Results found that fabricating an alternative story (i.e. lying) did not compromise correct recall, but induced more commission errors. The findings were discussed in terms of possible underlying mechanisms. Of interest, is that none of the participants claimed amnesia when trying to minimize culpability, but conversely, all participants fabricated an alternative account of their role in the crime. Compared with responding honestly on both tests, fabricating an alternative story on the first test undermined memory for the mock crime in terms of commission errors, and correct recall was unaffected. It appeared that this effect was related to story length: the longer the fabricated story, the more the commission errors when telling the truth 1 week later. It is noted that previous empirical studies have demonstrated that feigning amnesia undermines memory for a mock crime, but not much is known about the effects of other culpability-reducing strategies on memory. The present study investigated what strategies participants used when they were instructed to minimize culpability and if these strategies undermined memory to a similar extent as claiming amnesia. Data were obtained from a sample of 61 undergraduate students, 51 women, 10 men, in the Netherlands. The participants performed a mock crime, and were then instructed to either minimize culpability for this mock crime in a simulated interrogation or to respond honestly. One week later, memory for the mock crime was tested. Table and references