Home » Government Articles » To Err is Human -- US Supreme Court Re-Examines Eyewitness Identification
To Err is Human -- US Supreme Court Re-Examines Eyewitness Identification
In light of overwhelming evidence casting doubt on the reliability of eyewitness testimony, the US Supreme Court will soon be re-evaluating how eyewitness testimony is used in trials.
September 21, 2011 /Government PR News/ -- Imagine having your life taken away because someone said you were someplace that you were not and that you did something you did not. Eyewitness identification remains one of the most powerful tools that prosecutors use when trying someone for a crime. Each year, over 75,000 convictions are based on this form of evidence. How would you feel if you knew that many of those identifications were wrong?
The truth is, in addition to being the most potent form of evidence, witness identification is also the greatest source of wrongful convictions. According to the Innocence Project, of the 273 convictions that were overturned because of DNA evidence, 75 percent of them contained incorrect witness identifications.
Studies Reveal Human Errors
Research over the past 30 years has revealed that human memory is not steady and can be altered and tainted, especially when the subject is under stress. But that is not the common conception. Juries tend to believe witnesses.
The eyewitnesses who identify these defendants aren't bad people. They don't believe they are pointing out the wrong person. They legitimately believe they are pointing out the correct suspect. Unfortunately, they are frequently wrong. The witnesses are not evil, they're simply human.
To make matters, worse, juries find witness testimony very compelling. Most of the time, jurors have difficulty believing the witness could be mistaken. Now, two court cases are re-examining eyewitness identification with one already calling for new safeguards to protect against the possibility of misidentification.
New Guidelines for Use of Eyewitness Identification
A recent New Jersey Supreme Court decision initiated the charge to change the way jurors are presented with eyewitness testimony. In late August, Chief Justice Stuart Rabner penned a 134 page opinion laying down new rules for use of eyewitness evidence.
The new guidelines will allow a defendant to introduce evidence that a witness's identification was influenced. Once this has been done, a special hearing must be held to examine whether factors such as lighting, proximity to the suspect, display of a weapon, police behavior, the length of the time since the crime, or stress on the witness may have distorted or contaminated the witness's memory.
The bar for suppressing such evidence will still remain high; however the judge who does admit it must administer a special instruction to the jury on the sorts of influences that could impact the reliability of the witness's identification.
In November, the United States Supreme Court will re-examine the use of eyewitness evidence, specifically looking at when judicial inspection is needed. Will judges be required to limit review only to those situations where police have used suggestive methods to improperly influence the witness or will they have the freedom to inspect any problematic identification?
Proposed Improvements to Eyewitness Identification Procedures
It is the opinion of many legal scholars that our current two-step analysis to test the reliability of witness testimony is insufficient to properly weed out prejudicial and unreliable testimony.
Legal experts across the country are pushing for changes in the way identification is handled. Some proposed techniques for eyewitness identification are as follows:
- "Double Blind" -- This method would prevent the police officer who is administering the line-up or photographic identification from knowing the identity of the true suspect.
- Sequential Photo Lineup - This method employs showing photographs to a witness one by one to avoid the witness's tendency to pick one suspect amongst an array, even if he or she bears only a modest resemblance to the true perpetrator.
- Electronic Recording - Nobody wants to be wrong, least of all a witness. Once a witness identifies a suspect, they are likely to become more confident of their choice as time passes. Electronic recordings can record a witness's initial doubts.
Other scholars are demanding corroborating evidence accompany witness identification to reduce the chance of mistaken identification. Given that corroboration is required in many other areas of criminal law, it is reasonable, given the risks of a witness's faulty memory, to require corroboration of eyewitness identification.
If you or a family member have been picked up based on someone's mistaken belief, the importance of hiring an experienced Manhattan attorney at the moment of arrest cannot be underestimated. Before you speak to anyone, you should call a New York City criminal defense lawyer to ensure that your rights are protected.
Article provided by Goldberg & Allen, LLP
Visit us at www.goldbergandallen.com
---
Press release service and press release distribution provided by http://www.24-7pressrelease.com |
|
|
Press Release Contact Information:
Findlaw PR
|
|
|
|
|
| GOVERNMENT ARCHIVE SEARCH |
|
|
| |
|
|
Advertise With Us |
About Us |
Contact Us