,800 Speaker 3: able to report what Hugo had done with his left hand, 213 00:14:46,680 --> 00:14:49,200 Speaker 3: and so Hugo was not only able to show that 214 00:14:49,240 --> 00:14:53,119 Speaker 3: witnesses might fabricate details of a memory that never existed, 215 00:14:53,720 --> 00:14:57,640 Speaker 3: but they are also likely to not remember many details 216 00:14:57,640 --> 00:15:02,040 Speaker 3: of events that happened right in front of their These 217 00:15:02,080 --> 00:15:06,240 Speaker 3: experiments also demonstrated that the memories of two different people 218 00:15:06,440 --> 00:15:10,360 Speaker 3: observing the same event or photo could be wildly different, 219 00:15:10,880 --> 00:15:13,560 Speaker 3: despite the fact that they had no stake in line 220 00:15:14,000 --> 00:15:16,080 Speaker 3: or making the outcome of the events appear to have 221 00:15:16,120 --> 00:15:20,600 Speaker 3: happened one way or another. Hugo also concluded that the 222 00:15:20,600 --> 00:15:24,640 Speaker 3: witness's own claim of certainty didn't necessarily mean that their 223 00:15:24,680 --> 00:15:28,520 Speaker 3: memories were more accurate. A witness might say, for example, 224 00:15:28,560 --> 00:15:32,040 Speaker 3: that they were absolutely certain that there was a stove 225 00:15:32,080 --> 00:15:35,080 Speaker 3: in the photo, or that he or she was certain 226 00:15:35,160 --> 00:15:37,520 Speaker 3: that all Hugo did was spin a disk in his 227 00:15:37,640 --> 00:15:41,800 Speaker 3: right hand. But even as they claimed certainty, there was 228 00:15:41,920 --> 00:15:46,360 Speaker 3: proof that their memories were incorrect. When his book on 229 00:15:46,400 --> 00:15:49,680 Speaker 3: these experiments was published in nineteen oh eight, The New 230 00:15:49,760 --> 00:15:52,160 Speaker 3: York Times wrote that his studies had the potential to 231 00:15:52,280 --> 00:15:57,040 Speaker 3: revolutionize courtroom procedure and to quote bring light and order 232 00:15:57,120 --> 00:16:02,000 Speaker 3: in domains where all or almost all, is darkness and confusion. 233 00:16:03,160 --> 00:16:06,560 Speaker 3: But that's not what happened, because Hugo also had many 234 00:16:06,600 --> 00:16:10,160 Speaker 3: critics who scoffed at his attempt to apply psychology to 235 00:16:10,200 --> 00:16:15,440 Speaker 3: the courtroom, and so courtroom procedure around eyewitness testimony was 236 00:16:15,560 --> 00:16:21,200 Speaker 3: not completely revolutionized. To this day, countless innocent men and 237 00:16:21,280 --> 00:16:25,920 Speaker 3: women are sent to prison based on faulty eyewitness testimony. 238 00:16:26,960 --> 00:16:30,360 Speaker 3: Over a half a century after Hugo's research was mocked, 239 00:16:30,880 --> 00:16:35,960 Speaker 3: psychologist Elizabeth Loftis took another look at eyewitness testimony with 240 00:16:36,080 --> 00:16:39,800 Speaker 3: a more modern take on Hugo's experiments. She was able 241 00:16:39,840 --> 00:16:44,440 Speaker 3: to prove just how unreliable eyewitness testimony is and why 242 00:16:44,480 --> 00:16:47,800 Speaker 3: it shouldn't be trusted as the gold standard of evidence. 243 00:16:47,840 --> 00:16:50,520 Speaker 3: In a courtroom or in a police lineup. 244 00:16:54,080 --> 00:16:59,400 Speaker 2: Many people, unfortunately, believe that memory works like a recording device. 245 00:16:59,440 --> 00:17:02,760 Speaker 2: You take in the information, you record it, you just 246 00:17:02,840 --> 00:17:05,800 Speaker 2: play it back the way some kind of video recorder 247 00:17:05,880 --> 00:17:09,879 Speaker 2: would work, and that is not really the way memory works. 