Eyewitness Testimony: A Powerful Forms Of Evidence In A Trial

Eyewitness identification are considered to be the most powerful evidence against a suspect. There are numerous reasons for this to occur which includes stress, human memory, and the focus on weapons which leads for the eyewitness to focus less on the perpetrator. When an individual is in a position with high stress, their ability of remembering what actually occurred won't be easy to prove. It leaves the eyewitness unable to recall what occurred at the tie of the scene. This has been a huge problem over the years. According to “Carla Stenzel” eyewitness misidentification will occur because our memory is dynamic. It is very impossible for our brains to perform everything we see. Our memories take in pieces of information and processes the most important information. When a witness is asked by a police officer to give certain details of a suspect, they won't be able to remember how exactly they looked like but will be able to give out certain details like their height, race, and hair color. When a crime is being committed witnesses usually testify that there focus was more on the perpetrator's weapon. All they can focus on would be the size and shape of the weapon and focus less on the actual suspect. Another contribution would be the way the investigator presents the operator to the witness. The investigator prepares a lineup which includes a six pack of people. The use of a six pack lineup has

There are many different factors that play a part in the increased chance of a witness correctly identifying a suspect. Such factors should be brought to the attention of the jury and the judge to help in properly assessing whether a witness is correctly identifying a suspect. A study by Magnussen, Melinder, Stridbeck, & Raja (2010) found that of the three different types of people: judge, jury, and general public, that for the most part all where fairly ill-informed on the reliability of eyewitness testimony with judges having the most. Judges only had about an 8% difference in knowledge when compared to jurors. With this information it is very clear that education on the reliability of eyewitness testimony needs to become more of a general knowledge information for the everyone, especially people who are involved in upholding the law. Another factor to look into when evaluating the accuracy eyewitness testimony is the role that memory plays. Memory is divided into three processes: perceiving, remembering, and recalling information (Simmonsen, 2013). There is plenty of room in all three of those stages to forget or falsely remember something. Some factors that play a part when a person perceives an event is the amount of time they are exposed to the event and the suspect. A study conducted by Horry, Halford, Brewer, Milne, & Bull. (2014) found that witnesses were increasingly more likely to correctly identify a suspect if they had been exposed to the suspect for sixty

Lineup identifications can yield biases through the lineup administrator’s insight and biased instructions which influences an eyewitness’ decision. An administrator’s knowledge refers to their awareness of the suspect's identity during the line-up identification process (Quas, 2017). The advance knowledge can potentially influence the eyewitness to choose a suspect from the lineup even if they are absent. Lindsay et al. (1997) reveal that witnesses tend to identify a lineup member that closely resembles the suspect from their memory. If the eyewitness is aware of the administrator’s advanced knowledge, they can be pressured to identify a suspect. For example, the eyewitness may be inclined to choose a member from the lineup because they

The impact of eyewitness testimony upon the members of a jury has been the subject of various research projects and has guided the policies formed by the federal government regarding its competent use in criminal matters (Wells, Malpass, Lindsay, Fisher, Turtle, & Fulero, 2000). Therefore, eyewitness studies are important to understand how

Although eyewitness testimony can be significant when displaying it to a judge or a jury, years of supportive social science research has sustained that eyewitness identification is often unreliable. As the Innocence Project website illustrates, studies show that the human mind is nowhere near like a ‘tape recorder’ and we as humans do not record events exactly as we see them. Instead, witness recollection is just like any other evidence at a crime scene and must be preserved carefully and sensibly retrieved or it can be considered as contaminated.

In this paper I’m going to discuss the psychological issues that are used in prosecutors cases such as eyewitness identification, issues that have led to the wrongful convictions of defendants, and what is done to overturn these wrongful convictions. I will also start by defining eyewitness identification. Eyewitness identification is a person whose identification by sight of another person may be relevant in a criminal proceeding. (GS_15A-284.52.)

In Canada, the leading cause of wrongful conviction is due to the factor of eyewitness account. It has been proven that individual’s minds are not like tape recorders because everyone cannot precisely and accurately remember the description of what another person or object looks like. The courts looks at eyewitness accounts as a great factor to nab perpetrators because they believe that the witness should know what they are taking about and seen what occurred on the crime scene. On the other hand, eyewitness accounts lead to a 70 percent chance of wrongful conviction, where witnesses would substantially change their description of a perpetrator.

