Paper 2 Martha Domagala Eyewitnesses; they are a key point of evidence when needed yet consist of so many flaws pertaining to memory. If I were part of the blind experiment, I think I would remember certain suspects, especially the man in the high visibility jacket, as many of the eyewitnesses did. Considering I am a moderately observant person, I probably would have even noticed the man who started the argument when he first walked in because of his aggressive demeanor. Once I observed those 2 suspects, chances are I would have kept my eyes glued to the entire situation, trying to determine who was doing what. My adrenaline rushing would definitely play a large part in my memory, so until put in that situation, I’d like to assume I’d do well in identifying the murder at the scene. As I had previously mentioned, eyewitness reports have many flaws. This is mainly because most people are using their autobiographical memory. Many people are likely to not even pay attention to a situation until voices are raised or obvious chaos has begun. Therefore, the memories that the subjects had before the experiment started remain blurry, simply because they weren’t paying attention. Once things started getting heated, everyone has a different version of what happened based on multiple factors; memory being personal, the colors that the suspects’ were wearing (iconic memory), where people were sitting, different things that people heard (echoic memory), and personal bias with the questions used during the retrieval of memories. Since one of the suspects was wearing a high visibility jacket, the probability of him being remembered drastically increased. A problem with that is the fact that memory