3.3 Witnesses II

Question 1

types of lineups

Answer 1

target-present = lineup contains the culprit
target-absent = lineup contains an innocent suspect

Question 2

ID evidence?

Answer 2

• very convincing
• often inaccurate
• 2 neg consequences: 1. guilty person goes free, 2. innocent in jail
• sincere, confident, convincing and WRONG

Question 3

ID wrong: surveyed justice officials

Answer 3

• > 70% thought erroneous convictions in less than 1% cases
• approx 3mil arrests for serious crimes/year in US, 50% result in conviction = 1.5 mil, if 0.5% erroneous that’s 7500 wrongful convictions/year in US

Question 4

ID wrong: DNA exoneration

Answer 4

DNA link person to crime w/ v high degree certainty
- BUT 72% cases of DNA exoneration due to mistaken identification (human error)

Question 5

ID wrong: empirical studies

Answer 5

• 2 types empirical studies
  –field studies: high ecological validity, lack of experimental control
  –lab studies: high control, lack of ecological control

Question 6

evidence from field + lab studies

Answer 6

field: confederates into convenience stores, banks, unusual transaction, 41.8% IDs correct, RESULTS NO DIFFERENT FOR CLERKS TRAINED IN ID
lab: watch video/staged mock crime, identify perpetrator from lineup – false ID VARY 0%-100% –> false IDs often associated w/ very high witness confidence
lab –> not estimate overall accuracy, just one variable, manipulate task difficulty, avoid floor + ceiling effects

Question 7

showups

Answer 7

one-person lineup contaiing only suspect, acceptable if not enough evidence to arrest + conduct lineup
- biased as witness knows person is a suspect
- aus much more strict - victims often want generalised revenge/payback, so pin it on some rando

Question 8

lineups

Answer 8

test ability of witness to identify suspect when seen w/ foils
- lineup procedures vary greatly regionally
- 25% mid-west USA cases involve lineup w/ ONLY suspects
- aus + UK not permitted
- UK must be 7+ innocent foils of similar appearance
- NSW often 20+

Question 9

composition of ID procedure

Answer 9

• lineup should have foils who look like eyewitness descriptions (gender + race matched)
• good foil matches verbal description, differs in ways not mentioned
• live, videos, photos

Question 10

photo-lineups + mugshot searches

Answer 10

• photo-lineup = test witness ability to recognise suspect, US + AU majority photo
• mugshot searches = only used for ID suspect in early stages, cos if see face in mugshot search will likely pick person out in a lineup

Question 11

unconscious transference

Answer 11

when people remember a face but mistake circumstances

Question 12

conducting the lineup

Answer 12

• should be told perpetrator may or may not be in lineup
• should be double blind (testing officer doesn’t know)

Question 13

sequential lineup

Answer 13

members presented one at a time, must decide if it is the criminal or not before seeing another person
- RESULT IN FEWER FALSE IDENTIFICATIONS
- BUT MAY BE FEWER CORRECT IDs

Question 14

simultaneous lineup

Answer 14

present all lineup members at same time to witnesses

Question 15

why are sequential lineups better?

Answer 15

• use ABSOLUTE judgment rather than RELATIVE judgment
• absolute: each member is compared with witness’ memory
  relative: each member compared with each other, choose one that looks most like culprit
  8% difference in suspect ID between seq + sim, favour sim - MORE LIKELY OVERALL TO IDENTIFY GUILTY SUSPECT

Question 16

do jurors recognise problems w/ eyewitness accuracy

Answer 16

• perceived accuracy - more likely to believe more confident
• when lineups properly conducted, high-confidence IDs are remarkably accurate, but under less favourable conditions accuracy seriously compromised
• robbery-murder case –> circumstantial evidence + any form of eyewitness testimony (even discredited) = so much more likely for guilty verdict

Question 17

what can be done?

Answer 17

• thorough pre-lineup interview of eyewitness
• deice when or even to conduct lineup
• use neutral administrator to conduct
• slect lineup fillers so suspect doesn’t stand out
• nonsuggestive pre-lineup instructions to eyewitnesses
• take confidence statement from eyewitness immediately upon identification decision rather than later
• video record entire procedure
• avoid repeared identification procdeures w/ same witness + suspect
• avoid showups wherever possible
  –educate jurors about biased lineups, instructions, indication of confidene, misleading questions