As a lawyer I've encountered this. One actual example, but with names changed:
Jones and Smith were staying in the same hotel. Jones testifies that he went down to Smith's room, they ordered breakfast from room service, and completed the contract negotiations over breakfast in Smith's room. Smith testifies that Jones came down to his room and they both went to the hotel coffee shop, ordered breakfast, and completed the contract negotiations over breakfast in the coffee shop.
It was a matter about which neither could possibly have been mistaken at the time and as to which neither had an incentive to lie, because it was utterly irrelevant to anything in the case.
I have my own amateur theory about Clinton and the sniper fire. As they approached the airport, there was a warning of danger. What I would've done, if on that plane, would be to think about that, specifically by forming a mental image of myself disembarking under fire. Clinton probably did that. Such a vivid mental image stayed with her even after the little tag attached to it -- "This didn't happen" -- had faded with time.
As an aside, I think John McCain did the same thing about his supposed experience of encountering a covert Christian guard while he was a POW. He never mentioned such a thing until after a different POW had published a similar account. Then McCain remembered it as happening to him. He was luckier than Clinton, though, in that nobody could present video footage disproving his statement.
= new reply since forum marked as read
