RETHINKING PER SE EXCLUSIONS OF HYPNOTICALLY ELICITED RECALL AS LEGALTESTIMONY

In 1993, Boggs argued for a rethinking of the per se exclusion of hypn otically elicited testimony. This article analyzes the Minnesota v. Ma ck (1980) case that initiated this exclusion and the two Illinois case s Boggs cites in favor of her position. The scientific data on the eff ect of hypnosis on memory do not support Boggs's position. Rather than providing reasons for rethinking this per se position, these data sug gest that it should be retained.