Witness Evidence

[downbeatplumb]

One of us is wrong, either way my point stands.

Ok.... That was just more of a curious thing, I wasn't necessarily making an arguement.

I can understand if you heard something, and didn't know what it was.  Then read the news, thought it was the bomb, found out more info, and decided it wasn't the bomb that you heard.  However, if you didn't hear anything, watched the news, and decided you did hear something, and then read a scientist, about false memories, and decided you made the whole thing up.  Then I just think that you are extraordinarily suggestable.  And the question comes up... How do you know if you did hear something or not.... I'm interested in what your original testimony was before or the specifics of what you heard.  There are studies which show that people behave differently, when someone who wears a white lab coat, or is viewed as an authority tells them to do something as well.

Personally, when I am investigating an event, i find that you can tell when someone is giving you a conclusion rather then their testimony.  There are less details to the story, and they do not include much before and after.  Testimony also includes irrelevant details.  When I see this occurring, I ask questions, like what made you think that you heard a bomb?  I want to know details, of what you saw or heard (or felt), not necessarily what you think it was.

We heard nothing, it was only when we returned to the UK and saw the news that my wife put this whole thing together in her head.
It is a completely false memory that she has invented but is convinced is true.