Advanced

Minnets tillförlitlighet - Utsagors trovärdighet och bevisproblematik i brottmål

Ljunggren, Sara LU (2018) LAGF03 20181
Department of Law
Faculty of Law
Abstract
We don’t remember everything we have been through and the things we remember is compressed information of the real event that is filled out by our own subjective perceptions of what should have happened. Everytime a memory is considered, told or discussed it risks being changed in detail. There is also a risk that details are forgotten over time, especially if the detail is considered to be unimportant. Therefore it is not wise to entirely trust what someone tells you, even if it is filled with details and the person is totally sure of being truthful. Using statements as evidence in court might therefore be problematic.
The Swedish supreme court considers the plaintiffs testimony to be trustable if it is rich in details, logic and not... (More)
We don’t remember everything we have been through and the things we remember is compressed information of the real event that is filled out by our own subjective perceptions of what should have happened. Everytime a memory is considered, told or discussed it risks being changed in detail. There is also a risk that details are forgotten over time, especially if the detail is considered to be unimportant. Therefore it is not wise to entirely trust what someone tells you, even if it is filled with details and the person is totally sure of being truthful. Using statements as evidence in court might therefore be problematic.
The Swedish supreme court considers the plaintiffs testimony to be trustable if it is rich in details, logic and not different in important details. Especially richness in details is considered to be important by the court, it indicates that the event is self-perceived. This perception is likely to lead to incorrect verdicts. The court should pay attention to when in the process details are presented since later added information could mean that the person’s memory is affected. (Less)
Abstract (Swedish)
Vi minns inte allt vi upplevt och de händelser vi minns är snarare komprimerad information av den verkliga händelsen som fylls ut av våra egna subjektiva uppfattningar om vad som borde ha inträffat. Varje gång ett minne funderas på, berättas om eller diskuteras riskerar det att förändras detaljmässigt. Det finns även risk för att detaljer i minnet glöms bort, särskilt om de anses vara oviktiga. Det går alltså inte helt att lita på att det som en person berättar är helt sant, även om personen kan presentera utförliga detaljer och är helt övertygad om att berättelsen är sanningsenlig. Att använda utsagor som bevisning i en domstolsprocess kan därmed bli problematiskt.
Högsta domstolen bedömer att en målsägandes utsaga är trovärdigare om den... (More)
Vi minns inte allt vi upplevt och de händelser vi minns är snarare komprimerad information av den verkliga händelsen som fylls ut av våra egna subjektiva uppfattningar om vad som borde ha inträffat. Varje gång ett minne funderas på, berättas om eller diskuteras riskerar det att förändras detaljmässigt. Det finns även risk för att detaljer i minnet glöms bort, särskilt om de anses vara oviktiga. Det går alltså inte helt att lita på att det som en person berättar är helt sant, även om personen kan presentera utförliga detaljer och är helt övertygad om att berättelsen är sanningsenlig. Att använda utsagor som bevisning i en domstolsprocess kan därmed bli problematiskt.
Högsta domstolen bedömer att en målsägandes utsaga är trovärdigare om den är detaljrik, logiskt sammanhängande och inte avvikande i viktiga detaljer. Särskilt detaljrikedom anser domstolen tyder på att händelsen är självupplevd. Detta kan leda till felaktigheter i domar, särskilt om hänsyn inte tas till när i processen detaljer presenterats. Senare tillkomna detaljer i utsagan bör ifrågasättas då personens minne av händelsen kan vara påverkat. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Ljunggren, Sara LU
supervisor
organization
course
LAGF03 20181
year
type
M2 - Bachelor Degree
subject
keywords
Straffrätt, Vittnespsykologi
language
Swedish
id
8941043
date added to LUP
2018-07-04 18:16:11
date last changed
2018-07-04 18:16:11
@misc{8941043,
  abstract     = {We don’t remember everything we have been through and the things we remember is compressed information of the real event that is filled out by our own subjective perceptions of what should have happened. Everytime a memory is considered, told or discussed it risks being changed in detail. There is also a risk that details are forgotten over time, especially if the detail is considered to be unimportant. Therefore it is not wise to entirely trust what someone tells you, even if it is filled with details and the person is totally sure of being truthful. Using statements as evidence in court might therefore be problematic. 
The Swedish supreme court considers the plaintiffs testimony to be trustable if it is rich in details, logic and not different in important details. Especially richness in details is considered to be important by the court, it indicates that the event is self-perceived. This perception is likely to lead to incorrect verdicts. The court should pay attention to when in the process details are presented since later added information could mean that the person’s memory is affected.},
  author       = {Ljunggren, Sara},
  keyword      = {Straffrätt,Vittnespsykologi},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Minnets tillförlitlighet - Utsagors trovärdighet och bevisproblematik i brottmål},
  year         = {2018},
}