- Title
- Memory Science in the Pell Appeals: Impossibility, Timing, Inconsistencies
- Creator
- Goodman-Delahunty, Jane; Martschuk, Natalie; Nolan, Mark
- Relation
- Criminal Law Journal Vol. 44, Issue 4, p. 232-246
- Relation
- https://sites.thomsonreuters.com.au/journals/2020/10/06/criminal-law-journal-update-vol-44-pt-4
- Publisher
- LawBook Co.
- Resource Type
- journal article
- Date
- 2020
- Description
- We examine the appeals from the conviction of Cardinal Pell in light of the common sense versus scientific belief system about human memory and robust principles of memory. We outline how assumptions about memory operations appeared to influence the legal decisions. At the heart of the High Court’s reasoning seemed to be an assumption that memory about routine practice was to be believed when it contradicted the complainant’s memory of the alleged abuse. We question whether the complainant’s episodic memory was undervalued compared to potential over-reliance on sometimes questionable schematic recall of repeated events by the opportunity witnesses. This analysis does not suggest that the rule about appellate review of jury trials re-emphasised by the High Court was in error. In many types of legal cases, memory of institutional figures about routine practices, absent clear memory of specific adherence to the practice on a particular occasion, is accorded undue weight.
- Subject
- Cardinal Pell; legal decisions; memory operations; routine practices
- Identifier
- http://hdl.handle.net/1959.13/1442112
- Identifier
- uon:41612
- Identifier
- ISSN:0314-1160
- Language
- eng
- Reviewed
- Hits: 486
- Visitors: 473
- Downloads: 0
| Thumbnail | File | Description | Size | Format |
|---|