I'd like to tell you about a legal case that I worked on involving a man named Steve Titus.
Laneko kasu batez hitz egin nahi nuke Steve Titusei buruzkoa.
Titus was a restaurant manager. He was 31 years old, he lived in Seattle, Washington, he was engaged to Gretchen, about to be married, she was the love of his life. And one night, the couple went out for a romantic restaurant meal. They were on their way home, and they were pulled over by a police officer. You see, Titus' car sort of resembled a car that was driven earlier in the evening by a man who raped a female hitchhiker, and Titus kind of resembled that rapist. So the police took a picture of Titus, they put it in a photo lineup, they later showed it to the victim, and she pointed to Titus' photo. She said, "That one's the closest." The police and the prosecution proceeded with a trial, and when Steve Titus was put on trial for rape, the rape victim got on the stand and said, "I'm absolutely positive that's the man." And Titus was convicted. He proclaimed his innocence, his family screamed at the jury, his fiancée collapsed on the floor sobbing, and Titus is taken away to jail.
Titus jatetxe bateko gerentea zen. 31 urte zituen eta Seattlen bizi zen, Washingtonen, Gretchenekin konprometituta zegoen, ezkontzear zen, bera zen bere bizitzako maitasuna. Gau batean, bikotea irten egin zen jatetxe batean afari erromantiko batera. Etxera bidean, polizia batek geratu zituen. Titusen autoak beste baten antza zuen gau hartan ikusitako beste batena emakume bat bortxatu zuen gizon batena, eta Titusek bortxatzailearen antza zuen. Beraz poliziak argazki bat atera zion, errekonozimendu frogan jarri, eta biktimari erakutsi zizkioten argazkiak eta biktimak, Titusen argazkia seinalatu zuen. Eta esan zuen "Hau da antzekoena". Poliziak eta salatzaileak epaiketa eskatu zuten eta Steve Titus bortxaketagatik salatzerakoan, bortxaketako biktima altsatu eta esan zuen, "ziur nago bera dela". Eta Titus kondenatua izan zen. Errugabea zela aldarrikatu zuen, bere familiak epaileei oihukatu zien, emaztegaia negarrez lurrera erori zen, eta Titus kartzelan sartu zuten.
So what would you do at this point? What would you do? Well, Titus lost complete faith in the legal system, and yet he got an idea. He called up the local newspaper, he got the interest of an investigative journalist, and that journalist actually found the real rapist, a man who ultimately confessed to this rape, a man who was thought to have committed 50 rapes in that area, and when this information was given to the judge, the judge set Titus free.
Zer egingo zenukete une horretan? Zer egingo zenukete? Titusek konfidantza galdu zuen sistema juridikoan, baina ideia bat izan zuen. Herriko egunkariarekin jarri zen harremanetan, kazetari ikertzaile baten interesa piztu zuen, eta kazetariak, benetako bortxatzailea aurkitu zuen bortxaketa onartu zuen gizon bat, inguru hartan 50 bortxaketa egin izana leporatzen zitzaion gizon bat, eta informazioa epaileari eman zitzaionean epaileak Titus aske utzi zuen. Eta, zinez hor amaitu behar zen kasua.
And really, that's where this case should have ended. It should have been over. Titus should have thought of this as a horrible year, a year of accusation and trial, but over.
Amaitu egin behar zen. Titusentzat urte txar bat izan behar zen, salaketa eta epaiketa urtea, baina amaitua. Ez zen horrela amaitu.
It didn't end that way. Titus was so bitter. He'd lost his job. He couldn't get it back. He lost his fiancée. She couldn't put up with his persistent anger. He lost his entire savings, and so he decided to file a lawsuit against the police and others whom he felt were responsible for his suffering.
Titus etsita zegoen. Bere lana galdu zuen. Ezin zuen berreskuratu Emaztegaia galdu zuen. Bere etengabeko haserrea jasanezina zen. Bere aurrezkiak galdu zituen, eta salaketa bat jartzea erabaki zuen polizia eta beste batzuen aurka bere sufrimenduaren sortzaileen aurka. Eta orduan hasi nintzen kasu honetan lanean
And that's when I really started working on this case, trying to figure out how did that victim go from "That one's the closest" to "I'm absolutely positive that's the guy."
zera asmatu nahian, nola iritsi zen biktima "hau da antzekoena" esatetik "ziur nago hau dela" esatera. Titus indar gabe zegoen kasuagatik.
