If you know there is an eye witness to a crime, would you believe the person's testimony? After all, the person saw what happened, right? What if that person was you?
I attended a training course where our group was asked to watch a video, and we knew there would be questions afterwards, though we didn't know what the questions would be about. So we watched. Some people's attention wandered slightly, others seemed absorbed. When the video clip ended, we are asked a few questions about what we had just seen. I don't remember the specifics now as it has been a few years, and these are examples of what might have been asked: What were the people wearing? How many people were there? What was on the young man's t-shirt? What did the man who was wearing the green t-shirt look like: was he white, or not? What struck me was how sure people were about what they had seen. I couldn't remember details like clothing. Or even how many people there were. Individuals in our group could not even agree on the colour of the man in the green t-shirt, and some thought he was white, and others not. Then we watched the video again, and we saw how wrong the answers we gave were! Some answers were correct, but many were not. I tried to pay more attention when we were asked to watch a few more videos later on, and to take more careful note of what people were wearing and what they looked like, but I realised how exceedingly difficult it is to remember details, especially when there is no clue given as to what might be deemed important later on; if you are watching out for something, it is easier to pay it mind, but otherwise it may pass by notice.
How sure are you about what you yourself have seen, if you were a witness to an event? Would you make a good eye witness to a crime that happened, especially if you are only questioned a few days after something happened? Would you categorically state you knew what you saw? What if you were wrong?
No comments:
Post a Comment