Sept. 19, Holly Bowen, assistant psychology professor at SMU Dallas who specializes in memory issues, for a piece challenging the legitimacy of testimony from interviews conducted while the subject is under hypnosis. Published in the Dallas Morning News: https://bit.ly/33NtSGL
Since the inception of criminal investigations, the techniques and procedures used in these inquests have been plagued by pseudoscientific claims.
From spectral evidence allowed at the Salem witch trials and phrenologists interpreting bumps on the skulls of criminals, to modern-day polygraphs to detect lying and hypnosis to unlock repressed or forgotten memories, the justice system, and ultimately people’s lives, have too often been dictated by “junk” science. . .
The Flores case is an example of using “junk” science for a murder conviction.
By Holly Bowen
Since the inception of criminal investigations, the techniques and procedures used in these inquests have been plagued by pseudoscientific claims.
From spectral evidence allowed at the Salem witch trials and phrenologists interpreting bumps on the skulls of criminals, to modern-day polygraphs to detect lying and hypnosis to unlock repressed or forgotten memories, the justice system, and ultimately people’s lives, have too often been dictated by “junk” science.
While spectral evidence, phrenology and polygraphs are no longer admissible in court cases, hypnosis continues to be used by law enforcement. A recent yearlong exploration by The Dallas Morning News detailed how hypnosis is used in Texas courts and highlighted the case of Charles Don Flores, who was convicted and sits on death row after the key eyewitness “remembered” seeing him at the scene of the crime only after undergoing hypnosis. Flores could be executed unless his final appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court is approved and his 1998 conviction overturned. The ability to use testimony collected under hypnosis would be on trial, too.
Pseudoscientific claims appear to be based on the scientific method, but they lack objective measurement, and often are based on illusory correlations. Pseudoscience seeks confirmatory evidence while ignoring any evidence that falsifies the claim. Legitimate science focuses on falsification and tracks both the hits and misses. Belief in some pseudoscientific claims may be harmless (such as astrology), but the report on Charles Don Flores‘ case makes clear that belief in other pseudoscience can be extremely dangerous.
Hypnosis has been used in the justice system for decades, and taxpayer dollars are contributing to hundreds of law enforcement officials being “trained” in this technique. The biggest problem is that hypnosis is often used when there is very little or no other evidence in the case, such as DNA, or a person who can confidently identify the perpetrator in a lineup. When there is a victim or eyewitness with no clear memories of the crime details, or the perpetrator’s face during questioning, Texas police can, and sometimes do, turn to hypnosis. The idea is that these memories are just temporarily blocked, and hypnosis can encourage the memory to be released back to consciousness.
Using hypnosis to retrieve repressed memories is considered pseudoscience because there is no scientific evidence that the “repressed” memories one brings to mind while under hypnosis are accurate. If a victim or eyewitness brings to mind a possible suspect while under hypnosis, with no other evidence linking this person to the crime, as is often the case, there is no objective way to determine if this memory is accurate. Further, since hypnosis is rarely used in cases where there is other evidence linking someone to a crime, it can only be confirmatory evidence that hypnosis works, and therefore cannot be falsified against other evidence or information.
There is no scientific evidence that memories improve over time, and hypnosis sessions to retrieve forgotten memories would likely happen long after the crime has been committed and other avenues have been exhausted. However, there is plenty of scientific evidence that false memories can be easily created when one is in a vulnerable and suggestive state, like under hypnosis, or when motivated by seeking closure or justice, or trying help solve a crime.
I have written about how other aspects of police procedures are not conducive to retrieving accurate and reliable memories from victims and eyewitnesses, and these problems such as repeated questioning, multiple suspect lineups and feedback from law enforcement, will only be exacerbated by hypnosis.
Supporting advocacy groups like the Innocence Project can help in cases where there have been potential wrongful convictions due to pseudoscientific practices such as hypnosis. Calls to your local state government can also be useful for informing policymakers that these laws allowing testimony derived from hypnosis need to be overturned.
Lives like that of Charles Don Flores may depend on it.
Holly Bowen is an assistant professor of psychology at Southern Methodist University.