This research paper will be used to acknowledge the trending factor in our criminal justice system of wrongful convictions. Wrongful convictions socially can be defined as convicting the innocent and punishing the not guilty. In other words, wrongful convictions play a huge part of our flawed Criminal Justice system. In order to fix and come up with a solution, we will have to first come to basis of first understanding the issue, then using this information to gain ideas to which we can apply to access better results to the issue of wrongful convictions. Once we come up with a reasonable solution to this problem then we can conclude that the data will show an eminent decrease in this trend. The causes of wrongful convictions include the “Snitch” Testimony, Eyewitness misidentification, false confessions and much more that I will add during the readings of this paper. Literature Review Causes Eyewitness Misidentification Contributing to most cases of wrongful convictions is Eyewitness misidentification. Eyewitness misidentification not only is the greatest cause of wrongful conviction but it also single handedly creates a huge 75% of convictions to be overturned due to DNA testing. When dealing with eyewitness testimony there is no guarantee that the criminal to which the victim is describing can be narrowed down to a single person. That is where facial and body features such as height, weight, and other personal reference can help victims remember a clearer image. Thus, when the suspects are in the police lineup the victim will either see the criminal, or not. Sadly, the false testimony, or “snitch” testimony come to play. Yes, victims could be telling the truth to whether the criminal is actually in... ... middle of paper ... ... financial losses of our country and yet there are barely any arrests from these big business companies and other crisis’s such as identity thief. Conclusion Wrongful convictions are a growing trend amongst the Criminal Justice system. Justice can never be served completely to the extent of the victim but starting off with a proper conviction is a start. Eyewitness misidentification is one of the main causes for wrongful convictions. We should focus more on identifying victims through reforms and procedures that could help narrow down the perpetrator. Without these solutions there are bound to be consequences. These consequences are posttraumatic stress and the inability to cope to normal society. We need to follow these steps in order to lower the rate of wrongful conviction. I truly believe wrongful conviction can be prevented.
The use of eyewitnesses has been a constant in of criminal justice system since its very beginning. Unfortunately, people do not make the best witnesses to a crime. The person may not have seen the actual criminal, but someone that looks similar to them. The witness may lie about what he or she may have scene. Also the witness can be influenced by the police as to who or what they saw at the time of the crime. The witness or victims memory of the person may have faded so that they don’t remember exactly what had seen, which could be disastrous for the accused.
This paper will consider eye witness testimony and its place in convicting accused criminals. Psychology online (2013) defines “eye witness testimony” as a statement from a person who has witnessed a crime, and is capable of communicating what they have seen, to a court of law under oath. Eye witness testimonies are used to convict accused criminals due to the first hand nature of the eye witnesses’ observations. There are however many faults within this system of identification. Characteristics of the crime is the first issue that will be discussed in this paper, and the flaws that have been identified. The second issue to be discussed will be the stress impact and the inability to correctly identify the accused in a violent or weapon focused crime. The third issue to be discussed is inter racial identification and the problems faced when this becomes a prominent issue. The fourth issue will be time lapse, meaning, the time between the crime and the eye witness making a statement and how the memory can be misconstrued in this time frame. To follow this will be the issue of how much trust jurors-who have no legal training-put on to the eye witness testimony, which may be faltered. This paper references the works of primarily Wells and Olsen (2003) and Rodin (1987) and Schmechel et al. (2006) it will be argued that eye witness testimony is not always accurate, due to many features; inter racial identification, characteristics of the crime, response latency, and line up procedures therefore this paper will confirm that eyewitness testimonies should not be utilised in the criminal ju...
In the adversarial justice system, when the offender admits to the criminal act, there is no further controversy and the case promptly proceeds to sentencing. Physical evidence and victim or witness statements may often be overlooked and not considered. The confession is considered unequivocal evidence of guilt and a conviction is ensured. Indeed, the interrogation process’ sole purpose is to obtain a confession. Zimbardo (1967) estimated that “of those criminal cases that are solved, more than 80% are solved by a confession.” (Conti, 1999) Without the confession, convictions may be reduced significantly. So why does a person falsely confess to a crime if the likelihood of a conviction is eminent? A false confession to any crime is self-destructive and counterintuitive.
Another factor associated with wrongful convictions is eyewitness misidentification. The Innocence Project identifies eyewitness misidentification as the single most important factor leading to wrongful convictions. Eyewitness misidentification is often an error due to witnesses being under high pressure, witnesses focusing on the weapon more than the offender, and police procedures when receiving an identification statement from a victim. A study
Eyewitness identification and testimony play a huge role in the criminal justice system today, but skepticism of eyewitnesses has been growing. Forensic evidence has been used to undermine the reliability of eyewitness testimony, and the leading cause of false convictions in the United States is due to misidentifications by eyewitnesses. The role of eyewitness testimony in producing false confessions and the factors that contribute to the unreliability of these eyewitness testimonies are sending innocent people to prison, and changes are being made in order to reform these faulty identification procedures.
A defendant’s guilt is often determined in a single moment of fleeting emotion. A pointed finger, accompanied by the solidifying eyewitness statement “He’s the one!” is enough for a jury to make its final decision in a court case. Although it is understandable, when faced opposite of the individual creating the accusation, to place one’s belief in the accusation made, the credibility of the eyewitness’s account of events are rarely taken into consideration. Psychologists have taken part in research that recognizes the unreliable nature of eyewitness statements used to determine guilt because of the instability of long term memory acquisition and because of this, eyewitness accounts of situations should not be used before a jury in court.