Well, Titus was consumed with his civil case. He spent every waking moment thinking about it, and just days before he was to have his day in court, he woke up in the morning, doubled over in pain, and died of a stress-related heart attack. He was 35 years old.
Uneoro hortan pentsatzen zegoen, eta epaiketa baino egun batzuk lehenago, goizean esnatu, minez tolestu, eta estresak sortutako bihotzekoagatik hil zen. 35 urte zituen. Titusen kasuan lan egiteko eskatu zidaten.
So I was asked to work on Titus' case because I'm a psychological scientist. I study memory. I've studied memory for decades. And if I meet somebody on an airplane -- this happened on the way over to Scotland -- if I meet somebody on an airplane, and we ask each other, "What do you do? What do you do?" and I say "I study memory," they usually want to tell me how they have trouble remembering names, or they've got a relative who's got Alzheimer's or some kind of memory problem, but I have to tell them I don't study when people forget. I study the opposite: when they remember, when they remember things that didn't happen or remember things that were different from the way they really were. I study false memories.
Psikologo zientifikoa naizelako. Oroimena aztertu dut hamarkadetan zehar. Eta norbait ezagutzen badut hegazkinean - Eskoziara bidean gertatu zitzaidan- Norbait ezagutzen badut hegazkinean, eta elkarri galdetu "zer egiten duzu?" eta "oroimena aztertu" badiot, izenak gogoratzeko zailtasunez hitz egingo didate, edo Alzheimerra duen kide batez, edo oroimen arazoren batez, baina esan behar diet ez dudala aztertzen ahazte prozesua. Aurkakoa ikasten dut: gogoratzea, gertatu ez diren gauzak gogoratzea edo gauzak desberdin gogoratzea benetan izan zenarekin alderatuz. Oroimen faltsuak aztertzen ditut.
Unhappily, Steve Titus is not the only person to be convicted based on somebody's false memory. In one project in the United States, information has been gathered on 300 innocent people, 300 defendants who were convicted of crimes they didn't do. They spent 10, 20, 30 years in prison for these crimes, and now DNA testing has proven that they are actually innocent. And when those cases have been analyzed, three quarters of them are due to faulty memory, faulty eyewitness memory.
Zoritxarrez, Steve Titus ez da bakarra oroimen faltsu batengatik kondenatua izan dena EEBBetako proiektu batean informazioa bildu da 300 errugaberen inguruan, egin gabeko delituengatik kondenatutakoak. 10,20 eta 30 urte pasa zituzten kartzelan, eta orain DNA frogek frogatu dute errugabeak direla. Eta kasu hauek aztertuak izan direnean, hiru laurdenak oroimen faltsuengatik izan dira.
Well, why? Like the jurors who convicted those innocent people and the jurors who convicted Titus, many people believe that memory works like a recording device. You just record the information, then you call it up and play it back when you want to answer questions or identify images. But decades of work in psychology has shown that this just isn't true. Our memories are constructive. They're reconstructive. Memory works a little bit more like a Wikipedia page: You can go in there and change it, but so can other people. I first started studying this constructive memory process in the 1970s. I did my experiments that involved showing people simulated crimes and accidents and asking them questions about what they remember. In one study, we showed people a simulated accident and we asked people, how fast were the cars going when they hit each other? And we asked other people, how fast were the cars going when they smashed into each other? And if we asked the leading "smashed" question, the witnesses told us the cars were going faster, and moreover, that leading "smashed" question caused people to be more likely to tell us that they saw broken glass in the accident scene when there wasn't any broken glass at all. In another study, we showed a simulated accident where a car went through an intersection with a stop sign, and if we asked a question that insinuated it was a yield sign, many witnesses told us they remember seeing a yield sign at the intersection, not a stop sign.
