When Truthful Testimony is not Deemed Credible

For anyone who’s been in an interrogation room or on the witness stand and was unable to provide basic details about a crime for which they are a suspect, the frustration is very real. Why is it some people are simply unsure about the make of the vehicle, the color of clothing on others at the scene, or other fundamental facts. They were there! Why can’t they remember? Although prosecutors often view it as a sign of concealment or deception, there may be a more valid explanation: aphantasia.

Understanding Aphantasia 

Someone who cannot produce a mental picture of previous events may have a condition called  aphantasia. It can impact anyone, regardless of a person’s intelligence, sincerity, or alertness. It is a cognitive skill that is non-existent for roughly four percent of the population, making it impossible for those affected to conjure a picture of a scene, a person, or the sequence of events associated with a particular experience. This is not a matter of having a bad memory. It is the inability to picture things in one’s mind and recall it on command.

A Problem in Court 

The obvious hitch in a courtroom is that credibility is indelibly linked to accuracy and truthfulness as judges and juries, among others, evaluate. Thus, a person who delivers inaccurate or minimal details, whether as a witness or as a suspect, can present as unreliable, which can translate to unbelievable. And when a judgment is made that testimony in an interrogation room or on the stand is coming from someone who is not credible, it can taint the whole case in a negative way, with the prospect of leading to a wrongful conviction.

Addressing Such Negative Impressions

Since it can be nearly impossible to unravel initial impressions, it’s vital for a defense attorney to recognize aphantasia, enlighten the jury about its impacts, and demonstrate how standard law enforcement interrogations do not serve those with the condition. Emphasizing the flexibility of reliability factors, and stressing the other strengths of the case that support a version of events that exonerates the suspect is essential. Significantly, it is necessary to show jurors that the absence of visual memory is not synonymous with a lack of credibility. Building a defense, then, must focus more heavily on factors other than visual memory, including:

• Anchors in the daily routines for the person in question;
• Timelines of events compiled based on known facts;
• Calendar entries that can prod memory;
• Receipts addressing questions of what, where, or when questions;
• Audio recordings, video recordings, or time stamps;
• Phone records;
• Diagrams that order events for individuals who are spatial thinkers.

Protecting You and Your Rights

The experienced Las Vegas criminal defense attorneys at Lobo Law always fight for the best possible outcomes for our clients. If special circumstances like aphantasia are an issue, we will deal with them. To discuss, schedule a confidential consultation in our Las Vegas office today.