I rättegångar förhörs vittnen på grundval av att de antas ha avsevärda upplysningar i det aktuella brottmålet. Därmed kan vittnesutsagor ha en avgörande betydelse när det finns liten eller ingen teknisk bevisning. Det är vanligt förekommande att det kan gå flera veckor eller månader mellan brottet och att vittnet förhörs. Således finns det potentiella risker att vittnet kan försumma vissa minnesbilder av vad som vittnet i tidigare förhör redogjort för då minnet ej är statiskt över tid. Det föreligger idag begränsad forskning om hur en tidsfördröjd rättsprocess kan påverka vittnesutsagorna. Både nationellt och internationellt är den befintliga forskningen främst fokuserad på vittnesutsagornas inverkan vid manipulering av respondenterna i undersökningen. Syftet med föreliggande undersökning är att bidra med vidare förståelse för hur vittnesutsagor kan förändras över tid. I undersökningen studeras vittnesutsagor över en kortare tid, en eller två veckor från den ursprungliga intervjun, eftersom den mest dramatiska minnesförsämringen inträffar redan efter en vecka. Undersökningen baseras på 40 kvalitativa intervjuer med inslag av kognitiva intervjuer med 20 respondenter. Resultatet visar att ju längre tidsperioden mellan brottshändelsen och intervjun är, desto mindre likvärdiga är vittnesutsagorna i intervjuerna. Undersökningen diskuterar resultaten i förhållande till minnesprocessen och tidigare forskning. Undersökningen bidrar med att belysa hur vittnesutsagor kan förändras över tid och svårigheterna med vittnens minneskapacitet samt hur minnet kan påverkas av potentiella felkällor och minnesfel. Vidare lyfts praktiska rekommendationer för framtida forskning inom vittnesutsagor. Slutligen åskådliggör undersökningen även vikten av ytterligare nationell och internationell forskning inom ämnesområdet. / In trials, eyewitnesses are heard on the basis that they are assumed to have significant information in the criminal case in question. Thus, eyewitness testimonies can have a crucial role, when there is little or no technical evidence. It is common that it may take several weeks or months between the crime incident and the eyewitness to be interrogated. Thus, there are potential risks that the eyewitness can forget about certain memory images of what the eyewitness in previous interrogation described, since the memory is not static over time. There is currently limited research on how a time-delayed legal process can affect the testimonies. Both nationally and internationally, the existing research is mainly focused on the impact of eyewitness testimony when manipulating the respondents in the research. The purpose of the present study is to gain a wider understanding of how eyewitness testimonies can change over time. In the study, testimonies are studied over a shorter time, one or two weeks from the original interview, because the most dramatic memory impairment occurs already after a week. The survey is based on 40 qualitative interviews with elements of cognitive interviews with 20 respondents. The result shows that the longer the period between the crime incident and the interview, the less equivalent are the testimonies in the interviews. The study discusses the results in relation to the memory process and previous research. The study helps to illustrate how eyewitness testimonies can change over time and the difficulties with the eyewitnesses' memory capacity and how the memory can be affected by potential sources of error and memory failure. Furthermore, practical recommendations for future research in eyewitness testimonies are highlighted. Finally, the study also highlights the importance of further national and international research on the subject.

<p>The purpose of this essay is to examine and compare narrations by five witnesses, who has written about atrocities against Christians from 1915 to 1919 in what is today south-eastern Turkey, but what was then the Ottoman Empire. I have focused on how the roles of perpetrators, victims, spectators and protectors are featured in the witness narrations. Four questions were posed in the study: Who are portrayed as perpetrators, victims, bystanders and protectors in the various witness narrations? How are these roles expressed in the witness narrations? What differences can be found among the five selected witness narrations from Mardin and Urfa, 1915-1919? What are the explanations of the differences in the witness narrations? The method I have used has been an analysis in which I compare how the different narrations capture the events of 1915-1919. I have used three factors to look at the explanations why there may be differences in the witness narrations. The three factors are nationality, position, and religious affiliation. In the comparison and the results of the witness narrations, I have found that the three factors affect the way the authors write about the events and that these factors help to explain the differences in the witness narrations. These factors are a part of the authors’ respective worldviews. Also, local differences, power constellations, and political factors meant that witness narrations differed.</p>

The purpose of this essay is to examine and compare narrations by five witnesses, who has written about atrocities against Christians from 1915 to 1919 in what is today south-eastern Turkey, but what was then the Ottoman Empire. I have focused on how the roles of perpetrators, victims, spectators and protectors are featured in the witness narrations. Four questions were posed in the study: Who are portrayed as perpetrators, victims, bystanders and protectors in the various witness narrations? How are these roles expressed in the witness narrations? What differences can be found among the five selected witness narrations from Mardin and Urfa, 1915-1919? What are the explanations of the differences in the witness narrations? The method I have used has been an analysis in which I compare how the different narrations capture the events of 1915-1919. I have used three factors to look at the explanations why there may be differences in the witness narrations. The three factors are nationality, position, and religious affiliation. In the comparison and the results of the witness narrations, I have found that the three factors affect the way the authors write about the events and that these factors help to explain the differences in the witness narrations. These factors are a part of the authors’ respective worldviews. Also, local differences, power constellations, and political factors meant that witness narrations differed.

No description available.

Eyewitnesses are important for the outcome of many criminal cases. Sometimes other evidence is lacking and the testimony then becomes decisive, but it is difficult to know how reliable the eyewitness’ memories are. This study aimed to investigate speech rate as an indicator of memory accuracy. The hypothesis was that correct memories would be presented with a faster speech rate than incorrect memories. The participants (n = 10) were students who were part of a previous study by Lindholm et al. (2018). The students watched a film sequence and were interviewed afterwards about what they had seen. Their answers were recorded and the voice was analyzed digitally. A t-test for dependent samples showed that correct statements had significantly faster speech rate than incorrect ones. The results support the hypothesis and are in line with previous research on making asserted statements faster. Should future research show similar results, the method of digital voice analysis could be used as a complement in the judiciary to evaluate testimony. Understanding what acoustic indicators are on correct or incorrect memories could be helpful in assessing testimonies for judges, jurors, legal representatives and the police force. / Ögonvittnen är viktiga för utgången i många brottmål. Ibland saknas övrig bevisning och vittnesmålet blir då avgörande men det är svårt att veta hur pålitliga ögonvittnens minnen är. Denna studie syftade till att undersöka talhastighet som en indikator på korrekthet i minnen genom användning av digital röstanalys. Hypotesen var att talhastigheten vid korrekta minnen skulle vara snabbare än vid inkorrekta. Deltagarna (n = 10) var studenter som ingick i en tidigare experimentell studie av Lindholm et al. (2018). Studenterna fick se en film och intervjuades efteråt om vad de sett. Deras svar spelades in och rösten analyserades digitalt. Ett t-test för beroende mätningar visade att talhastigheten vid korrekta påståenden var signifikant snabbare än vid inkorrekta. Resultatet stödjer hypotesen samt ligger i linje med tidigare forskning kring att säkra påståenden sker snabbare. Skulle framtida forskning visa på liknande resultat skulle metoden med digital röstanalys kunna användas som ett komplement inom rättsväsendet som stöd vid vittnesmål. Förståelse för vilka akustiska indikatorer som finns på korrekta eller inkorrekta minnen skulle kunna vara hjälpsamma i vittnesförhör, både hos domare, nämndemän, juridiska ombud och hos polisen.