Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Issues dealing with criminal investigations
Issues dealing with criminal investigations
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Issues dealing with criminal investigations
As newer technology develops, more and more cases are being revisited to test for DNA and unlawful practices with hundreds of wrongfully convicted innocents being exonerated. According to the Innocence Project website, mistaken eyewitness identifications are the leading cause in wrongful convictions (Eyewitness Misidentification, 2014). One particular case in 1992 involved a young Florida man named Derrick Williams, who was charged and sentenced to serve 2 life sentences for sexual battery, robbery, grand theft auto, and 2 counts of battery due primarily to a faulty identification. Fortunately for Mr. Williams, he was exonerated in 2011 with the help of DNA evidence; however, he will never get back the 18 years he served for the crime he did not commit (Derrick Williams, 2014).
The victim was a Caucasian woman of 25 years of age and the scene of the crime began at her driveway and ended in a nearby orange grove. The woman was attacked as she was getting out of her vehicle by a black male who forced her back into the car and drove them to the grove. Once there, he tied her up and used his shirt to cover her eyes while he sexually assaulted her, ensuring that the victim was not able to get a close look at him during the act. The victim was able to get away with the shirt still in the car as evidence (Derrick Williams, 2014).
The shirt would have been able to provide DNA evidence that pointed to Mr. Williams’ innocence (which it later did), however the evidence was not used as part of the investigation with the trial instead focusing on the identification provided by the victim. Faulty police work was also present in the case, with the detectives presenting the victim with a photo-lineup that included Mr. Williams’ picture twice. The...
... middle of paper ...
...and the officer conducting the procedure do not know who the suspect is among the group or if he or she is even present as an option. Police bias that could intentionally or unintentionally guide the witness towards a particular choice during the lineup or boost their confidence in their selection after picking a person out would be eliminated using this tactic (Hasel, 2014).
Mistakes were made in Derrick Williams’ case that unfortunately lead to his undeserved incarceration but should serve as examples of how the criminal justice system and investigation techniques must be refined. Methods as simple as educating people about the commonality of mistaken identifications or giving jurors instructions in cases that rely on witness identifications about influencing factors could end up saving another innocent from serving the same sentence as Mr. Williams (Hasel, 2014).
In today’s Canadian society, it is certain that criminal law is to serve and protect and its fundamental purpose is to prevent crime and punish offenders. However, there have been cases where criminal law has punished the offender who turned out to be innocent. A conviction is needed to show that the system is not in disrepute and to keep order and people safe in society. If a criminal cannot be caught then people will look down upon the system in disgrace. In many cases, officers will arrest an individual who fits a certain description that they know will lead to an arrest and conviction. In the case of Guy Paul Morin it shows how the system failed in aiding the innocent who abide to the law. The law is established to protect those who are innocent from being targeted because of the law.
On May 7th 2000, fifteen year old Brenton Butler was accused of the murder of Mary Ann Stephens, who had been fatally shot in the head while walking down a breezeway of a hotel with her husband. Two and a half hours later, Butler is seen walking a mile away from where the incident occurred, and is picked up by the police because he fit the description of the individual who shot Mary Ann Stephens. However, the only characteristic of the description that Butler featured was the color of his skin. Police then brought Butler to the scene of the crime in order for Mary Ann Stephens’s husband, James Stephens, to confirm whether or not Butler was the individual who had shot his wife. Almost immediately, Stephens identifies Butler as his wife’s killer.
As we learned this week, DNA databases are used by various governmental agencies for several different purposes. We all have seen new magazine shows such as, 20/20 or Dateline, that show the collection of DNA samples from suspects in a case that is compared to those collected at the scene of the crime. But what happens when the sample is an incomplete match, compromised, or contaminated? The answer is the wrongful conviction of innocent citizens. The case that I have decided to highlight, is the wrongful conviction of Herman Atkins. In 1986, Atkins was convicted of two counts of forcible rape, two counts of oral copulation, and robbery in the state of California. It was alleged that Herman entered a shoe store, and raped, beat, and robbed a
In today's society no crime is a perfect crime, with the use of DNA testing and modern advancements in health and forensics even the smallest piece of someone's genome can be cultured and used to identify even the most devious of criminals. The use of DNA testing was able to help change the life of Gene Bibbins for the better and further proved how DNA testing is able to be used to help clarify who the culprit actually is. Gene Bibbins life was forever changed the night that he was unjustifiably arrested for aggravated rape which resulted in his being sentenced to life in prison, only for his case to eventually be reevaluated sixteen years after his conviction, leading to his exoneration.
This paper will consider eye witness testimony and its place in convicting accused criminals. Psychology online (2013) defines “eye witness testimony” as a statement from a person who has witnessed a crime, and is capable of communicating what they have seen, to a court of law under oath. Eye witness testimonies are used to convict accused criminals due to the first hand nature of the eye witnesses’ observations. There are however many faults within this system of identification. Characteristics of the crime is the first issue that will be discussed in this paper, and the flaws that have been identified. The second issue to be discussed will be the stress impact and the inability to correctly identify the accused in a violent or weapon focused crime. The third issue to be discussed is inter racial identification and the problems faced when this becomes a prominent issue. The fourth issue will be time lapse, meaning, the time between the crime and the eye witness making a statement and how the memory can be misconstrued in this time frame. To follow this will be the issue of how much trust jurors-who have no legal training-put on to the eye witness testimony, which may be faltered. This paper references the works of primarily Wells and Olsen (2003) and Rodin (1987) and Schmechel et al. (2006) it will be argued that eye witness testimony is not always accurate, due to many features; inter racial identification, characteristics of the crime, response latency, and line up procedures therefore this paper will confirm that eyewitness testimonies should not be utilised in the criminal ju...
