Eyewitness Misidentification Essay Examples

Innocence Project Report on the Case of Curtis Jasper Moore Tommy Warrick Drake University According to the Innocence Project one of the greatest causes of wrongful conviction is due to eyewitness misidentification. They state that 72% of cases where defendants have been exonerated eyewitness misidentification played a role. Even though eyewitness testimony has been proven inaccurate numerous times, it can still be the decisive evidence in a court of law. This is because the law views the human memory as a camcorder which can record and repeat whatever it sees.

As stated earlier, the first point of identification is the police or any professional who may so be called to identify any vulnerabilities. After identification is done, information is sent to the next level for it to be captured and acted upon. After a decision is taken by the higher agencies like the crown prosecution service and witness protection and the court, the necessary measures are then applied with strong collaboration between or among the relevant agencies. Identification is thus a process and as was shown in R-v-Green Youth Court herein, even the most straight forwards decision like may be an issue and measures and assistance are not merely granted on the basis of

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 piece of information from a credible source, it engages Loftus’ readers into going more in depth with the research into finding out more about the recommendations provided. This is an attempt by the author to encourage those who are familiar with the justice system particularly in Canada and the United States who both mainly use the adversarial court system to rise up and take part into bringing in a new method that will protect the defendant while in court from being falsely accused of a crime they did not

Ever since Sherlock Holmes, police and prosecutors have solved cases by confessions or eyewitness accounts, but recently they started solving cases from the forensic evidence found. In the passage, “Forensic Science: Evidence, Clues, and Investigation” by Andrea Campbell, forensic evidence is explained to be the most important evidence to present at trial. Forensic evidence are things like “fingerprints, body fluids, and bullets” (paragraph one). Forensic evidence is the evidence that’s found at the scene of a crime. In paragraph two, it says, “after police have secured the site, criminal investigators collect physical evidence.

In previous court cases, such as Manson v. Braithwaite, the Supreme Court deemed that if identification can be determined to be “reliable”, such evidence could be used. The study continues further to document a specific case of mistaken identity. In 1984, Ronald Cotton was sentenced to prison for the rape of 22-year-old, Jennifer Thompson. While many were pleased that a rapist was off the street, the police has gotten the wrong man.

Effects of post identification feedback on eyewitness identification and nonidentification confidence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 334–346. Lindsay, R., & Wells, G. (1985). Improving eyewitness identification from lineups: Simultaneous versus sequential lineup presentations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 70, 556–564.

Historically, eyewitness accounts of a crime were a vital piece of evidence used in the prosecution of criminal offenses. Lineups were a method used where typically a group of individuals not involved in the crime along with the suspect whom is believed to be directly related to the crime are grouped together for the witness to review in the hopes to identify the suspect. This is accomplished in two ways, the first is simultaneous where several photos are grouped together at the same time (typically six) for the witness to review. This specific procedure raises the issue of certainty from the witness.

“The Right Body Camera Policy” further expands on this idea, stating, “In general, watching body camera footage should reduce dishonesty in incident reports. When the footage reveals unambiguous misconduct, officers would be foolish to file dishonest reports. And when the footage reveals proper behavior, officers would feel emboldened to present their actions honestly and confidently.” Officers that file false reports would face harsh consequences if the truth ever came out. Therefore, with the application of body cameras, officers would be encouraged to be accurate in their reports, as the cameras would show any inconsistencies between the officer’s story and the real story.

She was shown photographs which included Hay’s photograph (taken 18 months earlier) and she selected him as an 80% likeness. Three weeks later, she was shown a sequence of photographs which included one of Hay (taken hours after the murder) and she did not select any photograph. At a second identification process, Maillard didn’t select any photographs and, when shown the photograph of Hay she stated that he looked very different and that in his arrest photo, he did not have a gaunt face like that of the second gunman at the club. An article by Pezdek, Abed & Cormia (2021) explores the relationship between stress and eyewitness memory accuracy, as well as the relationship between stress and eyewitness confidence. They found that stress impairs the accuracy of eyewitness memory but not the confidence-accuracy relationship.

From this one can conclude that people are trying to stop false witnesses. This is happening by sending them to jail. Three false witnesses in a murder case received double-digit prison sentences (O’Grady). This shows that people are taking steps to the right path of justice. A more specific example can be Austasia Kapteyn.

Part One is very informational and contains the bulk of the book’s research. The information was presented in a thesis format; Loftus stated a claim and then supported her ideas with research and quotations from experts in the field of law and memory. Part One is helpful for psychologists, attorneys, and interested law people. The major principles concerning the errors in eyewitness testimony are supported by research and are accepted by psychologists (Kassin, Ellsworth, & Smith, 1989). Part One will contribute to the future of psychology by showcasing how the memory works and the different ways it is manipulated and changed: this will allow jurors and lawyers to become more wary when dealing with a traumatized

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.

From interactions on the street to testifying in open court, an officer’s word is everything. Once that credibility is gone it is almost impossible for that officer to continue in a law enforcement capacity. Body cameras have emerged as a potential solution to the evolving discussion around police trust and legitimacy issues. One benefit of having a body camera is that if a critical incident, officer involved shooting, or accusation of brutality arises, the camera will provide footage from the officer’s point of view that

Furthermore, there can be several factors at play when a wrongful conviction occurs and each case is unique. Three of the more common and detrimental factors that will be explored in this essay are eyewitness error, the use of jailhouse informants and professional and institutional misconduct. Firstly, eyewitness testimony can be a major contributor to a conviction and is an important factor in wrongful conviction (Campbell & Denov, 2016, p. 227). Witness recall and, frankly, the human emory are not as reliable as previously thought. In fact there has been much research showing the problems with eyewitness testimony such as suggestive police interviewing, unconscious transference, and malleability of confidence (Campbell & Denov, 2016, p.227).

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.