Hypnosis used on witnesses in Laci Peterson case

[Ladewig]

story (http://www.modbee.com/reports/laci/story/7323367p-8246318c.html)

California law lays out strict conditions for allowing testimony from hypnotized witnesses in a criminal case. The conditions include that the testimony is limited to matters the witness recalled and related prior to the hypnosis, and the substance of the pre-hypnotic memory must be preserved in written, audiotape or videotape form before the hypnosis.

Wow. I would hate to be charged with a crime and have testimony introduced that was produced by hypontized witnesses. At least the law requires pre-hypnosis testimony to be preserved in some form.

[reprise]

Wow. I'm extremely surprised that it's admissible in court.

Using hypnosis in order to prompt recollections which might offer new direction to an investigation is one thing; allowing hypnotic recollections to be admitted as testimony - however - is just plain dangerous. Confabulation is just far too common in hypnotic recollections for testimony elicited in this manner to be admitted as evidence.

Can't someone challenge it on the basis of the unreliability of hypnotic recollections in respect of other issues, like past life regression and alien abduction?

[Mr Manifesto]

Originally posted by reprise
Wow. I'm extremely surprised that it's admissible in court.

Using hypnosis in order to prompt recollections which might offer new direction to an investigation is one thing; allowing hypnotic recollections to be admitted as testimony - however - is just plain dangerous. Confabulation is just far too common in hypnotic recollections for testimony elicited in this manner to be admitted as evidence.

Can't someone challenge it on the basis of the unreliability of hypnotic recollections in respect of other issues, like past life regression and alien abduction?

What, are you saying that Whitley Striber's recollections are 'unreliable'?

[nightwind]

This is scary, but maybe they will uncover some alien abductions in the process, who knows.

I do find it hard to believe that this type of evidence would be admissable in court, and looks like this would be grounds for appeal if it was let in.

But maybe the hypnotist could even "help them remember" if they didn't come through with the right information.

Well, either way it is used for prosecution or defense, don't really think that this could carry much weight.

[Dancing David]

Did anyone else read the article?

It is kind of vausge, and it involves a woman who might have been in the area of the Paterson's, walking her dog around the time that Laci disappeared. It doesn't say that she was hypnotised, it says something like :hypnosis like cognitive techniques:. Allegedly done so that the woman could recall where she was walking on Christmas Eve.

So while I agree that testimony that might convict Scott Peterson shouls never be used in court, or any where for that matter; in this case it is just more questionable forensics.

Hypnotic recollection: a great place for confabulation to occur.

Eye witness testimony: another great source of error and mistakes.

I would think that the prosecuter would have just done better to present the evidence. What if she is just prectising visualization to remember the christmas eve? Still piss poor foensics.

[Ladewig]

Yes, but she could easily be put on the stand. Both side agree that a witness saw a seven-month pregnant woman walking a dog near the time of the murder. The prosecution claims it was Laci Peterson. The defense claims it was this other woman who lives near the sighting. If this woman can definitely determine when and where she was walking her dog on December 24, then she will end up supporting one side or the other.

[Crossbow]

Well, it sounds to me like they are using hypnosis for investigative purposes as opposed to testifying purposes.

Police often do this sort of thing with lie detectors for example. They cannot use lie detector findings in court, but they have found that they are useful tools during the investigation phase.