3 ms·
Unless this information gets before the judge and/or jury; it is useless. A defense attorney bringing up any one of the studies mentioned here would be sanction
by pseingatl 11y ago
Unless this information gets before the judge and/or jury; it is useless. A defense attorney bringing up any one of the studies mentioned here would be sanctioned by the judge. Even if the studies show that 75% of the time, eyewitness identification is wrong; you might be dealing with the 25% of the time when the identification is correct. That is for the trier of fact. It is unfortunate--no, tragic--because eyewitness misidentification is commonplace.
- savanaly 11y agoDid you get the 75% number from the article? Because what the article in fact said was that 72% of cases that are subsequently overturned by DNA evidence involve mistaken eyewitness identification, which is very different than 75% of all eyewitness identifications.
- larrik 11y agoI interpreted the 75% as a hypothetical.