248 00:17:10,280 --> 00:17:13,879 Speaker 2: What happens when we're remembering something is we tend to 249 00:17:13,920 --> 00:17:17,520 Speaker 2: take bits and pieces of experience, sometimes from different times 250 00:17:17,520 --> 00:17:22,480 Speaker 2: and places. We bring it together and we construct a memory. 251 00:17:23,119 --> 00:17:25,720 Speaker 2: So I like to think of memory a little bit more, 252 00:17:26,000 --> 00:17:30,120 Speaker 2: not like a recording device, but more like a Wikipedia page. 253 00:17:30,720 --> 00:17:32,800 Speaker 2: You can go in there and edit it, but so 254 00:17:32,960 --> 00:17:33,879 Speaker 2: can other people. 255 00:17:35,000 --> 00:17:39,840 Speaker 3: Today on our show, we're speaking with renowned psychologist Elizabeth Loftis. 256 00:17:40,680 --> 00:17:44,960 Speaker 3: Elizabeth is currently a professor at the University of California, Irvine. 257 00:17:45,640 --> 00:17:50,880 Speaker 3: She studies human memory, specifically the malleability of memory, which 258 00:17:50,920 --> 00:17:54,439 Speaker 3: of course is a huge factor in cases where eyewitness 259 00:17:54,480 --> 00:17:59,680 Speaker 3: testimony is used as evidence. So, Elizabeth, can you tell 260 00:17:59,760 --> 00:18:02,760 Speaker 3: us about some of the experiments that you've worked on 261 00:18:03,040 --> 00:18:05,160 Speaker 3: to study memories of eyewitnesses. 262 00:18:06,400 --> 00:18:09,159 Speaker 2: You know, one of the ways that I and my 263 00:18:09,720 --> 00:18:14,119 Speaker 2: collaborators have studied memory, and hundreds of studies, you know, 264 00:18:14,200 --> 00:18:19,359 Speaker 2: probably now forty fifty thousand participants over the course of 265 00:18:19,400 --> 00:18:22,800 Speaker 2: my career. One of the ways that we study memory 266 00:18:23,480 --> 00:18:28,800 Speaker 2: is we'll show people a simulated crime. For example, we 267 00:18:28,840 --> 00:18:34,440 Speaker 2: will then expose people to some new information about that crime. 268 00:18:34,920 --> 00:18:38,159 Speaker 2: So they might have seen a bad guy take a 269 00:18:38,240 --> 00:18:42,000 Speaker 2: wallet out of somebody's purse and he's wearing a green jacket, 270 00:18:42,280 --> 00:18:47,040 Speaker 2: but they then get misinformation from another witness or from 271 00:18:47,119 --> 00:18:51,840 Speaker 2: a leading question that the jacket was brown. And finally 272 00:18:51,880 --> 00:18:55,240 Speaker 2: we will ask our witnesses, tell me exactly what you saw, 273 00:18:55,880 --> 00:18:58,880 Speaker 2: give me as much detail as you can remember, and 274 00:18:59,000 --> 00:19:02,119 Speaker 2: many of them will and remember that the jacket was 275 00:19:02,200 --> 00:19:06,040 Speaker 2: brown and not green, or we can make them believe 276 00:19:06,119 --> 00:19:09,000 Speaker 2: the bad guy had curly hair instead of straight hair. 277 00:19:09,640 --> 00:19:15,719 Speaker 2: All by exposing people to new information, misleading information, it 278 00:19:15,800 --> 00:19:19,160 Speaker 2: impairs their own memory, and this is now referred to 279 00:19:20,119 --> 00:19:24,199 Speaker 2: in the psychological literature as the misinformation effect. 280 00:19:24,520 --> 00:19:28,400 Speaker 3: So give me another example. What are some other experiments 281 00:19:28,520 --> 00:19:32,800 Speaker 3: you did where misinformation just kind of gets slipped into 282 00:19:32,840 --> 00:19:35,400 Speaker 3: the person's memory without them even knowing it. 283 00:19:36,400 --> 00:19:41,240 Speaker 2: We've shown people a simulated accident. A car goes through 284 00:19:41,320 --> 00:19:44,239 Speaker 2: an intersection with a yield sign and then ends up 285 00:19:44,280 --> 00:19:49,640 Speaker 2: hitting a pedestrian, and pedestrian falls over a police