Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Igel

(35,309 posts)
59. Memories are malleable.
Sun May 20, 2012, 09:49 PM
May 2012

Most of my early childhood memories are derived from photographs. Otherwise, I have none. But my memories seem real. They're fake.

Once I was accused of saying I'd erase all the data at my place of employment; I said there was no backup system, and if something happened there'd be a really bad data loss. At the time, there were three people in the room. One had left town before I was accused.

I was, however, accused by three people, siblings. They were unimpeachable. Until I was talking to one of them alone and asked who was in the room. She thought, and said her sister. I asked where the guy was and she said there were just the three of us. "Why were we there?" She remembered we were playing bridge and there were four of us: her, her sister, me, and the other guy (call him "F&quot . But there were just three people in the room--and she realized that her sister wasn't there and F was. Her sister was in the bathroom and couldn't have heard what I said.

So she called her sister over, and her sister said she was there at the time. The other guy ... she wasn't sure. She recalled we were playing bridge and decided that since her brother was there it had to be him (call him "C&quot . Then she called C over, and he said he was there. The four of us. But he said couldn't have been bridge we were playing. He'd never played. Didn't know how to play. But it was just the four of us. F wasn't there.

C's wife was there and asked when it was. They all agreed--it was some holiday or long weekend, so it was notable. She promptly said it was impossible for her husband to be there. It was her brother's birthday party and they went to that. She pulled out her planner. She and her husband weren't just at the party--they'd planned it. He insisted he was there--and said what we had for dinner, who was there, what we did that evening, etc., etc. Right down to who sat where at the table.

I asked them what I said. They all answered at once, but it seems I managed to say three different things. It took them a few minutes to start remembering all the same thing.

I left as they started to fight over other parts of their memories. One sister realized that she was in the room with me and F. The other sister insisted she was in the room and her brother confirmed it. The brother was arguing with his wife and brother-in-law because they both said he couldn't have been there and he insisted he was.

The fight happened less than two months after the events they were arguing over. Two had fabricated memories--one of something that occurred when she was out of the room, the other created memories for an entire evening. An evening that was really quite unmemorable or unremarkable.

Now, take a 16-year-old girlfriend whose boyfriend was killed and whose testimony might be crucial in nailing the guy who shot him. Consider the claim that there's no way she could embellish or change a memory, even accidentally.

