It turns out that the accuser has done work herself with victims of trauma (in conjunction with several co-researchers); and, found a range of reactions.
Even an eye-witness account by a victim in real time is “iffy.” You normally want corroborating evidence. These include physical evidence and third-party eye witnesses. Also, a pattern of behavior. Having said this, a report in real time by a victim would usually warrant some kind of police investigation to try to development corroborating evidence.
In the case of a recovered memory and a long-delayed report of abuse or assault, which report is uncorroborated or even contradicted, absolutely no.
The issue is VERY controversial. Similar to lie-detector tests. While lie-detector tests are widely used in many settings, the results of lie-detector tests are not admitted in courts of law because they’re not reliable. Some people, e.g., pathological liars, can pass lie-detector tests while lying. Others can pass lie-detector tests because they believe their false statements to be true. Regarding recovered memory, they too are used by a good number of therapists and have been found useful in therapy and in law enforcement. But, they have also been used to make many proven false accusations. They, by themselves, are unreliable.
Because of the possibility of recovered memory, statutes of limitation on child abuse and sexual assault have been extended in many jurisdictions. This is a valid response. In cases where the recovered memory is corroborated by other evidence, legal action can move forward, even to conviction. But, where the only evidence is the recovered memory, no, legal action should not move forward. This is only adding to the whatever condition warranted the therapy, and needless cost to the taxpayer and, especially, to the accused.
Especially concerning is when recovered memories involve famous people, the possibility of pecuniary gain, or other personal motivation, and all you have is the recovered memory of the accuser and the denial of the accused.
Double especially concerning is when the recovered memory is contradicted by third-party witnesses, physical evidence and patterns of behavior.
Now I will be blunt: in the case of Judge K.’s accuser, we are talking of a party girl who started drinking heavily as a young teenager and boasted of having sex with dozens of boys in her high school yearbook, and who continued to be a party girl after high school.
Have we become so numb to drug and alcohol abuse and to sexual promiscuity that we cannot consider the character of the accuser?
Doesn’t seem to matter. Didn’t with Crystal Mangum in the Duke Lacrosse scandal. Very sad society no longer reasons.
“Similar to lie-detector tests.”
A polygraph expert — former FBI, I think — was interviewed on Fox. He said there’s no such thing as a “lie detector”. He said they’re polygraphs and aren’t meant to detect lies necessarily. They just register reactions to verbal stimuli. Lies could be one trigger, but so could several other things.
I thought that was interesting. In true crime situations I’ve noticed that they’re only about 50% accurate when it comes to lies. How many people have been falsely maligned due to faulty polygraphs?
The new method that “reads” people’s voices might be more accurate.
Not true.
Maybe we wait until some reliable facts come out.