officer 286 00:19:49,720 --> 00:19:53,040 Speaker 2: comes to tend to the pedestrian who's lying down on 287 00:19:53,520 --> 00:19:59,760 Speaker 2: the ground. Afterwards, our witnesses are asked a series of questions, 288 00:20:00,280 --> 00:20:04,560 Speaker 2: and one of those questions might be did another car 289 00:20:05,000 --> 00:20:07,320 Speaker 2: pass the red dots and when it was at the 290 00:20:07,400 --> 00:20:11,600 Speaker 2: intersection with the stop sign. Now, that is a very 291 00:20:11,600 --> 00:20:15,960 Speaker 2: clever question. Just so you can appreciate the cleverness you, 292 00:20:16,040 --> 00:20:18,600 Speaker 2: as the witness, think I'm asking you about whether another 293 00:20:18,680 --> 00:20:25,240 Speaker 2: car passed while the dotson was stopped. You revisualize the scene, 294 00:20:25,880 --> 00:20:29,080 Speaker 2: and in your visualization you might put in a stop 295 00:20:29,119 --> 00:20:32,280 Speaker 2: sign that I've mentioned as part of the question. You 296 00:20:32,359 --> 00:20:36,080 Speaker 2: think you're answering about whether another car stop, But this 297 00:20:36,119 --> 00:20:40,119 Speaker 2: stop sign kind of invades your consciousness, almost like a 298 00:20:40,200 --> 00:20:44,840 Speaker 2: trojan horse. You don't even detect that it's coming. And 299 00:20:44,960 --> 00:20:49,560 Speaker 2: after that, many people will then claim I saw a 300 00:20:49,600 --> 00:20:54,000 Speaker 2: stop sign at that intersection. And you can show them 301 00:20:54,040 --> 00:20:56,439 Speaker 2: two scenes, the scene with a stop sign or the 302 00:20:56,480 --> 00:20:59,159 Speaker 2: scene with a yield sign. They'll pick the one with 303 00:20:59,240 --> 00:21:03,800 Speaker 2: a stop sign. They have succumbed to the question and 304 00:21:04,440 --> 00:21:08,360 Speaker 2: fallen sway to its suggestion, and now it appears as 305 00:21:08,400 --> 00:21:18,760 Speaker 2: if this is their memory. 306 00:21:20,440 --> 00:21:22,840 Speaker 3: Now I want to get back to the way cops 307 00:21:22,880 --> 00:21:27,320 Speaker 3: influence a witness. I've dealt with cases where the cops 308 00:21:27,840 --> 00:21:33,120 Speaker 3: know who the suspect is and do things either consciously 309 00:21:33,400 --> 00:21:38,080 Speaker 3: or even unconsciously, I guess, to encourage the witness to 310 00:21:38,280 --> 00:21:41,760 Speaker 3: choose the person that they believe is their suspect. Have 311 00:21:41,840 --> 00:21:44,200 Speaker 3: you dealt with anything like that in your research. 312 00:21:45,480 --> 00:21:49,639 Speaker 2: One of my favorite examples a case I testified in 313 00:21:49,640 --> 00:21:54,119 Speaker 2: in California. There's a crime, the eyewitness has shown a 314 00:21:54,200 --> 00:21:58,960 Speaker 2: six pack six photographs. The eyewitness says, I really don't 315 00:21:59,600 --> 00:22:04,439 Speaker 2: reckonise anybody, and the officer says, wait a minute, I 316 00:22:04,520 --> 00:22:07,720 Speaker 2: see your eyes drifting down to number six. What's going 317 00:22:07,760 --> 00:22:12,360 Speaker 2: on there? Eventually number six it gets seized upon identified, 318 00:22:12,440 --> 00:22:16,480 Speaker 2: and that's the person who gets prosecuted. So there's a 319 00:22:16,600 --> 00:22:22,000 Speaker 2: highly suggestive thing going on here. I'm willing to give, 320 00:22:22,240 --> 00:22:25,640 Speaker 2: certainly to give these officers the benefit of the doubt 321 00:22:25,720 --> 00:22:29,520 Speaker 2: and say they they're not even aware in a way 322 00:22:30,040 --> 00:22:33,840 Speaker 2: of their own influence, and that a lot of what's 323 00:22:33,880 --> 00:22:35,840 Speaker 2: happening is is kind of unwitting. 