I'd like to tell you about a legal case that I worked on involving a man named Steve Titus.
Želim vam reći o pravnom slučaju na kojem sam radila koji uključuje čovjeka pod imenom Steve Titus.
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 je bio voditelj restorana. Imao je 31 godinu, živio je u Seattleu u Washingtonu, bio je zaručen za Gretchen, trebao se ženiti, bila je ljubav njegova života. I jedne večeri par je izašao van na romantičnu večeru u restoran. Vraćali su se kući i zaustavio ih je policajac. Znate, Titusov auto je nekako sličio autu kojeg je ranije te noći vozio čovjek koji je silovao autostopericu i Titus je nekako ličio na tog silovatelja. Tako je policija uslikala Titusa, stavili su sliku u listu, koju su kasnije pokazali žrtvi i ona je pokazala na Titusovu sliku. Rekla je:"Taj je najbliže." Policija i optužba su nastavili sa suđenjem i kad je Steveu Titusu suđeno za silovanje, žrtva silovanja je svjedočila: "Apsolutno sam sigurna da je to taj čovjek." I Titus je osuđen. Oglasio se nedužnim, njegova obitelj je vikala na porotu, njegova zaručnica se srušila na pod plačući i Titus je zatvoren.
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.
Što biste učinili u tom trenutku? Što biste napravili? Pa, Titus je izgubio potpuno povjerenje u pravni sustav, ali je opet dobio ideju. Nazvao je lokalne novine, dobio pažnju istražnog novinara i taj novinar je zapravo našao pravog silovatelja, čovjeka koji je na kraju priznao to silovanje, čovjek za kojeg se mislilo da je počinio 50 silovanja u tom području, i kad je ta informacija dana sucu, sudac je oslobodio Titusa.
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.
I stvarno, to je mjesto gdje je taj slučaj trebao završiti. Trebalo je biti gotovo. Titus je trebao razmišljati o tom kao o groznoj godini, godini optužaba i suđenja, ali gotovoj.
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.
Nije završilo tako. Titus je bio jako ogorčen. Izgubio je posao. Nije ga mogao dobiti nazad. Izgubio je zaručnicu. Nije mogla podnijeti njegovu stalnu ljutnju. Izgubio je svu svoju ušteđevinu i odlučio je podnijeti tužbu protiv policije i drugih za koje je smatrao da su odgovorni za njegovu patnju.
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."
I to je kad sam stvarno počela raditi na ovom slučaju, pokušavajući shvatiti kako je ta žrtva otišla od "Taj je najbliže" do "Apsolutno sam sigurna da je to taj tip".
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.
Pa, Titus je bio obuzet svojim građanskim slučajem. Provodio je svaki budni trenutak razmišljajući o tom samo dane prije nego je trebao imati svoj dan na sudu, probudio se ujutro, savio od boli i umro od srčanog napadaja povezanog sa stresom. Imao je samo 35 godina.
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.
Zamoljena sam da radim na Titusovom slučaju jer sam psihološki znanstvenik. Proučavam sjećanja. Proučavala sam sjećanja desetljećima. I ako upoznam nekog u avionu - to se dogodilo na putu za Škotsku - ako upoznam nekoga u avionu i pitamo jedno drugo "Čime se bavite? Što radite?" i ja kažem "Proučavam sjećanja," oni mi inače žele reći kako imaju problema s pamćenjem imena ili imaju rođaka koji ima Alzheimerovu ili neki problem sa sjećanjem, ali im moram reći da ne proučavam kad ljudi zaborave. Proučavam suprotno: kad se sjete, kad se sjete stvari koje se nisu dogodile ili se sjete stvari koje su drugačije od onog kakve su stvarno bile. Proučavam lažna sjećanja.
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.
Na nesreću, Steve Titus nije jedina osoba koja je bila osuđena na temelju nečijeg lažnog sjećanja. U jednom projektu u Sjedinjenim Državama, skupljene su informacije o 300 nevinih ljudi, 300 branjenika koji su osuđeni za zločin koji nisu počinili. Proveli su 10, 20, 30 godina u zatvoru za te zločine i sada je DNK testiranje dokazalo da su zapravo nevini. I kad su ti slučajevi analizirani, tri četvrtine njih su zbog lošeg pamćenja,lošeg pamćenja svjedoka.