Eta zergatik? Errugabe hauek kondenatu zituzten epaimahiak eta Titus kondenatu zuen epaimahiak bezala, askok uste dute oroimena grabagailu bat bezalakoa dela. Informazioa gordetzen duena, gero berreskuratu eta berrerabiltzeko galderak erantzun edo irudiak identifikatu nahi direnean. Baina psikologian hamarkadetan egindako lanek hau ez dela horrela erakutsi dute. Gure oroitzapenak eraikitzaileak dira. Berreraikitzaileak. Oroimenak Wikipediaren orri baten antzera lan egiten du: Gauzak aldatu ditzakezu, baina baita besteek ere. Oroitzapen eraikitzaile hauek lehen adiz aztertzen 70.hamarkadan hasi nintzen. Esperimentuetan jendeari simulatutako delitu eta istripuak erakusten zitzaizkien eta gogoratzen zutenaz galdetzen zitzaien. Behin, simulatutako istripu bat erakutsi genuen eta zera galdetu, ze abiadura zeramaten autoek talka egitean? Beste batzuei zera galdetu genien ze abiadura zeramaten autoek elkar jo zutenean? eta galderan "jo" erabili genuenean, lekukoek autoa azkarrago zihoala esan zuten, eta orohar galderan "jo" hitza erabiltzeak jendeak probabilitate handiagoz zera esatea eragin zuen, istripuaren tokian kristal apurtuak ikusi zituela kristal apurturik ez zegoenean. Beste batean, simulatutako istripu bat erakutsi genuen non kotxe batek "stop" seinale bat pasatzen zuen eta "eman bidea" seinalea zela iradokiz galdera bat egitean, lekuko askok bidegurutzean "eman bidea" seinalea gogoratzen zutela esaten zuten eta ez "stop" seinalea. Eta pentsa dezakezu, tira, badakizu,
And you might be thinking, well, you know, these are filmed events, they are not particularly stressful. Would the same kind of mistakes be made with a really stressful event? In a study we published just a few months ago, we have an answer to this question, because what was unusual about this study is we arranged for people to have a very stressful experience. The subjects in this study were members of the U.S. military who were undergoing a harrowing training exercise to teach them what it's going to be like for them if they are ever captured as prisoners of war. And as part of this training exercise, these soldiers are interrogated in an aggressive, hostile, physically abusive fashion for 30 minutes and later on they have to try to identify the person who conducted that interrogation. And when we feed them suggestive information that insinuates it's a different person, many of them misidentify their interrogator, often identifying someone who doesn't even remotely resemble the real interrogator.
hauek grabaketak dira, eta ez dira bereziki estresagarriak. Akats berdinak egingo lirateke benetan estresagarriak diren egoeretan? Duela gutxi argitaratutako ikerketa batean galdera horri erantzun bat ematen diogu, ikerketa honen bereizgarri bat jendea egoera estresagarrian jartzea delako. Bertan, partaideak EEBBetako militarrak ziren entrenamendu beldurgarrian zeudenak egoera zailetara ohitzen joateko gerran preso eramaten bazituzten. Eta entrenamendu honen zati gisa, soldaduak agresiboki galdekatzen dituzte 30 minutuz fisikoki erasotuz eta gero identifikatzen saiatu behar dira nork galdekatu zituen. Eta informazio iradokitzailea eskaintzen diegunean pertsona desberdin bat dela iradokiz, askok txarto identifikatzen dute galdetzailea, askotan, identifikatutakoak ez du benetako galdetzailearen antzik ere. Ikerketa hauek erakusten dutena zera da,
And so what these studies are showing is that when you feed people misinformation about some experience that they may have had, you can distort or contaminate or change their memory.
jendeari iradokizunak egiterakoan jasan duten esperientzia baten inguruan, berain oroitzapena aldatu daitekeela. Benetako munduan,
Well out there in the real world, misinformation is everywhere. We get misinformation not only if we're questioned in a leading way, but if we talk to other witnesses who might consciously or inadvertently feed us some erroneous information, or if we see media coverage about some event we might have experienced, all of these provide the opportunity for this kind of contamination of our memory.
