Picking Cotton

According to “The Science Behind Eyewitness Identification Reform” there are two main variables that affect eyewitness testimonies “Estimator variables: are those that cannot be controlled by the criminal justice system. They include simple factors like the lighting when the crime took place or the distance from which the witness saw the perpetrator, and the degree of stress or trauma a witness experienced while seeing the perpetrator” and “System variables: are those that the criminal justice system can and should control. They include all of the ways that law enforcement agencies retrieve and record witness memory, such as lineups, photo arrays, and other identification procedures”. Eyewitness misidentification has led to 75% of false convictions that were overruled by modern DNA testing according to “The Innocence

In Canada, the leading cause of wrongful conviction is due to the factor of eyewitness account. It has been proven that individual’s minds are not like tape recorders because everyone cannot precisely and accurately remember the description of what another person or object looks like. The courts looks at eyewitness accounts as a great factor to nab perpetrators because they believe that the witness should know what they are taking about and seen what occurred on the crime scene. On the other hand, eyewitness accounts lead to a 70 percent chance of wrongful conviction, where witnesses would substantially change their description of a perpetrator.

Eyewitness identification are considered to be the most powerful evidence against a suspect. There are numerous reasons for this to occur which includes stress, human memory, and the focus on weapons which leads for the eyewitness to focus less on the perpetrator. When an individual is in a position with high stress, their ability of remembering what actually occurred won't be easy to prove. It leaves the eyewitness unable to recall what occurred at the tie of the scene. This has been a huge problem over the years. According to “Carla Stenzel” eyewitness misidentification will occur because our memory is dynamic. It is very impossible for our brains to perform everything we see. Our memories take in pieces of information and processes the most important information. When a witness is asked by a police officer to give certain details of a suspect, they won't be able to remember how exactly they looked like but will be able to give out certain details like their height, race, and hair color. When a crime is being committed witnesses usually testify that there focus was more on the perpetrator's weapon. All they can focus on would be the size and shape of the weapon and focus less on the actual suspect. Another contribution would be the way the investigator presents the operator to the witness. The investigator prepares a lineup which includes a six pack of people. The use of a six pack lineup has

Eyewitness identification, for the most part, is considered reliable eyewitness identification by the courts as excellent evidence to proof crimes at trial. Yet, Bennett Barbour’s arrest revealed these inaccuracies as he was wrongly arrested due to an over-reliance on eyewitness identification. Barbour’s physique, specifically his

According to Scheck, Neufeld, and Dwyer (2003), the majority of convictions overturned by DNA evidence involved mistaken eyewitness testimony. The Innocence Project estimates that around 70% of the convictions due to eyewitness misidentification have been overturned by DNA evidence (2015). A main factor in this occurrence is that eyewitness memory is unreliable (Wright, 2007). Eyewitness identification in a line-up is an important tool in criminal investigations. The eyewitness evidence that results from these line-ups has an impact on the subsequent investigation and prosecution procedures (Wells, 1984). Furthermore, according to Wright, it is not just about witnesses making errors when identifying, misidentifying, or not identifying, a suspect

As research shows, eyewitness misidentification is the single greatest cause of wrongful convictions nationwide, playing a role in 72% of convictions overturned through DNA testing. In this paper, I am going to revisit two cases that were affected by this striking procedure of eyewitness misidentification, efforts currently being made to address this problem, and my personal recommendations to minimize cases surrounding the topic illustrated in this paper.

In eyewitness identification, in criminal law, evidence is received from a witness "who has actually seen an event and can so testify in court.” (Law.com Legal Online Dictionary) While this could be an important piece of the investigation, it can never take the place of DNA, or forensic evidence. Unfortunately, that happens all too much, with our overburdened legal and criminal justice systems. “Eyewitness misidentification is widely recognized as the leading cause of wrongful conviction in the U.S., accounting for more wrongful convictions than all other cause combined.” (Boston College Journal of Law and Social Justice, Volume 35:1, p.2) While we have been aware of this problem for many years, innocent people are still being convicted daily. Too many people

This case is a well known case that has to do with the supposed rape and burglary of a woman from North Carolina on June 6th, 1984 and the case involved an eyewitness named Jennifer Thompson-Cannino, she was a college student at the time of her assault, the person being charged of these crimes was a man named Ronald Cotton and the story was that someone broke into her house, the assailant tried to rape her and she thought she got a good look at the person. In a photo and live lineup she thought Cotton was 100% her attacker.

