Eyewitness Identification

        Eyewitness Identification is an integral piece of evidence used in many court cases.  There is no better evidence then a witness who saw the crime being committed with their own eyes, right?  In truth, a person’s eyes can play tricks on them and there is always the power of suggestion to a person who maybe isn’t so sure of who they saw once they are presented with a line-up of very similar looking people.  Victims have a vetted interest in identifying their attacker to make sure that the crime does not go unpunished.  Is this kind of pressure too much for one to handle?  This paper will explore the proper procedures for eyewitness identification, the reliability of said identifications, and the effect that these eyewitness identifications have in court cases.

It is midnight, a man is sitting on his porch smoking a cigarette and enjoying the night air.  He is staring across the parking lot and sees a man and woman struggling.  In the moonlight, he sees the glint of metal and hears a shot ring out.  The woman falls to the ground and the man runs off towards the witness, as he passes by a streetlight the man looks up directly into the eyes of the witness.  He quickly looks away and keeps running.  

What could be more perfect?  The police now have an eyewitness to the crime.  How do they turn that into evidence to be presented in court?  “A confrontation is any presentation of a suspect to a victim of or witness to a crime for the purpose of identifying the perpetrator of the crime. (Ferdico, John N., Henry F. Fradella, and Christopher D. Totten. Criminal Procedure for the Criminal Justice Professional. 12th ed. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning, 2016, 571).  “Most witness identifications occur as a result of one of two pretrial confrontation techniques: showups or lineups. (Ferdico, Fradella, Totten, 571).”  “A showup is a presentation of a single suspect to a victim of or witness to a crime. (Ferdico, Fradella, Totten, 571).” “Showups are highly suggestive and, accordingly, produce high levels of false identifications. Moreover, showups have a biasing effect on any subsequent identification in a lineup or in court.  Showups should, therefore, not be used unless there is some extenuating circumstance that prevents a photo array or lineup from being used. (Ferdico, Fradella, Totten, 586).   “A lineup is the presentation of several persons at one time to a victim of or witness to a crime for the purpose of identifying the perpetrator of the crime. (Ferdico, Fradella, Totten, 571).”

There are two different types of lineups that a witness can be presented with.  “The two types of lineups require different mental processes from the witness.  ( http://www.nij.gov/topics/lawenforcement/investigations/eyewitness-identification/Pages/simultaneous-sequential.aspx).”    “For sequential lineups, witnesses must exercise “absolute judgement,” comparing each photograph or person only to their memory of what the offender looked like.  In simultaneous lineups, witnesses must use “relative judgement” to compare lineup photographs or members to each other. (nij.gov).”

In order to make eyewitness identification via a lineup as reliable as possible there are several guidelines that are expected to be followed.  “Only one suspect should appear in the lineup.  If there are two or more suspects, no two should appear together in the same lineup or photo array. (Ferdico, Fradella, Totten, 599).”  “Whenever practicable, the person who conducts a lineup or photo array and all others present (except for defense counsel, when his or her presence is constitutionally required) should be unaware of which of the participants is the suspect. (Ferdico, Fradella, Totten, 599).”  This is called a double-blind administration.  It is also important that the identifying witness be given instructions indicating that the suspect may or may not be in the lineup and that they do not have to identify anyone. (Ferdico, Fradella, Totten, 600).  They also should be provided with a lineup identification form to fill out. (Ferdico, Fradella, Totten, 600).  

“The people who appear in a lineup or photo array other than the suspect are called foils or fillers. (Ferdico, Fradella, Totten, 600).”  These fillers should resemble the suspect and be able to be described with the same general description as the suspect. (http://www.chron.com/opinion/outlook/article/A-suspect-process-In-police-lineups-eyewitness-1571568.php).  A suspect should only be shown to the eyewitness in one line up.  If the witness is continuously seeing the same person in the lineup they might become familiar with that person and falsely identify them. (chron.com). “Lineups and photo arrays should use a sufficient number of foils to reasonably reduce the risk of an eyewitness selecting a suspect by guessing rather than by recognition. (Ferdico, Fradella, Totten, 601).”  “Accordingly, most experts recommend that at least six people be in a lineup or photo array. (Ferdico, Fradella, Totten, 602). Suspects should be allowed to choose their position in the lineup to avoid any accusations of his placement in the lineup being suggestive. (Ferdico, Fradella, Totten, 602).  A confidence statement should be given by the witness immediately after they identify a suspect in the lineup that attests to their level of certainty that they have identified the suspect correctly. (chron.com). If it is possible the lineup should be recorded on video to show that standard procedures were followed and that the witness was not pressured to lean towards a specific suspect or identify someone even if they were not sure. (chron.com).  

 While these techniques seem to be cut and dry (the witness can either identify the suspect or they cannot), it is actually much more complicated than that.  In order to rely on these testimonies, one must be willing to believe that the mind is infallible and that people do not make mistakes, give into pressure, or are easily coerced.  “Research has shown that leading questioning or suggestive behavior by psychiatrists, police or acquaintances, as well as accounts in the media, can result in "planting" false memories in the mind of a witness. In some cases, this can lead witnesses to believe they saw incidents that never occurred. (Hayasaki, Erika. 2014. “Your Lying Eyes.” Newsweek Global 163, no. 21:38. MasterFile Premier, EBSCOhost (accessed October 3, 2016)).”  “Memory, as experts have been trying to teach judges and jurors, does not function like an iPhone camera recording. Memories can not only be deleted; they can be altered or invented without you even realizing it, as shown in a study published last year in the International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, which involved 861 U.S. soldiers enrolled in a survival school. (Hayaski).”  “As part of training, they endured abusive interrogations. Afterward, many were shown a photo of someone who looked nothing like their interrogator, and interviewers insinuated that the person depicted was the culprit. Eighty-four percent of the soldiers misidentified their interrogators after being misled, and some also remembered weapons or telephones that never existed. (Hayaski).”