3 ms·

They should ban that line "Can you identify the man who did this?" Original witness statements are the only things that are reliable. After the victim has iden

by wisty 16y ago

They should ban that line "Can you identify the man who did this?" Original witness statements are the only things that are reliable. After the victim has identified the "perpetrator" from a line-up, they forget the original face, and their memories become re-written to include the face they think is responsible. A friend of mine studying to be a cop knows this (all cops should know this) but they still persist in using testimony that they know is unreliable. Can you blame them though? If they didn't use the line, it would be much harder to get a conviction. Courts should just read a description, one that was made before the victim (or interviewing officer) has seen the suspect they dragged in. Or the police should get a sketch (or computer sketch) of the assailant before anyone involved has seen any possible suspects.

citricsquid 16y ago
The entire damn process should be changed, I sincerely hope these are not actual quotes because some of these questions are so incredibly leading, it's ridiculous that they're allowed especially with children involved. You get a child to admit to anything with the right words and authority, surely everyone knows this!
- baguasquirrel 16y ago
  The same language used by lawyers and prosecutors are the same words they hear on TV when the ads roll. Are you surprised?
alphakappa 16y ago
Very relevant story this week on 'This American Life' about a guy who spent decades in prison because a teenager randomly identified him from a stack of photos just to get the cops off his back. http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/282/diy http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/282/d...
46Bit 16y ago
I think it's as simple as this: witnesses aren't reliable. When you think about how often you turn out to remember little details wrong, it's clear that more often than not you'll pick out the wrong man in a lineup - especially when so traumatised. Lineups should be replaced by facial reconstruction - get the victim to sort out what the face looked like, then see if it looks like the suspect.
gnaritas 16y ago
> Original witness statements are the only things that are reliable. Even those aren't that reliable; memory is fallible and people remember things wrong all the time. Statements give you nothing more than a vague idea of what might have happened.
noonespecial 16y ago
Think of how it must be for the 4 people on the stand who answered yes. They were likely shown a few pictures along with the implication that they were "usual suspects", one of which was almost certainly the culprit. They'd probably seen all of about 5 real-life "people of color" in their lives and simply picked the closest looking one to what they remembered. The system then automatically worked to assure them that this was the guy. Over time their memories sloshed together with the picture and the guy on the bench and then they were sure of it. But now they know that they were 100% wrong and their testimony cost this guy his life. That's a tough one to live with.

by wisty 16y ago

citricsquid 16y ago

The entire damn process should be changed, I sincerely hope these are not actual quotes because some of these questions are so incredibly leading, it's ridiculous that they're allowed especially with children involved. You get a child to admit to anything with the right words and authority, surely everyone knows this!

baguasquirrel 16y ago
The same language used by lawyers and prosecutors are the same words they hear on TV when the ads roll. Are you surprised?

alphakappa 16y ago

Very relevant story this week on 'This American Life' about a guy who spent decades in prison because a teenager randomly identified him from a stack of photos just to get the cops off his back. http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/282/diy http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/282/d...

46Bit 16y ago

I think it's as simple as this: witnesses aren't reliable. When you think about how often you turn out to remember little details wrong, it's clear that more often than not you'll pick out the wrong man in a lineup - especially when so traumatised. Lineups should be replaced by facial reconstruction - get the victim to sort out what the face looked like, then see if it looks like the suspect.

gnaritas 16y ago

> Original witness statements are the only things that are reliable. Even those aren't that reliable; memory is fallible and people remember things wrong all the time. Statements give you nothing more than a vague idea of what might have happened.

noonespecial 16y ago

Think of how it must be for the 4 people on the stand who answered yes. They were likely shown a few pictures along with the implication that they were "usual suspects", one of which was almost certainly the culprit. They'd probably seen all of about 5 real-life "people of color" in their lives and simply picked the closest looking one to what they remembered. The system then automatically worked to assure them that this was the guy. Over time their memories sloshed together with the picture and the guy on the bench and then they were sure of it. But now they know that they were 100% wrong and their testimony cost this guy his life. That's a tough one to live with.