Eyewitness Should Not Be Used To Support Forensic Evidence

The debate over whether to trust eyewitness accounts or doers sic analyst in crime scenes is a long standing one. Although there have been great advances in technology which allow for greater analysts of crime scenes, in court, the side with primary sources, or people that witnessed the crime being committed, are more likely to gain the approval of the jury. This is because “seeing is believing”, so if there is a person that “saw” the crime, jury are more likely to be convinced than if there is just lab results and crime scene analyst. The reliance on eyewitness accounts over forensic evidence, results in the wrongful conviction of over 70% of the murder and rape suspects in America. The testimonies of eyewitnesses should not be used as

This raises the question, to what extent can eyewitness testimonies work with science to study history? For example, the Ferguson shooting, some eyewitness accounts helped to support forensic analysis, while others were completely nonsensical and clearly biased. While some witness claimed that Michael Brown was completely innocent and defenseless, evidence revealed that he had actually just robbed a store, confronted the officer, Darren Wilson, and then tried to reach for the officer's gun; the officer then acted out of self defense and the situation prevented him from using another means of defense. The accounts that were unbiased and actually true helped the investigators gains a more complete understanding of the scene. If there are only eye-witness accounts and no forensic evidence to analysis because the criminal has committed the “perfect crime” or if there very few eye witnesses, then there are several steps that investigators can take in order to ensure the eyewitness accounts are as accurate as possible. For one, when conducting a lineup of possible suspects, it should be a double blind suspect lineup meaning that neither the person in the room conducting the investigation nor the person identifying the suspect should know who the possible suspect is. This prevents the person conducting it from unintentionally giving hints which would affects the person's decisions. Also, when conducting a lineup it should be recorded and close attention should be paid to how long it took for the person to decide as a longer time indicates uncertainty, but also gives time for the brain to trick the person into becoming confident in their choice, especially if they receive confirmation from people around them. Also, many false eye witnesses, will give signs of nervousness, and after