Essay On Repressed Memories
False Memories There are a significant number of people tried for crimes that they did not commit based off of another’s repressed memory. Elizabeth Loftus made it her goal to find justice for those wrongfully accused. It is hard to say whether or not those accused are truly innocent or not, but what we can say is that too many people are being locked away without all the right evidence; just another’s memory of what might have happened. Loftus found it unlikely that any one person could forget such a traumatic experience, then remember it years later. It was later found that a majority of the accusers were seeing therapists. Could this have lead to the repressed memories showing up after many years of harboring them? How do we know that
…show more content…
I believe that when attempting to convict a person of a crime, there should be plenty of physical evidence of that person doing the crime in order for there to even be a case. In many cases, repressed memories can be false, but the author of Repressed Memories: True and False, believes that in some cases repressed memories can be legitimate but neither should be used as a reliable source in a criminal case. Only reliable sources should be used when attempting to convict another on a crime they may or may not have done. Loftus experiments prove that the cases that involve repressed memories as a primary source are typically weak cases (Reisner Paragraph 13). In reality, any type of evidence used in a criminal case should be physical. Memories are not a form of physical evidence and should not be used. The use of physical evidence in criminal cases has a far better chance of convicting the true criminal, verses using memories or thoughts as evidence. There is no way to back up the evidence if it is based off of a memory. There have been a numerous amount of cases that have been dismissed due to the jury not believing in the repressed memories. It’s impossible to have a strong case when the jurors do not even believe the information given to
I believe that when attempting to convict a person of a crime, there should be plenty of physical evidence of that person doing the crime in order for there to even be a case. In many cases, repressed memories can be false, but the author of Repressed Memories: True and False, believes that in some cases repressed memories can be legitimate but neither should be used as a reliable source in a criminal case. Only reliable sources should be used when attempting to convict another on a crime they may or may not have done. Loftus experiments prove that the cases that involve repressed memories as a primary source are typically weak cases (Reisner Paragraph 13). In reality, any type of evidence used in a criminal case should be physical. Memories are not a form of physical evidence and should not be used. The use of physical evidence in criminal cases has a far better chance of convicting the true criminal, verses using memories or thoughts as evidence. There is no way to back up the evidence if it is based off of a memory. There have been a numerous amount of cases that have been dismissed due to the jury not believing in the repressed memories. It’s impossible to have a strong case when the jurors do not even believe the information given to