Analysis Of Elizabeth Loftus Memory In Canadian Courts Of Law

In “Memory in Canadian Courts of Law” Elizabeth Loftus focuses on the testimonials of suspects based on victims or eyewitnesses memories to explain the issues that memories can cause in legal cases as it can result in false accusations and wrongful convictions. As a psychologist Loftus believes that false eyewitness memories are the major cause of wrongful convictions and that these “dubious” memories from witnesses can lead to innocent lives to be suffered. Loftus is informing readers there is a heavy reliance on memory and eyewitness testimony in the court system and it’s not valid methods of evidence. She wants readers to understand that it is unethical for jurors to use these methods to convict a suspect.

Loftus’s article is sifted

She mentions that these “dangerous” memories are presented in legal cases and explains her part in two of which she was apart of. In the first case, the photos of Thomas Sohponow who was mistakenly identified as the murderer of a young woman during the identification process were arrayed simultaneously rather than sequentially giving witnesses an easier target. This practice is not reliable as it allows witnesses to easily be persuaded by their naïve “memories” of a person and unfortunately in his case resulted in four years in prison. The second case Michael Kliman who was an elementary school teacher was accused of molesting a 6th grade student based on “repressed memories”. After two decades the student who “recovered” her memories laid charges on Kliman, which makes the case questionable since it could be difficult to justify the validity of a “repressed memory”. While both cases witnesses came to testify based on memories, jurors faultily accepted

Followed by the lack of corroboration, which is an important aspect in courtrooms, “corroboration will add credibility to the memory and lack of it may raise doubts about the allegations.” Loftus considers that relying on memory is not a valid way of justice; the legal system needs to improve when eyewitness testimonials are used in the courts. Loftus confides as a psychologist that psychological science has taught them about human memory and that the research has revealed the limits of human memory. Adding on, these research findings need to be incorporated in procedures to improve the court system. She hopes readers will acknowledge the fact that the use of memories in a trial can be problematic since they are “dangerous” and can lead to false