Abstract
The encounter between torture victims and the legal system is mostly dismissive. Thus, victims have repeatedly submitted complaints regarding alleged torture to the relevant authorities, but these cases are often rejected. A common reason for rejection is the inconsistency within and between testimonies, which can give the impression that the victim is fabricating the story and then undermines the legal case. This paper reviews the reasons that could explain the disparities in the testimonies of torture survivors. It relates to six facets that, taken together, increase the likelihood of inconsistency: (a) detention and interrogation, (b) flaws in normal memory, (c) psychological processes, (d) physical/medical aspects, (e) sociocultural factors, and (f) interview barriers. Examples are provided for each of these reasons for the discrepancy in testimonies. A discussion of the relevance in the field of psychological injury follows this. The study provides recommendations for legal and medical experts working with torture and other traumatized victims regarding the use of the Istanbul Protocol, collaboration, and education to enhance understanding, clarify inconsistencies in testimonies, and support cases in court.