informazio eza nonahi dago. Desinformazioa dago ez bakarrik galdetuak bagara, baita lekukoekin hitz egiterakoan ere nortzuek modu desegokian eskaini diezaguketen informazio okerra, edo bizitako egoera baten berria entzutean eta guzti honek oroimenaren kutsaketa ahalbidetzen du. 1990an, zera ikusten hasi ginen,
In the 1990s, we began to see an even more extreme kind of memory problem. Some patients were going into therapy with one problem -- maybe they had depression, an eating disorder -- and they were coming out of therapy with a different problem. Extreme memories for horrific brutalizations, sometimes in satanic rituals, sometimes involving really bizarre and unusual elements. One woman came out of psychotherapy believing that she'd endured years of ritualistic abuse, where she was forced into a pregnancy and that the baby was cut from her belly. But there were no physical scars or any kind of physical evidence that could have supported her story. And when I began looking into these cases, I was wondering, where do these bizarre memories come from? And what I found is that most of these situations involved some particular form of psychotherapy. And so I asked, were some of the things going on in this psychotherapy -- like the imagination exercises or dream interpretation, or in some cases hypnosis, or in some cases exposure to false information -- were these leading these patients to develop these very bizarre, unlikely memories? And I designed some experiments to try to study the processes that were being used in this psychotherapy so I could study the development of these very rich false memories.
oraindik larriagoa den oroimen arazoa. Pazienteak arazo batekin joaten ziren terapiara-- agian depresioa, elikadura nahastea-- eta terapiatik ateratzen zirenean arazo desberdin bat zuten. Basakeria beldurgarrien oroimenak, batzuetan erritual satanikoenak, batzuetan elementu arraroei loturikoak. Emakume batek psikoterapia amaitzean zera sinisten zuen, urteetan zehar eraso zeremonialak jasan izan zituela, haurdunaldira eraman zutenak eta haurra bere tripatik moztu zutela. Baina ez zeukan orbain fisikorik ez inolako froga fisikorik bere istorioa ziurtatuko zuenik. Eta kasu hauek aztertzen hasi nintzenean, nire buruari galdetzen nion, nondik datoz oroitzapen arraro hauek? Eta zera aurkitu nuen, kasu gehienetan psikoterapia motaren batean gertatzen zela hori. Eta beraz, galdetu nuen, psikoterapia honen aspekturen bat-- imajinazio ariketak esaterako edo ametsen interpretazioa, edo kasu batzuetan hipnosia, edo informazio faltsuaren aurkezpena-- ote zen pazienteak bultzatzen zituena oso arraroak ziren oroitzapenak garatzera. Beraz, esperimentu batzuk diseinatu nituen prozesu hauek aztertzen saiatzeko psikoterapia horietan, aztertu nahian oroimen faltsuen garapena. Egindako hasierako ikerketa batean,
In one of the first studies we did, we used suggestion, a method inspired by the psychotherapy we saw in these cases, we used this kind of suggestion and planted a false memory that when you were a kid, five or six years old, you were lost in a shopping mall. You were frightened. You were crying. You were ultimately rescued by an elderly person and reunited with the family. And we succeeded in planting this memory in the minds of about a quarter of our subjects. And you might be thinking, well, that's not particularly stressful. But we and other investigators have planted rich false memories of things that were much more unusual and much more stressful. So in a study done in Tennessee, researchers planted the false memory that when you were a kid, you nearly drowned and had to be rescued by a life guard. And in a study done in Canada, researchers planted the false memory that when you were a kid, something as awful as being attacked by a vicious animal happened to you, succeeding with about half of their subjects. And in a study done in Italy, researchers planted the false memory, when you were a kid, you witnessed demonic possession.
sugestioa erabili genuen, kasu horietako psikoterapiako metodo bat, sugestio mota bat erabili genuen eta oroitzapen faltsu bat txertatu non umea zinenean, 5-6 urte, zentro komertzial batean galdu zinen. Beldurtuta zeunden. Negarrez. Azkenean adineko batek salbatu zintuen eta zure familiarengana eraman. Eta oroitzapen hau txertatzea lortu genuen partaideen laurden batean. Eta pentsa dezakezu, tira, hori ez da bereziki estresagarria. Guk eta beste ikertzaile batzuk oroitzapen faltsuak txertatu ditugu ezohikoagoak eta estresagarriagoak zirenak. Tennesseen egindako ikerketa batean, ikertzaileek oroitzapen faltsu bat txertatu zuten non, haurra zinenean ia ito egin zinen eta sorosle batek erreskatatu behar izan zintuen. Eta Kanadan egindako ikerketa batean, ikertzaileek oroitzapen faltsua txertatu zuten non haurra zinenean animalia basati batek erasotzea bezalako zerbait gertatu zitzaizun, eta partehartzaile erdiekin lortu zuten. Eta Italian egindako ikerketa batean, ikertzaileek oroitzapen faltsua txertatu zuten non, haurra zinenean deabrutze bat ikusi zenuen. Gehitu nahi dut, eman dezakeela
I do want to add that it might seem like we are traumatizing these experimental subjects in the name of science, but our studies have gone through thorough evaluation by research ethics boards that have made the decision that the temporary discomfort that some of these subjects might experience in these studies is outweighed by the importance of this problem for understanding memory processes and the abuse of memory that is going on in some places in the world.
