Psychological law assignment

PSYCHOLOGICAL LAW 1

PSYCHOLOGICAL LAW 4

Psychological Law Assignment

Henry Mack

Grantham University

Psychological Law Assignment

The aim of the judicial system is to provide justice for the victims and restore their initial status before being effected. One key method used to make a judgment is eyewitness which are based on the information that the third party present when an injustice happened. However, mistaken identification based on eye witness can cause wrongful convictions and courts should use other methods such as expert witness. The stages that the police use when in investigating the case using eyewitness also determines whether a just judgment will be made or not. This essay evaluates how an eyewitness can lead to a wrong conviction and the possible means which can be used to improve its efficiency.

Eye witness aids in giving data and realities about a case. Generally, this data is non-technical like those from a specialist which are comprehensive with more subtleties around assessments and increasingly detailed. Thus, it causes the judge to settle on a choice on given cases. Without master data, the judge may settle on the wrong choice putting together just with respect to the legal advisor's contention which can be one-sided (Brodsky and Gutheil, 2012). Hence, in the events that the judges are to settle on a choice basing on contentions, subsequently a specialized master is required to expound on the realities about the case. Additionally, master declaration brings to the administration the quiet proof. This quiet proof may be viewed as negligible and subsequently confined, however meaningless that translated and clarified, at that point, it gets important and might be reasonable.

An eye witness makes at least one focus that seem to be extraordinary. For instance, if a bullet is discharged, and there is a need to state which firearm discharged the shot plainly, at that point an eye will be required to decipher and break down the to figure out which weapon was utilized (Stevens, 2013). In this way expert testimony is important to show the untrained listeners that one point is off base and the other is right. Eye witness requires an observer to give proof so the shortcoming or its quality can be resolved to maintain a strategic distance from ignorant observers giving bogus verifications (Stevens, 2013). This activity is finished with the use of the judicious and sensible ideas and to decide if the declaration given is right or bogus. This makes the oblivious with respect to the subject proficient and in this way maintains a strategic distance from unsuccessful labor of equity.

One of the necessities of an expert judgment is thinking which justifies the conclusion of a given testimony. Likewise, master declaration decides the counter-intuitive premise of bogus proof may be uncovered (Stevens, 2013). Eye Witness declaration encourages the judge to make a positive decision by citing old principles and basing its contentions with the old assessments. However, there are things that the judge or an offended party or even the observer can't see which requires the aid of means like an expert witness to make a sound and just conclusion about the case.

From the case, some methods can be used to improve the efficiency in deciding the case involving Mr. Cotton. For instance, the police ought to have used the “double-blind” method to prevent the administrator from offering intentional cues which can adversely impact the judgment. Confidence statements can also be used to articulate the level of confidence that an eyewitness has concerning a given case. However, despite these strategies which can be used to lower inaccuracies associated with eyewitness, other methods such as expert witness should be integrated with it.

References

Brodsky, S. L., & Gutheil, T. G. (2012). Boundaries between expert witness roles and trial consultation. The expert expert witness: More maxims and guidelines for testifying in court (2nd ed.), pp. 18-21.

Stevens, G. P. (2013). The role of expert evidence in support of the defense of criminal incapacity.