Eyewitness Assessment Essay

In the United States, eyewitness testimony is a critical feature of our legal system as it most commonly serves as the primary, or in some cases, the only piece of evidence in a criminal case (Wise, Fishman, & Safer, 2009). In some cases, eyewitness identifications can serve as a powerful tool whenever a witness is able to accurately identify a perpetrator, as they might be able to assist with the arrest and prosecution of the perpetrator. However, eyewitness identification could also pose harm to our criminal justice system due to the probability of witnesses incorrectly identifying suspects, which could lead to the conviction of someone who is innocent while the actual perpetrator gets to walk free with the potential of causing harm to someone

Although there are a number of factors that can influence an eyewitness to make an erroneous identification, it is first and foremost important to understand the deceitful nature of memory. Research has found that memory is often not as reliable as one might think, although memories can be true, they are without a question shaped by the way in which memories are encoded, stored, processed, and retrieved (Ross, Tredoux, & Malpass, 2014). Additionally, post-event information that becomes available to individuals by police officers, prosecutors, other eye witnesses, media, friends, family, etc., not only influencing how the eyewitness remembers the crime, but can also alter witness’s memories of the perpetrator (Wise, Sartori, Magnussen, & Safer, 2014). Other factors that may contribute to an eyewitness’s level could be the way in which law enforcement retracts the witness’s identification, whether they used tactics such as confirming the witness’s feedback, repeated questioning, or using leading questions (Wise, et al., 2014). Therefore, the confidence level of how well an eyewitness remembers the events of crime and what the perpetrator looks like, may not be as reliable as jurors might think. Research shows that jurors tend to rely on factors that are poor predictors of accuracy, such as an eyewitness’s confidence at trial, their memory of minor details, and the consistency of their testimony, while having a tendency to ignore factors that have been empirically proven to be significantly better predictors of accuracy, such as, how law enforcement retracted the witness's identification, or whether the perpetrator was wearing a disguise or using a weapon (Wise, et al., 2014). Furthermore, in addition to the findings that suggest jurors are