324 00:22:37,000 --> 00:22:40,960 Speaker 3: So look, I'm an alleged expert in jury selection, and 325 00:22:41,040 --> 00:22:43,119 Speaker 3: people are always saying to me, like, how does this 326 00:22:43,200 --> 00:22:46,920 Speaker 3: affect you? Are you always trying to psychoanalyze me. So 327 00:22:47,320 --> 00:22:50,239 Speaker 3: tell me a little bit about how this, you know, 328 00:22:51,080 --> 00:22:54,080 Speaker 3: deep knowledge of memory impacts you. Do you find yourself 329 00:22:54,160 --> 00:22:56,479 Speaker 3: like not trusting your own memory at times? 330 00:22:57,640 --> 00:22:59,959 Speaker 2: Well, the one experience that I do have from all 331 00:23:00,080 --> 00:23:03,000 Speaker 2: all these decades of doing this kind of work is 332 00:23:03,080 --> 00:23:08,520 Speaker 2: I understand that along with those sort of bits of 333 00:23:08,600 --> 00:23:14,200 Speaker 2: truth are bits of fiction intermingled in there. And I'm 334 00:23:14,200 --> 00:23:17,920 Speaker 2: not bothered by that. I understand that's part of the 335 00:23:19,440 --> 00:23:24,920 Speaker 2: malleable nature of memory. I think what this acceptance has 336 00:23:25,040 --> 00:23:28,360 Speaker 2: done for me is it makes me a little bit 337 00:23:28,400 --> 00:23:33,760 Speaker 2: more tolerant of the mistakes that friends make, or family 338 00:23:33,800 --> 00:23:37,640 Speaker 2: members make, or even I myself might make. I don't 339 00:23:37,640 --> 00:23:41,240 Speaker 2: immediately assume somebody is a big fat liar. They could 340 00:23:41,280 --> 00:23:43,679 Speaker 2: honestly have a false memory, and I think it's a 341 00:23:43,760 --> 00:23:46,760 Speaker 2: kind of kinder way to feel about people. 342 00:23:47,359 --> 00:23:50,639 Speaker 3: Okay, so that's pretty interesting. Do you think this same 343 00:23:50,840 --> 00:23:54,040 Speaker 3: kindness as you refer to it, that you offer, let's say, 344 00:23:54,080 --> 00:23:57,359 Speaker 3: your friends, your family, even yourself. Do you think we 345 00:23:57,359 --> 00:24:01,680 Speaker 3: should offer witnesses the same kind of kindness in court cases? 346 00:24:02,880 --> 00:24:05,840 Speaker 2: Do you want to call these people a liar or 347 00:24:05,880 --> 00:24:08,040 Speaker 2: do you want to accept the fact that maybe some 348 00:24:08,119 --> 00:24:13,040 Speaker 2: kind of process has led them to develop a set 349 00:24:13,080 --> 00:24:16,679 Speaker 2: of beliefs and things that feel to them like memories, 350 00:24:17,160 --> 00:24:20,199 Speaker 2: and it is kinder even in a court case. I 351 00:24:20,240 --> 00:24:25,640 Speaker 2: think sometimes for lawyers who are challenging these memories to 352 00:24:25,720 --> 00:24:29,200 Speaker 2: talk about them as potentially false memories rather than talk 353 00:24:29,240 --> 00:24:33,000 Speaker 2: about the accuser as being a big, fat liar. 354 00:24:33,760 --> 00:24:36,200 Speaker 3: So you're an expert witness in a lot of cases 355 00:24:36,240 --> 00:24:40,119 Speaker 3: that depend on eyewitness testimony. You know, we've talked a 356 00:24:40,160 --> 00:24:45,440 Speaker 3: lot throughout the course of this podcast about how some 357 00:24:45,520 --> 00:24:50,320 Speaker 3: expert witnesses aren't basing their testimony on good science or facts. 