BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//Greenwich Skeptics//Talk Calendar//EN
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:PUBLISH
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:Europe/London
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZNAME:BST
TZOFFSETFROM:+0000
TZOFFSETTO:+0100
DTSTART:19700329T010000
RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;BYMONTH=3;BYDAY=-1SU
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZNAME:GMT
TZOFFSETFROM:+0100
TZOFFSETTO:+0000
DTSTART:19701025T020000
RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;BYMONTH=10;BYDAY=-1SU
END:STANDARD
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
UID:b750dde2-ac71-41a9-b59c-84abbe40ffa3@greenwichskeptics.org
DTSTAMP:20261025T145047Z
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20271213T193000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20271213T213000
SUMMARY:Greenwich SITP: Who Do You Believe? Memory\, Evidence\, and the Kav
 anaugh - Blasey Ford Case [Professor Fiona Gabbert]
DESCRIPTION:In September 2018\, the world watched as Dr Christine Blasey Fo
 rd accused US Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexually assaulting
  her more than 30 years earlier. Ford described a traumatic event she said
  she remembered vividly. Kavanaugh categorically denied the accusation. Wi
 th two conflicting accounts\, decades-old memories\, and limited independe
 nt evidence\, how could anyone establish what really happened?\n\nUsing th
 e Kavanaugh – Blasey Ford case as a case study\, this talk explores the 
 science of human memory and the challenges of investigating allegations ma
 de many years after an event. What happens to memories over time? Should w
 e expect people to remember traumatic experiences accurately? Are gaps and
  inconsistencies in someone’s account signs that they are unreliable? An
 d how can we distinguish between an honestly held memory and an accurate o
 ne?\n\nWe’ll examine how the allegations were investigated\, the evidenc
 e that was available\, and the difficulties involved in evaluating the com
 peting accounts. Drawing on psychological research and best practices in i
 nvestigative interviewing\, we’ll also consider what could have been don
 e differently\, and how better questioning and more thorough investigation
  might have helped establish the facts.\n\nUltimately\, this talk asks a d
 eceptively simple question: when it’s one person’s word against anothe
 r’s\, how do we get closer to the truth?\n\nFiona Gabbert is Professor o
 f Applied Psychology and Director of the Forensic Psychology Unit (FPU) at
  Goldsmiths\, University of London. Her research focuses on investigative 
 interviewing\, professional information gathering\, and the science of mem
 ory\, with the aim of improving the quality\, completeness\, and reliabili
 ty of information obtained from victims\, witnesses\, and other informatio
 n providers. Her work includes developing evidence-based approaches to bui
 lding rapport\, facilitating accurate memory retrieval\, and reducing sugg
 estibility and other sources of error during interviews.\n\nFiona's resear
 ch has informed operational procedures\, policy\, and training internation
 ally. She works closely with practitioners and policymakers to translate p
 sychological science into practice\, including collaborating with the Coll
 ege of Policing (UK) to develop Authorised Professional Practice for front
 line officers gathering initial accounts\, and contributing to the develop
 ment of the Méndez Principles\, establishing international standards for 
 non-coercive interviewing.\n\nFiona also works with policing agencies and 
 organisations including Amber Alert Europe\, the National Crime Agency\, L
 ocate International\, and the International Cold Case Analysis Project. Th
 is work applies psychological science to cold case investigations and miss
 ing person enquiries\, improving the retrieval and evaluation of memory ev
 idence and helping practitioners generate new investigative leads.
LOCATION:The Plume of Feathers\, 19 Park Vista\, Greenwich\, SE10 9LZ
URL:https://greenwichskeptics.org/
STATUS:CONFIRMED
TRANSP:OPAQUE
SEQUENCE:0
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR