How reliable is Eyewitness Testimony?

Authors Avatar

                

How reliable is Eyewitness Testimony?

Eyewitness testimony is often important or even crucial evidence in a trial.  Therefore the reliability of it is an important factor. The testimony given by an eyewitness provides crucial evidence which can determine whether or not a defendant is convicted. Eyewitness testimony is highly regarded by the courts, however there is a great deal of empirical evidence to suggest that eyewitness testimony is not that reliable and the faith placed in by the courts is unjustified. However this research was not taken seriously until the late 1990s by criminal justice personnel. ‘More than 100 people who were convicted prior to the development of forensic DNA have now been exonerated by DNA tests and more than 75% of these people were victims of mistaken eyewitness identification.’ (Olson and Wells 2003, p. 278).  There a numerous ways in which the reliability of eyewitness testimony can be reduced.

One of the factors that can affect eyewitness testimony is the use of language for example the use of leading questions (questions that imply the correct answer). Loftus and Palmer (1974) showed participants a film of a car accident, and later asked them questions relating to it. Each participant was asked to estimate how fast the car was travelling when it ‘hit’ the other car. By replacing the word ‘hit’ with the word ‘smashed’ Loftus and Palmer were able to increase the estimated speed given by participants. This study provides evidence that the language used in a question can distort recall. When questioned later about the amount of glass at the scene more of the participants that had been in the ‘smashed’ condition reported seeing glass than the participants in the ‘hit’ condition, when actually there was none. Showing that information given after the event can alter a witness memory of the original event.

Loftus and Zanni (1974) as cited in Eysenck and Keane (2000) found that even trivial differences in the way a question is asked can create false memories. Loftus and Zanni showed participants a film of a car accident and then asked them questions relating to it. All the questions where the same and unbiased, except one. The control group where asked did they see a broken headlight and the other group where asked did they see the broken headlight. They found that the second group were much more likely to remember seeing a broken headlight, when in fact there wasn’t one at all. However Yuille and Cutshall (1986) interviewed witnesses of real crime, including a question based on Loftus and Zanni’s ‘the/a’ question and found no difference in accuracy.

Join now!

Another factor that may affect the reliability of eyewitness testimony relates to identity parades. The number of people within a line-up who are similar to the suspect can affect the chances of correct information. This is referred to as the functional size of the line-up. Doob & Kirshenbaum (1973) reported the case of Ron Shatford. Following a robbery the witness described the robber as ‘neatly dressed and good-looking’. Shatford was arrested a placed in a line-up with eleven unattractive men. He was then convicted of the robbery. However fifteen months into Shatford’s sentence another man confessed to the robbery. Also ...

This is a preview of the whole essay