ABSTRACT
IN THE COURSE of my work on the Clarence Elkins case, I learned a lot about memory and eyewitness testimony that surprised me even though as a prosecutor I had been cautious and aware of the fallibility of this form of evidence. At the time, DNA was proving again and again that even a victim’s seemingly certain eyewitness testimony could be absolutely wrong. Tragically, victims were victimized again by the hard truth that their testimony had cost innocent persons years in prison.
