Few things should go together better than psychology and law. Both are concerned with human behaviour: analyzing it, predicting it, understanding it and, sometimes, controlling it. Lawyers may, in the absence of empirical research, have made assumptions about human behaviour; for example that people who know they are dying will tell the truth (an exception to the rule against hearsay evidence). Judges had to make decisions to settle the dispute before them. But now there is research which can inform the law. However few things are getting together less successfully than psychology and law. The specialist journals, books and conferences tend to be dominated, both in numbers and contribution, by academic psychologists. It can be complained that lawyers are insufficiently welcoming but that would fly in the face of the pragmatic imperatives of law. Both psychologists and lawyers, like all other professionals, need to keep up-to-date with developments in their discipline. Some, particularly the academic members, have a duty (and the licence of academic freedom), to push their ideas into new fields. But, when that is applied to lawyers, it is related to current law and practice. There is no economic incentive for practicing lawyers to be interested in psychological research on law unless it helps them to do their job more efficiently or effectively. Perhaps the law ought to be different, because of what the psychological research has revealed. But that is a normative proposition. Lawyers do not need to know about it until, if, the law is changed to make it relevant. A consequence is that there are limited routes for the application of psychology to law. National differences can be identified reflecting different laws and opportunities. For example psychological reports to inform courts about the capacity of a defendant to stand trial are much more common in the United States of America (USA) and Australia than in the United Kingdom (UK). However government interest in the UK, first in the plight of child and then other vulnerable witnesses, led to a research focus on interviewing skills which has not been replicated, to the same degree, in other countries.