Memory in the Courtroom, Part II

The video discusses the evolution of legal attitudes towards expert memory testimony, highlighting key cases like State V Chapel that reversed convictions due to the exclusion of expert testimony. It explores the judicial discretion in allowing such testimony and the resistance faced despite growing evidence of wrongful convictions, particularly with the advent of DNA evidence. The video underscores the need for legal reforms to address the issues of faulty eyewitness testimony.

What significant change occurred in 1983 regarding expert memory testimony in Arizona?

How did the Arizona Supreme Court's decision impact the legal system in California?

Describe the resistance faced when introducing expert testimony on the science of memory into courtrooms.

What role did DNA evidence play in changing perceptions of eyewitness testimony?

What was identified as a major cause of wrongful convictions according to the text?