Psychological research shows eyewitness testimony, detailing events observed during the commission of a crime, has a high probability of containing significant memory errors. In response to these findings, the question is should witness testimony still be admissible in a court of law? Obviously, the answer to this question is an important one, and, is debatable depending on who you ask. Consequently, what we know is many innocent people are falsely imprisoned due to eyewitness misidentification. Therefore, defense attorneys use psychological research on problems with memory to thoroughly evaluate the validity of eyewitness evidence. The average person's memory is far from perfect. The professional psychological community reports that
…show more content…
Like when details of a crime are altered after witnesses read the newspaper, or, when they view other media reporting of the crime. In psychological terms, this occurrence is called retroactive interference in which new facts replace or change old ones. Still, another memory concern is the role that the distraction of a weapon might play in recalling events. In this situation, a defense attorney would illustrate; was the witness really paying attention to the crime, or, were their eyes preoccupied by the presence of a weapon. Psychologist, R. Feldman (2013), discussed this matter in his book Understanding Psychology, he wrote: "When a criminal perpetrator displays a gun or knife, it acts like a perceptual magnet, attracting the eyes of the witnesses.” Unequivocally, these memory errors are some of the basic issues that affect eyewitness testimony and that lawyers must address during a …show more content…
Hence, lawyers will scrutinize the wording used by police officers or other officials, and, if suggestive language is used, examine how that phrasing contaminates witness testimony. In a study, participants who were shown a video of a car accident were then asked to estimate the speed of the two cars involved using different phrases like; bumped into, hit, contacted, collided with, and, smashed into. Sure enough, the miles per hour estimate, given by participants, increased as the phrasing grew more aggressive. In the end, "Estimates varied substantially, depending on the way the question was worded (Source: Lotus & Palmer,
Like when details of a crime are altered after witnesses read the newspaper, or, when they view other media reporting of the crime. In psychological terms, this occurrence is called retroactive interference in which new facts replace or change old ones. Still, another memory concern is the role that the distraction of a weapon might play in recalling events. In this situation, a defense attorney would illustrate; was the witness really paying attention to the crime, or, were their eyes preoccupied by the presence of a weapon. Psychologist, R. Feldman (2013), discussed this matter in his book Understanding Psychology, he wrote: "When a criminal perpetrator displays a gun or knife, it acts like a perceptual magnet, attracting the eyes of the witnesses.” Unequivocally, these memory errors are some of the basic issues that affect eyewitness testimony and that lawyers must address during a …show more content…
Hence, lawyers will scrutinize the wording used by police officers or other officials, and, if suggestive language is used, examine how that phrasing contaminates witness testimony. In a study, participants who were shown a video of a car accident were then asked to estimate the speed of the two cars involved using different phrases like; bumped into, hit, contacted, collided with, and, smashed into. Sure enough, the miles per hour estimate, given by participants, increased as the phrasing grew more aggressive. In the end, "Estimates varied substantially, depending on the way the question was worded (Source: Lotus & Palmer,