In two studies, mock investigators conducted a computer‐based investigation of a crime involving an alibi witness who varied in the consistency of his statements taken 5 years apart. Investigators showed evidence of skepticism of alibi witness statements in which major contradictions (activity, location) were present, and some skepticism of statements in which minor (activity) details were contradictory. Entirely consistent statements were judged favorably, and reduced perceptions of suspect guilt (Study 2). The age of the alibi witness did not impact judgments of suspect guilt when children (6 years) and adults (25 years) were compared (Study 1, N = 254), or when children of different ages were compared (6, 8, 11 years; Study 2, N = 234). The present data suggest that investigators were relatively more sensitive to considerations of accuracy than honesty. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.