I wonder when the interview was conducted with the friend... Cave_Johnson May 2012 #1
Why is that? Kingofalldems May 2012 #2
Just thinking about it from a legal perspective... Cave_Johnson May 2012 #5
You can't be serious. Ikonoklast May 2012 #11
I'm not impeaching anything... Cave_Johnson May 2012 #12
Memories are malleable. Igel May 2012 #59
agreeed. I dont recall her saying that before. Either the press didn't tell us, or it was not there robinlynne May 2012 #22
Saying what before? n/t vaberella May 2012 #70
get off. get off. That is a different story than what we heard weeks ago. robinlynne May 2012 #96
Oh okay. Or it was never released. vaberella May 2012 #97
I agree Life Long Dem May 2012 #90
You are correct. n/t jaysunb May 2012 #39
If it was conducted much later? Fumesucker May 2012 #3
Not a matter of fault... Cave_Johnson May 2012 #8
There were interviews a long time ago. if she did not say it back then, I don't robinlynne May 2012 #23
Actually no one really new about her later into the game. vaberella May 2012 #71
Answered my own question with the google... Cave_Johnson May 2012 #54
Interesting that the police investigation didn't cover this.. Fumesucker May 2012 #56
I read some other sources... Cave_Johnson May 2012 #58
acceptable sources include people who were there, like this tiny elvis May 2012 #66
Hmm... Cave_Johnson May 2012 #68
She's not only emotionally fragile but physically, since this affected her physically. vaberella May 2012 #73
Should have been more clear... Cave_Johnson May 2012 #75
I'd like to see Atty. Crump's brief on why Trayvon's statements to his girlfriend are not hearsay. amandabeech May 2012 #78
I find that doubtful, to bordering on false. vaberella May 2012 #72
And, the hearsay rule may prevent some or most of Trayvon's comments from being amandabeech May 2012 #77
it was widely reported from early on that he was on the phone with his girlfriend while he was being magical thyme May 2012 #7
she was interviewed within hours? hfojvt May 2012 #24
he was identified the next morning magical thyme May 2012 #38
Which matches perfectly with the 'get off' comment. I hope this young lady is able to handle being freshwest May 2012 #32
Martin was shot in the chest... Cave_Johnson May 2012 #37
I'm sure you do obamanut2012 May 2012 #19
" H2O Man May 2012 #21
Glad we agree... Cave_Johnson May 2012 #43
... Starry Messenger May 2012 #81
It should have more weight than anything Zimmerman says Quixote1818 May 2012 #26
Everyone involved has their own biases... Cave_Johnson May 2012 #30
It's a simple and clear case of Zimmerman stalking Martin. FarPoint May 2012 #36
Ummm.. maybe? Cave_Johnson May 2012 #40
Not maybe at all. Martin would be here if Zimmerman had not gotten out of his car, period. Quixote1818 May 2012 #49
I present the simplicity of this case... FarPoint May 2012 #50
Not a chance the apologists will stfu. Look the first response is one. notadmblnd May 2012 #4
I don't think the person answering the non-emergency line is necessarily petronius May 2012 #6
Currently the City of Sanford Police Department has an authorized staffing level of 140 sworn notadmblnd May 2012 #10
I think the chance that he was actually talking to the dispatcher is even greater; petronius May 2012 #13
Easy for you to prove me wrong. Call them and ask if a the speaker is a real officer notadmblnd May 2012 #16
You're the one making the claim - why haven't you already called? petronius May 2012 #17
No matter if a dispatcher or a cop answers tonight, that does not tell us who did that night. ProgressiveProfessor May 2012 #18
Keep reaching.. and for your educational pleasure here is a copy of Sanford Fla's neighborhood notadmblnd May 2012 #28
Keep dodging that there is nothing to indicate Zimmerman spoke to an LEO on the phone ProgressiveProfessor May 2012 #63
Would you believe me if I did tell you that I already called? Somehow, I think not. notadmblnd May 2012 #25
Your claim up above was that, because the phone was answered petronius May 2012 #29
all you have to do is call it and find out notadmblnd May 2012 #31
So you didn't actually call already? petronius May 2012 #33
Dispatchers are cheaper than officers ProgressiveProfessor May 2012 #20
Excellent. FarPoint May 2012 #51
Got your link... ProgressiveProfessor May 2012 #14
The Dispatcher is an Officer.. FarPoint May 2012 #41
Exactly meanit May 2012 #62
He should of, but it did not have the force of law ProgressiveProfessor May 2012 #65
Your beating a dead horse. FarPoint May 2012 #69
Wishful thinking on your part ProgressiveProfessor May 2012 #91
If Zimmerman were being charged meanit May 2012 #85
Its a binary thing...LEO or not. ProgressiveProfessor May 2012 #64
Martin's lower sleeves had Zimmerman's dna on them magical thyme May 2012 #9
This is interesting... dkf May 2012 #15
this has more relevance to the 911 calls rather than the OP grok May 2012 #27
I think she sounded completely credible. Everything she said was pretty obscure Quixote1818 May 2012 #35
I find her credible also grok May 2012 #53
She sounded credible to me too Generic Other May 2012 #80
I really doubt zimmerman has to lie grok May 2012 #86
That makes sense that they wouldn't let him testify Generic Other May 2012 #87
Thank you Oilwellian May 2012 #45
Thanks for this n/t malaise May 2012 #47
You can, hear the grass. vaberella May 2012 #67
Actually I think it may be the headphone getting disconnected grok May 2012 #92
This part was interesting as well Oilwellian May 2012 #42
Well if he has the research or documentation to support his assertions then I guess he is creating dkf May 2012 #46
I think Oilwellian May 2012 #48
I have serious issues with reich. grok May 2012 #55
AFAIK it's not age, it's vocal tract length that determines frequency. Igel May 2012 #60
Off topic, but.. absyntheminded May 2012 #34
I love Mr. Fish Oilwellian May 2012 #44
Or it means she is lying krawhitham May 2012 #52
She might just be wrong. Igel May 2012 #61
But you can not dispute that she was on the phone with Martin, right? JoePhilly May 2012 #76
Silly rabbit...the Zimmerman fan club wouldn't believe anything a black girl said anyway! alcibiades_mystery May 2012 #57
Tsk, tsk indeed. trolling4dollaz May 2012 #95
Unfortunately, the defense will simply call her a liar. Tommy_Carcetti May 2012 #74
Actually, when she repeats her recollection of what Trayvon actually said, amandabeech May 2012 #79
Unavailability of declarant exception. Tommy_Carcetti May 2012 #82
I've examined the Wiki on the Federal Rules amandabeech May 2012 #83
This may be helpful: Fla. Stat. 90.804 Tommy_Carcetti May 2012 #88
Yes, that's what we called in law school long ago, "dying declaration." amandabeech May 2012 #89
This would be devastating to Zimmerman aikoaiko May 2012 #84
Post removed Post removed May 2012 #93
Farewell! MrScorpio May 2012 #94
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Just before the call cut ...»Reply #59