One third of these overturned cases rested on the testimony of two or more mistaken eyewitnesses” (SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN). While some prosecutors and judges are beginning to rely less heavily on eyewitness testimonies, still every year, more than 75,000 eyewitnesses identify criminal suspects in the U.S., and studies suggest that as many as a third of them are wrong ( THE

Various factors play into a juror’s decision about a defendant’s guilt and sentence. Two great issues are in regards to eyewitness testimony and a defendant’s characteristics that serve to be great influences on a juror’s decision (Shermer, Rose, & Hoffman, 2011; Sommers, 2007). Research has shown that an eyewitness’ credibility also has a large effect on a juror’s decision (Pozzulo & Dempsey, 2009). When a discredited witness is introduced in a study, it can greatly influence the decision of whether or not the defendant is guilty (Whitley, 2001). In addition, prior research has also shown that a juror may hold bias towards a certain ethnic group or race that effects their decision (Espinoza & Willis-Esqueda, 2008). The current study examined

According to the article “Expert testimony: Does eyewitness memory research have probative value for the courts?”, “…eyewitness identifications are the single most common cause of wrongful convictions” even though compared to actual confessions, “eyewitness testimony has been described as the most incriminating evidence that can be introduced against the accused” (Yarmey, 2001). While even though eyewitness testimony can lead to false accusations, it is still considered to be a necessary source of evidence in a crime case. A statistic provided by Christine Mumma, Dwayne Allen Dail’s lawyer, supports the liability of eyewitness testimony, stating that “Misidentification is the leading factor in wrongful conviction across the country…it’s present in 75 percent of wrongful convictions” (Mumma, 2009). Inaccurate eyewitness testimonies are not just simple memory slips of the brain, as they can unfairly affect the lives of innocent

“Wrongful convictions happen every week in every state in this country. And they happen for all the same reasons. Sloppy police work. Eyewitness identification is the most- is the worst type almost. Because it is wrong about half the time. Think about that.” (Grisham). Wrongful convictions can happen to anyone, at anytime. Grisham implies wrongful convictions happen for the same reasons, careless police work as well as eyewitness identification. An eyewitness identification is a crucial aspect in detective work because it essentially locates the person at the crime scene. This is the worst cause of wrongful convictions because it is wrong half the time.

Eyewitness identification and testimony play a huge role in the criminal justice system today, but skepticism of eyewitnesses has been growing. Forensic evidence has been used to undermine the reliability of eyewitness testimony, and the leading cause of false convictions in the United States is due to misidentifications by eyewitnesses. The role of eyewitness testimony in producing false confessions and the factors that contribute to the unreliability of these eyewitness testimonies are sending innocent people to prison, and changes are being made in order to reform these faulty identification procedures.

Witness identifications are not 100% fail-safe. Research by Borchard (1932) supports sixty-five eyewitness errors in his book, Convicting the Innocent: Sixty-Five Actual Errors of Criminal Justice. Today, based on suggestive implications during lineups, the U.S. Supreme Court determined in the case of the United States v. Wade (1967) that criminal procedures also have a duty to protect a suspect’s

In the past decade, eyewitness testimonies have cast a shadow on what is wrong with the justice system in today’s society. Before we had the advanced technology, we have today, eyewitness testimonies were solid cold-hard facts when it came to proving the defendant was guilty. However, time has changed and eyewitness testimonies have proven to be the leading causes of wrongful convictions due to misidentification. The Thompson and Cotton case is a perfect example of how eyewitness testimonies can put an innocent man behind bars.

Eyewitness testimony has been used as an important tool in the criminal justice system. When there is lack of other kinds of evidence, police often rely on eyewitness to find potential suspects. In court, eyewitness testimony is a kind of important evidence associates with DNA or other types of evidence. However, many psychologists think that it should not be used in the criminal justice system as most of the wrongful convictions were caused by inaccurate eyewitness testimony.