Winterchild87
Member
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2015
- Messages
- 74
- Reaction score
- 66
Only my own take on the vid. of the lady witness. I did a course on Forensic psychology (and must add I am not qualified for anything!). But it opened my eyes to witness statements and how unreliable they can be.
It appears imperative that witnesses must be interviewed separately and before they have time to speak to anyone else at the scene, since other peoples' views can influence their recollection.
IDK if in hindsight this/these witnesses who saw the suitcase man were influenced by the discovery of the suitcase contents.
It isn't their fault in any way, but memory can be elusive and guided by later events.
I'm not going into the "maybe this" and "maybe that", but imo their statements should be treated with the above in mind.
Hope I'm not saying anything upsetting here - I'm just voicing my thoughts FWIW.
Over time people can also develop "false memories", either because time has passed or because of influence by others. By which I mean, she may have heard what the others saw and she may think she remembers seeing something thay would have been impossible for her to see (such as the crossing of the railway line from a location that is not visible from).
False memories exist in everyone and are a very interesting phenomenon read about- most common are memories where you could swear someone was there with you when in reality they weren't (my boyfriend has sworn vehemently that I was at certain dinners with his family, when in reality I was interstate visiting my family or hadn't moved to his state yet!)