Eyewitness identification Essays

researchers have long warned that eyewitness identification evidence is less reliable than people seem to believe. Corroborating the concerns of psychologists, since the advent of forensic DNA testing in the 1990s, 258 people convicted by juries in the United States have been freed based on exculpatory DNA tests, and 200 of these were cases of mistaken eyewitness identification (Innocence Project, 2010). Examination of the reasons for these mistaken identifications has provided rich avenues of investigation

The five factors associated with wrongful convictions are as follows, adversarial process, eyewitness identification, forensic evidence misconduct/ error, interrogation and confessions, and informants/ jailhouse snitches. The adversarial process relies on the skills and resources of the defense and prosecution. Eyewitness identification includes evidence from a witness who has seen the event and can pick out a perpetrator. Forensic evidence misconduct/ error involves forensic evidence that has been

The first thing we need to discuss is what the ideal eyewitness should be and how they are in the judicial system. The eyewitness’ testimony is taken as the fundamental criterion, and the person should be able to perceive all that transpired during the event, accurately encode these perceptions, exhaustively store the encoded perceptions in memory, and accurately retrieve the encodings from memory in the form of later reports (Penrod, 121). I personally feel that eyewitnesses should be honest no

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

sentenced to the gas chamber an outcome that rested largely on the testimony of five eyewitnesses. One third of these overturned cases rested on the testimony of two or more mistaken eyewitnesses. How could so many eyewitnesses be wrong? Eyewitness identification typically involves selecting the alleged perpetrator from a police lineup, but it can also be based on police sketches and other methods. Soon after selecting a suspect, eyewitnesses are asked to make a formal statement confirming the ID

Eyewitness identifications can ruin the lives of innocent people and cause them to live their life behind bars for a crime they didn’t commit. Eye witness testimonies can be the deciding factor for a criminal trial, but the the reliability of the eye witness testimonies is not always as accurate as we assume. Although eyewitness identifications can be very beneficial in solving a case, there have been countless instances where the eyewitness identification has been incorrect due to multiple psychological

Over time, the topic of whether eyewitness testimony should be used in the courtroom or not has been debated back and forth, with both sides making a valid argument. Over the years, thousands of people are accused of committing a crime that they were not involved in. As published by The Week, the article “Is Eyewitness Testimony too Unreliable to Trust?” states, “Every year, more than 75,000 eyewitnesses identify criminal suspects in the U.S., and studies suggest that as many as a third of them are

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. This essay draws conclusions as to which method the legal system should implement. The showup is a suggestive procedure.

Blurred Vision: The Fallibility of Eyewitness Testimony On an early, foggy morning in April 1981, a Dallas, Texas woman awoke to find a man with a knife on top of her in her bed. After trying to get the knife from her attacker, she was cut on her hand, neck, and back, and then raped before the attacker fled the scene. According to the Innocence Project, in the report “Reevaluating Lineups: Why Witnesses Make Mistakes and How to Reduce the Chance of a Misidentification,” the victim originally told

can cause in legal cases as it can result in false accusations and wrongful convictions. As a psychologist Loftus believes that false eyewitness memories are the major cause of wrongful convictions and that these “dubious” memories from witnesses can lead to innocent lives to be suffered. Loftus is informing readers there is a heavy reliance on memory and eyewitness testimony in the court system and it’s not valid methods of evidence. She wants readers to understand that it is unethical for jurors

were undeniably divided. To explain this, it is important to understand not only the fragile nature of eyewitness testimony-particularly during moments of highly elevated stress, but also problems with eyewitness descriptions of gunfire in particular, as well as difficulties raised by specific conditions at the scene of the crime. The authoritative textbook, Firearms Investigation Identification and Evidence, states, "It is extremely difficult to tell the direction [from which a shot was fired] by

Eye-witnesses can become the key evidence to resolving a crime, but investigators have to be careful not to damage the integrity of the witness. One mistake can be enough to raise suspicion to the integrity of the witness statement, and have it all thrown out in court. Witnesses are very susceptible to suggestions, and investigators have to be careful not to give the witness any hints or ideas that will damage the statement. In order to avoide such mistakes, investigators use two methods of questioning

and we can create false memories. In psychology, there are numerous studies that focus on memory and on how accurately someone is able to recall a crime and the perpetrator. For instance, Elizabeth Loftus (1974) comes in mind when we talk about eyewitness testimonies and how the leading questions influence what we remember about an incident. Sometimes misinformation that is given to us can alter what we recall from the incident. In Loftus experiment she was able to predict that misinformation effect

It states “scientific research indicates that identification procedures such as line-ups and photo arrays produce more reliable evidence when the individual line-up members or photographs are shown to witnesses sequentially – one at a time – rather than simultaneously.” By giving the reader such a valuable

remembering and communicating. This includes memory, which is an important cognitive process specially when looking into eyewitness testimony. Eyewitness testimony is a legal expression signified to an incident people have witnessed such as, it might be an accident on the road people have seen and need to give their account. Juries in a court case pay extremely close attention to the eyewitness testimony and typically find it a reliable source of information however; it can be affected by psychological influences

The Rand Corporation conducted a study of criminal-investigation processes, reporting that the principal determinant of whether a case was solved was the completeness and accuracy of eyewitness accounts (Ronald Fisher, 1985). People learn things differently, so in a direct correlation, they tend to remember things differently as well. When it comes to witnessing an event, a crime being committed, or merely hearing someone say something; pieces of memory are going to be built that must be recalled

Eyewitness testimony is sent to sensory memory whereby it involves retaining information and details. In order to recall specific features of a person, the victim must be very observant and concentrate during the event and after when trying to remember these details. This can be transferred to short-term memory, which has the capacity of remembering 7±2 memories, and if subjects rehearse what they have seen then the memory can be stored in long-term memory. Memories can then be retrieved when needed

Eyewitness Identification is the most valuable and powerful tool a prosecutor can offer to the jury. there is nothing more captivating than a witness testifying and pointing at the accused and stating, " There, that's the criminal sitting right there." The downfall to any eyewitness is the fact that their testimony is so convincing. In fact, their statement is so manipulative that it can seize the hearts and minds of the jurors instantly. This will surely guarantee a guilty conviction. However, it

Eyewitness Identification & Wrongful Conviction Introduction According to Matlin (2013), eyewitness testimonies can be inaccurate for a few reasons including the inability to pick a person from another ethnic group, issues with memory schemas, and being influenced by someone else 's recall of the facts. Therefore, eyewitness testimony is not always the most reliable when faced with trying to place a suspect at the scene of a crime. Wrongful convictions can happen when an eyewitness recalls memories

Introduction In a criminal investigation, the most important thing will be material evidence collected against the accused to prove the guilty. But now, not only real evidence plays role ,even digital evidence plays a role in criminal investigation because of technology world we are living, where many days to day activities are done in digital and where it can provide a link between the crime and victim for example if the accused is the last person who the victim talked then the investigator will