Write a research paper on Eyewitnesses Identification and Testimony:
Develop a well-reasoned discussion of the issues associated with Eyewitnesses Identification
and Testimony
Include topics and suggestions or recommendations for appropriate interventions, policy
changes, etc., as well as biblical support for your suggestions and recommendations.
Include an introduction that describes the paper's purpose, the context of the discussion, and
the central issues; address the central issues and use headings to delineate your points.
The paper needs to include the integration of sources to support points and demonstrate
thinking through the complexities of the issues in discussing the central issues and
recommendations.
The final paper should have a substantive conclusion that summarizes the key points.
Title: Eyewitnesses Identification and Testimony: Unraveling Complexities and Crafting
Informed Interventions
Introduction:
Eyewitness identification and testimony constitute critical elements in criminal investigations
and legal proceedings, shaping the outcomes of trials and the dispensation of justice. This
research paper aims to delve into the multifaceted issues associated with eyewitness
identification, offering a comprehensive discussion and proposing interventions informed by
empirical evidence and biblical principles. By exploring the complexities surrounding eyewitness
testimony, this paper seeks to contribute to enhancing investigative practices and legal
processes.
Central Issues:
1. Memory Accuracy and Reconstruction:
Eyewitness memory is susceptible to various factors compromising accuracy, including stress,
suggestion, and post-event information. This section will address the challenges of memory
reconstruction, emphasizing the need for law enforcement training on unbiased interviewing
techniques to mitigate memory distortion.
2. Lineup Procedures and Bias:
The lineup identification process is prone to inherent biases that can lead to
misidentifications. Discussing the shortcomings of traditional lineup procedures, this section
will propose reforms such as double-blind administration and sequential rather than
simultaneous lineups to minimize suggestive influences.
3. Expert Testimony and Judicial Understanding:
Courts often grapple with interpreting eyewitness testimony, and experts play a crucial role in
elucidating its limitations. This section will underscore the necessity of expert testimony on
eyewitness reliability, fostering a better understanding among judges, attorneys, and jurors.
Eyewitness Identification History
Eyewitness identification, an age-old practice rooted in human society's need to address crime,
has evolved significantly over the centuries. In 1883, French criminologist Alphonse Bertillon
introduced the Bertillon system, relying on anthropometric measurements to identify criminal
suspects. This system involved capturing various body measurements using specialized
instruments and creating a comprehensive profile stored on cards. The method, effective for its
time, persisted until the late nineteenth century when more reliable techniques, such as
fingerprint analysis, emerged. The progression in identification methods showcases the
continuous efforts to enhance eyewitness identification within law enforcement agencies.
The significance of eyewitness identification lies at the intersection of human memory and
cognitive psychology. Memory, the repository of recollections, plays a crucial role when
physical evidence is lacking. Understanding the encoding, storage, and retrieval processes
within memory is vital for assessing the efficacy of identification procedures. Unfortunately,
memory is susceptible to errors at each stage, contributing to the challenges associated with
eyewitness testimony. Research indicates that around 71% of convictions based on eyewitness
testimony have been overturned due to DNA testing, highlighting the potential fallibility of
human memory in legal proceedings.
An illustrative case is that of Jennifer Thompson, a North Carolina college student whose
inaccurate eyewitness identification led to the wrongful conviction of an innocent man. Despite
the victim's earnest attempt to provide a detailed description and identification of the suspect,
subsequent DNA analysis revealed the error, emphasizing the need for accuracy in eyewitness
testimony to ensure justice. Thus, the evolution of eyewitness identification methods reflects
an ongoing quest for precision in the criminal justice system.
Eyewitness Testimony and Competency
Eyewitness testimony is one of the oldest forms of evidence in legal proceedings, rivaled only
by confessions. Its impact on jury decisions, determining the fate of individuals between
convictions and acquittals, is profound (Costanzo & Krauss, 2018). The late nineteenth century
witnessed a significant shift in the study of eyewitness testimony and its competency, primarily
driven by the advent of DNA testing. This technological advancement led to the exoneration of
over 100 individuals, with more than 75% of these cases involving mistaken eyewitness
identifications (Wells & Olson, 2003).
Despite the perceived reliability of eyewitness testimony by juries, psychological factors
introduce complexities that challenge its accuracy. Factors such as anxiety, stress,
reconstructive memory, weapon focus, and leading questions can all impact the competence of
eyewitnesses during trial proceedings (McLeod, 2018). Notably, stress and anxiety can enhance
memory recall, particularly under heightened arousal conditions like those induced by weapon
focus (Costanzo & Krauss, 2018). The weapon focus effect, a well-established phenomenon,
underscores the difficulty in recognizing assailants when attention is fixated on the weapon.
Additionally, the interplay between reconstructive memory and leading questions highlights the
potential for the distortion of recollections. Evaluating the accuracy of eyewitness identification
is thus crucial in assessing the reliability of testimony.
