False Witness: Forensic Hypnosis and Criminal Convictions Analysis

This report critically analyzes the use of forensic hypnosis in the US criminal justice system, focusing on its reliability and potential for errors. The author examines the claims of conspiracy theorists, the evidence used to support or refute these claims, and the reasons behind the persistent belief in forensic hypnosis's effectiveness. The report explores how the author uses language and evidence to shape the credibility of these claims. It also discusses the legal and ethical implications of using hypnosis in court, including cases where convictions have been questioned due to the use of hypnosis. The report also examines the argument that forensic hypnosis should be considered a conspiracy theory, given the restrictions and bans in several states. The central case study involves Flores, convicted based on hypnotic recall, and discusses the potential for the US Supreme Court to address the practice nationwide. The report concludes by emphasizing the importance of critically evaluating forensic hypnosis and its impact on justice.

Student Name
INSTITUTIONAL AFFILIATION(S)
CRITICAL THINKING

P a g e | 1
False witness: why is the US still using hypnosis to convict criminals?
Article summary
Post world war, forensic tools such as hypnosis has been used by US law enforcement
along with intelligence agencies to solve the crime, despite several pieces of evidence show it
is a junk science. Supporters of the conspiracy theory claim that forensic hypnosis not only
allows witnesses and victims to recall traumatic incidents but also gives clarity to emotions
by detaching it with irrelevant memories. Many scientific validations of success behind
forensic hypnosis especially in courtrooms made prosecutor rely on secure convictions,
however, some of them have now been considered as false which shows scientific error in the
discipline known as forensic hypnosis.
How does the author use language to make the claims of the conspiracy theorists
incredible?
The author, Ramchandani uses a colloquial language i.e. a very conversational tone to
make claims of the conspiracy theorist incredible. This can be said because the writer is
trying to convey the issue convincingly as well as making the audience familiar with the
ongoing Forensic hypnosis to solve crimes in the US.
How does the author use evidence to make the claims of the conspiracy theorists
incredible?
The evidence is used by the author as a supportive material while the actual claims
have been made based on research conducted by the conspiracy theorists. In the case of
Flores, although the reports validated that Forensic hypnosis shows some scientific error
which made the case postponed for some time, the author did not overlook the study made by
Gardner, Flores attorney while he approached a psychologist, Dr Steven Lynn. It was found

P a g e | 2
that hypnosis has the power to retrieve the memory, however, in Flores case, the hypnosis
seemed unfitting. Again, in a study made on people memory regarding Princess Diana death
in 2006, a range of memory recall methods were used to see whether people recalled what
Princess Diana did on the day she died. Lynn found that ones who were not hypnotised
remembered more as compared to the hypnotised one. This makes the author claim that since
hypnosis increases the subject's confidence towards their memories, it carries risks
particularly if the incident is portrayed incorrectly.
Why, according to the author, are those claims so persistently and widely believed?
The manner hypnotists demonstrate the art of hypnosis makes people believe
persistently that forensic hypnosis can help police track crime effectively. Most of the
therapists use hypnosis as a therapeutic tool to ease anxiety and physical pain in human to
lower their emotional constraints. Ones who have been applied hypnosis forensically takes it
as a searchlight through which particular memory can be picked out from the dark corner of a
traumatised brain. Making hypnosis a valuable element in clinical achievement further
strengthens people perception towards it as a fair suggestion, claiming it one way through
which dangerous situation can be solved along with making facts available in the courtroom.
According to Lynn, hypnosis is like a memory pill which can make a person recall
his/her memory more confidently. Evidence that made hypnosis gain popularity was also
revealed in the article particularly the incident published in New York Times on July 1976
when a buried bus driver recalled the licence plate number of the criminals who abducted
him. The case instantly became a catalyst for new a law enforcement in the country which
established legal use of forensic hypnosis after three years in Texas hypnosis program. Not
less than three-quarters of information gained from LAPD's hypnosis programme conducted

P a g e | 3
between the 70s and 80s in Los Angeles claims to be valuable for case investigations making
the forensic hypnosis approach believable.
How seriously should we take this conspiracy theory? What makes it worthy or unworthy
of our consideration?
The conspiracy theory concerning forensic hypnosis must be taken seriously
especially while living in a society where people have a dimly look over conspiracy theories,
ones who conspire and what opportunities or dismay it may bring on nation's prosperity. New
Jersey, in 2006 banned and abandoned every guideline of practices which involved
hypnotising a person after a sexual assault case identified someone who could not have been
involved in the crime. Even one of the pioneers of forensic hypnosis and the one who created
New Jersey guideline, Martin Orne agree that this practice must be banned as issues related to
it such as creating an illusionary memory and making people talk unknowingly makes this
practice riskier.
Although the supporters of it claim that forensic hypnosis must not be banned because
of few incorrect cases, our consideration towards banning it is more trustworthy as we or our
near ones can fall into its trap as shown in the evidence gathered by the writer. The forensic
hypnosis can go wrong partly because of making inappropriate assumptions regarding human
memory like following a chronological order while expressing an event as things occurred.
Though guided hypnotism can retrieve such memories which have been repressed or
forgotten, in reality, it is not as simple as it been assumed.
What is the argument of the piece?
Forensic hypnosis, at the very centre of people understanding, must be treated as a
conspiracy theory as many states have blocked or restricted its use since the past few decades.
The primary case study in the article reveals how Flores had been convicted for a crime

P a g e | 4
which he says he never committed. He has been accused of killing a woman in a robbery
course and despite making several appeals of him being innocent, he is approached with
lethal injections to hypnotise and speak the incident repeatedly. The intensity behind the
accused appeals and research made on forensic hypnosis validation immediately makes
audiences consider a fair trial for Flores which is free from any form of hypnosis or use of
lethal injection.
If appeals made by Flores proves appropriate and his conviction is falsified, Texas
will likely join other 27 states which have banned using forensic hypnosis due to growing
concern among experts about hypnosis being a junk science. This would be recorded as
momentum in the US to push a conspiracy theory into a scrap practice. Even if the appeal
made by Flores fails, the US Supreme Court can consider addressing forensic hypnosis
practice to decide whether or not ban it throughout the country.

P a g e | 5
References
Ramchandani, A. (2019, October 04). False witness: why is the US still using hypnosis to
convict criminals? Retrieved from
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2019/oct/04/false-witness-us-using-hypnosis-
convict-criminals