Eyewitness misidentification cost innocent people to end up in prison. Eyewitness misidentification is the single greatest cause of wrongful convictions in the United States, having played a role in more than 70% of original convictions later overturned by new DNA evidence(Dunn). This explains eyewitness misidentification is not a reliable solution to prison the suspect and deal with other solution. The suspect is effected because the suspect goes through terrible life for crime they did not commit and false witness hunts
(Kennedy & Haygood, 1992; Williams & Loftus, 1994), which is worrying considering the growing and substantial body of evidence from laboratory studies, field studies, and the criminal justice system supporting the conclusion that eyewitnesses frequently make mistakes (Cutler & Penrod, 1995; Huff, 1987; Huff, Rattner, & Sagarin, 1986; Innocence Project, 2009; Wells, Small, Penrod, Malpass, Fulero, & Brimacombe, 1998). According to a number of studies, eyewitness misidentifications are the most common cause of wrongful convictions (Huff, Rattner, & Sagarin, 1986; Wells et al., 1998; Yarmey, 2003) and, through the use of forensic DNA testing, have been found to account for more convictions of innocent individuals than all other factors combined (Innocence Project, 2009; Wells, Memon, & Penrod, 2006).
To support their conclusion the board tells the story of two men who were exonerated after spending thirty years in prison for a crime they did not commit. Days after the rape and murder of eleven year old Sabrina Buie, half-brothers Henry Lee McCollum and Leon Brown confessed to the crime. Not only were their confessions made under pressure without parents or an attorney present, but the prosecution failed to present multiple pieces of evidence to the defense lawyers, DNA evidence that proved McCollum and Brown were not responsible for the murder. In fact, the DNA belonged to a Roscoe Artis, who was a suspect all along and was convicted of a similar crime just weeks later.
were not previously seen, such as hostile or mistrustful attitude towards the world, social withdrawal, feelings of emptiness or hopelessness, a chronic feeling of threat, and estrangement.” Although psychological issues develop in anyone incarcerated, those discussed are particular from the perspective of a victim wrongfully accused.
As the world gets older, our technology gets stronger. When it comes to criminal cases such as homicides, the blooming of technology can be ever in the investigators favor. With the Grim Sleeper case in Los Angeles, DNA technology became a wonderful tool for the investigators. In the United States, the first appellate court decision to admit DNA evidence was made in Florida in 1998, in subsequent years DNA evidence gradually became a regular feature of criminal cases (Lewis 2010.) Having the technology we have today, we can connect recent cases with cold cases. A break in technology for this case was the outstanding familial DNA testing. This happened when the “Grim Sleeper” returned.
Psychological research shows, a witness's memory of details during the commission of a crime, has a high probability of containing significant errors. In response to these findings, the question is should witness testimony still be permissible in a court of law? Obviously, the answer to this question is an important one and is debatable. Consequently, what we know is many innocent people go to jail due to eyewitness misidentification. Therefore, it is imperative that all defense attorneys thoroughly evaluate the validity of eyewitness recollection events. Any defense attorney who does anything less is ignoring the findings of the psychological community and its’ study of how the brain functions. As a result, an intense analysis of an
According to the Innocence Project (2006), “On September 17, 2001, Chad wrote the Innocence Project in New York, which, in 2003, enlisted pro bono counsel from Holland & Knight to file a motion for DNA testing on Tina’s fingernail scrapings.” The state had tested the DNA that was under Tina’s nail from the first case but at that time it was inadequate and could not be tested. It was not until now that we have the technology capable enough to test it. In June 2004, the test came back negative to matching both Jeremey and Chain Heins but did come from an unknown male. The state argued that it was not enough to overturn the conviction so Chad’s attorney asked the state to do some further testing and to compare the DNA from under the fingernails to the hairs that was found on Tina’s body. It was in 2005 that the Florida Department of Law Enforcement confirmed that there was a match between the DNA under Tina’s nail and the pubic hair. According to LaForgia (2006), “this particular type of DNA, the report stated, was found in only about 8 percent of Caucasian American men.” During this process there was a new piece of evidence that Chad’s attorney had learned about during the appeals process, a fingerprint. There were some accusations that the prosecutors never disclosed this information about this third fingerprint and if they did it was too late. The jurors did not even know about this fingerprint and if they did this could have changed the whole case. This fingerprint was found on several objects that included the smoke detector, a piece of glass, and the bathroom sink. It was soon discovered that this fingerprint matched with the DNA found on the bedsheets that Tina was on. This was finally enough evidence to help Chad Heins become exonerated in
"Know the Cases." Innocence Project. Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, n.d. Web. 1 Mar 2011. .
There are many factors that can contribute to faulty eyewitness testimony, including own-race bias, focus on a weapon, stress, length of exposure to the stranger, eyewitness confidence, and events that occur after the incident, such as suggestive police procedures (V...
In 1987, United States used DNA evidence to prosecute and convict a serial rapist. It all started in Florida when a woman was awoken by noise. She woke up and a man was standing over her holding a knife towards her, threatening to kill her if she didn’t comply. While she was being raped she started fighting back, she was cut on her neck, legs, feet, and face. Once she was raped the rapist stole her purse and left her home. The victim reported the crime to police shortly after. During an examination a rape kit was performed and evidence of semen was f...