Week 4: Eyewitness Flashcards
Experiment of eyewitness testimonies
In a trial experiment, jurors were given information about a robbery in which two victims were shot. There were three conditions.
- When jurors were told there was no eyewitness to the shooting, only 18% convicted
- When a second group of jurors heard the store clerk testify that he saw the defendant shoot the two victims, 72 percent of those jurors voted to convict
- A third group of jurors also heard the store clerk testify but on cross examination it was revealed that the store clerk was legally blind. 68% of the jurors voted to convict.
What is the downside of including the testimony of an expert who says eyewitnesses aren’t as reliable?
Might skew the juror’s view too much so that they put too much weight on the fact
Factors that influence eyewitness memories:
-cross race IDs are less accurate than same race IDs
-poor lighting during the crime
-weapon is present (might be related to stress, which can lead to worse memory)
-suggestive circumstances in police photo lineups
Foster v. California (1969) context
Foster is connected to armed robbery based largely on testimony of a night manager of a Western Union office (the only evidence against home is from an accomplice)
The night manager, Joseph David, identified Foster as one of the robbers in the courtroom and a lineup a week or so after the crime
Foster was much taller than others in the lineup
In the first lineup, the night manager isn’t convinced that Foster is the guy. David asked to speak to Foster because he wasn’t sure and this was permitted. At the second lineup Foster was the only repeat individual and David said it was him.
What three factors were most likely to influence the eyewitness testinomy in the Foster v. California case?
- Davis spoke one on one with Foster
- Foster was much taller in the lineup
- Foster was the only repeat individual in the second lineup
How was it that meeting with Foster may have influenced David’s eyewitness?
He was confusing the source of memory. Familiarity isn’t based on him robbing David at gunpoint but based on the fact that they’ve had multiple interactions.
When is confidence associated with accuracy in a lineup?
The only time confidence is associated with accuracy is at the first lineup. Subsequent interactions with the suspect tend to taint and confuse your memory.
How might the Fifith Amendment be violated by police in a lineup?
If the conduct of the police identification procedures are so unnecessarily suggestives at to create a substantial likelihood of misidentification, then it violates due process of law.
Perry v. New Hampshire (2012) context
At 2:30 AM a woman observes a suspicious looking male roaming the parking lot beside her apartment building and looking into cars
When the police arrive, they find Barion Perry holding two car stereo amplifiers in his hands as well as a metal bat laying on the ground behind him.
Claims to have found the bat on the ground
While one officer stays with Perry, his partner goes up to the fourth floor and asks the woman for a more specific description of the man she saw. She points down to Perry.
About a month later, the police show the woman a photo array that includes a picture of Perry. She is unable to identify him. Still, based in part on the initial ID, he’s convicted of theft at trial.
What appeal does Perry make in Perry v. New Hampshire?
Perry argues that of course the woman would say it was him, when he was standing right next to the officer
Perry claims this violated his Fifth and Fourteenth Amendmen right to due process because his eyewitness was obtained under suggestive circumstances
Wanted his eyewitness testimony to be excluded for this reason
When else can a judge decide to omit evidence?
Judge can choose to omit evidence if it more prejudicial rather than actually useful to the argument
For example, it is not necessary to show images of deceased victims when it could be explained. Images would maybe incite anger and blur rational thinking.
How are due process cases assessed?
Due process requires courts to assess on a case by case basis whether improper police conduct created a “substantial likelihood of misconduct”
How was Perry v. New Hampshire different from Foster v. California?
In Foster, it was arranged by the police whereas in Perry it was inadvertent (police in the Perry case did not arrange the suggestive circumstances - they did not decide beforehand for this to happen, unlike in the Foster case)
In Foster, the police had the choice to make it so that Foster wasn’t an outlier in the lineup. They had the choice to not arrange a meet up. They had the choice to only include one person from the first lineup (Foster) in the second lineup.
When is expert testimony allowed?
Expert testimony is admissible only if:
- it will be of assistance to the jury in its deliberations
- relates to an area not within the competency of ordinary citizens
Expert testimony on eyewitness identifications is one of the most controversial issues is evidentiary procedure today
State v. Ammons context
Willie Ammons entered a grocery store in Nebraska and at gunpoint took about $12,000 in cash from the safe and cash drawers. The store manager who was forced to open the safe positively identified him at the trial as the person who committed the robbery
The defense argued that the evidence was not sufficient to support a guilty verdict and presented an expert to testify to the jury on the inaccuracy and unreliability of eyewitness IDs.
Expert witness was excluded because it would not add any value
Nebraka was the 50th state to allow eyewitness ID expert testimony in court
What is CA law regarding eyewitness testimony instructions?
The jury must receive eyewitness instruction if eyewitness testimony is the only piece of evidence. Otherwise, if there is other evidence, it is up to the judge’s discretion if eyewitness instructions will be allowed to be given.
Expert testimony
someone who has knowledge, skill, education, experience, or training in a specialized field
