Eyewitness+Identification+2011-4

Home  Eyewitness Identification:

Eyewitnesses play a vital role in the administration of justice. Their testimony can lead to identifying and convicting a suspect in a criminal case. In some cases, eyewitness evidence may be the only available evidence in the case. **Eyewitness Misidentification:** The number one reason for all wrongful convictions that are overturned in the United States court system are eyewitness misidentifications. It plays a part in almost 75% of the cases that are overturned by DNA evidence. Even with this statistic, eyewitness ID's are the most important evidence brought towards defendants. It normally puts the nail in the coffin for the defendant. Years and years of research has shown that the human mind is not going to remember the exact same thing over a long period of time. Changes will be made accidentally without the knowledge of it happening. The memory of the human brain must be preserved or it could easily become contaminated. Misidentification destroys the chance of finding the real suspect. While investigators are busy trying to impossibly convict the innocent, the actual criminal is busy fleeing. Almost all law enforcement officers conduct live or photo line ups without proper instruction which very commonly confuses the victim or witness, casuing them to pick the wrong person. The desire to make an identification at all costs or a gap in memory are a few examples of why these mistakes can occur. There are two types of variables that effect witness identification that leading scientists have researched; //estimator// and //system// variables. //Estimator Variables// are things that the criminal justice system has no control over. Some examples are crime scene lighting, race, whether or not the suspect has a gun, or how much stress the witness is under while the crime is taking place. //System Variables// are things that the criminal justice system can and are expected to control. Examples of these are ways investigators gather and use the recollections of the witnesses, the type of lineups used, or the "fillers" (people known to be innocent) in lineups. **How Mistakes are Made:**
 * In standard line ups, the administrator normally knows who the suspected person is and inadvertently gives small hints to the eyewitness that causes them to pick the person the administrator wanted without even realizing it.
 * Eyewitnesses are normally shown pictures of the people in the line up simultaneously, causing them to pick a person they believe looks the closest to the suspect instead of how they remember the suspect really looks.
 * If the administrator fails to tell the witness that the suspect may not be present in the pictures they are seeing, they may feel inclined to pick someone from the line up even though they don't believe the person is actually in the line up.


 * Solutions:**
 * //The "Double Blind" Procedure-// Neither the administrator or the witness has ever seen the lineup and neither know who the suspect is.
 * //Instructions/Directions//- The instructions given by the administrator need to clear and consistent. Instructions shouldn't change after every lineup. The witness must be clearly informed that the suspect may not be present in the lineup and should in no way, shape, or form, be influenced on who to pick by the administrator.
 * //Lineup//- Attention should not be drawn to the suspect due to others in the photo lineup. All fillers in the lineup should match the description the eyewitness gave to the police, not the description the police came up with for the suspect.
 * //Confidence//- Once the process of picking a suspect out of a lineup is complete, the witness must give a signed statement on how confident they are on their decision.
 * //Documentation//- The choosing of the suspect by the witness should in some way be documented, whether it be electronically recorded, video taped, or written down. This will show that there is actual documentation that the eyewitness picked the person they did.

(Facts from the Innocence Project) **Additional Information:** **[|The Innocence Project]** **[|The Midwestern Innocence Project]**
 * Facts:**
 * Over 230 people serving an average of 12 years in prison have been exonerated because of DNA testing in the US. Almost 75% of those wrongful convictions involved eyewitness identification.
 * In almost 38% of these cases, multiple witnesses identified the wrong suspect.
 * 53% of misidentification cases, where race is known, involved cross racial misidentifications.
 * In 50% of the misidentification cases, the eyewitness testimony was the central evidence against the defendant.
 * In at least 48% of these misidentification cases, the real suspect went on to commit additional crimes, while an innocent person sat in jail for his previous crime.

**Drew Whitley** **http://www.post-gazette.com/images4/20060509ds_whitleyPJ02_230.jpg** On August 17, 1988, at around 3:00 a.m., a man wearing a nylon mask approached the night manager at McDonald’s as she was leaving to go to her car. The man pistol-whipped her and shot her in the back. The man fled the scene,shedding his nylon mask, hat, and women’s trench coat. **The Identification** An employee at McDonald’s lived in the building next to Drew Whitley; the employee was waiting outside of the restaurant to start his shift at 3 A.M. As he recalls he saw a man wearing a nylon mask, a hat, and trench coat. The man recognized the man as Whitley. The witness then later indicated that he could not see the perpetrator’s face clearly, but recognized Whitley by his voice, the shape of his head, and the way he walked. At the trial another witness identified Whitley, as well a third employee attempted to help the victim get away, but was unable to identify Whitley. Further, a death row inmate testified at trial that Whitley confessed while they were incarcerated.

**Biological Evidence** The police collected the trench coat, hat and a 12-inch nylon stocking. At trial an Allegheny County Crime Laboratory technician testified that the hairs found in the mask were similar to Whitley’s hair. The salvia also found in the mask did not match Whitley. Based on the evidence and identifications, he was convicted of second-degree murder and sentenced to life.

**Post Conviction** In November 1995 the court approved Whitley’s motion for DNA testing, specifically two rooted hairs from the mask, the blood on Whitley’s shoes, and the blood on the coat found at the crime scene. The prosecution has reported that that the 39 hairs without roots had been lost in a flood of the Allegheny County Police Crime Room. Whitley continued to seek further DNA testing. In 2005 the prosecution informed his attorney, Scott Coffey, that indeed the 39 hairs without roots did, in fact, still exist. His attorney then filed a Post-Conviction Act Petition on Whitley’s behalf. Mitochondrial DNA testing was order by the court. After the DNA testing, Whitley was excluded from all the hairs. The prosecution then decided to send 5 hairs found in the hat for testing. He again was excluded as a source of these hairs. Finally on May 1, 2006, the prosecution dropped all charges against Whitley and he was released from prison.