Trochym, Hypnosis and Eyewitness Identification
The SCC has ruled inadmissible testimony from witnesses who have been subjected to hypnosis. So holds the recently released R. v. Trochym. The ruling is somewhat unusual; it's not often that the Court issues a blanket condemnation of evidence that has been used in Canadian courts for many years. On the other hand, the outcome is generally a sensible one, given the dangers that hypnotically "aided" testimony can present. What research has has been done suggests that hypnosis can result in a fuller memory of events, but that the fuller memory may include false ones. And it's often impossible to tell the true from the false parts of the "enhanced" memory. Another danger is that the witness who has undergone hypnosis may come to view her post-hypnosis memories as completely accurate, regardless of whether such is the case. Cross-examining a witness who firmly (but mistakenly) believes that she is telling the truth presents great difficulties for the Defence, and these types of witnesses can carry great wieght with the jury.
Criminalreview has nicely explained Trochym and some of its implications for hypnosis as a forensic tool. I want to touch on another area where we may feel welcome fallout from the judgement - the admissibility of eyewitness testimony.
Continue reading "Trochym, Hypnosis and Eyewitness Identification" »