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.
Pa, zašto? Poput porote koje su osudile te nevine ljude i porote koja je osudila Titusa, mnogi ljudi vjeruju da sjećanje funkcionira poput stroja za snimanje. Samo snimite informaciju, onda ju pozovete i pustite kad želite odgovoriti na pitanja ili identificirati slike. Ali desetljeća rada u psihologiji su pokazala da to jednostavno nije istina. Naša sjećanja su konstruktivna. Ona su rekonstruktivna. Sjećanje radi otprilike kao i stranica Wikipedije: Možete otići tamo i promijeniti ju, ali isto tako mogu i drugi ljudi. Započela sam proučavati taj proces konstruktivnih sjećanja 1970-ih. Radila sam eksperimente koji su uključivali pokazivanje ljudima simulirane zločine i nesreće i ispitujući ih o tom čega se sjećaju. U jednoj studiji, pokazali smo ljudima simuliranu nesreću i pitali ih, koliko brzo su išli auti kad su udarili jedan drugog? I pitali smo druge ljude koliko su brzo išli auti kad su se smrskali jedan o drugoga. I ako bismo pitali navodljivo "smrskano" pitanje, svjedoci bi rekli da su auti išli brže, štoviše, to navodljivo "smrskano" pitanje uzrokovalo je da su ljudi skloniji reći nam da su vidjeli razbijeno staklo u sceni nesreće u kojoj uopće nije bilo nikakvog razbijenog stakla. U drugoj studiji, pokazali smo simuliranu nesreću gdje je auto prošao križanje sa stop znakom i ako bismo pitali pitanje koje je insinuiralo da je to bio znak prednosti prolaza, mnogi svjedoci bi nam rekli da se sjećaju da su vidjeli znak prednosti prolaza na raskrižju, a ne stop znak.
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.
I vjerojatno razmišljate, pa, znate, to su snimljeni događaji, nisu pretjerano stresni. Bi li iste greške bile napravljene s jako stresnim događajem? U studiji koju smo objavili prije par mjeseci, imamo odgovor na ovo pitanje jer što je bilo neobično kod ove studije je da smo organizirali da ljudi imaju jako stresno iskustvo. Subjekti u ovoj studiji bili su članovi američke vojske koji su prolazili naporne trening vježbe koje bi ih trebale naučiti kako će im biti ako ikad budu ratni zarobljenici. I kao dio tih vježbi, ti vojnici su bili ispitivani na agresivan, neprijateljski i fizički zlostavljački način 30 minuta i nakon tog trebaju pokušati identificirati osobu koja je vodila ispitivanje. I kad ih nahranimo sugestivnim informacijama koje insinuiraju da je druga osoba, mnogi od njih krivo identificiraju svog ispitivača, često identificirajući nekog tko nimalo ne sliči na pravog ispitivača.
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.
Ono što ove studije pokazuju jest da kad ljude hranite dezinformacijama o nekom iskustva koje su možda imali, možete iskriviti, ili zagaditi ili izmijeniti njihovo sjećanje.
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.
U pravom svijetu, dezinformacije su posvuda. Dobivamo dezinformacije samo ako smo ispitivani na navodljiv način, ali ako pričamo s drugim svjedocima koji bi mogli svjesno ili nenamjerno hraniti nas nekim krivim informacijama ili ako vidimo medijsku objavu o nekom događaju koji smo iskusili, sve to može pružiti priliku za takvu vrstu zagađenja našeg sjećanja.
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.