Furthermore, assessing witness competency involves considering factors like age and recall. A
study by Bruer and Pozzulo (2014) explored how jurors perceived the credibility of child versus
adult eyewitnesses. The research indicated that mock jurors attributed more integrity and
reliability to adult eyewitnesses, emphasizing the need for nuanced considerations in evaluating
witness competency. While research in this domain has delved into child eyewitnesses, there is
a notable gap regarding individuals aged 60 and older, suggesting a potential avenue for future
exploration. Ultimately, beyond the psychological intricacies, it is imperative for an eyewitness
to comprehend the distinction between truth and falsehood, with the ability to articulate this
understanding if necessary.
Advantages and Disadvantages
The imperative role of eyewitness testimony in criminal trials stems from its ability to serve as a
crucial factor in determining the guilt or innocence of a defendant, particularly in the absence
of concrete evidence. Research reveals that jurors heavily rely on eyewitness accounts,
presenting a dichotomy of advantages and disadvantages within the trial process. On the other
hand, eyewitness testimony is pivotal in investigations, offering a real-life perspective on events
and providing jurors with a systematic description of the crime sequence (Regoli, 2015). This
personal connection enhances the credibility of the testimony, influencing jury decisions and
potentially leading to the defendant's conviction if the witness is perceived as reliable and
confident (Regoli, 2015).
Despite these advantages, there are inherent drawbacks to relying on eyewitness testimony,
introducing unreliability into the legal process. Factors such as the conditions of the crime
scene, misrepresentation, and memory contamination can compromise the accuracy of
eyewitness accounts (Regoli, 2015). The potential for inaccuracies is further underscored by the
limitations of human memory, which can be distorted, especially under stressful conditions.
This distortion poses a significant challenge during trials, as witnesses may unknowingly present
a personalized and potentially incomplete version of events (Costanzo & Krauss, 2018). The
case of Ronald Cotton and Jennifer Thompson serves as a poignant example, highlighting the
fallibility of eyewitness testimony and the need to address credibility issues. Ms. Thompson's
initial uncertainty and subsequent confidence in her identification underscore the challenges in
ensuring witness reliability during legal proceedings, prompting a crucial question regarding
enhancing witness credibility in the pursuit of justice.
Recommendations and Interventions:
1. Training Programs for Law Enforcement:
Implementing comprehensive training programs for law enforcement personnel will enhance
their awareness of the factors influencing eyewitness identification. Drawing on empirical
research, this recommendation emphasizes ongoing education to keep officers abreast of
evolving best practices.
2. Policy Changes in Lineup Procedures:
Advocating for policy changes in lineup procedures, the paper proposes adopting double-blind
administration and sequential lineups as standard practices. This recommendation aligns with
empirical evidence highlighting the effectiveness of these interventions in reducing
misidentifications.
3. Integration of Expert Testimony:
Courts should actively encourage the inclusion of expert testimony on eyewitness reliability to
guide judicial decision-making. This recommendation aims to bridge the gap between scientific
knowledge and legal proceedings, fostering a more nuanced understanding of the limitations
inherent in eyewitness testimony.
Additionally, witnesses to crimes cannot always remember the most critical details of what they saw due
to trauma. The two essential and widely utilized techniques include hypnosis and cognitive interviewing
(Costanzo & Krauss, 2018).
1. Hypnosis: an English physician coined the term after Hypnos, the Greek god of sleep.
This technique has been used during psychotherapy as a technique for improving
athletic performance and as a substitute for light anesthesia during medical procedures
(Costanzo & Krauss, 2018, p. 174).
2. Hypnotic hypermnesia: this is a phenomenon where people recall more information
when they are hypnotized than when they are not. Once under hypnosis, the witness
will be asked to “rewitness” the event as if watching a documentary of the crime
(Costanzo & Krauss, 2018, p.174).
3. Memory hardening: this is when a witness becomes confident in the memory they have
imagined while under hypnosis (Costanzo & Krauss, 2018).
4. Cognitive interview: involves a subtle systematic procedure designed to relax the
witness and mentally reinstate the context surrounding the crime. The goal of this
technique is to improve the witness’s retrieval of accurate information while also
avoiding the increased suggestibility of hypnosis (Costanzo & Krauss, 2018, p.175-176).
As seen in many cases, crucial evidence is oftentimes psychological and not necessarily physical.
In addition to memory refreshers, research suggests six additional ways to improve eyewitness
accuracy and they include the following:
1. Blind Lineup Administrators (Double Blind Lineup): this is when the person who conducts the
live lineup or photo spread should not have knowledge of which or if the suspect is actually
there. This attempt aims to prevent the administrator from providing intentional or unintentional
clues that could sway an eyewitness (Costanzo & Krauss, 2018). This procedure is required in 13
different states across the United States (Eyewitness Identification Reform, n.d.).
2. Bias-Reducing Instructions: this is when the administrator tells the eyewitness(s)
that the actual perpetrator may not be in the lineup/photo spread. This type of instruction
removes the presumption that the witness must choose someone from the group available
and forces the witness to use their memory (Costanzo & Krauss, 2018).
3. Unbiased Lineups: the lineup or photo spread should include fillers that all resemble each
other and that correlate with the witness’s description. No one in the lineup should stand
out that would suggest they are the suspect (Eyewitness Identification Reform, n.d.).