358 00:24:50,960 --> 00:24:53,640 Speaker 3: But you're not that kind of witness. I mean, you've 359 00:24:53,640 --> 00:24:56,680 Speaker 3: been studying memory for years and years, and you've done 360 00:24:56,720 --> 00:25:02,199 Speaker 3: experiments and you know, tested with thousands of participants. You 361 00:25:02,280 --> 00:25:04,280 Speaker 3: have a lot of data to back up what you're 362 00:25:04,320 --> 00:25:07,159 Speaker 3: testifying to in court. But tell me, have you ever 363 00:25:07,240 --> 00:25:10,400 Speaker 3: heard of witness testifying in court or read their testimony 364 00:25:11,119 --> 00:25:13,720 Speaker 3: and it kind of made you think, well, this isn't 365 00:25:13,800 --> 00:25:17,199 Speaker 3: science at all. They're actually twisting this so much that 366 00:25:17,280 --> 00:25:19,000 Speaker 3: it's more like junk science. 367 00:25:20,280 --> 00:25:24,400 Speaker 2: I guess what I've seen happen in some cases, and 368 00:25:24,440 --> 00:25:29,800 Speaker 2: this bothers me where I think opposing experts are introducing 369 00:25:30,000 --> 00:25:35,840 Speaker 2: junk science. It's about trauma. They want to introduce to 370 00:25:36,000 --> 00:25:43,800 Speaker 2: science that basically says traumatic memories are completely different. Traumatic memories, 371 00:25:43,880 --> 00:25:47,440 Speaker 2: you know, are stored in the body. Traumatic memories can 372 00:25:47,480 --> 00:25:51,080 Speaker 2: be relied on traumatic memories that kind of don't have 373 00:25:51,200 --> 00:25:56,680 Speaker 2: these same problems. In fact, traumatic memories operate under similar 374 00:25:56,760 --> 00:26:01,000 Speaker 2: in similar ways. They fade over time, they can be 375 00:26:01,119 --> 00:26:05,439 Speaker 2: influenced by post event information. They are just lots of 376 00:26:06,040 --> 00:26:10,280 Speaker 2: features of memory that are true, whether you're trying to 377 00:26:10,320 --> 00:26:13,439 Speaker 2: remember something that's upsetting or whether you're trying to remember 378 00:26:13,520 --> 00:26:18,800 Speaker 2: something that is a little bit more neutral and less emotional. 379 00:26:19,520 --> 00:26:21,760 Speaker 2: You see this in the movies all the time. They're 380 00:26:21,800 --> 00:26:25,280 Speaker 2: saying something like I was so frightened when this happened. 381 00:26:25,760 --> 00:26:28,480 Speaker 2: I'll never forget that face as long as I live. 382 00:26:28,920 --> 00:26:33,679 Speaker 2: That's an expression of the belief that this traumatic memory 383 00:26:33,720 --> 00:26:37,280 Speaker 2: is sort of imprinted in the brain and is reliably 384 00:26:37,359 --> 00:26:40,399 Speaker 2: and solidly there and you just need to read it out. 385 00:26:40,920 --> 00:26:45,280 Speaker 2: And that is not the way things work with memory 386 00:26:45,320 --> 00:26:48,600 Speaker 2: in general, or even traumatic memories. 387 00:26:49,320 --> 00:26:52,359 Speaker 3: So tell us more about that, because I do think 388 00:26:52,440 --> 00:26:56,639 Speaker 3: that when we hear about someone who has been raped 389 00:26:56,880 --> 00:27:01,239 Speaker 3: or there's been a violent attack, are in instinct is 390 00:27:01,240 --> 00:27:04,439 Speaker 3: that we should believe them no matter what, right, like, 391 00:27:04,480 --> 00:27:08,080 Speaker 3: why would somebody make this up? So how do we 392 00:27:08,200 --> 00:27:14,040 Speaker 3: reconcile the desire to believe a victim or the natural 393 00:27:14,160 --> 00:27:18,760 Speaker 3: tendency to believe a victim with the knowledge that memories 394 00:27:18,840 --> 00:27:21,400 Speaker 3: just aren't the most reliable form of evidence. 395 00:27:22,600 --> 00:27:25,640 Speaker 2: I think the way we reconcile all this is that 396 00:27:26,080 --> 00:27:30,840 Speaker 2: when there is somebody with an accusation, we certainly listen 397 00:27:30,960 --> 00:27:35,119 Speaker 2: to it and examine it. And we don't want to 398 00:27:35,240 --> 00:27:39,840 Speaker 2: uncritically accept every accusation, no matter how dubious, And we 399 00:27:40,000 --> 00:27:45,520 Speaker 2: don't want to routinely reject an accusation just because we 400 00:27:45,600 --> 00:27:48,920 Speaker 2: don't like how it sounds. So I do think there 401 00:27:49,080 --> 00:27:55,480 Speaker 2: is a way to reconcile these two seemingly conflictual driving forces. 