U 1990-ima, počeli smo viđati sve ekstremnije vrste problema sa sjećanjem. Neki pacijenti su išli na terapiju s jednim problemom - možda su imali depresiju, poremećaj prehrane - - i izlazili su iz terapije s drugačijim problemom. Ekstremna sjećanja za grozne brutalizacije, ponekad satanskih rituala, ponekad uključujući bizarne i neobične elemente. Jedna žena je došla iz psihoterapije vjerujući da je izdržala godine ritualističkog zlostavljanja, gdje je siljena u trudnoću i da je dijete izrezano iz njenog trbuha. Ali nije bilo fizičkih ožiljaka ili bilo kakvog oblika fizičkog dokaza koji bi mogli poduprijeti njenu priču. I kad sam počela provjeravati te slučajeve, pitala sam se, otkud dolaze ta bizarna sjećanja? I što sam saznala je da većina ovih situacija uključuje neku vrstu psihoterapije. I tako sam pitala, jesu li neke od stvari koje se događaju na psihoterapiji - poput vježbi mašte ili tumačenja snova, ili u nekim slučajevima hipnoze, ili u nekim slučajevima izloženost lažnim informacijama - jesu li one navodile pacijente da razviju ova jako bizarna, nevjerojatna sjećanja? I osmislila sam neke eksperimente kako bih pokušala proučiti procese koji su se koristili u psihoterapiji kako bih mogla proučiti razvoj tih vrlo bogato lažnih sjećanja.
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.
U jednoj od prvih studija koje smo napravili, koristili smo sugestiju, metodu inspiriranu psihoterapijom koju smo vidjeli u ovim slučajevima, koristili smo takav oblik sugestije i posadili lažno sjećanje da kad ste bili dijete, pet ili šest godina stari, bili ste izgubljeni u trgovačkom centru. Bili ste prestrašeni. Plakali ste. Bili ste na kraju spašeni od strane starije osobe i ujedinjeni s obitelji. I uspjeli smo u usađivanju tih sjećanja u umove otprilike četvrtine naših subjekata. I možda si mislite, pa, to nije pretjerano stresno. Ali mi i drugi istražitelji smo posadili bogata lažna sjećanja o stvarima koje su bile mnogo neobičnije i puno stresnije. Tako u studiji rađenoj u Tennesseeju, istraživači su posadili lažno sjećanje da ste se gotovo utopili kad ste bili dijete te da vas je morao spasiti spasilac. I u studiji rađenoj u Kanadi, istraživači su posadili lažno sjećanje da, kad ste bili dijete, nešto grozno poput napada opasne životinje vam se dogodilo, uspijevajući s otprilike pola svojih subjekata. I jedna studija rađena u Italiji, istraživači su posadili lažno sjećanje, kad ste bili dijete, da ste svjedočili demonskom opsjedanju.
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.
Želim dodati da se može činiti kao da traumatiziramo eksperimentalne subjekte u ime znanosti, ali naša studija je prošla kroz detaljnu evaluaciju odbora za istraživačku etiku koji su donijeli odluku da je privremena nelagoda koju neki od ovih subjekata mogu iskusiti u ovim studijama prevagnuta važnošću ovog problema za shvaćanje procesa sjećanja i zloupotrebe sjećanja koje se događa u nekim mjestima u svijetu.
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.
Pa, na moje iznenađenje, kad sam objavila taj rad i počela govoriti protiv ove vrste psihoterapije, stvorio je neke poprilično loše probleme za mene: neprijateljstvo, prvenstveno od strane uvrijeđenih terapeuta koji rade na sjećanjima, koji su se osjećali napadnuti, i od strane pacijenata na koje su utjecali. Imala sam ponekad naoružane zaštitare na govorima gdje sam pozvana govoriti, ljudi su pokušavali nagovoriti ljude na kampanje pisanja pisama da dobijem otkaz. Ali je vjerojatno najgore bilo što sam sumnjala da je jedna žena bila krivo optužena za zlostavljanje kako je tvrdila njena odrasla kćer. Optužila je svoju majku za seksualno zlostavljanje utemeljeno na potisnutom sjećanju. I ta optužujuća kćer je zapravo dopustila da se njena priča snimi i predstavi na javnim mjestima. Bila sam sumnjičava u vezi s tom pričom pa sam tako počela istraživati i na kraju saznala informaciju koja me uvjerila da je ta majka bila nedužna. Objavila sam ekspoze o tom slučaju i malo kasnije je optužujuća kćer pokrenula parnicu. Iako nikad nisam spomenula njeno ime, tužila me za klevetu i invaziju privatnosti. I provela sam skoro pet godina noseći se s tom neurednom, neugodnom parnicom, ali napokon, napokon, završilo je i mogla sam se stvarno vratiti svom poslu. U tom procesu, ipak, postala sam dio uznemiravajućeg trenda u Americi gdje su znanstvenici bili tuženi za jednostavno govorenje o temama koje su bile dio velike javne polemike.