4. Confidence Ratings: this is when the investigator obtains a clear statement from the
witness on how confident they are about the person they identified as the suspect. This
can be done on a scale, or by percentage but ultimately this must be taken immediately
after their statement and before feedback is given (Costanzo & Krauss, 2018).
5. Video Recording: documentation of the lineup or photo spread that is electronically
recorded. This can be visual, audio, or transcribed (Eyewitness Identification Reform,
n.d.). This is done to show the reliability and credibility of the eyewitness during trial.
6. Expert Testimony: this is when an expert of eyewitness identification testifies to the court
on their opinion of the eyewitnesses’ credibility (Costanzo & Krauss, 2018). This
testimony is admitted often during trial, but many judges are reluctant for fear they may
persuade the jury.
Each suggestion that has been discussed does not come without scrutiny. While there will never
be the perfect witness, there are steps to take to ensure that eyewitnesses are thoroughly vetted
and credible. Since eyewitness testimony does hold the most weight during trial, it is important
to make sure the eyewitness is reliable to ensure there are no innocent people sent to prison.
Throughout the years, psychological research has evolved in order to develop appropriate
measures in assisting the advancement of accurate eyewitness testimony. From that research,
came the development and recommendations of previously mentioned methods.
Biblical Support for eyewitness testimony:
Drawing upon biblical principles of justice, truth, and fairness, the paper will weave in scriptural
references to underscore the importance of ensuring that the legal system aligns with ethical
considerations. Emphasizing concepts of forgiveness, redemption, and discernment, the biblical
perspective will lend moral weight to the proposed interventions.
It is my strong belief that God’s will does no harm, meaning that if we follow him we are
following his guidance and therefore should do no harm. Unfortunately, not everyone has this
belief and does hurt others, whether it is intentional or not. In the realm of forensic psychology
and more specifically eyewitness testimony, I believe it is important to trust God and to follow
his word. With that being said, I think it is important to note if we try to convict the innocent,
God will punish us but if we do the Lord’s work we will be rewarded. In Psalm 37:27-29 (ESV),
“Turn from evil and do good; then you will dwell in the land forever. For the LORD loves the just
and will not forsake his faithful ones. Wrongdoers will be completely destroyed; the offspring of
the wicked will perish. The righteous will inherit the land and dwell in it forever”. It is important
to note that throughout the Bible, we are constantly reminded not to take revenge, but to leave
everything up to God. In Proverbs 21:15 (ESV) “When justice is done, it brings joy to the
righteous but terror to evildoers”. I believe this specific quote is a perfect example of how
eyewitness testimony and a Christian Worldview work in cohesion.
Conclusion:
In conclusion, this research paper navigates the intricate landscape of eyewitness identification
and testimony, addressing key issues and proposing interventions grounded in empirical
evidence and biblical principles. By offering a balanced perspective, this work aspires to
contribute to refining investigative and legal practices, fostering a justice system that aligns
with both empirical insights and moral imperatives.
References
(Costanzo & Krauss, 2021)
Costanzo, M., & Krauss, D. A. (2021). Forensic and legal psychology: Psychological science
applied to law (4th ed.). New York, NY: Worth Publishers.
(Innocence Project, 2019)
Eyewitness Misidentification. Innocence Project. (2023).
https://innocenceproject.org/eyewitness-misidentification/
(McLeod, 2018)
Mcleod, S. (2023). Eyewitness Testimony in Psychology. Simply Psychology.
https://www.simplypsychology.org/eyewitness-testimony.html
(Bruer & Pozzulo, 2012)
Bruer, K. & Pozzulo, J. D. (2012). Influence of Eyewitness Age and Recall Error on Mock Juror
Decision‐making. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 19(2), 332–348.
https://doi.org/10.1111/lcrp.12001
(Paterson et al., 2017)
Paterson, H. M., Luppino, D., Calderwood, C., MacDougall, H. G., Taubert, J., &; Kemp, R. I.
(2017). Can Training Improve Eyewitness Identification? The Effect of Internal Feature Focus
on Memory for Faces. Psychology, Crime &; Law, 23(10), 927–945.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316x.2017.1346099
(Connect, 2015)
Connect U.S. (2015). Eight Predominant Pros and Cons of Eyewitness Testimony. ConnectU.S. -
Nonprofit. https://connectusfund.org/8-predominant-pros-and-cons-of-eyewitness-testimony
(Soeter, & Kindt, 2013)
Soeter, M., & Kindt, M. (2013). High Trait Anxiety: A Challenge for Disrupting Fear Memory
Reconsolidation. PLoS ONE, 8(11). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0075239
(Wells & Olson, 2003)
Wells, G. L., & Olson, E. A. (2003). Eyewitness Testimony. Annual Review of Psychology,
54(1), 277–295. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145028
(McNabb et al., 2017)
McNabb, N., Farrell, B. R., & Brown, C. (2017). Voluntary Adoption of Evidence-Based
Practices by Local Law Enforcement: Eyewitness Identification Procedures in Arkansas, Iowa,
Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska. Social Science Research Network (SSRN).
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2960268
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
