Elizabeth Loftus

Elizabeth Loftus testified for the defense as an expert in memory science, memory reconstruction, and the effects of later events on memory. Before her testimony, the court denied the government's motion to exclude her proposed opinions about suggestive activities but required her to discuss general principles without applying them to the facts or specifics of the case.

On direct examination, Loftus described memory as involving acquisition, retention, and retrieval. She explained that later conversations, interviews, media, language, internal inferences, and elapsed time can introduce post-event information. She also discussed research on misinformation and false memories, testifying that vividness, emotion, and confidence do not by themselves establish accuracy and that confirming information or a perceived source can increase confidence in a recollection.

The government questioned Loftus about her compensation, her defense-side criminal work, a passage from her book, and the boundaries of the research she discussed. She agreed that people can remember the core of traumatic events, that repeated exposure generally improves memory, and that her research had not attempted to implant a false memory of childhood sexual abuse.

On redirect, Loftus explained that research ethics restrict experiments that could harm participants, including efforts to implant memories of sexual abuse. She also said her opinions would not have changed if the government had called her. During deliberations, the court identified a jury request for her transcript and designated the request note as a court exhibit.