Eyewitness testimonies are often unreliable and yet they are usually the most incriminating "evidence" provided in court. Eyewitnesses are often under a large amount of stress in the moment and are unable to gather all of the necessary information to accurately describe a crime. The setting of the crime, the type of event occurring, the amount of activity taking place, and the emotional state of the eyewitness can all affect and alter the testimony of the eyewitness. According to the Innocence Project, inaccurate eyewitness testimony accouted for 87% of wrongful convictions. One of these convictions was that of Ronald Cotton.

Reveal Topic: Eyewitness identification Credibility: According to californiainnocenceproject.org one huge factor in wrongful convictions is

During the 60 minutes about picking Cotton, I can say that no one did anything wrong based on the time frame it happened. Overall for me revising it, I can say that one of the issues I came across was the degree of being sure during the photo line up. When the detective asked Jennifer if she is sure after she picked up cotton, I think there should have been more open to that question. “How sure are you?” I think they should use open-ended type of interview to ask her to make sure we know how sure she is. Again the other thing was that after she picked him, I think the interviewer thought she got the guy. During the actual line up, there was another issue that I think may have enforced her to pick Cotton again.

More people are found innocent of crimes they did not commit and are convicted of based on faulty eyewitness testimony. Several studies have shown that eyewitness testimony is the least liable thing for evidence yet, it is the most frequently used in convicting innocent people. A study was conducted in a park where somebody stole a purse and ran, several people in the park at the time of the study and when it was time to collect eyewitness statements no two statements were alike even though they all saw the same thing happen.

In 2001, more than roughly 200 innocent people were convicted of crimes that they did not commit. All of these cases had one thing in common: mistaken eyewitness identification. According to Webster dictionary, an eyewitness identification can be summed up by someone who sees something happen and is able to describe it. In reality, mistaken eyewitness identification has become a huge complication in the United States, because of the difficulties that follow it. Mistaken eyewitness identification has been the leading contributing factors to wrongful convictions. (The Innocence Project) With the help of DNA testing, more than 70% of convictions were overturned. There have been several major research programs and centers that have been actively pursuing new, accurate methods that help to arrest and convict a suspect. The Robert Presley Crime and Justice Center is one of the numerous research centers that help to contribute, to how we as a society, can improve our methods on making successful eyewitness identifications.

Nevertheless, one may object that the records of identification decisions are unlikely to be incorrect or that witnesses usually sign their names next to the photo of the identified suspect. Considering how often professionals make procedural errors (e.g., erroneous matches of bullets, foot- and fingerprints; Saks & Koehler, 2005) and the impact of biases due to contextual influences in the forensic science (Kassin, Dror, & Kukucka, 2013), we posit that such a scenario is not all that unrealistic. In exacerbation to this issue, the report on prosecutorial misconduct cases compiled by the Northern California Innocence Project sides with the idea of altered identification decisions and tempered with testimony in real investigations (NCIP; Ridolfi & Possley, 2010). The report reveals 4,000 cases of alleged misconduct, in 707 of which the courts explicitly established that the prosecutors deliberately mishandled, mistreated or destroyed evidence. Thus, errors in the recording of

On the website, www.innocenceproject.org/causes/eyewitness-misidentification/ examines the accuracy of eyewitness identification. In today’s society, people say if you see something, say something. Now, more and more people are speaking up and giving needed eyewitness statements to the authorities. The Innocence Project points out areas where eyewitness identification can render inaccurate results. For instance, the police may give non-verbal hints that causes the witness to doubts the details of the incident resulting in a wrongful conviction. To prevent misidentification, the Innocence Project is partnering with law enforcement to come up with list of policies to follow.