But now let us suppose that our witness, through the medium of his imperfect senses and his partial attention, has received a certain image. What deformations may it suffer before it is produced as his evidence? If his memory of the incident has “lapsed” the image will undergo comparatively little alteration, but if it has often been called to mind it will probably suffer a very considerable change. Each time the image is recalled it will suggest others; the creative imagination gets to work, altering the emphasis, adding particulars, obliterating others, and the result will be as much a work of art as the reproduction of a fact. This tendency is particularly to be noticed with women, and with certain “excitable” types; it may be almost a national characteristic, as with Gascons and Sicilians. But all witnesses are prone to this kind of inaccuracy. Where the event has often been narrated by the witness the deformations become even more serious. For he is here exposed not only to the suggestions of his own creative imagination, but to the suggestions of other people. Every one wishes to make a success of the story he is telling, and the perception of what points to stress and what details to add is wonderfully ready and alert. It has often happened that a witness of perfect good faith has changed from the simple spectator of a drama to a prominent actor in it under the influence of repeated narration. Finally, we reach the point when the witness has to bear his formal testimony. His observations were imperfect, he has imperfectly remembered them, his imagination has distorted them, and he is now to express them. A very considerable additional source of inaccuracy is likely to enter here. The witness probably cannot express his complete image--words may not be sufficiently precise to render the fine shades of his remembered perceptions. The nature of a sound, the kind of emotion expressed by a voice,--he may have no words for such things. And, in any case, the witness will not express his complete image. He will select--in accordance with his own estimate of what is pertinent and what trivial. He will do this even if he be allowed to talk to his heart’s content; but the method of question and answer as pursued in our Law Courts leads to even more imperfect expression. For he is forced to be precise where his recollection is vague, and he will either give a false precision to his answer or else profess complete ignorance. More often still the witness sins by exaggeration, and these exaggerations, in a thousand subtle ways, usually tend to add to his own importance. And it is important to notice that, besides tending to import fictitious details, the witness will tend to exaggerate his degree of conviction. Where he was originally doubtful he is now perfectly sure.