Most say they don't remember anything after they committed a crime. Which is what Adnan is saying.

The Fragility of Memory in Criminal Cases

In criminal cases, the reliability of memory is often called into question. Many individuals claim they have no recollection of events that occurred during or after they committed a crime. Adnan's assertion of not remembering anything post-crime is not uncommon. However, the durability of this memory lapse is temporary. Once the memory resurfaces, the criminal may experience intense emotions and distress.

Final answer:

Memory can fade over time, and external sources can influence and create false memories. Suggestibility plays a role in eyewitness accounts, as seen during the DC sniper attacks. Additionally, trauma may lead to repressed memories that can be later recalled through techniques like hypnosis.

Explanation:

When someone witnesses a crime, their memory of the details of the crime can be crucial. However, memory is fragile and can be easily influenced by external sources, leading to the creation of false memories. This is known as suggestibility. For example, during the DC sniper attacks in 2002, with over 140,000 tips received, approximately 35,000 possible suspects were identified, highlighting the impact of suggestibility on eyewitness accounts.

In addition, memories can fade over time due to transience, where unused information tends to decay with time. For instance, if someone reads a book in high school but doesn't revisit it for many years, they may only recall a few details from the story. This phenomenon is called storage decay.

Furthermore, the ability to remember events can also be affected by various factors such as trauma. Some researchers argue that traumatic experiences can lead to repressed memories, which can be locked away for years and later recalled through techniques like hypnosis. However, this idea is controversial and debated in the field of psychology.