Originally Posted by Ixchel13: The reason LE might hold Salzmann in high esteem is that he was the Prosecutor here for two terms. I fully understand how a defense atty functions, I'm just saying that this guy is not the type to ruin a potential political career to back a liar. Allowing his client to claim amnesia when it a) might be more than partially true and b) he was punched to the ground, is not exactly dirty dealing.
It's not unusual either, as it turns out. I seriously thought this only happened in movies, but google 'crime-related amnesia' or 'malingered amnesia'. A huge percentage of people accused or convicted of crime claim total memory loss, the key characteristic being that it is limited to the very specific period in which the crime takes place. (As in "I can't remember anything from X minutes before the crime to...")
(link)claims of amnesia for violent crimes, including murder, are very common. Obviously, some guilty suspects deny involvement in the crime or claim amnesia to avoid punishment. About 25–40 per cent of those who are found guilty of homicide claim to be amnesic or to have a complete memory loss (Schacter, 1986; Taylor and Kopelman, 1984), and the large majority of these claims are circumscribed to the crime itself (Bradford and Smith, 1979).
Of course, it's also possible that people suffer memory loss from things like being punched in the face, so it's possible that one could happen to have amnesia during the exact same time frame that an unrelated crime takes place. That would be unfortunate. Especially if you were the last person seen with the crime victim... :innocent: