photo: ~BostonBill~
Since DNA testing was first introduced in the 1990s it has been used to free wrongly convicted prisoners, including some that were sentenced to death. Many of these innocents were incarcerated due to the testimony of an eyewitness. This demonstrates that many of these eyewitnesses provided faulty testimony without knowing it. There are many reasons why an eyewitness may strongly believe in the false information they are presenting. First, certain attributes such as psychological disorders and substance dependency make a person more likely to be involved in criminal activity and therefore more likely to be falsely connected to a crime. Next, jurors often believe more in a witness who claims to be very sure about their testimony even though their accuracy is nearly the same as the less confident. Third, the way in which the human memory works makes it very susceptible to false recall. The human mind does not work like a camera storing information and playing it back when needed. Instead, memories are reconstructed each time they are needed. Other pieces of information could unknowingly be combined into the memory, leading to false recall. Certain factors can reduce the accuracy of eyewitness identification such as:
- The way in which a lawyer questions the eyewitness
- Extreme stress
- Presence of a weapon at the crime scene
- Use of a disguise during the crime
- A racial disparity between the witness and the suspect
- Limited viewing time during identification
- Lack of distinctive characteristics to aid in identification
It would be very difficult to minimize such errors of testimony as the witness often feels very strongly about the accuracy of their recollection. One suggestion to remedy the situation is to allow an expert on eyewitness identification to testify in court to educate the jurors on the process in which an eyewitness recalls facts. In most U.S. jurisdictions such experts have not been allowed in the courtroom. However, in Utah, in December of 2009 in the case of the State of Utah v. Deon Lomax Clopten the Supreme Court of Utah overturned a murder conviction in which the trial judge refused to allow an expert on eyewitness identification to testify for the defense.
Related posts:
- Lying to a Utah Cop
- Utah Criminal Legal Definition: Identity Theft
- Dismissing Criminal Charges in Utah
- Criminal Jury Selection in Utah
Tags: Evidence, eyewitness, eyewitness testimony
