Are Eyewitnesses Reliable
Studies say that even though 50% of eyewitness testimonies are wrong, the information given to the jury by a confident eyewitness beats the reliable facts of fingerprints and DNA. Researchers have studied the affects of eyewitness testimony and it is said that incorrect eyewitness identifications account for more convictions of innocent people than any other causes combined. Two studies have shown that after being questioned for a crime, positive feedback by police enforcers or other investigators made the eyewitness more confident, even if there answer was wrong. Unfortunately, how confident people are about making identifications doesn't necessarily reflect how accurate their identification is. In fact, an eyewitness' degree of certainty is quite flexible and can easily become overblown. "Confidence levels can be influenced by external factors that have nothing to do with the witness's actual memories or perceptions of the event." (psychologist, Elizabeth Brimacombe). I believe that eyewitness testimony should not be used in court cases in which it is the only factor of determining the defendant's future. Other factors should be considered. In some cases, the jury may not understand the concept of DNA and might not
understand the importance and the accuracy of it. If one was to look at a photo spread the first person that even resembles the perpetrator would automatically be questioned and put into custody. If jurors had been indoctrinated about such testimony some of the following cases could have freed the innocent. If and eyewitness is the only evidence of a crime then a decision clearly should be maintained until more information is assembled. At his trial, and eyewitness identified him as the killer. At trial, she testified she was 100% certain Shareef was the killer. A new trial has been ordered, but he remains imprisoned. In the following essay, I have provided information about eyewitness' memory and also the importance of DNA testing in a criminal case. Most states refuse to fairly compensate a person's wrongly convicted imprisonment and causes innocent people to be ripped from their families, jobs, and lives. A person's memory does not function like a video recorder. It should be evident by now that these people are the lucky ones. Congress should be encouraged to establish laws that permit enough time to gather reasonable information for court cases. Many innocent people are in jail serving long sentences or even awaiting execution for crimes they did not commit because DNA testing has not been available to them and time for their appeals has run out. They have to understand also, that the witnesses are not lying or being deceptive, they are moral citizens and are trying to be contributive.
Common topics in this essay:
Row United,
Elizabeth Brimacombe,
DNA Researchers,
Kevin Byrd,
,
Wardell Illinois,
Shareef Cousin,
dna testing,
innocent people,
Governor Bush,
commit dna testing,
dna testing proved,
eyewitness testimony,
commit dna,
testing available,
trial eyewitness,
dna testing available,
testing proved,
|
Acceptance Essays