partehartzaile esperimentalak traumatizatzen ditugula zientziaren izenean, baina gure ikerketak ebaluatuak izan dira etika batzordeengandik eta erabaki dute sortu dezaketen egonezin iragankorra, partehartzaile esperimentalek sufritu dezaketena, konpentsatu egiten dela arazoaren garrantziarekin, oroimen prozesuak ulertzea eta munduko leku batzuetan egiten diren gehiegikeriak aztertzea. Nire harridurarako,
Well, to my surprise, when I published this work and began to speak out against this particular brand of psychotherapy, it created some pretty bad problems for me: hostilities, primarily from the repressed memory therapists, who felt under attack, and by the patients whom they had influenced. I had sometimes armed guards at speeches that I was invited to give, people trying to drum up letter-writing campaigns to get me fired. But probably the worst was I suspected that a woman was innocent of abuse that was being claimed by her grown daughter. She accused her mother of sexual abuse based on a repressed memory. And this accusing daughter had actually allowed her story to be filmed and presented in public places. I was suspicious of this story, and so I started to investigate, and eventually found information that convinced me that this mother was innocent. I published an exposé on the case, and a little while later, the accusing daughter filed a lawsuit. Even though I'd never mentioned her name, she sued me for defamation and invasion of privacy. And I went through nearly five years of dealing with this messy, unpleasant litigation, but finally, finally, it was over and I could really get back to my work. In the process, however, I became part of a disturbing trend in America where scientists are being sued for simply speaking out on matters of great public controversy.
lan hau argitaratu eta hitz egiten hastean psikoterapia mota horien aurka, arazo batzuk sortu zitzaizkidan: etsaitasunak, batez ere oroimen erreprimituen terapeutengandik erasotuak sentitu zirenak, eta tratatuak izan ziren pazienteengandik. Batzuetan zaindariak eraman behar izan nituen hitzaldietara non gonbidatua izan nintzen, jendea ni kaleratzeko kanpaina egiten. Baina segurutik, okerrena zera izan zen, susmoa nuela emakume bat erasoen errugabea zela, eta bere alabak salatu egin zuela. Amari eraso sexualak egitea leporatzen zion erreprimitutako oroitzapenetan oinarrituta. Eta alaba salatari hark baimendu egin zuen istorioa filmatua eta publikoki argitaratua izatea. Zalantzak neuzkan istorioaren inguruan, eta ikertzen hasi nintzen, eta informazioa lortu nuen konbentzitu ninduena ama errugabea zela. Kasuaren inguruan argitaratu nuen, eta geroago, alaba salatzaileak auzitara eraman ninduen. Bere izena inoiz aipatu ez nuen arren, difamazio eta pribatutasun inbasioagatik salatu ninduen. Eta 5 urtean zehar auzi desatseginetan ibili nintzen, baina azkenean amaitu zen, eta lanera itzuli ahal izan nuen. Hala ere, bidean, parte izan nintzen EEBBetako joera kezkagarri batena non zientzialariak salatuak diren eztabaida publikoetan parte hartzeagatik. Lanera itzuli nintzenean, galdetu nuen:
When I got back to my work, I asked this question: if I plant a false memory in your mind, does it have repercussions? Does it affect your later thoughts, your later behaviors? Our first study planted a false memory that you got sick as a child eating certain foods: hard-boiled eggs, dill pickles, strawberry ice cream. And we found that once we planted this false memory, people didn't want to eat the foods as much at an outdoor picnic. The false memories aren't necessarily bad or unpleasant. If we planted a warm, fuzzy memory involving a healthy food like asparagus, we could get people to want to eat asparagus more. And so what these studies are showing is that you can plant false memories and they have repercussions that affect behavior long after the memories take hold.