402 00:27:56,000 --> 00:28:01,359 Speaker 2: But I don't think we forego our democratic PRIs and 403 00:28:01,720 --> 00:28:05,960 Speaker 2: and forget about the fact that that we're proud to 404 00:28:06,040 --> 00:28:11,560 Speaker 2: have a label system that respects the rights of the 405 00:28:11,640 --> 00:28:13,960 Speaker 2: accused to have a defense. 406 00:28:14,920 --> 00:28:18,280 Speaker 3: Yeah. I mean it's a tough dilemma, right, because I've 407 00:28:18,359 --> 00:28:23,679 Speaker 3: had that instance just last week where you know, I 408 00:28:23,720 --> 00:28:27,280 Speaker 3: am defending someone who I believe to be innocent, and 409 00:28:27,760 --> 00:28:30,240 Speaker 3: you know I when when people hear about the case, 410 00:28:30,440 --> 00:28:32,679 Speaker 3: or you tell them about the case, you know at 411 00:28:32,760 --> 00:28:35,960 Speaker 3: least what's public knowledge. You know, their reaction is, well, 412 00:28:36,000 --> 00:28:41,160 Speaker 3: why would somebody make up, you know, a accusation of 413 00:28:41,480 --> 00:28:44,400 Speaker 3: sexual assault for instance. But the reality is is that 414 00:28:44,440 --> 00:28:47,360 Speaker 3: they may not be consciously making it up. It may 415 00:28:47,400 --> 00:28:50,040 Speaker 3: not be a conscious lie. It may just be that 416 00:28:50,120 --> 00:28:54,720 Speaker 3: their perception and there what they think is their reliable 417 00:28:54,800 --> 00:28:58,480 Speaker 3: memory is just not correct. Now, look, I have my 418 00:28:58,600 --> 00:29:02,640 Speaker 3: own ideas, and the Innocence Project, as you know, has 419 00:29:02,840 --> 00:29:05,720 Speaker 3: done a ton of policy work around this and trying 420 00:29:05,720 --> 00:29:11,880 Speaker 3: to get reform achieved in law enforcement across the country 421 00:29:11,880 --> 00:29:19,240 Speaker 3: and the way they go about instituting lineups and eyewitness identifications. 422 00:29:19,240 --> 00:29:22,960 Speaker 3: But you tell tell me what you think. What do 423 00:29:23,040 --> 00:29:25,400 Speaker 3: you think is a way that we can reform the 424 00:29:25,480 --> 00:29:28,760 Speaker 3: system so that eyewitness identification would be more accurate. 425 00:29:29,960 --> 00:29:33,560 Speaker 2: First of all, one thing that is important when law 426 00:29:33,600 --> 00:29:38,000 Speaker 2: enforcement is conducting some kind of test, whether it's with 427 00:29:38,080 --> 00:29:41,480 Speaker 2: photographs or whether it's with a live lineup, how do 428 00:29:41,520 --> 00:29:45,000 Speaker 2: you conduct the test? What instruction do you give to 429 00:29:45,080 --> 00:29:50,040 Speaker 2: the witness who conducts the test? Who are the fillers? 430 00:29:50,120 --> 00:29:52,560 Speaker 2: The people who are put in the set of photos 431 00:29:52,560 --> 00:29:57,960 Speaker 2: are put in the lineup along with your suspect. Each 432 00:29:58,000 --> 00:30:02,360 Speaker 2: of these issues is important, and there are best practices 433 00:30:02,480 --> 00:30:07,560 Speaker 2: that have been devised by scientists and very thoughtful people 434 00:30:07,720 --> 00:30:11,600 Speaker 2: in the legal field about what those best practices should be. 435 00:30:12,080 --> 00:30:15,800 Speaker 2: So best practice, the person conducting the test should not 436 00:30:15,960 --> 00:30:18,960 Speaker 2: know who the suspect is. That's one of the most 437 00:30:18,960 --> 00:30:23,000 Speaker 2: important things that In other words, the