The facts of the case in question are that the subject of the inquiry, referred to as “DMS,” stole a car and then crashed it at a high speed, resulting in death and serious injuries. Upon questioning about the accident, DMS claimed to remember nothing of the events leading to the accident, the accident itself, and the events that transpired after the accident. The focus of the chapter is on the assessment of the truthfulness of DMS’s claim of amnesia. The analysis of the case included an assessment of the transcripts of interviews with DMS, reviews of audiotapes, review of location maps prepared by the accident investigator, and review of other evidence pertaining to the case. The four types of amnesia are described (organic, functional, simulated, and mixed) as the author demonstrates the difficulty of distinguishing between simulated (faked) amnesia and genuine forms of amnesia. A report that summarizes forgotten and remembered events in juxtaposition to other evidence is presented and lauded for its usefulness in ascertaining the truthfulness of the amnesia claim. In closing, the author cautions that because it is impossible to reliably distinguish genuine from simulated amnesia, unequivocal statements about the veracity of amnesia claims is inappropriate, however in this case, the evidence suggests that if DMS were suffering from genuine amnesia, it would be an unusual amnesic claim at best. Tables, notes, references