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.
Kad sam se vratila svom radu, pitala sam ovo pitanje: ako posadim lažno sjećanje u vaš um, ima li to posljedice? Utječe li na vaše daljnje misli, na vaše daljnje ponašanje? Naša je prva studija posadila lažno sjećanje da ste se razboljeli kao dijete jedući određenu hranu: tvrdo kuhana jaja, kisele krastavce, sladoled od jagode. I saznali smo da nakon što smo posadili to lažno sjećanje, ljudi nisu htjeli jesti hranu kao prije na pikniku. Lažno sjećanje nije nužno loše ili neugodno. Ako bismo posadili toplo, ugodno sjećanje koje uključuje zdravu hranu poput šparoga, mogli bismo navesti ljude da žele jesti više šparoga. I tako, ono što ove studije pokazuju jest da možete posaditi lažna sjećanja i da ona imaju posljedice koje utječu na ponašanja dugo nakon što se sama sjećanja stvore.
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."
Pa, zajedno s tom sposobnošću da se posade sjećanja i kontrolira ponašanje očito dolaze neki bitni etički problemi, poput, kad bismo trebali koristiti tu umnu tehnologiju? I bismo li trebali ikada zabraniti njezinu upotrebu? Terapeuti ne mogu etički posaditi lažna sjećanja u umove svojih pacijenata čak i kad bi to pomoglo pacijentu, ali ne postoji ništa što bi zaustavilo roditelja da iskuša ovo na svom gojaznom ili pretilom tinejdžeru. I kad sam predložila ovo javno, stvorilo je opet negodovanje. "Eto nje. Zagovara da roditelji lažu svojoj djeci."
Hello, Santa Claus. (Laughter)
Bok, Djede Mraze. (Smijeh)
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.
Mislim, drugačiji način da se razmišlja o tom je, što biste radije imali, dijete s pretilosti, dijabetesom, skraćenim životnim vijekom, svim stvarima koje idu s tim, ili dijete s malenim viškom lažnog sjećanja? Znam što bih ja odabrala za svoje dijete.
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.
Ali me možda moj rad učinio drugačijom od većine ljudi. Većina ljudi cijeni svoja sjećanja, znaju da predstavljaju njihov identitet, tko su, otkud su došli. I ja cijenim to. Isto se tako osjećam. Ali znam od svog rada koliko fikcije već postoji. Ako sam išta naučila od ovih desetljeća radeći na tim problemima, to je ovo: samo zato što vam netko kaže nešto i to vam kažu samouvjereno, samo zato što to kažu s puno detalja, samo zato što izraze osjećaje kad to kažu, to ne znači da se zbilja dogodilo. Ne možemo sa sigurnošću razlikovati istinita sjećanja od lažnih sjećanja. Trebamo nezavisnu potvrdu. Takvo otkriće me učinilo tolerantnijom prema svakodnevnim pogreškama sjećanja koje moji prijatelji i članovi obitelji počine. Takvo je otkriće moglo spasiti Stevea Titusa, čovjeka čija je budućnost ugrabljena od strane lažnog sjećanja.
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)
Ali u međuvremenu, trebali bismo svi imati na umu, trebali bismo, da je sjećanje, kao i sloboda, krhka stvar. Hvala vam. Hvala vam. Hvala vam. (Pljesak) Hvala puno. (Pljesak)