Predictive Factors Aid In Eyewitness Accuracy

According to “The Science Behind Eyewitness Identification Reform” there are two main variables that affect eyewitness testimonies “Estimator variables: are those that cannot be controlled by the criminal justice system. They include simple factors like the lighting when the crime took place or the distance from which the witness saw the perpetrator, and the degree of stress or trauma a witness experienced while seeing the perpetrator” and “System variables: are those that the criminal justice system can and should control. They include all of the ways that law enforcement agencies retrieve and record witness memory, such as lineups, photo arrays, and other identification procedures”. Eyewitness misidentification has led to 75% of false convictions that were overruled by modern DNA testing according to “The Innocence

There are a number of factors can reduce the accuracy of eyewitness identifications for example; extreme witness stress at the crime scene or during the identification process, presence of weapons at the crime; because they can

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.

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.

The human mind is not like a tape recorder obviously, it does not record events exactly as seen in the moment of a crime, and neither can the events be recalled precisely like a tape that can rewind back in time. Therefore, making eyewitness identification inaccurate. For example, in the case of a

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

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 is many things that should be taken into account that requires certain questions to be asked. The first factor would be to what extent was the eyewitness paying attention to the crime taking place. It is important to that witness ability to recall what happened accurately (Schwartz, 2015, p. 13). The next factor would be duration, how long did that crime go on for? The duration comes into plays because the longer the event was going on the longer opportunity the witness has to encode that information for stronger recall (Schwartz, 2015, p. 14). Also, lighting and distance is important because it plays a direct effect on the quality of the memory and encoding. The better the view is for the witness, the better chance the witness has retracing

According to the Innocence Project, the misidentification of eyewitness is the most common causes of wrongful conviction in which approximately 75% of the cases has been overturned because of this case. There are several causes of eyewitness misidentification, which includes the types of lineup, post-identification feedback effect, and does the instructions given. The lineup is a process which the suspect is identified by the witness as the perpetrator. The main reason that the

An eye witness is a person who has personally seen something happen and so can give a first hand description of it. Every year, more than 75,000 eyewitnesses recognize criminal suspects in the U.S., and studies propose that as many as a third of them are wrong. Mistaken eyewitnesses helped convict three quarters of the people who have been freed from U.S. prisons base on DNA evidence presented by the Innocence Project. The Innocence Project is a nonprofit legal organization that challenges uncertain prosecutions. The California Innocence Project says that they are numerous reasons why eyewitness are mostly wrong. They are High Stress Environment and Trauma, Human Memory, and Suggestive Identification and etc. There are all these reasons that eyewitnesses have a high rate of error but, are still considered some of the most powerful evidence against a suspect. After a comprehensive two-year study of eyewitness testimonies, the New Jersey Supreme Court concluded that they often leads to fictional or false identifications. Thus, recently ordered that new rules on how such testimonies are treated in the courtroom. This is

Revealing the truth of the wicked eye, the certainty behind eye witness identification will not always remain hidden. Many innocent individuals have been wrongfully convicted on account of illegitimate witness statements and suspect identification. Faulty eye witnesses have been deemed the leading cause of wrongful convictions. Of the first 250 DNA exonerations in the United States, 190 of them appear to have involved mistaken identity (Benforado, 2015, p. 112). To resolve the problem of wrongful imprisonment due to false witness statements, the governors of each state should ensure that law enforcement enforce recording of witness testimonies in its entirety to verify factuality. In addition, the jurors should be informed on erroneous witness

Lindsay and Wells (1985) devised an alternative line-up presentation procedure to reduce the tendency of eyewitnesses to rely on relative judgment. A Sequential Line-Up (SEQ) presents the eyewitness with only one suspect at a time and they respond to each suspect with either a positive identification or none (Wells & Olson, 2003). It was proposed that reasoned that this procedure may raise participants’ response criterion and evoke a more "absolute" criterion (i.e., Is this the perpetrator or not?) rather than the similarity based relative-judgment criterion, thereby alleviating the simultaneous bias (Ebbesen & Flowe, 2002; Lindsay & Wells, 1985). To compare the SEQ and SIM line-ups Lindsay and Wells (1985) used two conditions; a target-absent line-up, in which one an innocent suspect is embedded among fillers, and a target-present line-up in which the guilty suspect is embedded among fillers. This data found that the SIM and SEQ procedures produced nearly identical correct identification rates in the target-present trial whereas in the target-absent condition the rate of mistaken identifications the rate was 43% with the SIM procedure and only 17% with the SEQ method (Lindsay et al., 1991). Compared to SIM presentation, SEQ line-up presentation did not significantly influence the correct identification rate but

The Case of Cotton is one of the best which explains eyewitness misidentification and how eyewitness mistakes might happen. There are various factors which contributed to this faulty eyewitness identification. First, when Ms. Thompson was presented with the two images of Cotton to examine, after she had asserted that Cotton was the one, she asked the detectives “Did I do OK?” and the detectives responded, “You did great, Ms. Thompson.” The officers failed to take a confidence statement.

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.

This is not always obvious because a witness's statement can seem accurate except for a single variance with the physical evidence. This can be important because of the case were to go to trial, a simple discrepancy in the testimony could be exploited by the opposing attorney. Although it is normal for eyewitness testimony not to be perfect, if there is a difference between the witness's account and a particular piece of evidence, there is a chance that some or all of the testimony has been derived from the statement of one of the parties in the lawsuit or criminal case.