Witness Inconsistency – When Does Inconsistency Matter? Does it matter when someone seems to change their story from one interview to another – if they’ve added some new information or contradict themselves? Lorraine Hope and Matthew Francis draw on research on memory and consistency to look at when interviewers should, and shouldn’t, worry about inconsistencies.

All credit to this piece to Professor Lorraine Hope and the team at Crest research. I was sparked to highlight it as it immediately cognitively reinstated me to a time many years ago at a social event when an eminent magistrate remarked to me that he’d heard a case of minor assault in which the victim and a key eyewitness contradicted each other by saying that the offender held the weapon in different hands. The magistrate resolutely insisted that one of them ‘must be lying’ because of the contradiction, defence win the argument of reasonable doubt and case dismissed. Justice!

This was a defining moment and one of those etched in my memory to underscore the amount of work still to be done to drag UK judiciary into the 21st century.

Investigations change lives. Do your decisions rely on fact-finding interviews? Contact us if accuracy and detail are important to you. ECM® is THE Mark of Quality for anybody conducting fact-finding interviews. 

Full article reproduced here courtesy of CREST: https://crestresearch.ac.uk/comment/when-does-inconsistency-matter/?utm_content=bufferd690e&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer