ABOUT THIS EPISODE
In this episode, Ronald Cotton and Jennifer Thompson become the centre of a discussion about one of the most important psychological concepts in criminal justice: the misinformation effect.
Dr Catrin Williams examines how memory is formed, stored, and retrieved — and why human memory does not function like a CCTV recording. Using the wrongful conviction of Cotton as a case study, the episode explores how eyewitness identification, repeated exposure, authority influence, and post-event information can alter a person’s recollection of events.
The episode follows the timeline of Cotton’s conviction in 1984, Jennifer Thompson’s identifications of him through mugshots, line-ups, and trial testimony, and the later DNA evidence that excluded Cotton and identified Bobby Poole as the perpetrator. Cotton spent more than a decade imprisoned before being exonerated in 1995.
The discussion also explores the work of Elizabeth Loftus, the psychology of false memories, the difference between recall and recognition, and the role of suggestion in high-profile cases such as the McMartin preschool trial.
Who was talking?
Dr Catrin Williams (Forensic Psychologist)
List of Topics Covered
- The misinformation effect
- How memory encoding, storage, and retrieval work
- Eyewitness identification reliability
- The wrongful conviction of Ronald Cotton
- Jennifer Thompson’s eyewitness testimony
- Elizabeth Loftus’s false memory research
- The McMartin Preschool case
References and Reading
Loftus, E. F. (2019). Eyewitness testimony. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 33(4), 498–503. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3542
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMartin_preschool_trial
https://innocenceproject.org/cases/ronald-cotton/
Content warnings and Disclaimer
This podcast episode discusses serious criminal offences, wrongful conviction, sexual violence allegations, and failures within the criminal justice system. Listener discretion is advised.The content of this podcast is intended for educational and informational purposes only and should not be considered legal or clinical advice. While every effort has been made to ensure factual accuracy, discussions are based on publicly available information and psychological research available at the time of recording.
The views and opinions expressed in this podcast are those of the host and guests and do not represent the official positions of any organisation or professional body. This podcast is intended for educational and informational purposes only and should not be taken as psychological advice or a substitute for professional consultation. While efforts are made to ensure the accuracy of information shared, psychological concepts and case details are simplified for discussion. Any resemblance to actual persons, living or deceased, is purely coincidental unless explicitly stated.
The hosts and guests will never discuss any details of individual cases or locations that they have personally worked with or within. Vague personal and professional experiences may be shared as part of discussions, but considerable details will have been changed to ensure that there is no identifiable information to ensure anonymity and confidentiality. There will be no discussion on any current or ongoing cases in the United Kingdom, not any cases from the United Kingdom unless they are historical and fully resolved. All discussions adhere to HCPC and BPS ethical guidelines regarding confidentiality, professional boundaries and responsible communication of psychological information.
Listener discretion is advice, as some topics may contain descriptions of violence trauma and other sensitive content.
Get in touch at indictablepodcast@gmail.com
Where to find me! (Please follow x)
@indictablepodcast on Instagram, Tiktok and Facebook