person conducting the test. 438 00:30:23,640 --> 00:30:27,080 Speaker 2: It should be what's called a double blind test. The 439 00:30:27,120 --> 00:30:30,040 Speaker 2: witness doesn't know who the suspect is and the person 440 00:30:30,120 --> 00:30:33,360 Speaker 2: conducting the test doesn't know who the suspect is. And 441 00:30:33,480 --> 00:30:38,040 Speaker 2: why that's important is because that means that the person 442 00:30:38,120 --> 00:30:43,040 Speaker 2: conducting the test cannot inadvertently queue the witness as to 443 00:30:43,240 --> 00:30:48,480 Speaker 2: who to pick, and the investigator cannot give feedback to 444 00:30:48,560 --> 00:30:54,280 Speaker 2: the witness, cannot say, good job, that's our suspect, that's 445 00:30:54,320 --> 00:30:58,640 Speaker 2: who we think did it. Another witness pick that same person, 446 00:31:00,040 --> 00:31:05,120 Speaker 2: and a feedback artificially inflates the confidence of the witness 447 00:31:05,760 --> 00:31:09,160 Speaker 2: and makes them a more powerful witness at the time 448 00:31:09,200 --> 00:31:13,480 Speaker 2: of the trial, more impervious to cross examination. It's not 449 00:31:13,560 --> 00:31:18,920 Speaker 2: a fair situation. So blind testing is one simple reform 450 00:31:19,440 --> 00:31:22,760 Speaker 2: that's been suggested. How about the instruction you give to 451 00:31:22,840 --> 00:31:27,160 Speaker 2: the witness. It's very important to have an unbiased instruction 452 00:31:27,680 --> 00:31:30,840 Speaker 2: to say to the witness, you know, the person may 453 00:31:30,920 --> 00:31:34,000 Speaker 2: or may not be in this lineup. It's just as 454 00:31:34,040 --> 00:31:38,120 Speaker 2: important to exonerate the innocent as to find the guilty person. 455 00:31:38,720 --> 00:31:42,760 Speaker 2: You're trying to take pressure off of the witness, take 456 00:31:42,840 --> 00:31:45,120 Speaker 2: the pressure off so they don't feel they've got to 457 00:31:45,160 --> 00:31:49,240 Speaker 2: pick someone anyone in order to solve the case. So 458 00:31:49,320 --> 00:31:52,720 Speaker 2: that's why that instruction is important. Then there are other 459 00:31:52,880 --> 00:31:55,920 Speaker 2: issues like who you put into the lineup? What should 460 00:31:55,920 --> 00:32:00,360 Speaker 2: the fillers look like? Do they just resemble the suspect? No, 461 00:32:00,680 --> 00:32:05,360 Speaker 2: they should also resemble the description that the witness gave. 462 00:32:06,280 --> 00:32:10,200 Speaker 2: So if the witness said, you know a skinny guy 463 00:32:10,280 --> 00:32:15,040 Speaker 2: with medium length hair, you want basically skinny people with 464 00:32:15,160 --> 00:32:20,760 Speaker 2: medium length hair fitting the description, not just fitting the 465 00:32:20,880 --> 00:32:22,960 Speaker 2: characteristics of the suspect. 466 00:32:23,680 --> 00:32:27,880 Speaker 3: What is the biggest takeaway that you think our listeners 467 00:32:27,880 --> 00:32:29,720 Speaker 3: should have from today's episode. 468 00:32:31,120 --> 00:32:34,920 Speaker 2: Just because somebody tells you something and they say it 469 00:32:34,960 --> 00:32:37,000 Speaker 2: with a lot of detail, and they say it with 470 00:32:37,120 --> 00:32:39,959 Speaker 2: confidence and they even show emotion when they tell you, 471 00:32:40,440 --> 00:32:44,280 Speaker 2: it doesn't mean it really happened. It doesn't mean it 472 00:32:44,320 --> 00:32:50,080 Speaker 2: really happened exactly that way, you need independent corroboration to 473 00:32:50,280 --> 00:32:55,840 Speaker 2: know whether you're dealing with an authentic memory or one 474 00:32:55,880 --> 00:33:01,160 Speaker 2: that is a product of some other process imagine suggestion, 475 00:33:02,280 --> 00:33:07,440 Speaker 2: misinterpreting dreams, or some other non authentic process. 