Memory Errors in Alibi Generation: How an Alibi Can Turn Against Us

Abstract

Alibis play a critical role in the criminal justice system. Yet research on the process of alibi generation and evaluation is still nascent. Indeed, similar to other widely investigated psychological phenomena in the legal system - such as false confessions, historical claims of abuse, and eyewitness memory - the basic assumptions underlying alibi generation and evaluation require closer empirical scrutiny. To date, the majority of alibi research investigates the social psychological aspects of the process. We argue that applying our understanding of basic human memory is critical to a complete understanding of the alibi process. Specifically, we challenge the use of alibi inconsistency as an indication of guilt by outlining the "cascading effects" that can put innocents at risk for conviction. We discuss how normal encoding and storage processes can pose problems at retrieval, particularly for innocent suspects that can result in alibi inconsistencies over time. Those inconsistencies are typically misunderstood as intentional deception, first by law enforcement, affecting the investigation, then by prosecutors affecting prosecution decisions, and finally by juries, ultimately affecting guilt judgments. Put differently, despite the universal nature of memory inconsistencies, a single error can produce a cascading effect, rendering an innocent individual's alibi, ironically, proof of guilt. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

True and false alibis among prisoners and their detection by police detectives

“…Experiment 2: Alibi discrimination and evaluation The proposition that innocent people can generate accurate alibis supported with strong evidence (Olson & Charman, 2012) raises the possibility that those who are not innocent cannot generate accurate alibis with strong supportive evidence. However, as described above, there are various reasons why nonoffenders would not report an accurate alibi (Crozier et al, 2017). In addition, alibi generation research shows that the strength of the supportive evidence cannot be used on its own to determine the believability of an alibi because most non-offenders do not have such strong evidence although they are innocent (e.g.…”

“…This means that the alibi should be correct and supported by strong evidence. True alibis can, however, also be inaccurate because of various reasons (Crozier et al, 2017). It has been demonstrated that the larger the time gap between the alleged crime and the moment of interviewing, the more errors occur in the alibi statement of non-offenders (e.g.…”

“I think you did it!”: Examining the effect of presuming guilt on the verbal output of innocent suspects during brief interviews

“…Regardless of the guilt/innocence presumption with which interviewers approach suspect interviews, innocent suspects sometimes fail to provide convincing alibis due to the reporting of incomplete and/or inaccurate details (Olson & Charman, ; Olson & Wells, , ). During a crime investigation, innocent suspects whose alibi turns out to be erroneous or incomplete may be perceived as liars (Burke, Turtle, & Olson, ; Dysart & Strange, ; Olson & Charman, ), and, ultimately, are at increased risk of being falsely convicted (Crozier, Strange, & Loftus, ; Wells et al, ). Thus, unintentionally providing inaccurate alibis can be very risky for innocent suspects.…”

Using the Cognitive Interview to Enhance Recall During Contact Tracing

“…Another context in which people are asked to list places visited and people encountered is generating true alibi statements to a crime (e.g., Allison, Michael, Mathews, & Overman, 2011;Crozier, Strange, & Loftus, 2017;Culhane, Hosch, & Kehn, 2008;Culhane et al, 2013;Olson & Charman, 2012). In fact, there are many different facets of providing an alibi that are similar to reporting during contact tracing.…”

“…In eyewitness memory research the participant is often aware that the information presented is likely to be requested later. However, in generating an alibi, the individual is typically recalling everyday events for which he or she did not pay attention and therefore has difficulty remembering later (Crozier, Strange, & Loftus, 2017). Reporting an alibi is also unique to other types of reporting because it asks individuals to remember autobiographical events, which often occur repeatedly (i.e., a person trying to remember details about one specific instance (e.g., driving to school last Tuesday) amongst all other instances (e.g., driving to school on Thursday, or on the Tuesday before)).…”