oroitzapen faltsu bat txertatuz gero, ondorioak izango al ditu? Zure geroko pentsamenduetan eragingo al du? eta zure geroko jokabideetan? Lehen ikerketan oroitzapen bat txertatu genuen non haurra zinenean elikagai batek gaixotu zintuen: arrautza egosiak, pepinoak, marrubizko izozkia. Aurkitu genuen, behin oroitzapena txertatuta jendeak ez zuela hori hainbeste jan nahi kanpoko piknik batean. Oroitzapen faltsuak ez dute desatseginak izan beharrik. Oroitzapen atsegin bat txertatuz gero zainzuria bezalako elikagai osasuntsu baten inguruan jendeak zainzuri gehiago jatea lortuko genuke. Ikerketa hauek erakusten dutena da oroitzapen faltsuak txertatu daitezkeela eta ondorio izan ditzaketela jokabidean, epe luzera. Gaitasun honekin batera
Well, along with this ability to plant memories and control behavior obviously come some important ethical issues, like, when should we use this mind technology? And should we ever ban its use? Therapists can't ethically plant false memories in the mind of their patients even if it would help the patient, but there's nothing to stop a parent from trying this out on their overweight or obese teenager. And when I suggested this publicly, it created an outcry again. "There she goes. She's advocating that parents lie to their children."
oroitzapenak txertatzea eta jokabidea kontrolatzea, kontu etiko garrantzitsuak daude, esaterako, noiz erabili behar dira teknika hauek? edo, debekatu egin behar dira? Terapeutek ezin dute etikoki oroitzapenik txertatu pazienteen gogamenean laguntzeko bada ere, baina ezerk ez dio guraso bati galerazten haur obesoekin egiten saiatzeko. Eta hau publikoki iradoki nuenean, kexak sortu ziren berriz. "Hor doa. Gurasoek haurrei gezurrak esatea bultzatzen" Kaixo, Santa Claus. (Barreak)
Hello, Santa Claus. (Laughter)
Hau ikusteko eduki dezakegun beste modu bat zera da,
I mean, another way to think about this is, which would you rather have, a kid with obesity, diabetes, shortened lifespan, all the things that go with it, or a kid with one little extra bit of false memory? I know what I would choose for a kid of mine.
zer nahiago duzu, haur obesoa, diabetesarekin, biziraupen laburra, honek guztiak dakarrena, ala oroitzapen faltsu txiki bat duen haurra? Badakit zer aukeratuko nukeen nire haurrarentzat. Beharbada nire lanak gehiengotik desberdindu egin nau.
But maybe my work has made me different from most people. Most people cherish their memories, know that they represent their identity, who they are, where they came from. And I appreciate that. I feel that way too. But I know from my work how much fiction is already in there. If I've learned anything from these decades of working on these problems, it's this: just because somebody tells you something and they say it with confidence, just because they say it with lots of detail, just because they express emotion when they say it, it doesn't mean that it really happened. We can't reliably distinguish true memories from false memories. We need independent corroboration. Such a discovery has made me more tolerant of the everyday memory mistakes that my friends and family members make. Such a discovery might have saved Steve Titus, the man whose whole future was snatched away by a false memory.
Gehienek oroitzapenak maite dituzte, euren identitatea errepresentatzen dute, nortzuk diren, nondik datozen. Eta hori baloratzen dut. Nik ere horrela sentitzen dut. Baina nire lanagatik dakit zenbat fikzio dagoen horietan. Hamarkada hauetan zerbait ikasi badut arazo horiekin lanean, zera da: norbaitek zerbait esateak soilik eta konfidantzarekin esateak, zehaztasun osoz kontatu arren, kontatzerakoan emozioak adierazi arren, ez du esan nahi gertatu zenik. Ezin dira oroitzapen faltsua eta benetakoa guztiz bereiztu Baieztapen independienteak behar ditugu. Aurkikuntza hauek toleranteagoa egin naute lagun eta familiakoek egindako ohiko oroimen akatsekiko. Aurkikuntza hauek Steve Titus salba zezaketen bere etorkizuna kendu zioten gizona oroitzapen faltsu bategatik. Bitartean jakin beharko genuke,
But meanwhile, we should all keep in mind, we'd do well to, that memory, like liberty, is a fragile thing. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. (Applause) Thanks very much. (Applause)
ondo egingo genuke, oroimena, askatasuna bezala, gauza hauskorra dela. Eskerrik asko. Eskerrik asko. Eskerrik asko. (Txaloak) Mila esker. (Txaloak)