More handpicked essays just for you.
Importance of eyewitness testimony in the legal system
American psychology association eyewitness testimony
Eyewitness testimony in the criminal justice system
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Eyewitness accounts play a huge role in general in trials and verdicts, but may be unreliable many times, with certain views placed on evidence provided by children. Unreliability may arise from not being able to recount the identity of the accused, the actions and speech occurring during that time, the relationship of individuals towards the person in question, and many
During the “West Memphis Three” trials however, no eye witnesses came forth to the judges and said that they saw the boys do it. In determining if the defendants should be counted guilty, eye witnesses play a huge part in it. During the “West Memphis Three” trials, Jason Baldwin
This week’s topic was very interesting to learn about how important eyewitnesses can be when a crime and accidents do occur. In the case that was presented in the 60-minute segment of Ronald Cotton and Jennifer Thompson is exactly how legal system can fail us when it comes to the eyewitnesses’ identification testimony and how a person’s perception and memory can be altered. The aspect of psychology and law research from this week’s course material is most relevant to the topic of perception and memory. The memory has different stages the first is encoding the process of entering perception into memory.
The case highlights the problems associated with flawed eyewitness identification, prosecutorial misconduct, and inadequate legal representation. By addressing these issues through comprehensive reforms, such as improving eyewitness identification procedures, increasing accountability for prosecutors, and providing adequate resources for public defenders, we can work towards a more just and equitable system. The case of Lamar Johnson not only underscores the importance of rectifying individual wrongful convictions but also emphasizes the broader implications for our society and the urgent need for criminal justice
Richard miles was wrongfully convicted of murder and attempted murder in 1995 based on eyewitness testimony, false or misleading forensic evidence and official misconduct. The evidence presented at his trial that is useful for this particular research paper is the eyewitness testimony. Thurman the witness in this case identified Miles as the gunman from a photospread that police had given him. Several other witnesses were shown the same photospread but could not identify Miles. Miles was charged with murder and attempted murder.
It’s mind blowing how the justice sentence can convict somebody solely off an eye witness testimony, especially if the eye-witness isn’t accurate. “Eyewitness misidentification is the greatest contributing factor to wrongful convictions proven by DNA testing, playing a role in more than 70% of convictions overturned through DNA testing nationwide.’’ (Eyewitness Misindentification,2017) Immediately after reporting the crime, the victim was taken to a hospital where a rape kit was administered, and swabs were taking from her body. Days after the rape the victim was also shown two photo lineups of suspects, however she didn’t identify anyone.
This research looks at type of eyewitness identification called CMEI, which claims that certain crimes will instantly stimulate precise stereotypes about a suspects looks. Dependence of this relies on how much the suspect looks or does not look like themselves, and thus the eyewitness may recall the suspect looking like them or not at all (Osborne & Davis, 2014). Much research done previously also supports the idea of CMEI, and therefor will support the current research.
Own-race identifications are those in which people distinguish someone of the same race as their own. Cross-race identifications mean identifying individuals from a race different from our own. A comprehensive study, with 271 real court cases, was conducted in connection with these issues and the results revealed that witnesses pertinently identified 65% of the defendants who were of the same race as them. On the other hand, 45% of the defendants were identified who belonged to a different race than the witnesses. A further scientific study also indicates that own-race identifications are liable to be more precise, by 10 percent to 15 percent, than cross-race identifications (Eysenck and Keane
In 1907, Hugo Mustenberg examined the reliability of eyewitness identification in his book, “On the Witness Stand”. In a study of 65 wrongful convictions completed
She urges jurors to remain skeptical of eyewitness identifications of defendants, and demonstrates how mistakes have been made. This book is built around descriptions of cases in which Loftus has been involved as an expert witness for the defense. The book begins with a brief description
The principle in law that one is innocent until proven guilty has created much discourse. There are those who feel that the moment that one is arrested, there is reasonable belief that they committed the crime. However, there are those who feel that just as the principle states, one is, and should be taken as a victim and the outcome could be either way: guilty or not guilty. In fact, this argument is supported by the many cases of malicious prosecutions and mistaken identities.
Bauckham argues the importance and credibility of the eyewitnesses within the gospel. The eyewitnesses “set the oral traditions” as well as “ remained important figures (19).” The author then amends his original argument to include the reasoning behind only certain eyewitnesses being named. He states, “the gospels are much closer to the way the eyewitnesses told, “ than researchers and historians originally believed. These named individual, or major characters, became members of the early Christian church (20).
Most cases where someone has been exonerated due to DNA retesting had a problem with eyewitnesses misidentifying the suspects. This is a problem that can change someone’s life forever. Misidentification of suspects is a flaw in the criminal justice system that can be addressed through more police training and increased help from the judges. Misidentification by the eyewitnesses and the police officers are current problems in the justice system. Suspects are identified by the eyewitnesses of the crime, but this can lead to some problems with who is identified.
Eyewitness identification is ineffective and unjust. Studies have shown that 40% of eyewitness identifications are wrong (Vrij, 1998). Eyewitness identification has great importance in the legal system. This requires the best eyewitness testimony procedure. This essay examines the three main types of eyewitness line-ups; the showup, the sequential and the simultaneous line-up.
Eye witness identification involves selecting an accused perpetrator from a police line up, sketch or being at the crime scene during the murder time. After selecting a suspect, witnesses are asked to make a formal statement confirming the ID of the suspect (s) or other surrounding details which the eyewitness can testify in court. Eyewitnesses are always required to testify in court but eyewitnesses with psychological disorders, substance dependancy are at a higher chance of identifying the wrong suspect therefore wrongfully assisting convict the perpetrator in the wrong (Hal Arkowitz, Scott O. Lilienfeld, January 1, 2010). Anxiety or stress is always associated with crimes involving traumatic events that have previously taken place.