476 00:33:11,360 --> 00:33:13,600 Speaker 3: We always try to end each episode with a call 477 00:33:13,640 --> 00:33:16,640 Speaker 3: to action. So I've been thinking about the lessons from 478 00:33:16,680 --> 00:33:22,239 Speaker 3: today's interview with Elizabeth and just how interesting, informative and 479 00:33:22,360 --> 00:33:26,520 Speaker 3: really eye opening it's been when someone's freedom hangs in 480 00:33:26,560 --> 00:33:30,320 Speaker 3: the balance. We should leave open the possibility that when 481 00:33:30,440 --> 00:33:33,480 Speaker 3: someone takes a witness stand and claims to have watched 482 00:33:33,480 --> 00:33:36,720 Speaker 3: a crime unfold or says they are sure they saw 483 00:33:36,800 --> 00:33:39,800 Speaker 3: the defendant leaving the scene of a crime, they may 484 00:33:39,840 --> 00:33:43,440 Speaker 3: not be accurately conveying what happened, and not because they're 485 00:33:43,480 --> 00:33:47,840 Speaker 3: intentionally lying or even shading the truth, but their memory 486 00:33:47,880 --> 00:33:51,680 Speaker 3: may have been influenced in some way, so considered the 487 00:33:51,720 --> 00:33:56,400 Speaker 3: surrounding circumstances, whether they were fed information, if there was 488 00:33:56,440 --> 00:33:59,000 Speaker 3: a suggestion about who may have committed the crime by 489 00:33:59,000 --> 00:34:02,120 Speaker 3: a member of law enforce smith, if the methods used 490 00:34:02,160 --> 00:34:06,120 Speaker 3: to quote unquote identify a perpetrator were influenced in a 491 00:34:06,120 --> 00:34:09,319 Speaker 3: way that made the accused stand out, and maybe it's 492 00:34:09,360 --> 00:34:12,480 Speaker 3: not the most reassuring thing that in an error. When 493 00:34:12,520 --> 00:34:17,000 Speaker 3: it seems that misinformation is rather popular and it's sometimes 494 00:34:17,040 --> 00:34:19,920 Speaker 3: difficult to know what the truth actually is. Here is 495 00:34:20,000 --> 00:34:23,839 Speaker 3: yet another reason to doubt our perception of reality. But 496 00:34:23,920 --> 00:34:29,000 Speaker 3: remember your willingness to remain open to all credible possibilities 497 00:34:29,840 --> 00:34:40,480 Speaker 3: may in fact prevent the next wrongful conviction. Next week, 498 00:34:40,760 --> 00:34:44,239 Speaker 3: on our final episode of the season, we'll explore how 499 00:34:44,239 --> 00:34:47,799 Speaker 3: what's known as shaken baby syndrome has been used to 500 00:34:48,000 --> 00:34:52,120 Speaker 3: falsely implicate people in crimes they did not commit. We'll 501 00:34:52,120 --> 00:34:55,799 Speaker 3: discuss this with executive director of the Center for Integrity 502 00:34:55,800 --> 00:35:01,880 Speaker 3: and Forensic Sciences, Kate Judson. Wrongful Conviction Junk Science is 503 00:35:01,880 --> 00:35:05,000 Speaker 3: a production of Lava for Good Podcasts and association with 504 00:35:05,080 --> 00:35:08,800 Speaker 3: Signal Company Number One. Thanks to our executive producer Jason 505 00:35:08,840 --> 00:35:12,480 Speaker 3: Flamm and the team at Signal Company Number One executive 506 00:35:12,480 --> 00:35:16,880 Speaker 3: producer Kevin Wardis and senior producers Ker Kornhaber and Britz Spangler. 507 00:35:17,640 --> 00:35:20,880 Speaker 3: Our music was composed by Jay Ralph. You can follow 508 00:35:20,920 --> 00:35:24,880 Speaker 3: me on Instagram at dubin Josh, follow the Wrongful Conviction 509 00:35:25,000 --> 00:35:29,120 Speaker 3: podcast on Facebook and on Instagram at Wrongful Conviction, and 510 00:35:29,239 --> 00:35:30,920 Speaker 3: on Twitter at wrong conviction,