In conclusion, the CJS should take more notice of the problems that have been identified within eyewitness testimonies, however it would be difficult to implement another method of gathering information from the scene of a crime that would not yield similar problems. EWT can be contaminated, lost, destroyed or otherwise influenced to produce incorrect results, the best way to improve how the Criminal Justice System deals with eyewitness testimonies would be to ensure that they don’t use leading questions when interviewing or questioning witnesses, don’t solely rely on vulnerable peoples testimonies as these are not as reliable and just be aware of the general issues surrounding EWT and take this into consideration when using eyewitness testimonies as evidence .
Eyewitnesses play a dynamic and important role when trying to expose the truth about a crime. “Even the most honest and objective people can make mistakes in recalling and interpreting a witnessed event”. (Reno, 1999) Every evidence a witness proves can be critical in sentencing suspected criminals. But yet there is one way to obtain the most accurate and reliable evidence that investigators follow and is to keep an eye on procedures in their investigations. The Technical Working Group for
Eyewitnesses are such a powerful tool because, “...eyewitnesses are too persuasive in the sense that their confidence and other qualities of their testimony are greatly exaggerated.”(Wells/Bradfield 1998). This can be a useful tool in any courtroom, heavily turning a case in one's favor. However, this can also be (and often is) a dangerous aspect to using eyewitnesses in a trial, because a witness who strongly believes in their identification of a suspect can solidify a verdict, even if the suspect is innocent. It becomes monumentally more dangerous when you find that the eyewitness’ confidence can be swayed into a desired direction. Researchers Wells and Bradfield had to take into account the different variables that factor into the confidence levels of eyewitnesses spanning the gap between the identification of a suspect and their testimony. To help narrow this window, the researchers employed what they called a “postidentification feedback paradigm”, which through only administering feedback after the viewing and identification processes allows the researchers to assume that any variation of recollection stemming from the use of feedback manipulation would be forms of false recall about the witnessing process (Wells/Bradfield
It is my belief that eyewitness testimony should be inadmissible in a court of law due to the many dilemmas’ in our memory and our inability to recollect certain details from specific memories without them being distorted. Studies have been conducted showing the extent to which eyewitness testimony can be inaccurate, one being the Wells and Bradfield (1998). This study instructed participants to watch a video of a robbery (8 seconds long), after they were given slides of possible robbers. All participants identified a robber, although the actual person in the video was not present in the slide. It is the shown that errors of mistaken identity and constructive nature of memory, such as this that make eyewitness testimony an unreliable source to be used in a court of law.
Forensic psychology covers many different topics such as detecting deception, interrogations, criminal profiling, and eyewitness testimony to name a few. Eyewitness testimony is a key element in regards to the criminal justice system and crime evidence. It uses the recall of memories but these memories can be corrupt along the way which impacts eyewitness testimony. There are many different research findings in this area of study and these different studies have been conducted to understand how accurate eyewitness testimony and identification can be. In a real world example a man is wrongfully convicted because of two eyewitness testimonies stating he was the culprit.
Eyewitness account testimony remains an important part of the justice system. Individuals who are victims of crime or witness a crime are asked what they say and who was the perpetrator of a crime. However, eyewitness testimony has been shown to be false in many cases. In the case shown, a man was falsely imprisoned for two rapes. His one victim memorized the perpetrator during the rape. She stated that she made a conscious effort to remember anything possible about the man who raped her. She wanted to help the police in catching the man. However, the wrong man was put in jail. The man repeatedly denied his guilt. After the OJ Simpson trial, the convicted person asked for a DNA test. The DNA test exonerated him. He was released from prison after eleven years.
The accuracy of eye-witness testimony is a prevalent yet controversial topic within the criminology field. Over the last 20 years, scientific psychology and research pertaining to eye-witness testimony has made great advances in discovering the factors that affect witness identification of suspects. It is considered that due to the fact that eye-witness testimony is often believed to be inaccurate, through applying certain recommendations, its accuracy can be enhanced, thus allowing it to become remarkably more reliable and continue to be admissible evidence within the criminal justice system. This essay will examine and define eye-witness testimony and its accuracy through: firstly, how human memory and perception are negatively impacted on
Unfortunately, despite the fact that eyewitness testimony is given much importance and plays such a large role, eyewitness identification is often inaccurate. Many innocent people have been convicted and imprisoned because of inaccurate eyewitness testimony (Aronson et al, 2010; Goldstein, 2008). Of all the cases in which a convict was later exonerated due to DNA evidence, around
Andre Hatchett was convicted of murder in 1991. However, there was no DNA evidence linking him to the crime. Only a single eyewitness said that he saw Hatchett attack the women in a park. During the trial, the eyewitness had testified and Andre Hatchett was charged with murder and was put in jail for 25 years. But 25 years into his sentence it was found that he was wrongly convicted and the eyewitness had testified for having a burglary charge dropped against him. An eyewitness was responsible for putting Hatchet in jail. Eyewitnesses are able to put a suspect behind bars for simple misdemeanors to serious felonies. Eyewitnesses can be incorrect which can lead to the wrong people being put in jail. Eyewitness’s memories