When you use hypnosis in a ciminal investigation, it is very very important to use proper forensic procedures . . . just because someone is a police officer, doesn’t mean they can perform forensic hypnosis . . . just because someone is any ol’ hypnotist doesn’t mean they can perform forensic hypnosis . . . you need to be a skilled hypnotist and you need to use clean language with a critical mindset . . . you should not assume evidence from hypnosis is all true, nor should a case be based upon it, you need to get leads to other evidence outside of the hypnosis but don’t take the hypnosis as testimony itself . . . be very wary of identifying suspects, especially when they are presented as obvious choices as the suggestion to choose this person is inherent in the question . . . Larry Mayes spent near to two decades in maximum security prison as he was identified under hypnosis as the assailant of a girl . . . the DNA said otherwise and nineteen years later he was freed . . . here’s the big zero . . . the officers in the case used hypnosis with the witness and got a positive ID of Mayes and they did not tell the defence they did it . . . witness hypnosis messed up . . . now, Mayes is suing the city of Hammond for damages, he can’t have his life back but he can get some sort of restitution. I have met a few hypnotists who have done under-the-covers hypnosis work of this type. It can lead to a lot of problems for the case, the officers, the witnesses, and eventually all hypnotists who do forensic work. Some, including very famous hypnotists, have even participated in projects of trying to hypnotize suspects against their will (strapped into a chair for several hours). Stay aboveboard and stay transparent and videotape every single session for court records. Be clear and use clean language that guides but does not lead. Hypnosis is a wonderful wonderful tool for criminal investigation, but it has to be used within very clear parameters.