Police lineup

My mistakes and life have been just growing with me as I move further into my life. I have had so much mistakes ever since I was a baby. I am really clumsy which makes it easy for me to make tons of mistakes. I thought this would be an interesting topic because you learn from failure and just got to accept that fact. The Mistakes I Made as a Baby/Toddler: The only way I knew of all these mistakes I made as a baby was because my parents recorded everything when I was a baby. I was an angry baby

victim was told to go back inside her property. Female victim son called the police immediately to notify them of situation. Hapeville Police Department officers were dispatched to the home. A Hapeville officer on duty spotted the stolen truck less than a half mile from the location vehicle was taken from. The officer pursue the truck, and the thief exit the vehicle and started running. However, despite the fact that Atlanta Police helicopters were used in the search to cover more range, officers failed

identification of a possible suspect. For an example, an incident occurred in Richmond, Va, is an example of police lineups going wrong. Michael Kenneth McAlister, 58 was convicted of the February 1986, abduction and attempted rape of a woman who was dragged at knifepoint from an apartment complex laundry room in Richmond. The victim identified McAlister as the attacker from a photo lineup that did not include a picture of a now known serial rapist, Norman Bruce Derr, who lived nearby and bore a

perfect; however, law enforcement agencies still use lineups, show-ups, and photographic arrays today. The professionals have taken a closer look at eyewitness evidence, precisely at the effectiveness of identifying suspects from lineups and photographic arrays. Law enforcement officers in the United States investigate millions of crimes per year; considering, a percentage of law enforcement agencies investigate crimes that involve the use of police arranged identification procedures. "The National

the attack, the Burlington Police Department of North Carolina had determined a suspect through the composite Thompson made and arrested Ronald J. Cotton on August 1, of 1984. Thompson was able to identify Cotton under photo identification and then successfully chose him again in the physical line-up. The second victim, however did not chose Cotton in either of the lineups. Cotton went to trial in January of 1985. The evidence included Thompson’s photo and physical lineup identification, Thompson’s

with a photo lineup. This study was designed to identify the differences, if they existed, between the two presentation methods of photo lineups. The sequential lineup presentation was originally designed to deter “[a] witness from making ‘relative judgments’ in which [they] compare lineup members with each other and then show a propensity to identify the person who looks most like their memory” (Wells 2). The study was conducted to help determine the most reliable way to present lineups to witnesses

of Exonerations has found that police officers and prosecutors are becoming more cooperative with exonerations. BACKGROUND In 1989 law enforcement actively participated in twenty exonerations, two being DNA and eighteen being Non-DNA; in 2013 that number has risen to eighty- seven, eighteen being DNA and sixty-nine being Non-DNA (National Registry of Exonerations). This increased number of exonerations can be accredited to new guidelines for conducting photo lineups, willingness to revisit convictions

the attack, the Burlington Police Department of North Carolina had determined a suspect through the composite Thompson made and arrested Ronald J. Cotton on August 1, of 1984. Thompson was able to identify Cotton under photo identification and then successfully chose him again in the physical line-up. The second victim, however did not chose Cotton in either of the lineups. Cotton went to trial in January of 1985. The evidence included Thompson’s photo and physical lineup identification, Thompson’s

the issues of faulty eyewitness testimony and began to establish limited safeguards. Some of the safeguards introduced by the Supreme Court include allowing the defendant to have an attorney present at a lineup, allowing defendants to challenge identifications resulting from questionable police procedures, and establishing model jury instructions (Jost 862-863). Despite the efforts of the courts and law enforcement agencies to improve the handling of eyewitness testimony, misidentifications continue

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