I recently read Andrew Roberts’ The Frailties of Human Memory the Accused’s Right to Accurate Procedures.
Roberts makes a strong argument that many of the procedural safeguards surrounding eyewitness identifications should be extended to evidence of other witnesses. This includes expert evidence about memory and judicial warnings.
He also notes that if we are interested in the best evidence, the initial witness statement should be recorded and admitted as an exception to the hearsay rule (which is allowed by legislation in the UK. It strikes me that this is similar to a recent argument by Cheng and Nunn that original witness-centric model that developed hundreds of years ago should be carefully amended in light of modern technology.