|
|
This is only a preview of the paper
Click here to register and get the full text.
Existing members click here to login
|
|
|
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.
Approximate Word count = 782
Approximate Pages = 3.1
(250 words per page double spaced)
|
|
|
|
|
|