Eyewitness And Meta-Analysis

Eyewitness testimony is a hot button issue in not only the criminal justice field but also the psychology field as well. It continues to be argued that this type of “evidence” is far too unreliable for the court room and can ultimately end up punishing the wrong person for a crime they did not commit. The influence of an eyewitness testimony cannot be denied as research has showed that, “adding a single prosecution eyewitness to a murder trial summary increased the percentage of mock jurors’ guilty verdicts from 18 to 72” (Leippe, Manion, & Romanczyk, p. 182, 1992). In the article discussed here, researchers will look into various age groups to see if age has an effect on the credibility of eyewitness testimonies while attempting to discern what certain cues build upon such credibility.

There has been considerable interest and study in the accuracy or inaccuracy of the use of eyewitness testimonies in the current criminal justice system. Results collated by several studies add to the bulk of literature suggesting that the current usage of eyewitness testimony by the legal system is far from ideal. Currently, high emphasis is being placed on reviewing and reconsidering eyewitness accounts (Leinfelt, 2004). In particular, recent DNA exoneration cases have substantiated the warnings of eyewitness identification researchers by showing that mistaken eyewitness identification was the largest single factor contributing to the conviction of innocent people (Wells & Olson, 2003). In this essay, the use of eyewitness testimony in the criminal justice system will be explored, with a particular focus on the impreciseness of this practice.

A study was held to see what percentage of people on death row were wrongfully executed, the results were that 1.6% of the innocent were exonerated, while 4.1% were wrongfully executed such as Larry Griffin’s case. Larry Griffin was put to death in 1995 for the 1981 murder of Quintin Moss, a Missouri drug dealer. Griffin always maintained his innocence, and now, evidence seems to indicate he was telling the truth. The first police officer on the scene now says the eyewitness account was false, even though the officer supported the claims during the trial. Another eyewitness who was wounded during the attack was never contacted during the trial, and he says Griffin wasn’t present at the crime scene that night. Cases like this is a sign of why better

Although supporters of capital punishment argue that there has been no proof of an innocent person being executed in the past century, more inmates are being exonerated from the death row (SB). It is evident that the criminal justice system makes mistakes as errors have gone through the process. In “Death Penalty Debates: Is the capital punishment system working?” Kenneth Jost stated that a Texas death row inmate, Anthony Graves, spent nearly two decades in prison for a crime he did not commit, becoming the 139th former death row inmate to have been freed of his alleged crime (AP). Some death row inmates were proven innocent by DNA analysis and some were released based on a reexamination of evidence. “Most of the exonerations, like Graves’,

Research that has been performed on this factor shows that the chance of mistaken identification is 1.56 times greater in cases that involve different races than in cases involving same race identification (Vallas, 2011). This factor of own-race bias does not vary significantly among age groups. Other factors that affect eyewitness identification are violence, stress, and the focus on a weapon.

"Since 1973, over eighty people have been released from death row with evidence of their innocence" (Innocence and the Death Penalty 1). Statistics say that of the three-thousand six hundred people on death row right now, at least one hundred of them are innocent (Capital Punishment 1). When an innocent person is executed, the real killer is still on the streets ready to victimize someone else (Pragmatic Arguments 1). The most important problem is that when an innocent person is executed, they represent another human being who did not deserve to die.

Eyewitness misidentification can pose a serious threat in forensic evidence. Eye witness testimony can easily be tampered with due to words or phrases used. Bias is a major issue in identification especially if the police officer uses suggestive tones to portray whom they believe is the suspect. Some witnesses will change their opinion when they hear new information of the suspect. A study has shown that words can play a major impact in the witness' mind and cause them to recall false information. False information can also stem from human memory, age, distance, and how long it took before a witness could recall the information. It has been shown that due to the confidence that a witness may have, it could impact the court systems' reliability on the witness; however, there are several solutions that can be done to prevent misidentification in the court of law. Some examples that can be done are blind administration, lineup composition, instructions, confidence statements, and

Before the study, they conducted a pilot to figure out which images they should use to identify the perpetrator. College students classified photos of caucasian and black males on age and toughness, so that the experimenters could match the photos best during the study.

The lack of proper resources during a trial can make the difference between the innocence and guilt of a person. The death penalty does not always show the innocence or guilt of a person. It shows how much he or she is willing to spend to help the trial go his or her way. The death penalty is an unfair system to those who cannot afford the “evidence” they need to help free them.

What would you do if you were suddenly arrested for a crime that you didn’t commit? What if you were taken to the station, interrogated, and booked for murder? Would you stick to your innocence, or possibly take a plea bargain just to get past the constant questioning from authority? Would you write to others to try and prove your innocence? During the course of many years, this has happened to numerous people. Many people have been ripped from their daily lives and thrown into a cell. The individuals are just waiting for the day when someone will prove them innocent. In the past 39 years, 117 people who were serving time on death row have been proved innocent and released from prison (Daily 36). Over time, critics have presented flaws in

Execution of innocent prisoners, does not produce an overall net intrinsic value compared to alternative punishments. According to statistical data collected, as of October 2015, a total of 156 people have been exonerated while on death row- since 1973. A total of 1,414 people have been executed since that time, meaning one out of ten people on death row are innocent. (“Exoneration of Innocent Men and Women”) This data brings forth the scenario of innocent victims being killed, by flaws in the criminal justice system. Murder of an innocent individual is not morally justifiable, because it would fail

According to a 1987 study published in the Stanford Law Review, at least 23 non-culpable individuals have been executed from 1900 to 1987, which is more than one innocent execution every four years. These miscarriages of justice are often due to evidence that was not discovered or made available until after the execution. Although recent scientific improvements, such as forensic DNA evidence, have enabled investigators to more accurately pinpoint guilt in a suspect, no current amount of scientific or technological advancement can completely guarantee that errors will never be made. In an issue such as the death penalty, where the stakes are so high – human life – any margin of error, no matter how minuscule, is unacceptable.

Many people would argue that in today’s society it is highly unlikely that someone would be wrongly convicted of a crime due to the scientific knowledge and DNA evidence that is around today. Furthermore, if there is any doubt in the judges mind as to whether the person actually committed the crime then they will not apply the death penalty. Unfortunately, there are still cases in which people are proven innocent; In the USA 87 people have been freed from death row after being proved innocent since the reinstatement of capital punishment. This statistic suggests an alarming error rate of 1 in 7.

Human error can always cause problems and make mistakes. We trust our judicial system to handle these cases of the death penalty, but what if they make a mistake? Sentencing an innocent person to death is the worst possible outcome of the death penalty, but it still happens. Innocent people are potentially executed by our government on a regular basis as 4% of death row inmates are innocent (Oliver). This is a substantially high number considering the circumstances. Since the early 1970s, more than 150 people sentenced to death have been exonerated (Berman). This statistic shows that our judicial system makes mistakes that could have been extremely bad. Most people believe, even if they are for the death penalty, that there is some risk of this horrible mistake. How could one live with oneself knowing that they possibly kill innocent people? A Pew Research Center poll recorded that seven out of ten Americans feel there is still some risk an innocent person will be put to death (Berman). If

Because of this, an entire program has been dedicated to death row survivors who were wrongfully sentenced called Witness to Innocence (Evans). Without solid evidence, many cases are based solely on testimonies from eyewitnesses and essentially theories of how someone could be the culprit. Those convicted and sentenced to capital punishment are often done so because of the response of human nature to seek retribution in the form of strident punishment for persons who have committed cruel crimes (“Life”).