An Examination of the Causes and Solutions to Eyewitness Error

Abstract

Eyewitness error is one of the leading causes of wrongful convictions. In fact, the American Psychological Association estimates that one in three eyewitnesses make an erroneous identification. In this review, we look briefly at some of the causes of eyewitness error. We examine what jurors, judges, attorneys, law officers, and experts from various countries know about eyewitness testimony and memory, and if they have the requisite knowledge and skills to accurately assess eyewitness testimony. We evaluate whether legal safeguards such as voir dire, motion-to-suppress an identification, cross-examination, jury instructions, and eyewitness expert testimony are effective in identifying eyewitness errors. Lastly, we discuss solutions to eyewitness error.

Norwegian judges’ knowledge of factors affecting eyewitness testimony: a 12-year follow-up

“…Currently, the training for Norwegian judges and deputy judges includes a lecture (two and three hours in length, respectively) on eyewitness psychology, which covers basic cognitive phenomena, research on eyewitness testimony, false confessions, and their relation to known legal cases. However, given the importance of judges as triers of fact in the legal system and the potentially detrimental consequences of eyewitness error in the courtroom, the current results support a call for comprehensive education and training in eyewitness research for judges (Kovera & McAuliff, 2000;Magnussen et al, 2008;Wise, Sartori, Magnussen, & Safer, 2014), and may serve as a useful indication of knowledge gaps to be considered in future training.…”

The values of prediction in criminal cases

“…Consider a situation in which multiple eyewitnesses report on a robbery. We know that eyewitnesses commonly misremember many of the details of any event (Wise et al, 2014). So the stories that these witnesses tell will often diverge both from the truth and from each other in many ways.…”

“…information provided to a witness after her observation (Zaragoza et al, 2007). To give an example, police providing information about a potential suspect to a witness is a well-known cause of witnesses identifying the wrong suspect (Wise et al, 2014). Such post-event information then plays a causal role in the construction of the testimony and hence counts as an accommodation-one that lowers the witness's reliability.…”

Eyewitness memory contamination through misleading questions by reporters

“…General knowledge by members of the public about memory is frequently deficient, and they do not always recognize the fragility and vulnerability of it. This lack of knowledge is visible among all walks of life (Benton et al, 2006; Lynn et al, 2015; Wise et al, 2014). Erroneous beliefs range from thinking that memory is permanently recorded like a movie in our brains to perceptions about the validity of accessing memory through hypnosis (Ost et al, 2017).…”