Nexus - 1305 - New Times Magazine-pages

Page Content (OCR)

memories—we call them rich false memories because they are so Seascape Cottage, he heard the vehicle explode. His assumption detailed and so big." was that his hostage had died in the explosion: Less well known is the fact that pseudomemories can emerge in Warren: Do you, you've already said that you remembered me self-incriminating forms. The textbook case is that of Paul Ingram, —_going to see you at the hospital? an American man accused of sexual abuse by his two daughters, Bryant: Ohh yes. Mmm. who in the late 1980s "produced an astonishing series of self- Warren: And that I told you that you were being charged incriminating 'memories" relating to his alleged membership of a with... satanic cult which had supposedly sacrificed 25 babies. According Bryant: A murder count. to John Frow, what is striking about the Ingram case is the Warren: A murder. "breathtaking readiness on the part of its major players to form Bryant: Yeah. lasting 'memories' on very slight provocation": not only Ingram Warren: What recollection have you got of that? and his daughters but a son, his wife and two of his colleagues Bryant: Must've been the hostage, the bloke in the BMW implicated in the supposed satanic cult and in ongoing abuse of the must've died. daughters, either at some time remembered major and almost certainly non-existent crimes or at least Although Bryant did not recall having set suspected their own complicity even if not the vehicle on fire, he realised that the remembering it; and Ingram "remembered", explosion had to have started somehow. After and came firmly to believe in, a . concluding (erroneously, as we shall see) that pseudomemory suggested to him by a If the vehicle only he could have started the fire, he tried to sociologist working as a consultant for the exploded while he imagine what he would have to have done to prosecution.’ . have caused it. He decided that he must have People of extremely low intelligence—as was knocking on the transferred "two or three" plastic drums of wel as those with eertain types of mental door of Seascape, petrol ‘om the yore to ee “pped the illness—are probably even more capable o: petrol all over the car, and then lit it using a persuading themselves to believe that they how can the match (or a lighter) that he must have found have done terrible things which in fact they explanation for his inside his jacket pocket. Having decided that have not done, than people of average this is how he had set fire to the car, Bryant intelligence. According to Richard Ofshe, a burns be that he was seized upon the fire as an explanation for his sociologist at the University of i i burns: "I must've been in the car when it California, Berkeley, obtaining in the car when it went up, 'cos I got burnt." He reasoned confessions from mentally disabled ignited? that the whole mess that had landed him people "is like taking candy from a in gaol had been the result of "a bad baby".© That such persons have thing", by which he meant "playing with generated false, self-incriminating fire" as he had done when he was 10 memories that have led to their being years old. imprisoned or even executed is a The problems with Bryant's story are documented fact. Two examples are immediately apparent. First, there is the given in Bob Woffinden's 1987 book matter of where he was when the Miscarriages of Justice, including those explosion took place. If the vehicle of Timothy Evans, who confessed to exploded while he was knocking on the killing his wife, and Margaret Livesey, door of Seascape, how can the who confessed to the murder of her son. explanation for his burns be that he was Neither was guilty. Thus, with respect to in the car when it ignited? How can he Bryant's admissions regarding the Fortescue Bay turnoff possibly not remember where he was when he "got burnt"? carjacking, we would seem to be looking at a classic case of the Second, there is the problem of how the explosion started. Bryant mentally deficient person confessing to a crime that he believes he told Inspectors Warren and Paine that he had not been carrying must have committed, even if he doesn't actually remember doing anything with him that he could have used to start a fire. So how so or know why he would have done such a thing. could this non-smoker happen to find himself carrying something It is possible to reconstruct the laborious mental process that in his shirt pocket that proved useful for precisely this purpose? would have led the hapless Bryant to believe that he had actually And how can he possibly not recall whether the object was a set of How can he possibly not remember where he was when he "got burnt"? perpetrated the Fortescue Bay turnoff carjacking. When the matches or a cigarette lighter? interview with Inspectors Warren and Paine began, Bryant knew Clearly, Bryant was foundering for an explanation that would no more than that he was being detained on a single charge of account for the burns to his body and his subsequent loss of murder. He had no idea what had happened, who had died or why liberty. Since he was not trying to evade responsibility for the he was being held responsible. Building an explanation on the carjacking and the subsequent explosion, he found himself in the basis of certain facts that must have been leaked to him about the dilemma of a person who accepts that he is guilty but is having case, presumably by a doctor and "security guards" (who may in great difficulty envisaging the precise circumstances in which he fact have been intelligence agents feeding him carefully selecte committed the offences. Thus Bryant's recurring use of "must tidbits of information), he finally believed himself to have have": he "must've" played with fire, he "must've" transferred commandeered a BMW at gunpoint and taken the male driver petrol drums into the BMW, the hostage "must've" still been in the hostage. Although Bryant knew that the man he thinks he took car when it exploded. In short, Bryant was desperately hostage had subsequently died, he did not admit having killed him hypothesising. If he had really been responsible for the explosion intentionally. He stated that, as he was knocking on the door of and not seeking to deny it, how can he possibly not remember Seascape Cottage, he heard the vehicle explode. His assumption was that his hostage had died in the explosion: Warren: Do you, you've already said that you remembered me going to see you at the hospital? Bryant: Ohh yes. Mmm. Warren: And that I told you that you were being charged with... Bryant: A murder count. Warren: A murder. Bryant: Yeah. Warren: What recollection have you got of that? Bryant: Must've been the hostage, the bloke in the BMW must've died. Ifthe vehicle exploded while he was knocking on the abo. -f ALL door of Seascape, how can the ; ignited? "got burnt"? NEXUS © 15 explanation for his burns be that he was in the car when it How can he possibly not remember where he was when he AUGUST - SEPTEMBER 2006 www.nexusmagazine.com